Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-01-24 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI }' ¥$ � � � ^^ .� f + \- INCDW Hill$ ( « ° } `\� w 0, 1, C I T Y C 0 M M I S S 10 N MEETING M I N U T E S OF MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 24,2002 PREPARED 2Y THE OFFICE Of THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL WlrrJF r/iCR! 0 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 24`k' day of January 2002, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in regular session. The meeting was called to order at 9:22 a.m. by Chairman Tomas Regalado with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez (District 1) Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton (District 2) Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3) Chairman Tomas Regalado (District 4) Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5) ALSO PRESENT: Carlos A. Gimencz, City Manager Alejandro Vilareilo, Assistant City Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Cleric Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk I January 24, 2002 0 1. PROCLAIM THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 2002 AS FOOTBALL FEDERATION GOLD CUP DAY (SOCCER). WELCOME MEMBERS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER REBECCA SOSA AND JIMMY MORALE'S STAFF. NO VETOES FROM JANUARY 10, 2002 MEETING. COMMISSIONER TEELE COMMENDS MANAGER AND STAFF OF DEPARTMENT OF CONVENTIONS AND CONFERENCES FOR PROFESSIONALISM DURING SOCCER EVENT AT ORANGE BOWL. Commissioner Regalado: (INAUDIBLE) regular session. Commissioner Winton will be here in a few minutes. He's in the building. Commissioner Sanchez will do the invocation. Commissioner Teele, can you do the pledge? Commissioner Sanchez. If you all would stand. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chainnan. If you could all stand and join ine in prayer. An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Sanchez, after which Commissioner Teele leading those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Chairman Regalado: For your information, I'd like to recognize representatives of two Miami Dade County Commissioners, Gloria Palacios is here, representing Commissioner Rebecca Sosa, and Dr. Nunez-Portuondo is representing Commissioner Jimmy Morales, both Commissioners with areas in the City of Miami. And we thank you because their Commissioners have sent them to participate in the City of Miami Commission meetings, and we thank Jin-imy and Rebecca for their interest. We will have also representative of Bruno Barreiro and all the members of the Commission in future meetings. There are no vetoes from the Mayor. And one -- we have no more proclamations today. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Before you do, if I could, to the Manager and to Mr. Iglesias, Chip Iglesias and to the Assistant Director for Conventions, Marinas -- I still think that's the best job in the City somewhere -- and to the Orange Bowl director and staff. I want to, again, state how professional the staff - your staff is carrying them -- conducting themselves. The Orange Bowl soccer -- Gold Cup Soccer has been -- was a venue :for a lot of community activities, and was a way to embrace the community. And I really do think we've got to do a better job in working with MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority) and others to get the word about soccer out. I mean, if we don't do anything but advertise locally, we need to develop a really first class soccer message because soccer is a tremendous sport. It's not a big sport in the district that I represent, and it's not a big sport perhaps in much of the Cuban community, but in virtually all of the other communities, including soccer moms that live in the gated communities and 2 January 24, 2002 • particularly in the district -- the portion of the district of Little Haiti that I'm pleased to represent and the portion of the district of Wynwood, and you can go right through many of our communities and neighborhoods, soccer is a big, big, big sport. And I really do think that the City of Miami must take the lead in making soccer venues available and working with all of our resources, both the Orange Bowl, MSEA, our Parks Department, in doing that. And I just think that your staff is -- I realize that you've got sort of a former soccer jock apparently on your staff, and that may be a little bit of it, in Mr. Iglesias, if I can refer to him that way. But there is a real commitment and a real sensitivity to professionalism, and I just wanted to pay a compliment to you, Mr. Manager, in that regard. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Thank you very much, sir. January 24, 2002 0 2. CONSENT AGENDA Chairman Regalado: OK. For your information -- I'd like to consult with the members of the Commission to see what they -- if they agree with this. We have a time certain item at 5 p.m. It's the first reading ordinance concerning the Civilian Panel for the Police Department. That is a public hearing. We have a time certain item at 6 regarding the problems with density in the Brickell area. Now, my question to Vice Chair Johnny is, do you want now to delay this little like 6:30 or 7? because I don't think that in one hour -- if we start at 5 -- I mean, just not to keep people waiting here. So, 6:30 -- Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: OK. So -- Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: OK. That's -- so, we have PZ (Planning & Zoning) that we can do after 2 o'clock. We are now in the consent agenda. Anybody from the Commission wants to pull any items from the consent agenda? Commissioner Sanchez: No. Discussion on CA -5. Chairman Regalado: Can I get a move and a second for discussion? Vice Chairman Winton: Move. Commissioner Teele: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Discussion. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion on CA -5. Are we -- is this an even swap? In other words, if we provide the parking for them, are we not paying anything for the mounted police usage of the stables? Laura Billberry (Director, Asset Management): Correct. We would be getting free use of the stables for an additional year, in exchange for them allowing -- being able to do the parking at the Marine Stadium and the old County park site. And the Trust also has approved this. Commissioner Sanchez: How much did we pay last year? Was it a hundred and thirty-eight thousand? Ms. Billberry: No. We didn't pay it. Last year we had the same arrangements. Commissioner Sanchez: You had the same arrangements. OK. 4 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: Well, last year they didn't park in the Virginia Beach area, just in the Marine Stadium area. Ms. Billberry: I recall, they did do both. Chairman Regalado: In the Virginia Key? Ms. Billberry: I thought they did both. Chairman Regalado: I don't think so, but if you say so. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chainnan. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: On CA -8, just very briefly, and that's the identification of funds outside of the CD (Community Development) target area. I would just like to amend that for a minimum of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). This is not going to be enough money. It doesn't affect my district, Commissioner Winton. It largely affects your district and Commissioner Regalado's district. There's another issue coming on line here and that is the environmental impact issues associated even in the CD area. And what I'm anticipating, Mr. Manager, is that we may have a period here, over the next four or five months, where we may need to use non CD dollars and then seek to get them reimbursed, you know. So, we need to build in that flexibility to use non CD dollars and then seek to get them reimbursed or not. But the important thing is that we're using strictly CD dollars right now for slum and blight, to remove slum and blight. There is slum and blight outside of the target areas, and we don't need to penalize those communities that cannot access CD dollars. And, so, I just -- there may be some discussions later on about fairness on the agenda, but -- I mean, I do think that you have tried. and this Commission is trying to make sure that all communities that are similarly situated are treated relatively fairly, and this hundred thousand may not be enough as we go down the road. That's all. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe there is some kind of error in this resolution, because it says the proposed resolution would direct the City Manager to identify total funding for a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to demolish structures in a non -target area, such as Upper Eastside, January 24, 2002 Wynwood, Edgewater, Allapattah. Wynwood, Edgewater and Allapattah are target areas and they're referring to non -target areas. So, you know, maybe they need to make a correction. I don't know if this could create any kind of problems in the future to -- right? Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): It doesn't create a problem. And we can correct it. Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Thank you. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, are you referring to the resolution? Chairman Regalado: Yeah, he's referring to the resolution, Mr. Vilarello: Or the cover memorandum? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Mr. Vilarello: OK. Chairman Regalado: So it has to be amended? Mr. Vilarello: Because the resolution simply says non -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, I'm talking about the cover memorandum, right. Mr. Vilarello: Yeah, because the resolution says in non -community development target areas. So, the resolution covers what you just discussed. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Commissioner Teele: Well, I think the resolution should be amended anyway to say non CD areas -- target areas, and target areas when appropriate. In that way, if you've got an environmental -- and target areas where appropriate. In that way, if you've got an environmental issue, you can use the non CD dollars and move on. Because, you know, communities don't know if you're sitting around trying to do an EIS or something or not. They don't really care and they shouldn't be put through that inconvenience. Vice Chairman Winton: And I think that, further, and even from my view point, I think that obviously we have to do this technically correct, and I'm going to count on staff to do that. But what I'm more interested in is making sure we don't run out of money. So, you know, these are crucial redevelopment issues in any neighborhood. And so, you know, if we speed up the process and we end up putting more things that have to -- we've got to figure out where more money comes from to keep that process going. So, even if you go through this in three months, we've got to bring more money to the table. Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. 6 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez mentioned some areas, Upper Eastside, Wynwood, Edgewater, Allapattah, the Coral Way and Northeast Coconut Grove. I don't know which area of Coral Way this is referring to, but -- do you know the area of Coral Way? lector Lima: Hector Lima, Building Department. Exactly the area, no. But the -- what we have been told is that the districts within those areas are reduced and that's what it should have really said, instead of target areas. It should have said districts. Ms. Warren: Commissioner, Gwendolyn Warren, Community Development Director. As you may recall, in '99 the City Commission changed the old CD target areas to community revitalization districts. And during that process, you targeted all the community development resources to these districts, where the median household income was 50 percent or less of the County, and home ownership rate was 20 percent or less. What this will allow us to do is to, one, all of the resources have been targeted to those areas. And what the Commission is allowing today is that where there is code enforcement or demolition issues outside those target areas, we'll be able to take care of them, either through the use of CD funds, if eligible, or City general fund monies, if not eligible. It also will allow for us in the cases that the Commission has described, where we need to do things on an expedited basis. In other words, the environmental or the historic preservation may interfere with a development issue, but it's not a critical program issue. We can move forward with the demolition. So, what this will allow us to do is have the flexibility to target -- keep -- remain targeted in the critical areas, do demolition in those areas that have been identified and have gone through the process by the Building Department, and the general fund monies will also give us the flexibility to expedite demolition, so we would not have to, if it would interfere, go through the rather elaborate federal process. Chairman Regalado: It is -- Ms. Warren: But it will all be legal. Chainnan Regalado: It it's a very good explanation, but my question wasn't about the program itself. My question was about an area. Commissioner Tecle mentioned that that will impact Commissioner Winton and my district, and I just want to be clear on the record, that of all the areas mentioned, there is one area that could be part of District 4, and that is Coral Way. So, if you tell me the area -- because Coral Way, it starts in the Brickell area, and ends in Coral Gables. So I just wanted to establish on the record that District 4 may not be getting any fiends. Ms. Warren: What will happen, on the record, is that in those cases that are outside of the revitalization districts, we will review them on a case-by-case basis. If they're eligible, we'll do it. And if not, we'll use the general fund allocation, if you approve it today. But you will receive demolition service. Chairman Regalado: Right. But I'm just trying to establish on the record that no area of District 4 is on the back-up letter. Is it or isn't? 7 January 24, 2002 • 9 Ms. Warren: You're not a revitalization district, and each one of the cases would have to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Chairman Regalado: That's exactly what I wanted to establish. So -- Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): But also, Commissioner -- Chairman Regalado: And you are? Ms. Bianchino: Even though you're not part of the revitalization district, we have -- Chairman Regalado: You are? Ms. Bianchino: I'm sorry. I'm Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager. That's why we're setting up this fund today of general fund money, so that when you have problems in your area, we can use this source of funds because you're not in a revitalization district. So, you're eligible for demo. Chairman Regalado: OK. Public comments. Mr. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. See, the Commission did away with the Community Development Advisory Board. That was important to have a grass root, in a way, advisory board, because sometime staff is outside completely of what's going on or they are in the Ivory Towers and they don't know exactly what's going on in the neighborhood. We should have more input from citizens, and those community development hearings at the neighborhood level were acting like mini town hall meetings, where people could complain and say things and that. And remember, regardless of whether they are CD dollars or federal dollars, or general fund money from the City, they are tax dollars. They all come from the people. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Anybody else on the consent agenda? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, very quickly, two things. What has happened -- and I'm as much -- I've used the wrong terminology as much as anyone else. Ms. Warren, help me now, because we need to keep the record clear, and sometimes citizens come up and say things and they're not -- you know, I'm dealing with the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) now, where we've got the federal government breathing down our necks because nobody corrected the records on certain things. This whole issue of CD target areas, did we abolish it or did -- or was there a change in the federal statute? It was my understanding, initially, that the entire City of January 24, 2002 • 1 0 Miami is CD eligible, based upon the census and the obvious information that has come out of that. How much of the City is eligible for CD? Ms. Warren: I'll try to be brief, but it will take a brief explanation. The City of Miami has been an entitlement City for 27 years. When you initially received your entitlement, the City had certain pockets of poverty and they were very small. And the City Commission decided that they would target their monies to what was previously known as CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) target areas. The entitlement was in the `70s. In 1995, with the mid decade census, the demographics for the original target areas were similar throughout the City. The poverty level or the eligibility for CD funds had spread from the original target areas to the majority of the City. So, in 1999, when the City Commission reviewed the whole five-year plan, one of the things that we did was look at how the monies were being distributed and we revised the CD target areas. One, we're using a more popular term, Community Revitalization District, which is a federal term, and it incorporates quality of life, housing and economic development. So, the City -- in 1999 this Commission voted to restructure the target areas to expand them to community revitalization districts, and it covers more of an area. The issue of whether the City is eligible, the poverty rate in the City has significantly increased since we received our initial entitlement 27 years ago to now. It has spread, I would say, to approximately 95 percent of the City as a whole, when you talk about areas where you would have pockets of poverty or you would have public blight or you would have residents who were actually eligible to receive services. We can say with certainty that 65 percent of the City's population is economically eligible to receive funds. Code enforcement goes to anything that surrounds those areas. So, generally, the smaller CD target areas have been expanded because the poverty in the City has expanded and, therefore, the neighborhoods that would be eligible for demolition funds, code enforcement funds, and the like has also expanded. We still have certain smaller areas in the City that are not -- the residents are not economically disadvantaged. So, therefore, services such as code enforcement, would be restricted in those areas in using federal funds. So, in '95 you changed the concept. We broadened it to fit the new population growth and patterns. Commissioner Teele: OK. Well, very briefly, then, three quick things. Number one, the Community Development Advisory Board's Committees were replaced by what is called a pure democracy town hall meetings. Ms. Warren: Yes. Commissioner Teele: So, there is a mandatory town hall meeting. So, instead of having a handful of people coming up doing all the talking, what you have is wlybody in that area or in an area. Now, have we agreed on when the town hall meetings are going to be? Because last year we waited a little bit too late, and we need to get those town hall meetings date -- each Commissioner, under this agreement, under the five-year plan, is obliged to host a town hall -- at least one town hall meeting. Ms. Warren: That is correct. Commissioner Teele: And I think this may be also a good time to ask you to come back to us in the next meeting -- 9 January 24, 2002 • Ms. Warren: It is on the next calendar. Commissioner Teele: -- with a schedule so that we can try to fit our meetings within that time frame. And secondly, I would like to see if we could just got a review or a briefing on our five- year plan. Ms. Warren: OIC. Commissioner Teele: Sixty days, 90 days, before those town hall meetings, so that we know exactly where we are. We've had changes in the Commission and we all ought to be pretty much on the same information base. And I think this will be a good time to calibrate where we're going over the next 90 days as it relates to that. And, finally, Mr. Attorney, there are several late developments in court. You all have done a good job, I think, in some court actions, where the City has gotten title back to land, and I would hope that the buildings that were scheduled to be demolished will be moved ahead. The worst thing for us to be - is for the City to have ownership of land and own slum and blight. And I think we all agree - Ms. Warren: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: -- that once the City does -- 1 mean, the day the judge signs the order, we should be out there doing what we're supposed to be doing in terms of that, Ms. Warren: Ycs, sir. Chairman Regalado: Are we ready to vote? Commissioner Teele: The Attorney just -- read the amendment to that -- what was that, number 9? Mr. Vilarello: From the discussion of the City Commission, this is my understanding of how the resolution will read. It's a resolution of the Miami City Commission directing the Manager to identify funds in an amount greater than a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for use in and out of community revitalization areas and to take whatever steps are necessary to appropriate said funds, if necessary, from the capital improvement project account. And it's the account number that's listed. 1 believe that allows us to use it in the target area -- what was formally known as the target areas, and outside. Chairman Regalado: OK. We are going to vote on the whole thing, on all the consent agenda. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I have -- Chairman Regalado: What do you need -- Ms. Billberry: If I may, Laura Billberry, Asset Management. I distributed prior to the meeting -- you should find in front of you -- an amendment to CA -6. The change is that it deletes reference 10 January 24, 2002 to a management agreement. There will be a management agreement brought to you in the next month or two with Oakland Growth Neighborhood Improvement Association for the management of this proposed Little River Preserve Park. Commissioner Teele: Are you dealing with Mr. Lee on this thing? No. Ms, Billberry: I'm sorry. The negotiations actually with Oakland are between the Parks Department, and I have not been involved in that directly. Chairman Regalado: Do you -- Commissioner Teele, that's in your district. Do you agree with that? Commissioner Teele: Yeah, I agree with it. I just want to make sure that --why would Parks be handling a negotiation on a management agreement? Ms. Billberry: We work in conjunction with them on issues like this, because it is a park use. Commissioner Teele: All right. Would you make sure that we've got Mr. Kit -- Curtin and Cage, C -U -R -T -I -N, you know, because this is about that manatee preserve thing on the river? OK. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: I have two questions. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: CA -10, where we're creating this Occupational License Review Committee. I think we ought to put an absolute sunset date in this so that they have a time line by which we're really demanding that they get this done at the latest. From what I understand, this task -- last time it was done, it was accomplished in three or four months. So, we ought to put in here this committee sunsets in six months or seven months or eight months, some time frame, so that there's a requirement that they come back to us specifically if it isn't done. Chairman Regalado: You want six months then on the -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, you know, I'm open to suggestions of staff, in terms of something. Chairman Regalado: Well, you're right. You're right. The last committee, chaired by Horacio Aguirre, did it in 90 days or something like that. Vice Chairman Winton: So, now, I don't want to make it so tight that they have to come back to us, but -- so, give them some flexibility there. So, six months -- 11 January 24, 2002 Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, there may be a way to tie it to when the Manager needs the information or the conclusions of the City Commission, and then getting it on the Occupational License invoices, which go out in October. I just don't know, operationally, how far you have to back that out. And that would be a good time to sunset them. They would require the report of the committee. Vice Chairman Winton: So, give me dates. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): I think six months is fine. Vice Chairman Winton: Fine. So, we want to make that modification. And in CA -7, in the ICMA (International City Management Association) retirement -- the Deferred Compensation Plan, the last sentence says the City will incur no costs by the adoption of the attached resolution. And I understand the answer to that is that -- because I wanted to make sure that -- to understand whether or not there were any circumstances under which the City could incur additional costs. The answer came back as "no." But I want to melee sure I get, number one, "no" on the record, and I also want to know how we know the answer's "no." Sue Weller: Sue Weller, Labor Relations Officer. The answer is no. There is no additional cost incurred. This is merely re -adopting a revised pension plan -- not pension plan. The Deferred Compensation Plan, the ICMA Deferred Compensation Plan. In September of last year, Congress passed some revisions to the Deferred Compensation Plans that allowed them to be more flexible. These plans that we have available to the employees are where the employees strictly put the money into the plan themselves. OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. I have no further questions. Commissioner Teele: What item number is that? Vice Chairman Winton: CA -7. Chairman Regalado: CA -7. Commissioner Teele: Is that -- does that have a financial impact? Ms. Weller: No, Commissioner, it does not. Vice Chairman Winton: No. That's why I asked. Zero. Chairman Regalado: OK. We're ready to vote. Consent agenda has been moved and second. All in favor say -- Commissioner Sanchez: As amended. Chairman Regalado: As amended. All in favor say "aye." 12 January 24, 2002 • The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: CODE SEC. 2-33 (J) STIPULATES THAT CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS THAT ARE REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA PRIOR TO CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERATION SHALL AUTOMATICALLY BE SCHEDULED AS A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF TIME CITY COMMISSION. Thereupon, on motion duly made by Vice Chairman Winton and seconded by Commissioner Teelc, the consent agenda items were passed by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 2.1 ACCEPT BID OF SUPERIOR COMMUNICATIONS, INC., PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-01-256 FOR PROCUREMENT OF SEVENTEEN MOTORCYCLE HELMET MICROPHONE KITS FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $8483; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 02-58 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF SUPERIOR COMMUNICATIONS, INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-01-256, DATED NOVEMBER 21, 2001, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF SEVENTEEN MOTORCYCLE HELMET MICROPHONE KITS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $8,483; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO. 690003; SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING." 13 January 24, 2002 rl 2.2. AUTHORISE FUNDING OF OPERATION AUTO TRAP (TACTICAL RECOVERY ,AND APPREHENSION PROGRAM) TO ASSIST WITH''INVESTIGATVE COSTS FOR TARGETING AUTO THEFT, CRIMES, $56,449.50; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TRVTST FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 02-59 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE FUNDING OF OPERATION AUTO TRAP (TACTICAL RECOVERY AND APPREHENSION PROGRAM) TO ASSIST WITH INVESTIGATIVE COSTS FOR TARGETING AUTO THEFT CRIMES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $56,449.50; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO. 690003, SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING." `23 AUTHORIZE. LEASING OF TWO VEHICLES FROM INTERAMERICAN CAR RENTAL, INC. FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICES UNDER EXISTING CITY QF MIAMI CONTRACT NO. 99-00-134, $18,360; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 02-60 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE LEASING OF TWO VEHICLES FROM INTIsRAMERICAN CAR RENTAL, INC., FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, UNDER EXISTING CITY OF MIAMI CONTRACT NO. 99-00-134, EFFECTIVE UNTIL AUGUST 10, 2002, AND SUBJECT TO ANY EXTENSIONS, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR ONE ADDITIONAL YEAR, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $18,360; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO. 690003, SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING." 14 January 24, 2002 0 0 ,4 ;AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN CONTRACT WITH CARET BOUTIQUE; 1NC , TO FURNISH AND INSTALL CARPET AND TILE FOR' POLICE DEPARTMENT'S HEADQUARTERS BUILDING $33,J 13.80,. FROM $453,841.60 ;TO $486;955.40;. ALLOCAIT FUNDS. FROM :CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. RESOLUTION NO. 02-61 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE 1N THE CONTRACT WITH THE CARPET BOUTIQUE, INC., TO FURNISH AND INSTALL CARPET AND TILE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S HEADQUARTERS BUILDING, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $33,113.80, FROM $453,841.60 TO $486,955.40; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ACCOUNT CODE NO. 312025.299301.6.830. 2.5 GRANT MIAMI -DARE COUNTY USE -OF PORTION OF VIRGINIA.KEY PARK AND PORTION OF MIAMI MARINE STADIUM PARKING LOT,. LOCATED AT 3601 RIGKENBACKERCAUSEWAY TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY PARKING. FOR ERICCSON OPEN ''TENNIS : TOURNAMENT AT CRANDON PARK ON KEY BISCAYNE IN EXCHANGE FOR CITY'S CONTINUED USE OF STABLES AT TROPICAL PARK. RESOLUTION NO. 02-62 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), GRANTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY (THE "COUNTY") USE A PORTION OF VIRGINIA KEY PARK (THE "PICNIC AREA") AND A PORTION OF THE MIAMI MARINE STADIUM PARKING LOT, LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3601 RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY PARKING FOR THE ERICCSON OPEN TENNIS TOURNAMENT SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 20, 2002 TO APRIL 1, 2002, AT CRANDON PARK ON KEY BISCAYNE, FLORIDA, IN EXCHANGE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI'S CONTINUED USE OF THE STABLES AT TROPICAL PARK; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID PURPOSE. 15 January 24, 2002 9 2 6 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES, $150,000, LOCATED AT 399 NORTHEAST 82"`;TERRACE AND 8355 NORTHEAST 4th'' AVENUE TO BE DEVELOPED AS NATURE PRESERVE .AND CITY PARK TO BE KNOWN : AS "LITTLE =RIVER' PRESERVE"; CONTINGENT UPONRECEIPT OF $150,000 GRANT, FROM FLORIDA' .COMMUNITIES TRUST AND RECEIPT OF MATCHING FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARRS BOND PROGRAM SERIES 2000 PROJECTS FOR DEVELOPMENT: RESOLUTION NO. 02-63 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACQUIRE, 1N AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $150,000, THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 399 NORTHEAST 82'd TERRACE AND 8355 NORTHEAST 4"' AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE DEVELOPED AS A NATURE PRESERVE AND CITY PARK TO BE KNOWN AS THE "LITTLE RIVER PRESERVE"; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, CONTINGENT UPON RECEIPT OF A GRANT FROM THE FLORIDA COMMUNITIES TRUST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000, AND RECEIPT OF MATCHING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT $150,000, FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND PROGRAM SERIES 2000 PROJECTS FOR DEVELOPMENT FOR ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTIES. 2.7 AMEND ..CITY'S 457 DEFERRED"COMPENSATION ,PLAN IN FORM OF ICMA RETIREMENT; CORPORATION 'DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND TRUST `FOR CITY EMPLOYEES. RESOLUTION NO. 02-64 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, AMENDING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN IN THE FORM OF THE ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AND TRUST FOR CITY EMPLOYEES IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED PLAN AND TRUST DOCUMENT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCLJMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO EFFECT THE PLAN AMENDMENTS. 16 January 24, 2002 RESOLUTION NO. 02-65 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO IDENTIFY FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT GREATER THAN $100,000, TO DEMOLISH THOSE STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN AND OUT OF COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION DISTRICTS; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE WHATEVER STEPS NECESSARY TO APPROPRIATE SAID FUNDS TO CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 145001, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 251113-340, 2 9;' 'AMEND RESOLUTION, NO 0I-,,1188 WHICH ESTABLISHED OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE EQUITY STUDY COMMISSION; RESOLUTION NO. 02-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 01-1188 WHICH ESTABLISHED THE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE EQUITY STUDY COMMISSION TO PROVIDE FOR THE COMMITTEE'S SUNSET, MEMBERSHIP, QUALIFICATIONS, TERMS OF OFFICE, VACANCIES; OFFICERS, PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY, MEETINGS, QUORUM, VOTING ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS, ASSIGNMENT OF STAFF, COUNSEL; AND NOTICES AND FILING OF RECORDS. 17 January 24, 2002 0 • 2.10 AUTHORIZE CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT OF LAW FIRM Off` HO AN & HARTSON, L.L.P FOR LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED TO CITY IN CONNECTION WITH ILLEGALLY. PLACED BILLBOARDS AND CASE OF NATIONAL ADVERTISING CO. VS. CITY, $1,00,000, ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST- FUND. RESOLUTION NO, 02-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW FIRM OF ROGAN & HARTSON, L.L.P. FOR LEGAL SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE CITY OF MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH ILLEGALLY PLACED BILLBOARDS AND THE CASE OF NATIONAL ADVERTISING CO. VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CASE NO. 01-3039 CIV -KING, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000, PLUS COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF- INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.661, FOR SAID SERVICES. 18 January 24, 2002 E • 3. RATIFY MAYOR DIAZ' ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION OF $12,850 FROM VARIOUS DONORS FOR ACQUISITION OF FOOD AND ASSOCIATED COMMODITIES FOR HOLIDAY TOY DRIVE AND PARTY HELD AT COCONUT GROVE EXHIBITION CENTER, ON DECEMBER 20, 2001, TO BENEFIT 2,000 CITY CHILDREN AFFILIATED WITH CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY NETWORK. Chairman Regalado: We have a request from Mayor Diaz. As you know, on the swearing in ceremony, he accepted some donations for the ceremony, and now we have to ratify this donation. Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Tee1c, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-68 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RATIFYING MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ' ACCEPTANCE OF THE DONATION OF FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,850, FROM VARIOUS DONORS AS SET FORTH HEREIN, FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FOOD AND ASSOCIATED COMMODITIES REQUIRED BY THE MAYOR FOR THE HOLIDAY TOY DRIVE AND PARTY HELD AT THE COCONUT GROVE EXHIBITION CENTER, ON DECEMBER 20, 2001, TO BENEFIT APPROXIMATELY 2,000 CITY OF MIAMI CHILDREN AFFILIATED WITH THE CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY NETWORK. 19 January 24, 2002 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Just for the record, it didn't have to do with the swearing in ceremony, but the Holiday Toy Drive, but it was donations to the City. Commissioner Teele: But it's contained in the resolution. Mr. Vilarello: Yes. Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. I'm sorry. My mistake. It's the toy drive. 20 January 24, 2002 • 4. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 01-1251, WHICH APPROVED CITY'S CO-SPONSORSHIP AND AUTHORIZED PROVISION OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT, IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES FOR PARADES AND EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BY AUTHORIZING INCREASE OF $2,000, FROM $5,500 TO $7,500, FOR JOSE MARTI PARADE, SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR ACQUISITION OF BARRICADES. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have a pocket resolution requesting funds -- Chairman Regalado: Do you want to do the pocket items in your page? You don't have anything in your page. If you want to do it -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I just had one item. Chairman Regalado: Just go ahead and do it. Commissioner Gonzalez: It has to do with the Jose Marti Parade on tomorrow. Every year the group that does this parade used to obtain fiends from the school board -- or the barricades for the parade from the school board. This year they're not able to get the barricades. So, what we're requesting is that we cover the costs of the barricades that is twenty-five hundred dollars ($2,500). Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a motion. It's been moved and second. All in favor -- Commissioner Teele: However, Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the Police Department be requested, as an amendment, to coordinate with them and also see if there are barricades that they may be able to identify. This is tomorrow, but my goodness, they had more barricades than they've ever had at the Martin Luther King Parade this year, and those barricades have got to be somewhere. So, it may be -- I mean, approving the resolution, but further requesting the Police Department to work directly with the organizers to see if we can identify barricades, if that's all right with you. Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you very much, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: All right. The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-69 21 January 24, 2002 • A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 01-1251, WHICH APPROVED THE CITY OF MIAMPS CO-SPONSORSHIP AND AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED THE PROVISION OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT, ASSISTANCE, AND IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES FOR CERTAIN PARADES AND EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BY AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE OF $2,000, FROM $5,500 TO $7,500, FOR THE JOSE MARTI PARADE, SAID INCREASE SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF BARRICADES. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 22 January 24, 2002 0 5. (A) BRIEF COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER WINTON ON EXOTIC ANIMALS. (B) APPOINT SYLVIA SCHEIDER AS ACTING CITY CLERK EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 2, 2002 UNTIL CITY CLERK IS APPOINTED. Chairman Regalado: Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Two things. One's just a light moment that I thought y'all would be interested in. Remember we had the discussion about controlling exotic animals at the last meeting, and Frank Rollason brought that forward and he reminded me that he brought that forward, as a result of a meeting that we had in my office. Commissioner Sanchez: Is this about D -I? Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but you handed him out -- you hung him out to dry. Vice Chairman Winton: That's what he said. And I said, Frank, I have to tell you that i forgot about that completely. I did not mean to hang you out to dry, and I'm going to apologize to you. He said, no, no, no, you can't do that. But, Frank Rollason, wherever you are, I'm apologizing because apparently I did hang him out to dry. Commissioner Teele: Don't apologize. Commissioner Sanchez: So, Johnny, your office has also been receiving all those notes. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. I got some mail from a constituent that this pet iguana bit some kid's -- the end of his finger off, and a constituent wrote me a little note that said, "Commissioner, you see. The animals are trying to assert their dominance over humans everywhere. They feel vindicated by the failure of the City's exotic animal ordinance." That's actually a good friend of mine. A more serious business point here. I have a question on -- you know, the City Clerk is retiring. Actually, when he wasn't here last time, I thought he'd already retired. Chairman Regalado: He's moving up. Vice Chairman Winton: But that position reports to us. And, frankly, I have no idea what the process or the procedure or who's responsible for doing the search, the interview for the replacement to Walter, and how that process works. Chairman Regalado: If I may, Vice Chair. The process is that what's been established, you can all change the process right here, right now, if you want to. Walter -- this will be Walter's last Commission meeting; although, he is ready to come back, he told me, on the 14th, for the meeting, and swearing in the new City Clerk. But what's been established is that any member of the Commission can proffer a name. Anybody can approach the Commission individually, meet 23 January 24, 2002 with all of us and request the job. And then it's a Commission's decision that -- the administration doesn't have to do anything at all with this. It's a decision that the City Commission makes. If you all want to meet with Walter, he will suggest a person or persons. If you have any candidates, you can contact that candidate and that candidate could meet with every member of the City Commission. Vice Chairman Winton: Wow. Commissioner Teele: On the point. Vice Chairman Winton: Sounds like a pretty awful process. Commissioner Teele: On the point, Mr. Chairman. If you would, Commissioner Winton. It is a process that is very informal and I think it probably should be, to a great extent, very much like the appointment of the City Attorney that we have before us as well. I have reduced a three or four-page memo to writing, with a recommendation that, at the next Commission meeting, we make a final decision. And I will circulate a memo to you and -- to the Chairman and you regarding that. But I think Commissioner Regalado has correctly outlined that there are five Commissioners and it is a Commission -- it is one of the two appointments that the Commission makes, and while the Chairman has suggested that we should seek appointments from -- or seek input from Mr. Foeman, which I have no objection to, I certainly think that our -- the duties of the office, et cetera, and the qualifications should be run past him. In the case of the recommendation that I'm malting, I've discussed it not only with Mr. Foeman, but the Manager, and the Attorney; neither one of whom have offered advice regarding who should be appointed. Because I would not ask them that because I don't think that's their prerogative, and I wouldn't want to confer on the Attorney or the Manager the implication that they should be making advice. To the contrary, they should stay out of this. But I did inquire as to whether or not the person that I would like to nominate today is a person that they could work with and both have said they could work with that person, as well as any number of other people. So -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I don't have anyone in mind. I don't -- wasn't -- certainly wasn't my intent to go to try to find someone. But I'm not -- I don't -- and the candidate you have may be great, but a process whereby somebody just kind of circulates a memo and says, here's the person that we ought to have for such an important position, just strikes me as fraught with potential problems. I mean, it seems to me that, as Commissioners, we would -- and let me not speak for anyone here but me. As a Commissioner, what I would like to have is a job description, with a list of qualifications that are important for that kind of job, that comes from someone, and it could certainly start with our existing City Clerk. But there ought to be -- that kind of thing ought to be held in the archives somewhere so that we can look at it. Then, as Commissioners who have viable candidates, you know, there ought to be a list of those potential candidates with their qualifications that we can kind of match up with what the real qualifications or accepted qualifications for that kind of position are, and then we'd be in a position to make an informed decision, which -- and a right decision. And so, I'm a little nervous about the process that apparently has been used in the past. 24 January 24, 2002 0 Chairman Regalado: But, Johnny, just before Commissioner Sanchez has the floor. I mean, you have to decide, at the end of the day, who do you want as City Clerk. You can do it your way -- if all the Commissioners want to do it their way. As a matter of fact, they can proffer any name now and that person should understand that he or she has to meet with everyone in the City Commission and explain to the members why he or she should be the City Clerk. If you want -- what you requested, do you want that and we request that to Walter and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think for my personal benefit, absolutely. And if the Commission decides they're going to vote on somebody today, so be it. I'm not going to vote positively for anyone today because I do want to get that information. Chairman Regalado: No, no. No, no. We're not being asked to vote today. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I understood -- Chairman Regalado: No, no. It has to be done -- it should be done. I mean, we can have an Acting City Clerk. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Regalado: -- on Sylvia, I mean, if she wants to proffer her name or anybody else, and then -- but we should have a City Clerk in place some time. So -- Vice Chairman Winton: Agreed. Chairman Regalado: -- it have to be done in -- some time in February. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I believe also that a process -- the old process that was used, I have problems with, and let me just say, if there is a -- one of the most important appointments that we can make sure, besides the City Attorney, is the City Clerk, and we've been blessed to have such a good City Clerk for so many years here. Let me just say that four years ago or three years ago, I wouldn't even use the word "nationwide search," because of the situation we were in, but I think the City of Miami today is at another level, and I think there are people out there, on a nationwide search, that we could have a process in place to put out and have people apply for the position. Have as many applicants as possible. At the end, we know that we will make that decision. Whether we make that decision, being a local City Cleric or whether we have somebody that's already in place at the City Clerk's Office to take over the helm as the City Clerk. But, you know, I think the more the merrier. I think there's a lot of qualified people out there that will be interested for this position. Whatever the process may be that we could go along within this Commission, I think. that we also are blessed that this Commission has worked in harmony, and there is a good rapport among ourselves. At the end of the day, we're going to select the best person for that position. But I tend to agree with Johnny on the process, that to proffer it -- I mean, if anything, today -- Mr. City Clerk, when is your last day? Is it -- Walter Forman (City Clerk.): Last day is February 1 st. 25 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Sanchez: It's February 1st. Mr. Foeman: Next Friday. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, if we can't -- if we go through that process -- and it's going to take some time -- I don't think anybody in this Commission would bring or maybe bring somebody from the City Clerk has to be the interim City Clerk for "X" amount of time before we make our decision. I mean, that's something that I'm prepared -- not today -- but, you know, look around and talk to maybe someone who is already there, who may be interested in being the interim City Clerk until we come to an agreement on a process. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I don't think we ought to make this more difficult than it is. I mean, we didn't go through this, to my knowledge -- Mr. Diaz didn't go through this to select a Manager. We didn't go through this for a Clerk. I have -- 1 would like to recommend that we establish the February 28th meeting as the decision date for the Clerk. You can always change that date. But I think, you know, to just start a paper chase is getting ready to get ridiculous, and we are talking about the Clerk of the City of Miami, which has unique responsibilities and duties. I would recommend, if there is no objection, that there be a motion that the Commission sets for its agenda, the first item, the selection of a Clerk for the meeting of February 28th, and in the ensuing process, that the Cleric's Office notice and advertise in professional journals, as well as in newspapers of circulation, for a closing date of the 19th of February, for a position, which is two weeks, three weeks, and that those applications be forwarded to each Commissioner for their review. And I think that process will be good. The Clerk -- and I'm really surprised -- the Clerk -- the existing Clerk has a document this thick -- it's more than I can read -- on the duties of the Cleric and what's expected and what has been done. You haven't furnished that to everybody? Mr. Foeman: Yes, 1 did. It's a transitional document. I furnished it about a month ago. Commissioner Teele: And there's a transitional document. I mean, this thing has been going on now for like 60 day, 90 days, and there's been discussions from the dais where we've asked him to do this, to prepare a document. One of the things that I'm concerned about, candidly, is that while there isn't a lot of public discussion about it, we have revolutionized the Clerk's Office, initially at the objections of the Manager, and now with the support of the Manager -- and I don't mean that personally. I'm just talking about the staff -- particularly in the area of technology. There are things that are on line now that have never been on line. I mean, you can literally dial in and get information. We need a Clerk's function, in my judgment, that is committed to technology and the continuing of some of the cutting edge things that we're doing in terms of taking the historical records of the Cleric and getting them on line. The pilot program that we've got with the Universe of Florida and the State. And, you know, with all due respect to all of the candidates, we need a Clerk, in addition to having experience in elections, which is very, very important, and having experience with boards, that has a commitment to technology and has experience, at some degree, in elections and boards. I think this -- it's also a very good time to 26 January 24, 2002 say, it's really a shame that the City of Miami continues to lose our -- some of our best and our brightest, and i think that's one of the things that we, as a board, really should be focused opon, pension plans and those kind of things, which we've asked the Manager and Mr. Nachlinger and others to work on and get back to us. But I think it's -- and we will honor him at the appropriate time today, I hope, near the end of the meeting, but I think it's unfortunate -- it's really tragic, in a way, that Walter Foeman is prematurely leaving. He has no gray hair in his head that you can discern at a distance. He is going now to be the deputy for a major County, a County that was in the national spotlight. And he's going there primarily -- largely because of his election experience. And, you know, f have no objection to a nationwide search and 1 think it's, in some ways, encouraging. But the truth of the matter is is that Miami has become almost a proving ground for quality people in certain areas, and certainly the leadership that Walter and our boards and Commission have done are among the best in the state, in this area. And, so, I wanted to urge you to take note of the outward migration patterns in the City. Again, 18 percent of African Americans are leaving Miami, in the district that I represent, at least, according to the census, as compared to Anglos that have come in at a rate of about 10 percent, I think, citywide, in that last census data, for the first time in 20 years, and that's a good thing. But I do think that this Commission, if we're going to really stay focused on diversity andpluralism, we've got to do a much better job of reaching out to African Americans as we go forward. And I say that recognizing that if you look at the addresses of most of the people that I've hired in my own office and around City Hall, most of those addresses are in Broward County, unfortunately. And we've just got to do a better job, I thin],,, of making duality of life issues, the things that you're doing, Johnny, particularly in neighborhood improvement, and job opportunities available here in this City. And I would say, candidly, that I think we should try to find the most qualified person, but I also think we should look to hire more minorities and particularly more women. This is turning into an old boys' club. Chairman Regalado: OK. What we're going to do is have Walter distribute a simple job description for us. I read your report, but just' do this. And when -- 1 will distribute also the memorandum from Commissioner Teele to all the members of the Commission. Anybody who now is listening here can send to the members of the Commission their request to be heard about this position. And that was it. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, 1 really don't recommend they send resumes to the Commissioners. I think we ought to have one central point, you know, whether it be the Attorney's Office -- Chairman Regalado: No, no. Commissioner Teele: -- or the Clerk's Office. Chairman Regalado: What I'm saying is to send it to the City Cleric as the notice will be asking. The notice in the papers will be asking to send the resume to the City Cleric and the City Clerk, according to your request, will distribute to the members of the Commission. 27 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Chairman, when Commissioner Sanchez comes back at the appropriate time this evening, I would like to nominate Sylvia to serve as the Acting Clerk until a Cleric has been designated. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Teele: But I think we should do that with five Commissioners on the dais. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: This is really a comment to Commissioner Teele. I would be particularly interested, Commissioner Teele, because of your real breadth of experience in. government and your knowledge -- working knowledge of that particular department, that resume to get circulated, I would really appreciate it if, when you look at it, you see things that might be -- not resume, the job description. If there's things that are missing in there that you think are important, I think it's important that you write that on there. And if you've got to send it to the City Attorney, so he can send it to us, so that it's appropriately sun shined, but your comments and points on that, to me, are very important. So, I hope you will feel free to do that. Chairman Regalado: OIC. Commissioner Sanchez is back. Commissioner, there was a comment by Commissioner Teele saying that when you come back, he would like to make a motion to nominate Sylvia as the acting City Cleric until when the Commission appoint a new City Clerk. That would be effective on February the 2nd. Mr. Foeman: That is correct. Commissioner Sanchez: And, Mr. Chairman, I would second that motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's been moved and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes five zero. 28 January 24, 2002 E • The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-70 A MOTION APPOINTING SYLVIA SCHEIDER AS ACTING CI'T'Y CLERK EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 2, 2002 UNTIL A CITY CLERK IS APPOINTED. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: Sylvia, Acting City Cleric when Walter leaves. I just wanted to say something very briefly. It's important. But, you know, Johnny, in the job description that you're going to get, probably you won't find the person has to have imagination, because that was never placed on the resume. However, Walter came with an idea that has given the; City Cleric and the City hundreds of thousands of dollars, which is the Passport Agency in the City Clerk. He didn't have to do it, but he thought about it and he tools his staff to all the swearing in ceremonies, gave leaflets, and information and the City has been making a lot of money. So, I guess we have to thank you, Walter, for what you come up. 29 January 24, 2002 • • 6. APPROVE CITY'S CO-SPONSORSHIP OF MIAMI METRO ZOO; AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT CITY TO PROMOTE SAID FACILITY. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, my item, I just have one, and it pertains to banners. I would move that the City of Miami -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: -- co-sponsor banner placements along the City of Miami, supporting the Miami Metro Zoo banner. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's been moved and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-71 A MOTION APPROVING THE CITY'S CO-SPONSORSHIP OF MIAMI METROZOO; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MIAMI TO PROMOTE SAID FACILITY. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairinan Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 30 January 24, 2002 0 7. DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE AT NEXT COMMISSION MEETING STATUS REPORTS FOLLOWING ISSUES: (1) GATEWAYS IN CITY, PARTICULARLY GATEWAY IN OVERTOWN; (2) WORD OF LIFE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NEIGHBORHOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; AND (3) b'I'll ANNUAL HAITIAN MUSIC FESTIVAL, SAID REPORT TO BE COORDINATED WITH MIAMI SPORTS EXHIBITION AUTHORITY (MSEA). Chairman Regalado: Let's do -- Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I only have three items. Number one, I would like a report at the next meeting regarding the gateway -- the status of the gateway that we designated previously in Overtown, in particular. Number two, I would like a report and a discussion regarding the Word of Life CDC (Community Development Corporation) Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan, and I would specifically request that the management sit down with Word of Life and People's Barbecue and -- it's my understanding, Commissioner Winton, just for your information and edification, that there is a real effort in the West Grove for people who are interested in trying to see businesses expand over there -- and he's not on the dais -- but it would be my hope that we could meet with the people from West Grove and Commissioner Winton's Office, and People's Barbecue that's there, in conjunction with the Word Of Life, neighborhood redevelopment activities. And then, finally, I would like to get a report from the Manager regarding the Haitian -- Sixth Annual Haitian Music Festival. It's my understanding that the Mayor wants to be supportive of that, but I would like that report to be coordinated with MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority), Mr. Manager, at the next meeting, so that we can take a look at that, at the request of the Mayor's Office. Commissioner Sanchez: Second for the purpose of discussion. Basically, just clarification. Is that all the gateways that will be -- all the City of Miami -- Commissioner Teele: The only gateway that I'm trying to figure out is where we really are with this one that's right off of 95. When you come off the ramp of 95 and come into the old arena on Sth Street, you know, you've got this building that's just horrible and it's terrible and it's going back and forth and back and forth and we need to bring that to some closure. Commissioner Sanchez: Would you support an amendment to yours to come back with all the gateways, including that one? Commissioner Teele: All the gateways, absolutely, if -- to give us an update on all of the gateways. And, again, I think that's one of the things -- and I don't want to get into a discussion on the bond issue -- but I think it's one of the things that we ought to look at because it's one of the things that's going to be very noticeable throughout the City. And it's a way to have a double impact, that is, gateways being provided through bond dollars, et cetera. And, so, Anna , I hope you and Mr. Nachlinger and the Budget Director will look at this, also. Because I think this could be one of the solutions to some of the things that we're going to be grappling with later on today about that. Because Commissioner Sanchez's point is an excellent point. I've only -- my gateway, but we do have a gateway opportunity, as well as perhaps some challenges. And one of the commonalities of gateways is we've got gateways in everybody's district in everything, and I 31 January 24, 2002 0 i think it's one of the things that we can look at in the context of some of the revenue bond, quite candidly, issues that can be spread throughout this City. And, so, I would amend it as Commissioner Sanchez has requested. . Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a motion -- is it a motion -- Commissioner Teele: It's a motion on those three reports at the next meeting. Chairman Regalado: OK. Do you want those reports include in the bond list? Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. Not at this time. It may come up later on today. But what I'm really looking at is getting the Manager to work with us and to make some presentations to the City so that we can do it. I only said this in response to what Commissioner Sanchez is saying, gateways are very visible, and while we may not have given this a lot of thought, but to the extent we've got gateways all over this City that have to be done, utilizing bond dollars for gateways is something that clearly is going to impact the entire City. It's not going to be big, big, big dollars, but it is going to be a big, big, big impact. You know. And so, we're -- I'm looking at ways we can minimize any, you know, negatives that may be coming out and try to accent the positive opportunities that we have. And I take Commissioner Sanchez' point on that very seriously, and I appreciate it. Chairman Regalado: And, like you say, it's very cheap. I mean, if we don't buy the tanks for the Police Department, we can do the gateways. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: The tanks. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may. And just to elaborate a little bit on what Commissioner Teele said. You know, when you -- when you're traveling west on Coral Way and you enter Coral Gables, you have a beautiful gateway letting you know you're coming into Coral Gables. Well, you turn it around and you come back, when you have; two gateways that we have in the City. One is a giant billboard welcoming you to the City and the other one is a five -by -eight plywood that says, "Welcome to the City of Miami." So, you know, not anymore. We're taking this City to another level. I keep saying that. And it's our purpose here. But to have the gateways, when we decide to do them, I think in all fairness, in all fairness, if there's something that should be fair is that they do -- they try to do all the gateways at the same time so, you know, people see that. When people are driving back to the City from work or they're coming back home and they see that, that's something -- they're going to see it 365 days a year and they're going to notice that we are using the money exactly what we told them for. And we have a big responsibility. Not only did they trust us when they voted on the bond issue, but now they're seeing what their money is doing, and that's something that I would suggest to you, Mr. City Manager, you do that when you do the gateways, do them all at the same time. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele -- 32 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: On the motion, I'd like to call the question. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor to the motion say "aye." Commissioner Sanchez: As amended. Chairman Regalado: As amended. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Passes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-72 A MOTION DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING STATUS REPORTS ACCENTING THE POSITIVE OPPORTUNITIES REGARDING THE FOLLOWING ISSUES: (1) ALL GATEWAYS IN THE CITY, PARTICULARLY THE GATEWAY IN OVERTOWN; (2) WORD OF LIFE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION NEIGHBORHOOD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN; AND (3) THE 6 T1 ANNUAL HAITIAN MUSIC FESTIVAL, SAID REPORT TO BE COORDINATED WITH MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY (MSEA). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 33 January 24, 2002 8. MANAGER TO COORDINATE WITH HADLEY PARK HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION AND AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS {AARP} TO ARRANGE FOR FORMAL OPENING OF HADLEY PARK FACILITY FOR MARCH 20, 2002; MANAGER TO COME BACK WITH PROPOSED RESOLUTION AND PLAN FOR SAID OPENING. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, that's it? OK, I have -- Commissioner Teelc: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: There's one thing. I would like to request of the Manager that you coordinate with the Hadley Park Homeowner Association and the AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) to arrange for the opening, the formal opening of the Hadley Park facility for the third Wednesday at noon of March, and give us a report on that. That's when the AARP is meeting at noon. I think it's the third Wednesday. And just come back with a resolution and a plan for that, if you would, please. Ready or not. Chairman Regalado: OK. 34 January 24, 2002 9. DIRECT MANAGER TO ISSUE EXPEDITED REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR PROFESSIONAL FIRM TO CONDUCT COMPREHENSIVE; ASSESSMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF RISK MANAGEMENT; MANAGER TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN 60 DAYS ON HOW TO IMPROVE OPERATIONS OF SAID OFFICE. Chairman Regalado: OK. This -- I have an item and some other comments, but this item should have been in Commissioner Sanchez' page. Commissioner Sanchez tools -- no, but he tools the lead many, many, many months ago. And what was an item, it became a crusade. And your interest ignited the interests of all the members of the City Commission. We have to do something about Risk Management. The City is spending a lot of money. The City has not been able to fix the problems. 1 met and I think other members of the Commission with representatives of a company that is very unique. And I ask those representatives to be here so you can all listen to what they have to say after reviewing some of the numbers of the City of Miami. And they don't -- like they don't work on any kind of treatment. They just work with cities, and agencies, and governments and business to reduce the numbers of cases. I don't know what you all want to do. If you want to open a process, an RFP (Request for Proposals) for this kind of counseling, and have all the companies that do this, if they are, but I think, I think that we need to do something, and something about this situation, because it keeps becoming a burden, more and more, every week. I just don't see. I read everything from the Manager. I don't think that we have been able. Had it not been for Commissioner Sanchez and his insistence -- he's been resilient on this item -- probably what -- the little that we have saved, we would not have saved it. So there is no will from the part of the system that we have in place to fix itself. So this is why I request that they would come up and have a short presentation. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I think that we have been able to slow the train down just a little bit, but still, we're not happy. I agree with you. I think it's time that maybe on a professional level, they need to borrow our watch and tell us what time it is. And I'll tell you why. When we started this three years ago, some 300 and -- We had 3,000 employees. We had 2,783 open claims. We have been able to reduce those claims. We have been able to close on some of those cases. And it's taken the City a lot of money. We have been able to identify what the problem is, because I think we've done that. However, I don't think that we've focused on a clear solution to that problem. And I'll tell you where I think one of the problems exist. The City needs to realize that they have had 580 open claims older than five years. 580 open claims past five years. For those five years, the City has been spending money. So if you look at all the numbers -- and I have to say that the administration has worked with me on providing me the information that I've asked. If you look at the numbers, and they clearly speak for themselves, the report here strengths -- in cases where they break it down into heart, contusions, fractions, hear loss, exposure and others. We basically have 100 claims that is costing or has cost the City twenty-seven point three million dollars ($27.3 million). OK? Twenty-seven point seven million dollars ($27.7 million). OK. Those are permanent disabled, or whatever the case may be. And, my gosh, I always say it up here, if you get hurt, it is our responsibility to take care of you. However, we will not tolerate abuse. We will not tolerate theft. And I think the City has taken proactive steps to address these issues. They've put together a task force that has basically, right now, for the first time in the City's history, has gone to the State Attorney's Office with some cases. But I feel that more money should go into different types to reduce this. Whether it 35 January 24, 2002 i 0 is the will of this Commission to go out publicly, I could support that. I really can. Because after all, if we have a responsibility here, it is we are the true guardians of the City's assets, and that includes funds. We're spending way too much money on disability. I think that the resources that we had at one time, it was laughable, it was comical. We have put more resources into it. But however, until this point, I am not satisfied. And I have led the charge with the flag on this issue. I'm not satisfied with where we're at. I'm not here to blame anybody. I have put some City employees on the spot, you know. I don't apologize for the issue, because the City, itself, has done what it can, but it hasn't been there to solve the problem. Just to elaborate on another issue, the broken down of all the cases from five to three years -- and I have this report. If you don't have it in your office, I'd be more than glad to provide it for you. You know, at one time, everybody sat up here and said it was Solid Waste. And I'm guilty of that. And when I first got here and I looked at it, maybe it was that I didn't do my research. And I pointed the finger at Solid Waste. Well, it wasn't Solid Waste, I can tell you. Coming back, it was the Police Department that had the "X" number of highest cases of open cases, then it was fire fighters, and then it was Sanitation. So once again, I strongly feel -- and this is just me putting it out on the table for my colleagues here -- that we need to go outside and have the professionals borrow our watch, and tell us what time it is, and make recommendations on what we can do. I don't know exactly where it's at. It's not my profession. I'm not in the insurance business or the opening and closing of cases, but I think that the administration needs to go out, explore, analyze, and come back and make recommendations to us whether it's going to save the City money or not. If they come back and they say it's not going to save us any money, then, I, for one, will say, hey, OK. But if it comes back through the advisement of professional people that it's going to save the City money, I am prepared to support that issue. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's hear the concept of what companies like this can offer after they spend a lot of time analyzing the City of Miami's Risk Management Department and cases. So your name and addresses, please. Lucia Estrella: Yes. My name is Lucia Estrella. 8300 West Flagler Street in Miami, 33144. I represent American Interstate and Act Safe. We are an "A" rated company, and we specialize in writing high-risk workers' comp. insurance. We have been able to do that, because we have a program called Act Safe. Our clients are -- experience 60 percent of loss reduction having our program. Cindy Dawson, my colleague, which she's in charge of Act Safe, will go further into detail. Commissioner Joe Sanchez is talking about Miami going to another level. And definitely, your claims is totally out of hands. And we are experts on this. We -- like I mentioned again, we specialize in high risk. Let me transfer Cindy and we'll go back and forth. Cindy Dawson: I'm Cindy Dawson, also with Act Safe. My address is 105 Lake Road, Tavernier, Florida. One thing we would like to thank the Commission for is acknowledging the City of Miami is in crisis with their workers' compensation claims. We certainly agree with you in that regard. And as specialists in the field of workers' compensation, I would like to draw the analogy of the relationship we would hope to establish with the City in Risk Management as that of a cardiologist to your family physician. We would like to go in and help you really reduce these claims. As Commissioner Sanchez pointed out, over the last three years, in 1999, the City of Miami expended ten point three million dollars ($10.3 million) in workers' compensation claims. In the year 2000, they expended ten thousand -- or ten million dollars ($10,000,000), ten 36 January 24, 2002 0 • point one million dollars ($10.1 million) in workers' compensation claims. And now, in the year 2001, that has risen to eleven point almost two million dollars ,in total claims. Almost half of that is in indemnity. Indemnity is what is paid to workers who are not working, in lieu of the wages, due to their injury. If I could direct your attention to the graphs that we provided to you, the first one, Graph A shows that there has been an increase in reported claims, that injuries have not gone down. They have increased. There are two main ways of reducing workers' compensation cost. They are to reduce the frequency of injuries -- obviously, if people don't get injured, you'll have much less cost in claims. And secondly, to reduce the frequent -- the severity of the claims. And there's a number of ways to do that, which we'll get to in a minute. You can see again, 1999, there were a total of 838 reported claims. In the year 2000, there were 806. And in the last graph, you'll see that that is not a full calendar year. That's only a ten-month period of time. And the claims had already risen to 852. That's not a good trend. We wish to help you stop that. One of the ways that we'll help you stop that is to be doing aggressive on-site inspections of all the areas that your employees are in, where they are at risk for injury. The second graph that you'll see is Graph B. Those are the new claims, compared to the total work force. If you look at that graph, Miami and their 3700 employees, approximately 22 percent of their employees are injured per year. That's one out of four City employees are injured at some course in the year, which is an unacceptably high level. We hope, through our program, to reduce that dramatically for you, also. Also, on the third chart that you'll see, that's the medical only claims compared to lost time. This is where we go into the issue of severity. Ideally, when an employee is hurt -- if they are hurt, which we hope to reduce those amount of injuries -- they get definitive medical care quickly. The medical care should be a lesser issue to you, other than the tremendous amount of lost time. If you look at the bar graph for Jacksonville, that should be more proportionate to what you're seeing for the graph of Miami, where there may be far more medical claims, which, are the people who go in, they have a small laceration, it's cut, it's stitched, they get a tetanus shot. They return to work. They sprain something or strain something, they go back to work, modified duty, as opposed to what's currently is happening with Miami, as reflected by the fact that of the eleven million dollars ($11,000,000) spent in workers' compensation cost, over five million dollars ($5,000,000) of that was spent in indemnity. An aggressive -- sure. Commissioner Teele: What does that mean? I mean -- Ms. Dawson: Indemnity? Commissioner Teele: No. When you say -- What's the significance of that number, of the five million dollars ($5,000,000) being spent in indemnity? Ms. Dawson: It means that half of the cost that the City of Miami is paying out in workers' compensation costs are for workers who are not working. It is in lieu of their wages. One huge factor in how we can reduce the cost of workers' compensation for the City of Miami is to take those injured workers who are being paid indemnity, return them to work in a modified duty capacity. Commissioner Teele: Right, Right. And that's what I kept asking about. And they said that that's -- You're right. You're 100 percent right. 37 January 24, 2002 Ms. Dawson: And that's what we specialize in doing. Commissioner Teele: There's no incentive. Ms. Dawson: There are very few circumstances where, in some way or another, particularly with a City as wide as Miami, and the range of job opportunities you have. If you have people simply picking up trash on the sidewalk who are injured workers, as opposed to sitting home and falling into a couch potato syndrome, not only does that give the workers the incentive to return to work, but it also will reduce your medical costs. People who sit at home that work, when they're used to doing hard physical jobs, wind up getting de -conditioned very quickly by sitting there. Then there's additional physical therapy costs, work hardening programs, et cetera that you have to put the employees through in order to return them to their job. Also, by returning employees on modified duty status, you will also be saving other peripheral costs to the City, such as the cost of training new employees to replace the injured workers, loss of production in their jobs, et cetera, et cetera. So returning injured workers to work in a modified duty program is one of the main aspects of what we'll be focusing on. That also involves some close communication with doctors, to make sure that we're complying with the doctor's restrictions, that the employee can safely go back to what we feel he can do. We'll be working with each of the departments to detennine exactly what they have, what needs there are in the department that can be filled. There are very few departments or businesses that, if someone is injured, and they don't have their full duty capacity to go back to their original job that there isn't something you can find for them to do. Most departments have pet projects, whether they be involved inventorying things, cleaning up things, beautification processes, but there's tons and tons of things we can do to return workers to work. It also gives the workers a sense of pride to actually be doing something to earn a living, instead of being on -- Vice Chainnan Winton: I would bet it gives them an incentive to go back to their regular job. Ms. Dawson: I have been known to give them such tedious return to work jobs that they're begging to go back to work. When they get tired of counting nuts and bolts for days on end, they decide that they really feel far better than what they had previously. So, yes, we will work in providing incentives, and also plenty of opportunities for injured workers to return to work. And as you can see, that's almost in its entirety a 50 percent savings on the City of Miami's cost as we speak. The last graph that you have there is also what Commissioner Sanchez referred to, which are the vast number of open claims. As you see, the Police Department accounts for 51 percent of them, as he mentioned; the Fire Department, 23; and Solid Waste, 15. Not only will it assist in closing claims to return injured workers to work, returning -- closing a claim involves somewhat of a lengthy process sometimes. In order to properly close a claim, you have to have the employee back to work. Under the current workers' compensation laws, at this point in time, after two years, an injured worker is considered at maximum medical improvement. At that point in time, he's rated as far as what disability he has. The claim is settled. The medical is either stipulated or continued. For claims of which I believe Commissioner Sanchez mentioned there are over 500 of them that are still open after five years, is not a good situation, to say the least. 38 January 24, 2002 Ms. Estrella: We want to mention that this is a three -- sorry. We want to mention -- oh, I'm sorry. My name is Lucia Estrella. We want to mention to the Commissioners that this is a three- year program, only. In three years, we will modify the system completely. There is no need for us to be here more than three years. That would be more than enough. It's going to be investment from the City, but it will be well worth it, because right now, everything is completely out of hand. But I just don't want you to think this is something permanent for us. You have any questions? Chairman Regalado: Anybody has any question? What does the Commission suggest in teens of the next step that we do? I guess that there is a consensus that we have to do something, and that we have to do something soon, and that we have to do something coming from outside to look at the inside of the department. So anybody has a suggestion? Commissioner Sanchez? Commissioner Teele? Commissioner Sanchez: I would make a motion having the City ]Manager seek outside professional assistance on this matter through an RFP process. Chairman Regalado: OK. What you are seeking is the concept that they presented here? Commissioner Sanchez: Similar to it. Chairman Regalado: Sorry? Commissioner Gonzalez: I second the motion. Commissioner Teele: I would ask, Commissioner, if you would consider the following: An RFP is going to take probably 90 days or so. And RFQ (Request for Qualifications), however, Request for Qualifications -- What we need to do is identify essentially the finns that are out there to create a competitive process. An RFP is going to have all kinds of issues where you get into qualifications, you get into cost, you get into scopes, et cetera. I think what we should try to do is to have a competitive process in this. I think the most expeditious way to do it -- and I can tell you, I have seen two Commissioners now want to do something similar to this in the Police Department. We still haven't agreed on the scope of work yet, four years later. So just know that this has the very real potential of never coming back. What I would recommend you do is instruct the Manager to have an expedited RFQ, Request for Qualifications of firms that do the certain things it is we want to do, to have those firms to come in and identify what their qualifications are, and to submit it back to this board with a recommendation from the Manager within 30 days. And that can be done. Commissioner Sanchez: Sixty days is -- Commissioner Teele: Sixty days? Commissioner Sanchez: Sixty days. Commissioner Teele: Sixty days is fine. If that what you -- if that's what -- 39 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Well, do you feel comfortable in 30 days, Mr. City Manager? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): What are we asking this firm to do? I mean, I'm not -- Chairman Regalado: We're asking the concept of what they just said. What this company -- and the concept is to come and try to close cases. This company or any other company. I don't know if there are more like this. What they've done in other cities, what they've done in other business is to come -- to do exactly what they just said -- close cases, save money. Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, i would recommend something a little bit different. And I would recommend that you give me the right or get Request for Qualifications for firms that will do a thorough evaluation of the entire Risk Management Department, and give specific recommendations as to what we need to do to clean it up from the outside. Not from the inside, but somebody from the outside. Commissioner Gonzalez: From the outside. Mr. Gimenez: And that are professionals in that area, and that we clean this up at once, because Vice Chairman Winton: And that they be hired for the cleanup. Mr. Gimenez: They may have a great -- this may be a component of cleaning it up, but I think we need an entire, you know, clean slate with this, and get a whole slew of recommendations from them as to what we need to do in the Risk Management Department, because, you know, obviously, what we've been doing or trying to do, we've had some limited success and we are, I agree, we're out of whack with other municipalities in the state in terms of our cost. And we need an entire revamping. We need a total clean look from the outside. Nobody's got any -- invested anything inside the City. Somebody from the outside to tell us what it is we need to do and come up to today's standards. Ms. Dawson: If I could interject something for just a moment, maybe I can clarify this a bit. Ameri-Safe did present to the Commissioners a proposal of what our services would involve, which included -- in September -- which included Act Safe, which is an interactive safety behavior based newsletter that would go out to all employees. It has input from the employees. It has a safety message every month. It also provides recognition and positive enforcement for the employees. We also recommended a modified duty program, which would include job hazard analysis, with written physical demands of each job within the City, to help facilitate the physician's releases, so that we would have more meaningful releases to return workers to work. We also said that we would follow up and make sure there is definitive medical care being taken. We would also identify less physically demanding aspects of the job. We would review old claims to make recommendations on how those may be more quickly closed. We would provide on-site safety training, jobs specific to what the injured workers were doing. The cost that we came through with this proposal was two hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars ($275,000) a year for a three-year period of time, which is approximately 2.5 percent of the eleven million 40 January 24, 2002 0 • dollars ($11,000,000) that Miami is currently spending a year, for our services. Or as Commissioner Sanchez pointed out, the 100 claims out of the 500 that Risk Management documented, having a total of twenty-seven point seven million. If you do the multiplica -- or division on that, you would find that one claim averages two hundred and seventy-seven thousand. So if we were successful in closing only one old claim per year, it would pay for our services. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Commissioner Gonzdlez has asked Commissioner Sanchez before to be recognized. Go ahead, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I happen to concur with Commissioner Teele that what we need to do is an RFQ. And also, I concur with the Manager that we need to establish some specifics of -- We have a situation. We have a problem. What do you propose in your scope of service to help us solve our problem? Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, my recommendation is an "A" through "Z" analysis -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly, Mr. Gimenez: -- of the entire operation. And we get, you know, a set of recommendations of exactly what it is that this City needs to do to resolve the situation. Like I said, this could be a component of that. Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly. Mr. Gimenez: But, you know, I'd hate to jump into something that -- before we get an "A" through "Z" of exactly what it is that we need to do. And it needs to be outside of the City, some professionals that have no stake in our process at this time, and can tell us exactly what it is we need to do. Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Probably need to do a study of the situation, of the entire situation, and then come up with some recommendation. And maybe the same, the same group can implement the strategy to solve this problem. But it has to be taken in two or three steps, I believe. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. Let's do the whole thing. All right? Let's start from "A" and let's go all the way through "Z." Now, I'll tell you what we can't continue to do that we've done for the three years that I've been here. We can't continue to put two-inch bandages on fatal wounds. It isn't going to work. And we could spend all the money in the world doing it, and you know what? It's going to stay the same way it is. So I agree with you. Go out there through an RFQ process. Hire whoever you want to hire that could come in and look at the whole department, analyze it, make recommendations to improve, and above all, to save the City dollars. Because when this is all brought out -- You know why this came to light? Because looking through the books, I saw it, and it was a flag that really slapped me in the 41 January 24, 2002 face. And when I brought it in front of this Commission, maybe feathers got roughed up. But you know what? Every now and then, we've got to ruffle some feathers. So go out, do the whole thing, and let's take care of it. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Just as a point of mechanics. Isn't there an RFP on the street to hire a firm to do half of our claims processing or something? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, there is. And it was supposed to come back in February. And it only dealt with new claims, and it really didn't deal with the entire, the entire issue of Risk Management, So I'm not wholly satisfied with what went on there, either. So like I said, it needs to be looked at. It needs to be looked at. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, again, in light of the recommendation coming from this Commission, though, it seems to me that we need to pull that RFP off the street. I don't think that -- Mr. Gimenez: I agree. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that only would muddle the situation. Mr. Gimenez: I agree. I agree. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Regalado; I just want to make a comment. I am very skeptical about this "A" to "Z" process. It will take months and months, and it will be recommendations that you all are not going to follow, because we have recommended many things, and you said yourself that success has been minimal. I think that we have to start working directly. Companies like that are a component. That's what you said. But we cannot live with recommendations to you, because your staff won't respond to the recommendations. And they have not done what this Commission had requested them to do. They just have not performed. And I think the Risk Management Department has not performed, according to the three years that we have been dealing with this. So if you want to delay fixing this process, let's go for a study of "A" to "Z." But I would request that parallel to that study, you start the process to have people like them, or anybody that does the same thing, working directly, not only making recommendations, but doing the things that they do, trying to close cases, trying to do things, because if not, next year, we're going to be here discussing the same thing, because, you know, you're going to have a six- month window for studying, and then come up with recommendations. And meanwhile, the taxpayers of Miami keep paying millions and millions of dollars. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 42 .January 24, 2002 • 0 Vice Chairman Winton: What you said almost always goes against my nature in terms of the way I approach these kinds of problems. However, I'm not sure that I completely disagree with you here. And what I'm struggling with in my mind here is whether or not there isn't, in fact, a way to do both of these things, kind of as you have suggested. Because if you do an RFQ, as Commissioner Teele suggested, to identify a firm that can attack one component part of Risk Management -- Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying, Johnny. Vice Chairman Winton: -- which is the biggest number right here, I'm not -- I don't know for sure, but it isn't clear in my mind that it would be illogical to run parallel paths here. There may be some problems associated with that that I haven't identified, because I'm not expert enough in terms of what Risk Management does, and how this process is going to work in terms of what the rest of Risk Management does. But just from a pure logic standpoint, I don't -- I'm not sure that we couldn't do both on a parallel path. So I guess I'm kind of saying that unless management would stand up and say, Johnny and Commissioner Regalado, here are the specific problems associated with doing that right now, we might want to take up a little further discussion about your idea. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Teele: I'm very encouraged with the discussion, particularly the comments that you made and Commissioner Winton's initial concern, and then his views that parallel yours. Let me tell you where I come from. When I came on this Commission four years ago, the big debate was the Attorney's Office. We had an Attorney that was sitting here who is not here now. There were two big issues around that office. One issue was Community Development and the various OIG (Office of Inspector General) audits that the City Attorney's Office had failed to protect the federal -- safeguard federal dollars by allowing the Commission -- dah-dah-dale-dah- dah -- and a whole series of things. And the other issue was Risk Management. Now, this is -- If you go back far enough, you're going to figure out Risk Management's been a problem for 10 or 15 years. It didn't just begin to be a problem. And Risk Management has bounced around like potatoes in a potato truck, because nobody really wants to deal with it. But the good thing about Risk Management is the numbers are so big, it's sort of like that rule that local government officials are -- There's a book -- I forget the name of it -- somebody's inverse view of management. Rojas, you probably remember it. And it talks about how a local City Commission, City Council will debate for two hours the Christmas party, how much money to spend for it, the size of the cake, what baker you ought to use, who's going to provide this, that and the other. And then the books says that but when a five million dollar ($5,000,000) gymnasium is to be discussed, the numbers are so big that everybody is uncomfortable. So it just gets moved and adopted without discussion. And that's sort of the way Risk Management has been around here. We've not really gotten into it until Commissioner Sanchez rolled up his sleeve and tried to take it on. Now, Mr. Attorney, you do know that at one time, Risk Management, much of the Risk Management functions were in the Attorney's Office? 43 January 24, 2002 i 0 Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes. That's happened -- It was with the Manager until about 1987, and then in the City Attorney's Office through '91 or '92, I believe, and then back to the Manager's Office. Commissioner Teele: So this thing has gone back and forth, and the problems are unresolved. And it's one of those things where we can spend the ten million dollars ($10,000,000), and never discuss it and never debate it, because it's a number that's so big that we just sort of approve it as a non -debatable, non -discussion item. But the elements that are in it, we've never really looked at. Now, let me tell you where I conic out on this. I am 100 percent in support of what Commissioner Regalado said. I think the Manager is doing the professional thing in saying, let's do an "A" to "Z" approach, and I commend hire for that. But I know that an "A" to "Z" approach is going to be something that is going to have to be quantified. There's going to have to be a detailed scope of work. There's going to have to be a lot of parameters done. And candidly, it'll take 180 days to get back to us, at a minimum, with something like that. We, however, have zeroed in on at least two problems, and where I come on is where I've been misled. Now, Mr. Clerk, I'm going to ask you to get a transcript today, hopefully before the end of the meeting, if it's possible, without taxing your office before you leave -- I don't want to upset you on the day before you leave -- of the discussion about the one item, work status, duty status plans, because the staff sat up here and misled me, or at least 1 feel misled. I feel misled, based upon the discussion, because it's very clear to me that I didn't understand but half of the issue of these indemnity claims, five million dollars ($5,000,000), which apparently, a substantial part of that could be mitigated or reduced, apparently -- and I don't know that to be true. Apparently, a substantial part of that could be mitigated by an aggressive back to work program. And I say, do we have an aggressive program? Is it there? And the response was: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. And I accept that. But obviously, our back to work program -- You know, there's obviously back to work programs, and then there's back to work programs. And so, you know, I'm prepared to say, let's let somebody else do a back to work program for us, and if nothing else but do an RFQ on just the indemnity portion of this thing, and to focus in on these old claims and the indemnity thing. I mean, I don't have a problem narrowing this thing down to just one scope of work, and that is 50 percent of what the problem is, I mean. So why let 50 percent of the problem get caught up with the other 40 percent or .50 percent of what's potentially out there in the "A" to "Z"? But I would like to allow the staff to respond about the back to work issue, because that's the issue that I just see that cries out for more support. Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, before I allow Mario to respond, I have no particular opposition to taking a look at some of the components that we're already having problems with, and working with consultants to try to resolve them right away. I just thought my recommendation was to really -- We need to solve this problem, because you are talking about a problem that has gone back into the `80s. It may take 180 days and the whole thing, but we're going to have to bite the bullet, and we're going to do it. Commissioner Teele: We got to, I agree. Mr. Gimenez: Now, in the interim, if there are things that we can identify to reduce the cost, I'll be willing to work with consultants and bring them on board just to try to reduce that. However, I'm not sure that you got a total, true picture of this indemnity issue. We do have a light duty 44 January 24, 2002 0 i work program in the City. A lot of our people that are injured go back: to light duty. I don't know. I think there is a handful of people that actually are staying at home. So, I mean, I'll let Mario clarify that. Chaimlan Regalado: Excuse me. Mr. Manager, there are people who are being told that they have to go back to work, and they need to go on light duty. And when they go back to the department, they are being told to go back home, because there's no position for them. Mr. Gimenez: That is some kind of -- Chairman Regalado: However -- however -- excuse me. However, there are some people that are in light duty in that department who are getting a lot of overtime to do the same job that other people in light duty could do. Mr. Gimenez: And we're looking into that situation. We understand about that one department, and we're looking into that. Chairman Regalado: Well, if there is -- if that is happening in one department, how can we be certain that it's not happening in other departments? Mr. Gimenez: We don't believe it's happening in other departments. We believe it's happening in one bargaining unit. We do not hear any of the same complaints from the other bargaining units. And, I mean, maybe Charlie has some knowledge about that. Commissioner Teele: I can assure you, you haven't had complaints out of Police and Fire,. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Teele: Not with these statistics. Mr. Gimenez: Well, I'm going to let -- I'll let Mario respond to that. He's got the numbers -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Before Mario, Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe Mr. Charlie Cox has some information regarding this issue, because Charlie is pointing at us, making a seal of two. Does that mean that it's two departments? Charlie Cox (President, AFSCME Local 1907): Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Thank you. Chairman Regalado; Charlie, you want to add something to that or -- That's your comment? Mr. Cox: No. I'd like to add a few things. 45 January 24, 2002 • 0 Chairman Regalado; Go ahead. Mr. Cox: I could tell you some things like the lady -- Number one is, I've never been -- Oh, Charlie Cox, President, AFSCME (American, Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), Local 1907. I mean, it's been clear that I've never been a supporter of Mario's, and there are several reasons why. But when the ladies get up here, and their plan may be the greatest thing, and tell you that they can do things that we haven't done here and mare it work, I could tell you that our light duty people -- Now, you've got to remember, I'm less than two percent of the problem in the City of the people that I represent. But our light duty people have been put to the cemetery to go to light duty work, on the midnight shift, elsewhere. So if you think counting bolts is going to make them get back to work, I think the cemetery, to where they're worried, they're not allowed to carry guns, they get a flashlight, they don't get a beeper, they don't get a phone. They're put over to Miami Marina to pull guard service. I mean, those are some of the light duty work that are given to the people that I represent to urge them to get back to work. They have been told on numerous occasions in different departments that I work that we have no light duty work. There is -- Commissioner Teele: Say that again? Mr. Cox: In numerous departments that I represent that there is no light duty work. But there are other things that Carlos has to face, too. We don't have open, budgeted positions. If you're going to start creating open, budgeted positions for everybody that's light duty, there's a cost to that. And that is one of the problems. Now, our pension, our pension plan has been inundated with people walking out the door, because they check their credentials, they say there's nothing that they can do. And it's been a big problem in Solid Waste, absolutely. They say there's nothing they can do. We can't retrain them. So the doctors say, no, they're not totally and permanently disabled. But then, the City says, we have no work for them. So you're pretty much then at the point to say, well, you're going to have to push them out the door, because they can. Now, there are other issues. I will tell you, when she talks about let's -- closing out these cases, I, as a union President -- and we do have workmen's comp, lawyers that we send them to. If you tell me there is a case today of a man that I worked with, with Florida Power & Light -- and I'm going to use his name. His name is Jerry Seppe. He is a lineman. Now, try and buy insurance as a lineman. You can't do it. OK? It's worse than a cop to get insurance. I am a lineman. I have been a lineman since I was 21 years old. And you know what? Knock on wood, I survived it. Other people haven't. But by the same token, that man has had five operations since he's been with the City. He busts his butt to come into work in the Communications shop and do what he can. He's out on another operation now. Do you think -- The problem is that we don't treat our employees right, never have, the ones that are legitimately injured and hurt. And do you think -- He has had these people that are private contractors now that Mario is using come to the hospital while lie's on the hospital bed being operated on, trying to find out what's going on with him. Come into his room and find out what the operations are. He's had people that went to his doctor when he had a doctor's appointment, and they just showed up unannounced. So if you think that the City's not doing everything that -- that Commissioner Sanchez hasn't put a watchdog -- He's turned it around so bad now that you think everybody is a criminal out there. And if Jerry Seppe -- And the good part is when he comes back, he's got a list of 27 times he's called Risk Management. Do you think once they 46 January 24, 2002 • picked up the phone and returned his phone call? And I net with Mario over this same individual five months ago. Has it got any better? Hell, no. It just gets worse. So, in other words, to solve the problem, we're going to screw the employees. And you know what? If they're faking it, I will be the first one to support the City. I always have. As long as you keep their salary going, I've said it, put them to the cemetery, put them working at midnights. And when they come to me crying, I say, wait a minute, guys. You're getting your paycheck for doing what you were paid to do, and you got hurt. And now, this is keeping you in payroll status. Because my people don't get 100 percent of their pay when they're out here. My people also don't get paid from day one. You got to use 14 days -- you got to use your sick time before Risk Management ever, ever kicks in. But if she says that she's going to go out there and say, we're gone to settle these cases, I'lI send every one of them that are legitimately hurt and tell them, don't you ever settle, because the City owns that injury, because when you're 60 years old and you got a fifty thousand dollar ($50,000) settlement, who's going to pay for that doctor to do another operation on your knee, or another operation on your back? Because then we have City insurance. Once you're hurt with workmen's comp., your City insurance will not pick trip the bill for that. So when those dollars are gone, who's going to pay to keep maintaining, put a new kneecap in, a new back in? So if you think you're going to go out there, for the ones that I represent and say, we're going to wash these people out, I can guarantee you, that's not going to happen. So that five million dollar ($5,000,000) deficit is not going to go down, because once they got hurt legitimately on the job, then you own them. And I think that's only fair that you do own them. Jerry Seppe used to climb those 90 -foot poles out at Curtis Park. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Charlie, I've heard it now, you know? I don't need a repeat of Charlie Seppe or whatever. What's going on here, absolutely, 100 percent represents and helps us identify the reason why we need consultants in here. And I think that's what we're moving towards. I have zero interest in hearing, you know, the tennis ball going back and forth, he said/she said, he's doing, they're doing, dah-dah-dah. We need to do what we're on a mission here to do. That's hire the appropriate consultants to get this thing rolling. And I frankly don't want to sit here another 30 minutes and have to listen to everybody talking about who's doing what, and who's doing -- and the answer back and forth. I think we're on the right path here. Chairman Regalado: We're going to move on now. Mr. Cox: That's fine. Commissioner Winton, I spent five minutes, and I will give it to you in writing. Chairman Regalado: We're going to move on now. There is a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: What's the motion? I've forgotten. Commissioner Sanchez: "A" to "Z." My motion. 47 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: "A" to "Z." Commissioner Sanchez: As the maker of the motion -- no. As the maker of the motion, what I - - An "A" through "Z" assessment with recommendations to overhaul Risk Management, Vice Chairman Winton: And you're going to start with an RFQ. And you're going to start with an RFQ. Commissioner Sanchez. RFQ. Chairman Regalado: And a parallel component. Commissioner Teele: That's not his motion. Commissioner Sanchez: No, that's not my motion. Chairman Regalado: That's not his motion. OK. Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second your motion. Chairman Regalado: We have one motion. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 48 January 24, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-73 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ISSUE AN EXPEDITED REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR A PROFESSIONAL FIRM TO CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF RISK MANAGEMENT; FURTHER DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO BRING BACK RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN 60 DAYS ON HOW TO IMPROVE OPERATIONS OF SAID OFFICE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado NAYS: None ABSENT: None Vice Chairman Winton: And the "when," the "when." And you need to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Sixty days. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Chairman Regalado: OK. The other motion. Vice Chairman Winton: I think the other motion is to -- And Commissioner Tecle, should this be an RFQ, also? I mean, it seems -- Commissioner Teele: What I would rather do, I think, is instruct the Manager to come back at the next meeting with a targeted approach for an RFQ, to target in on the area that would give us the greatest impact, based upon the public discussion and debate, and give them a chance to think it through. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Tecle: Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: And to attack the specific problem which was described by Act Safe. 49 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: By Act Safe, et cetera. Vice Chairman Winton: Right, Commissioner Teele: But give them a chance to sit down, regroup and come back in. But I think, you know, from the discussion, it's very clear, it's the indemnification issue. It's back to work. And I want to apologize to Mr. -- Where is Mr. Cox? Because he gets emotional about these things. If there is any implication on the Commission -- by the Commission that our goal is to screw the employee, that's certainly not what any of us -- Vice Chairman Winton: But we've said that over, and over and over again. So, you know. Commissioner Teele: Well, but we need to say that, though, because -- Vice Chairman Winton: We have said it over and over. Commissioner Sanchez: But Johnny, they come in front of the Commission and they make those statements, you know, and I'm holding back. Vice Chairman Winton: But you're correct. I'm sorry. Yes. Commissioner Teele: You know, and I think it's not fair to characterize work on any governmental service that we have. The City does have a cemetery. We do have docks. We also have parks. And I must tell you, what Mr. Cox said to tree underscores the need to really get in here and focus on this thing. And it also underscores, Mr. Manager, my observation to you, when you were up for confirmation, that the biggest problem we have in my judgment is not enough Assistant Managers and too many department heads. And this is the point. If this thing is being run by department heads, it is going to be a disaster. There has got to be some kind of coordinated effort for light duty that cuts across departments, because one month, one department may have a big need, whether it's counting bolts in GSA (General Services Administration) -- and there is a need to count and separate bolts. Maybe not an elegant analogy, but there is a need to do that. But there's always a need in the Parks Department for light duty people. There's always a need in some of our parks for light duty cleanup or in our -- We just had the discussion about the entrances of our City, the malls, you know, gateways. And so, you know, this can't be done -- I'm convinced of one thing. And I don't want to give you advice on this, but this cannot be done department by department, unless there is some union reason that you got to go that way. This thing has got to be a City program. Forget the departments. Once they go into that pool, that workers' comp. pool, they are a City employee. And whether they're working at Parks and they come out of Technology or Solid Waste, it really shouldn't matter. We've got needs in this City that go beyond a department director's vision and boundary. And if we don't expand that, we're going to get exactly what they're describing. Some departments are going to say, go back home. And so we need this "A" to "Z" study. But we also need, I think, a focus. And I think that focus ought to be on that indemnification issue, and a Citywide light duty program, where we can really get some bang for our buck. Parks Department, you cannot tell me that we cannot take virtually every person who's at home and send them into a park to do 50 January 24, 2002 0 • something, to help an elderly person, something that's charitable, something that's noble, something that Mother Teresa could approve of. We've got those needs all over this City. Chairman Regalado: And we don't have anybody on Sundays in the park. OK. That's the nature of the motion. That would be your -- Commissioner Teele: The motion would be to request the Manager to come back next week with. a focused approach with an RFQ. Vice Chairman Winton: Please. Right. Commissioner Teele: In the next meeting, with a focused approach for an RFQ, with a time line and all that. Vice Chairman Winton: That we will approve then. Commissioner Teele: That we will approve then. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion -- Commissioner Teele: Did you second that? Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, second. Chairman Regalado: No, we're -- OK. It's been moved and seconded. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-74 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO COME BACK AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING WITH A FOCUSED APPROACH FOR A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) TO TARGET IN ON WORKERS' COMPENSATION ISSUES TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC PROBLEMS (INDEMNIFICATION ISSUE) IDENTIFIED BY ACTSAFE GROUP. 51 January 24, 2002 Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teale, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado NAYS: None ABSENT: None Mario Soldevilla (Department of Solid Waste): Commissioner, could I make one comment, please? Chairman Regalado: No, sir. We just said that we are going to deal with this next session. We are not going to listen to it. If you want to, you can meet with Commissioners individually in the future, if they want to do that, to explain your process. 52 January 24, 2002 0 . 10. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH CYPRESS CORPORATION, SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, FOR RELICENSING, MAINTENANCE, UPGRADE SERVICE AND PRODUCT SUPPORT OF CYPRESS KNOWLEDGE DELIVERY ARCHITECTURE SOFTWARE FOR DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, $9,860. Chairman Regalado: Item 2, resolution. It needs a four-fifths vote. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-75 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT (S), BY A FOUR-FIFTHS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF A SOLE SOURCE; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED :FORM, WITH CYPRESS CORPORATION, SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, FOR RELICENSING, MAINTENANCE, UPGRADE SERVICE AND PRODUCT SUPPORT OF THE CYPRESS KNOWLEDGE DELIVERY ARCHITECTURE SOFTWARE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR FOUR ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $9,860 FOR THE INITIAL PERIOD OF THE AGREEMENT, WITH ANNUAL MAINTENANCE INCREASES NOT TO EXCEED 10%; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.460101.6.670. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado 53 January 24, 2002 0 0 Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 54 January 24, 2002 0 0 11. DEFER. PROPOSED APPROVAL OF ACQUISITION OF PRINTING SERVICES FOR PRINTING OF 1,800 DEPARTMENTAL ORDERS BOOKS FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE AND PROPOSED ACCEPTANCE OF PLAT ENTITLED BANYAN BAY APARTMENTS REPLAT. Chairman Regalado: Item 3 is an emergency ordinance. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Gimenez: Before we go, I'd like to make the following changes to the agenda. We want to pull number 12 and we want to defer number 14. Chairman Regalado: Number 12, printing services is being pulled. Defer -- what do you mean, defer? Defer for the -- Frank Rollason (Director, Building & Zoning): Number 14, we'll come back and -- Mr. Gimenez: We'll come hack. Mr. Rollason: -- the next meeting in February on the plat. Should be a plat., right, number 14? Commissioner Gonzalez: Right, it is. Mr. Gimenez: Yes. Mr. Rollason: OK. Chairman Regalado: Fourteen, Mr, Rollason: That will come back in February. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And when you come back with 14, would you explain what we're trying to accomplish, because I couldn't get that -- I couldn't figure that out at all. When you come back. Mr. Rollason: Yes. It's complicated, but we'll -- Chairman Regalado: OK. 55 January 24, 2002 i 12. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. AMEND SECTION 40-262 OF CITY CODE BY CLARIFYING DEFINITION OF ELIGIBLE RETIREMENT PLAN TO INCLUDE ELIGIBLE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN. Chairman Regalado: Emergency ordinance. It needs a four-fifths vote, Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Move it. Vice Chairman Winton: Sanchez is right there. Second. Chairnan Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: Three, Chairman Regalado: Three. Vice Chairman Winton: We're on three. We've already done -- Chairman Regalado: Three. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 40/ARTICLE IVIDIVISION 3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEUPENSION AND RETIREMENT PLAN/CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES AND SANITATION EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT TRUST", BY CLARIFYING THE DEFINITION OF AN ELIGIBLE RETIREMENT PLAN TO INCLUDE AN ELIGIBLE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 457(B) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 40-262 TO SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. 56 January 24, 2002 • • was introduced by Commissioner Tecle and seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele and seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12181 57 January 24, 2002 0 13. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 12128, ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE, TO INCREASE CERTAIN OPERATIONAL AND BUDGETARY APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2002; APPROVE CHANGES TO TABLE OF ORGANIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2002; AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 12144 TO REFLECT REVISION IN FUNDING SOURCE. Chairman Regalado: 3-A, an emergency ordinance. It needs a four/fifths vote. Vice Chairman Winton: So move. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second, Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and seconded. Read the ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: But I have a question. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: It says from parking surcharge in fiscal 2002. Are we in fiscal 2002 flow? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, we are. Vice Chairman Winton: The money that got tied up in surcharge in the lawsuit, was that 2001 money or 2002 money? Mr. Gimenez: We put aside some 2001 frfoney and also, 2002 money was involved, because we didn't -- that thing wasn't done until -- Vice Chairman Winton: So it's a part of 2001 and 2002. Mr. Gimenez: Yeah. Vice Chairnian Winton: OK. Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance. M.r. Gimenez: OK. We -- This is also part of the -- putting the rescue trucks in? Shorty Bryson (Fire Chief): Yes, sir. 58 January 24, 2002 Mr. Gimenez: OK. I need to make -- I need to put something on the record, so that we understand that this will be putting these rescue units in for this year. You came back with -- We do have a reduction in some expenses that may be able to fiend it next year. However, there are some issues dealing with next year's budget. So these two rescue units are going to be dealt with. This is part of the regular budgetary, you know, process for next year. There are some issues. There are significant issues in next year's budget, and I didn't want you all to, you know, be feeling that this will not be an item for discussion of next year's budget. Commissioner Teele: Well, I hope you've got commitments fi-om the Commissioners who are pushing this for your revenue enhancements next year. I mean, I hope -- Chairman Regalado: He doesn't have my commitment. And I talked to the Chief. Commissioner'reel e: I'm only Joking, Tomas. Chainnan Regalado: Like you said, I want to clear the record. No commitment from me. Vice Chairman Winton: So we're going to put these in place and then shut them down? Is that what you're suggesting you might want to do? Chairman Regalado: I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just telling you, because I do what I say. And I'm just telling you, there's no commitment from me to enhance. That's a very elegant way to say, "Raise taxes." Commissioner Teele: Well, let me just say this while we're here, because if Angel Gonzalez has not watched the Commission meetings, it's a good time to start paying attention, Angel, because in the past, this thing has always been a three to two vote. And -- and the third vote came from the seat where you're sitting. Now, I'm going to be very honest with you. This is all fun and games right now, but when it's time to put the budget together to keep this stuff running, we've got to come up with the money. I mean, it's got to be in the budget. And this is a zero slim game. You add something, you either take something out for the equal dollars or you add revenue. And that's what it always gets down to. And I support this. This is very necessary. But I also am going to be supporting the Manager's budget recommendations to fund this next year. And I do think it's not too early for the Manager to be talking to every -- all five of us about what the fiscal impact of this is. This is nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000). What's the full 12 -month cost? Chief Bryson: It's one point five million in a fill fiscal year. Commissioner Toole: So next year's budget -- Vice Chairman Winton: Significant. Commissioner Teele: We need another one point five million dollars ($1.5 million). Now, obviously, we can get it by increasing the ad valorem taxes for what equals one point five, which 59 January 24, 2002 is going to be, you know, a very, very -- it's less -- it's about one-tenth of one mill. Is that a good number, Madam Budget Director? Linda Haskins (Director, Management and Budget): Linda Haskins, Director of Management and Budget. Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele. And our millage rate right now is what? Ms. Haskins: $.995 mills. Commissioner Teele: 8.99. So this, in effect, if this were being added as a millage rate, we would be taking the millage up to about 9 mills, 9.1 mills or 9.05 mills, something like that. Ms. Haskins: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: So, you know, I kind of wish there would be a greater full disclosure in these documents, so when we're approving this, we're approving, you know, a commitment to fund it in the succeeding year, Admittedly, that commitment is a naked commitment, because it's subject only to the next vote. But at least we ought to get everybody on record that we're acknowledging we're adding -- one point one or one point five? Chief Bryson: Five. Commissioner Teele: We're adding one point five million dollars ($1.5 million) to the budget Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, like I said, we have identified -- Commissioner Teele: And on a reoccurring basis. Mr. Gimenez: We have identified, you know, one point five million dollars ($1.5 million) in an expense reduction for next year. And if all things were equal, it would be OK. But I need to put on the record that there are some issues that have come to light that were not part of our five-year plan in terms of expenditures. So I just wanted to put that on the record so that everybody understood that. Commissioner Teele: Where are the reductions coming from? Mr. Gimenez: We have some pension numbers that are a little bit more than what we had planned, somewhat more than what we had planned. The reductions are coming in expenditures that we -- that the City had incurred for retiree health insurance costs, and those are being reduced. Vice Chairman Winton: You mentioned some potentially -- I forget the adjective you used to describe the increase in pension cost. When -- when will we have a dialogue about that? 60 January 24, 2002 Mr. Gimenez: Well, we already have started a dialogue with the unions. There is a Pension Board meeting today to discuss those numbers. And we are hopeful that we can get those numbers down. Vice Chairman Winton: But when do we have a dialogue from here about it? Because we're the ones that are going to have to be dealing with it and hearing about it. Mr. Gimenez: It'll be part of the budget process. We'll get you some information. We just got these numbers last week. I'll be having meetings with you all and tell you what the ramifications of some of those numbers are, but they're not final. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Gimenez: So like I said, we may have to deal with this in the next budget year. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. But it seems to me that sooner may be better than later, because there may be some actions we want to take as a part of other things that are going on before we get into the budget process. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: OK, Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Gonzalez: I would like to address the issue Chairman Regalado; Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzdlez: It's the second time that Commissioner Teele makes reference to me in reference to the budget and how we're spending the money. And let me tell you how I feel about it. OK? And I'm going to tell you as a resident of the City of Miami, and not as a Commissioner. You know what really pisses you off, the people out thcre? The fact that we spend three quarters of the budget of the City of Miami between Fire and Police Department, that we don't have the necessary amount of police officers out on the streets serving the people, the fact that our streets are a mess, the fact that our sidewalks are a mess, the fact that we don't have the City clean, the fact with the many problems that we have in the City that hasn't been addressed the way they should have been addressed long time ago. OK? And I'm sure that everybody knows that there's two things in life in this country. You have to pay taxes, and you have to die one day. OK? And people out there know that they have to pay taxes. And nobody out there will refuse or will complain to pay taxes if they will get the appropriate services that they should get. And that is my point of view, and that is going to be my point of view continuously. We have -- let me tell you, one really -- one thing that is really frustrating to me, and it hasn't been -- and you've seen me before at this City Commission many, many times. And when I was -- when I "standed" out there as a citizen and as a community leader, 1 always had your respect, and I appreciate that, and your consideration. It's the fact that the bureaucracy 61 January 24, 2002 in this City is something that it is absurd. OK? We don't -- we don't care about providing services to the people. We don't -- We need to put more people out on the street to do the work that we need to do in this City. And let me tell you, when the residents of the City of Miami see that they -- that we are giving them a share of what they deserve on services, nobody will complain about this City Commission, nobody will complain about this government, .and everybody will be happy to pay taxes. But they see that they're paying taxes every -- Every time something happen in the City, we say, let's increase taxes. Let's raise the fire fee. Let's raise the fire -- the solid waste. And what are we giving them in return? Nothing. I went to that Solid Waste Department that is -- and that department is a mess. Solid Waste, it's a complete mess. Now we're talking that we have to reduce the budget that we may not be able to afford two fire rescue trucks to save lives, but we bought 18 trucks for Solid Waste that we don't even know if they are going to work in the City of Miami. And that is not, that is not acting responsibly. We were supposed -- And I was here sitting over there during that meeting when we said that we're going to bring one truck as a pilot program. We were going to use it in the City and see if the truck work, and then the City was going to decide if they were going to buy the trucks. They already purchased 18 trucks. Three and a half million dollars. And we don't even know. And I -- and I'll tell you, Commissioner, I assure you, most of those trucks are not going to be able to pick up garbage in the City of Miami. And I will -- And let me tell you, I want to see what the answer is going to be when we cannot use those trucks. What are we going to do? Are we going to give them to some country in Latin America? Are we going to try to send them back and see if they give us a refund? What -- I want to see a plan on what we're going to do with those trucks whenever we're not able to use them. Thank you. And I know, I'm -- let me tell you, I'm concerned that we need to have recurring income to pay for our expenses. And if we don't have the income, then we're going to have to start cutting expenses. And maybe we'll have to go to the extent of cutting some of the huge salaries that are paid to some people in this City. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. I suspect that that's a third vote. OK. Read the ordinance. 3-A, it's been moved and seconded. Call the roll. 62 January 24, 2002 An Ordinance entitled -- AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12128, AS AMENDED, THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE, TO INCREASE CERTAIN OPERATIONAL AND BUDGETARY APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2002, TO REFLECT CHANGES FOR THE ADDITION OF TWO FIRE -RESCUE UNITS; FURTHER APPROVING CHANGES TO THE TABLE OF ORGANIZATION ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 25, 2001 FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2002; AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12144, ADOPTED OCTOBER 25, 2001, TO REFLECT A REVISION IN THE FUNDING SOURCE RELATED TO THE FLAGLER FIRST CONDOMINIUM PROJECT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Joe Sanchez NAYS: ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado None None Whereupon, the Commission, on motion of Vice Chairman Winton, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Joe Sanchez NAYS: ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado None None THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12182. 63 January 24, 2002 • 0 The ordinance was read, by title, into the public record by the City Attorney, Chairman Regalado: Number 4 -- Commissioner Teele: Second the motion of Commissioner Gonzalez requesting a report from the Manager at the close of the meeting regarding those -- what was it'? 18 trucks? Seriously. Mr. Gimenez: That's the pilot program for the one-armed bandits. Commissioner Teele: Seriously, you ought to give us a brief -- Mr. Gimenez: We can give you a report on exactly when they're going to go in, where they're going to go. Commissioner Teele: Later on this afternoon. Mr. Gimenez: Absolutely, yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: They're called the one-armed -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: -- one-armed bandit. 64 January 24, 2002 0 9 14. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 40-255 OF CITY CODE RELATING TO CITY GENERAL EMPLOYEES' AND SANITATION EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST, BY RENUMBERING OPTIONAL ALLOWANCES FOR PURPOSES OF CLARIFICATION. Chairman Regalado: First reading ordinance, item 4. Commissioner Teele: Moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chainnan Regalado: Is there a second? It's been second. Read the ordinance. Roil call. An Ordinance entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 40/ARTICLE IV/DIVISION 3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEL/PENSION AND REPLAN/CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES AND SANITATION EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT TRUST", BY RENUMBERING THE RETIREMENT OPTIONAL ALLOWANCES FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 40-255; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 65 January 24, 2002 0 15. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: RENAME COCONUT GROVE CONVENTION CENTER TO COCONUT GROVE EXPO CENTER; AMEND SECTIONS 2-358, 53 ARTICLE III, 53-151, 53-152, 53-153, 53-154 AND 54-341 OF CITY CODE. Chairman Regalado: Five, first reading ordinance relating to -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Regalado: -- Coconut Grove Convention Center. It's been moved. Commissioner Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) affects more people. Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been seconded. Read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTERS 2, 53 AND 54 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE COCONUT GROVE CONVENTION CENTER TO THE COCONUT GROVE EXPO CENTER; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2-358, 53-1, 53-151, 53-152, 53-153, 53-154 AND 54-341 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. Was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 66 January 24, 2002 16. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S ACTION TO AUTHORIZE USE OF $151,186.01 FROM GENERAL FUND TO ENABLE SPRING GARDEN CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. TO EXECUTE TIMELY CLOSING FOR ORGANIZATION TO PURCHASE SEYBOLD CANAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 613 NW 7 STREET ROAD, PENDING CITY'S RECEIPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. Chairman Regalado: Item 6. Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: And second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chainnan Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-76 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY AND AUTHORIZING THE USE OF FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $151,186.01 TO ENABLE THE SPRING GARDEN CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC. ("ASSOCIATION") TO EXECUTE THE TIMELY CLOSING FOR THE ASSOCIATION TO PURCHASE THE SEE BOLD CANAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 613 NORTHWEST 7TH STREET ROAD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, PENDING THE CITY'S RECEIPT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez 67 January 24, 2002 • i 17. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF EMERGENCY; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVE EMERGENCY REPAIR OF RESCUE 12, BY AMERICAN LAFRANCE MEDICMASTER CORPORATION, $13,360.50. Chairman Regalado: Item 7. Fire -rescue resolution. It needs a four-fifths vote. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Second, Chairman Regalado: It's be been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-77 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND ISSUING A PURCHASE ORDER FOR THE ACQUISITION OF REPAIR SERVICES TO RESCUE 12 MEDICAL SERVICE UNIT FROM AMERICAN LAFRANCE MEDICMASTER CORPORATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $13,360,50; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO, 001000.280701.6.670. 69 January 24, 2002 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: None. 70 January 24, 2002 0 • 18. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S .FINDING OF EMERGENCY; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVE EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF FRONT SUSPENSION PARTS TO REPAIR ENGINE 58, BY TEN -8 EQUIPMENT, INC., $5,282.70. Chairman Regalado: Number 8, a resolution -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Regalado: -- four-fifths vote. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second, Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 71 January 24, 2002 • 0 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-78 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND ISSUING A PURCHASE ORDER FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF FRONT SUSPENSION PARTS TO REPAIR ENGINE 58 FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE FROM 10-5 EQUIPMENT, INC. IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,282.70; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO.001000.280701.6.670. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzaiez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: None. 72 January 24, 2002 • 0 19. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVE PURCHASE OF PARATECH RESCUE PNEUMATIC STRUTS AND ACCESSORIES FROM TEAM RESCUE EQUIPMENT, INC., $9,363.60, FOR DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. Chairman Regalado: Number 9, it also needs a four-fifths vote. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (CoIlectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-79 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF PARATECH RESCUE PNEUMATIC STRUTS AND ACCESSORIES FROM TEAM RESCUE EQUIPMENT, INC. FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,363.60; ALLOCATING FUND FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 313304, ACCOUNT CODE NO, 289401.6.840, AS FUNDED BY THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE. 73 January 24, 2002 i i (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None, 74 January 24, 2002 • 0 20. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF EMERGENCY, WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES, AND APPROVE PURCHASE OF AIR HANDLERS AT THIRD LEVEL PRESS BOX AT ORANGE BOWL STADIUM FOR DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES FROM SOUTH FLORIDA TRANE SERVICES, $3,700; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM ORANGE BOWL STADIUM OPERATING BUDGET. Chairman Regalado: Number 10, resolution -- Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-80 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF AIR HANDLERS FOR THE THIRD LEVEL PRESS BOX AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES FROM SOUTH FLORIDA TRANE SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,700; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO, 404000.350 503.670. 75 January 24, 2002 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None, 76 January 24, 2002 i 0 21. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF EMERGENCY, WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES, AND APPROVE PURCHASE OF WELDING REPAIRS TO SAFETY RAILINGS AT ORANGE BOWL STADIUM FOR DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, FROM PROGRESSIVE WELDING CORPORATION $1,728; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM ORANGE BOWL STADIUM OPERATING BUDGET. Chairman Regalado: Number 11, resolution. It needs a four-fifths vote. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner GOnz_.a1ez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second, Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Gonzalez. All in favor say "aye." The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, 13Y A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF WELDING REPAIRS TO SAFETY RAILING AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES FROM PROGRESSIVE WELDING CORPORATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,728; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO.404000.350 503.670. 77 January 24, 2002 i 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlcz Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regal ado: Department of police, number 12, have been pulled. 78 January 24, 2002 i C 22. RATIFY, APPROVE, AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF EMERGENCY, WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND ISSUING PURCHASE ORDER FOR PROCUREMENT OF TWO EXPLOSIVES DETECTION DOGS FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $ I5,300; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, Chairman Regalado: Department -- Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Item 13. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. All in favor -- it needs a four-fifths vote, say "yes." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-82 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND ISSUING A PURCHASE ORDER FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF TWO EXPLOSIVES DETECTION DOGS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,300; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.875. 79 January 24, 2002 r] (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk,) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chain-nan Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: Number 14 as has been deferred. 80 January 24, 2002 0 . 23. APPROVE SALE OF CITY -OWNED PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY TO ATLANTIC PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, $1,000, SUBJECT TO FINAL PLAT OF BANYAN BAY APARTMENTS REPLAT AND OTHER CONDITIONS. Chairman Regalado: Number 15, sale of a City -owned parcel of real estate property. Resolution. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved, with a question. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: How many square feet is this site? Laura Billberry (Director, Asset Management): It's a small five-foot strip. It's 750 square feet. It's five feet wide. Vice Chairman Winton: You need to put in here how many square feet it is so that we know for sure that it fits the new rules -- Ms. Billberry: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: -- that were promulgated through the Charter changes. Ms. Billberry: OK. I think it is, and -- OK. You're right. Chairman Regalado: OK. Any other questions? No more questions? Vice Chairman Winton: No. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." 81 January 24, 2002 • 9 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT (S), APPROVING THE SALE OF A CITY -OWNED PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A" (THE "PROPERTY"), TO ATLANTIC PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, A MARYLAND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ("ATLANTIC"), FOR THE SUM OF $1,000.00 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AND RECORDATION OF THE FINAL PLAT OF BANYAN BAY APARTMENTS REPLAT AND TO OTHER CONDITIONS; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS: (A) A QUIT CLAIM DEED IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED AS "EXHIBIT B", CONVEYING THE PROPERTY FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI TO ATLANTIC, AND (B) OWNERS AFFIDAVIT IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED AS "EXHIBIT C." (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 82 January 24, 2002 24. APPOINT MARIA TERESA ZORILLA CLARK, REVEREND RICHARD BENNETT, OBED JAUREGUI AS MEMBERS OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD. Chairman Regalado: Item 16, Community Relations Board. You have some appointments. I have to leave now. Vice Chairman, if you want to continue with the appointments or do any other things? I have some appointments, but I. can do it later on, if you -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Can I suggest that we do the appointments later on. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, you can do that. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, although, you know, this is a pretty easy thing to kind of get through. And, Commissioner Regalado, when he gets back, can make his real quickly and we can all get the rest of ours done. Chairman Regalado: Whatever you want to do. Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, because these aren't generally controversial, right'? Chairman Regalado: I just need to -- Commissioner Gonzalez: (INAUDIBLE) after lunch? Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to do them all now and let him -- Commissioner Rcgalado bring his back after- lunch and we get all the rest of ours done that we want -- Chairman Regalado: At what time do you want to come back? See, we have this 5 o'clock certain, the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel). We have your Brickell at 6:30, right? Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, just one point of -- take something out of -- Vice Chairman Winton: And of all the PZ (Planning & Zoning) items. Commissioner Sanchez. (INAUDIBLE) February the 28th meeting happens to fall on date day, and I believe that some of us may be in Tallahassee at that time, so let's get together and come up with a date that we can change February the 28th maybe to the 21st of February, so look at your calendars and then, in the afternoon, we'll get together and decide what day. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. 83 January 24, 2002 40 Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Chairman Regalado: Fine. So, what time you want to come back? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we've got a -- Commissioner Gonzalez: How about 3 o'clock. Vice Chairman Winton: -- a lot of PZ items, too, by the way, gang, so -- Chairman Regalado: Yeah. What I was thinking is that maybe at 3 we can take -- at 3 o'clock, Johnny, we can take some PZ items and then go on to the CIP and come back to the PZ -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. So you want to do 3 o'clock? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Is that what you're saying? Commissioner Gonzalez: Three o'clock, OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Fine. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Note for the Record: Chairman Regalado exits meeting at 11:41 a.m. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, Commissioner Sanchez: We're ready for appointments. Vice Chairman Winton: On 16? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Community Relations Board. Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to reappoint Teresita Zorilla Clark. 84 January 24, 2002 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teeie, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado. 86 January 24, 2002 0 C� 25. APPOINT CARLOS NAVARRO, MERLINE JOSEPH, JESSICA SHAPIRO AS MEMBERS OF CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Number 17 is Culture and Fine Arts Board. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to reappoint Carlos Navarro. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Would reappoint the current appointee, Joseph. Vice Chairman Winton: Merline Joseph. Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: I have no appointment at this time. Vice Chairman Winton: And I'd like to reappoint Jessica Shapiro. So, we need a motion for those three -- Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Need a second. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Got a motion and a second. further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye," The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-85 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed andadopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton 87 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 88 January 24, 2002 26. APPOINT FRANKIE ROLLE, GERALD SILVERMAN, MARIANO CRUZ AND CONFIRM ELECTION OF ELOY GARCIA, JORGE L. GARCIA AS MEMBERS OF CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Eighteen. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I would move the reappointment of Frankie Rolle for one of the three seats. So moved, with a -- requesting a second. Vice Chairman Winton: And I -- we also have a new person who would like to get into the mix, that I think is pretty good. Should we vote on these individually? Commissioner Teele: Individual appointments, yes. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Teele: I mean, it's a group appointment, but to be voted on individually. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we have a motion to reappoint Frankie Rolle. Commissioner Gonzdlez: I would like to proffer Mariano Cruz name. Commissioner Teele: Let's vote on each one separate. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. OK. Because I have one also. Gerald Silverman. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So that we could kind of set the stage here, if there are two -- let's see. You said you're going to have one? Commissioner Sanchez. Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I have somebody that would like to go up. You have one. So, what this means is that there won't be -- so, I guess, Commissioner Teele, I would ask if you think we should have a bit of a dialogue about the names that are being proffered here and then vote one by one? Or do you want to just do it the way you're suggesting? Commissioner Teele: I think we should vote one by one, but -- either way, but I think we should have a little bit of a dialogue. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So, why don't we get all the names out on the table and then we can have some dialogue, and then we'll vote one by one. 89 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Gerald Silverman. He is the acting chairperson on the Civil Service Board. He's been there for God knows how many years. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's not a new name. So, you're proffering one that's here -- OK. And who did you proffer, Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalez: Mariano Cruz. Vice Chairman Winton: And I have a resume from someone who would like to serve, who's name is Miguel do la o. And I'll pass this resume around. I don't _- so y'all can take a look at -- Unidentified Speaker: That's an attorney? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, he's an attorney. And there are three slots. So -- Commissioner Tcele: Well, why don't we do this. I would move the confirmation of the results of the Civil Service Board employees election of Eloy Garcia for seat number 1 and Jorge Garcia for seat number 2. And this is to confirm the results of the Civil Service Board, Commissioner Gonzalez: Is that a motion? Commissioner Teele: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, it's a motion. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second on the confirmation of the Civil Service Board elections. Any further discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-86 A MOTION CONFIRMING THE ELECTION RESULTS OF THE DECEMBER 2001 CIVIL SERVICE BOARD ELECTION WHEREIN ELOY GARCIA (SEAT NO. 1) AND JORGE L. GARCIA (SEAT NO. 2) WERE ELECTED TO SERVE AS MEMBERS. 90 January 24, 2002 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: In proffering of the name of Frankie Rolle, I would offer that Mrs. Rolle is a distinguished lifetime citizen in the community, lived in the Grove area. Her civic achievements resulted in a building by Dade County being named in her honor: The Primary Neighborhood Center. She's the widow of the late Billy Rolle, who was a legend in the music industry. And I think Ms. Rolle is a person who has served this community. She has no reason - - she's been an employee of the County -- was she an employee of the County or the City? School Board for many, many years, and I would urge the unanimous adoption of Mrs. Rolle as a person who not -- doesn't live in my district candidly. She lives in your district, Commissioner Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: But she's a person that serve this community with distinction. Vice Chairman Winton: So, I have a motion on Frankie Rolle. Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Further discussion. All in favor aye. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion caries. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: 91 January 24, 2002 0 MOTION NO. 02-87 L.J A MOTION APPOINTING FRANKIE ROLLE AS A MEMBER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and ,adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado. Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to move Gerald Silverman, who is the acting -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, we have a motion for Gerald Silverman. Commissioner Teele: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: And a second. All in favor -- any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-88 A MOTION APPOINTING GERALD SILVERMAN AS A MEMBER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chainnan Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. 92 January 24, 2002 • ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Gonzalez: My appointment, Mariano Cruz, the name that I proffered. Mariano is a well-known activist of Allapattah and community leader in Allapattah. Mari,zno has worked serving and representing our community for many, many years, and has taken the position always to work in favor of our community. He also has a great relationship with different people in the administration and City employees. And I think Mariano -- as a matter of fact, he was serving on the board until recently. And I think that Mariano will be able to do a great job _- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Commissioner Gonzdlez: -- for the entire City. Commissioner Teele: For discussion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cruz is well known to me and he's someone that I think actually could provide a unique balance, but 1 would say this. I think, if Mr. Cruz accepts this appointment, he clearly must agree to carry himself and comport himself -- no, no, no -- before this Commission, because -- no, no, no -- because this is -- you know, Jessie Jackson says there's two roles: There's tree shakers and there's jelly makers. And the tree shakers don't get to make the jelly. And the jelly makers wouldn't have jelly if there weren't tree shalcers. Now, I see Mr. Cruz as a little bit of a tree shaker and I think that's good. I think we need tree shakers. But I also think that when he's on television here and the public sees him, and then he goes and he sits there in a board meeting, where people's lives are at line, their careers are at line, people want to have a sense that Mr. Cruz is going to comport himself in accordance with the rules of order and be recognized and not argue back and forth with the Chairman. And, you know -- and I enjoy Mr. Cruz here very much, but sometimes Mr. Cruz does get extremely excited, and that's your right. That's your first amendment right. But I think, if you're going to go onto this board, then, literally, it's going to decide the future of citizens and people. They want to feel like you play by the rules, as well. And I'm pleased to second the nomination. I'm pleased to support it. But I just want to say that, because once you're on, you're on and we can't tell you what to do. And this is my only chance to stay what I'm going to say. And I'm through with it. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Commissioner Teele, I was going to say exactly the same thing. What comes with this appointment is a tremendous amount of responsibility and., you know, the excitement and emotion and the ability to say just anything you want to say, which you can do from that podium is not appropriate on this board, because it is a serious board. So -- and I hope that -- and, frankly, I see this issue a little differently than you do, Commissioner Teele, in that I think, during the course of this year, we have to start paying careful attention to what's going on on that Civil Service Board and if we're not getting the kind of results that we need -- because that board has, as far as I'm concerned, a dual responsibility. It has the responsibility to protect 93 January 24, 2002 the rights of our employees. It also has the responsibility to protect the rights of our citizens, and that means to fire employees who need firing. And so there's a dual responsibility there. And I think this is one of the most important boards in our City, and I think that we all -- and, certainly, I am going to start paying more attention to what that board's doing during the course of the year and 1, frankly, am not going to be afraid to come before this Commission and remove any of our -- move to remove any of our at large appointments if they're not appropriately fulfilling those dual roles. So, any further discussion on this nomination? And that wasn't directed at Mariano, by the way. That was directed at all three appointments here. So, any other discussion on this? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chainnan Winton: Like sign opposed. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-89 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AND CONFIRMING THE ELECTIONS OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE CIVIL SERVICE .BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny .L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to allow Mr. Cruz -- Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: -- the opportunity to make a statement, if he'd like, now that there's been a unanimous vote. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. And thank to you this appointment. I accept the appointment to the Civil Service Board. And, you know, I'd like to say one thing: I 94 January 24, 2002 0 0 am fair. You can check all these TV (television) things from the civil (UNINTELLIGIBLE). One thing, I am not intimidated, either by employees or by other people, whatever. I'm going to say here whatever I say outside, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) because it shouldn't -- I go there and I sit in your chair, which I like it. I maybe move to the Grove. Vice Chairman Winton: Which "your?" Mr. Cruz: Your chair. Commissioner Teele: He's already (INAUDIBLE) chair. Vice Chairman Winton: No wonder I can't get this thing to move. Mr. Cruz: No. But what I say is -- and remember, if I am here and this board is — remember last two years ago the bickering about Garcia versus Garcia to go to the board? That was why they appoint me. And I serve and I try to be there and read, do the homework, be fair and go by the fact. And I'm going to say one thing: I resent one thing that happened last year. One time the Manager sent back three of our decisions. First time that that happened, when we found somebody not guilty, the Manager should abide by the decisions of the Civil Service Board. The only thing he can do is modify something -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Mariano, we were interested in a comment about your appointment. We're not interested in a discussion right now about how it's working or not working. Mr. Cruz: Well, you know, that's to be fair. Commissioner Teele: 1 thought you were going to say, thank you fo-r the -- Mr. Cruz: That's to be fair. Not to say that the board -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. You can bring that back. We've got -- Mr. Cruz: The board is always responsible -- Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you for your comments. 95 January 24, 2002 0 0 27. APPOINT MEMBERS OF FLORIDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FINANCING AUTHORITY: ALEX HECKLER (LEGAL AND REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY), LUIS DE VARONA (REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY), RON HARVEY (ACCOUNTING CATEGORY). Vice Chairman Winton: Number 19, Economic Development Financing Authority. I think each of us has an appointment Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele, do you have anyone? Commissioner Gonzdlez, Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Mr. Alex Heckler is my appointment. Vice Chairman Winton: So, Alex Heckler? Commissioner Gonzdlez:.Right. Vice Chainnan Winton: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, Luis de Varona in the category of real estate development. So moved. Commissioner Gonzdlcz: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: All -- and we'll do them all at once. Commissioner Gonzalez, what category is yours going to fill? Accounting, banking, investment or legal and real estate development? Commissioner Gonzalez: You're talking to me? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Economic Development Finance Authority. Vice Chairman Winton: Real -- legal and real estate development? No, no. He's going to be on the Economic Development Financing Authority, but -- Commissioner Gonzdlcz: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: But we've got three categories. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Right. 96 January 24, 2002 1] 0 Vice Chairman Winton: Accounting, banking, or investment banking or legal and real estate development, and I want to know which of those three -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I would say legal and real estate development. Vice Chairman Winton: Fine. And back to you, Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Ron Harvey, accounting. Vice Chairman Winton: Accounting. And I have -- and I'll bring someone Lack at the next meeting. So, we have three appointments. Need a motion on the three. Commissioner Gonzalez: Move. Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: And a second. Commissioner Teele: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-90 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FINANCING AUTHORITY FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. 97 January 24, 2002 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 98 January 24, 2002 0 28. APPOINT ARTHUR HERTZ, LEWIS FREEMAN, JORGE LUIS LOPEZ, LARRY COKER, PAUL DEE, AND COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ AS MEMBERS OF ORANGE BOWL ADVISORY BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Orange Bowl Advisory Board. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to reappoint both of my previous appointments. Reappointment of Arthur Hertz and Luis B. Freeman. Commissioner Teele: Now, Freeman exceeded -- OK. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Commissioner Sanchez, could we just include a waiver for that? Because one exceeded the number of absences. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So, motion for a waiver of Mr. Foeman: And also there's an elector waiver we need, as well, before anything -- Commissioner Sanchez: A what`? Mr. Foeman: There is also an elector waiver because the person was not a registered voter. We can waive that, as well. Commissioner Sanchez: OK, Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele. You want me to go on? Commissioner Teele: Temporarily pass. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. You're talking about the Orange Bowl Advisory Board, right? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm going to defer one appointment and I'm going to make one appointment now. Jorge Luis Lopez. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Second Commissioner Teele: Second. 99 January 24, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: And I've got -- let me see. I think -- Commissioner Teele: Better do it before the Chairman gets back. Vice Chairman Winton: They both want -- well -- but -- and I'm going to reappoint obviously Coach Larry Coker, and need a waiver because -- we need both waivers, don't we, both the elector waiver and the exceeded number of absences waiver? Mr. Foeman: Yes, that's correct. Vice Chairman Winton: So -- and the other appointment I. will not make at this time. So, we -- well, maybe -- I will -- yeah. And then, if lie misses again, we'll -- and plus I'll call. OK. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. No, no. He's Commission at large, so we've got to -- you've got to make the Commission at large appointment, someone, and that -- Commissioner Teele: I would move Commissioner Sanchez as the Commissioner at large appointment. Commissioner Sanchez: And thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. But we also need the Commission at large -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Paul Dec. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: Has always attended the meetings. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. So, we need him. So, now we have Commissioner Sanchez, Paul Dec, Jorge Luis Lopez, Art Hertz, Luis Freeman, and Larry Coker. We have any other names to proffer. Being none, need a motion and a second on this. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Vice Chairman. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 100 January 24, 2002 0 • Vice Chairman Winton: Life sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-91 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Cleric.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Winton: Property and Asset Review Committee. Commissioner Tecle: But may I inquire? When does this committee sunset? Did we change that? Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, we changed it. Mr. Foeman: I'd have to cheep it. Commissioner Sanchez: We did. I think it's got another year. Vice Chairman Winton: Could you check for us, please -- Mr. Foeman: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: -- and come back? Mr. Foeman: I will. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Which one -- are you talking about Property And Asset Review? 101 January 24, 2002 0 Commissioner Sanchez: Orange Bowl. Vice Chairman Winton: Or Orange Bowl? Commissioner Sanchez: Steering Committee. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, I would think. Yeah, Orange Bowl. 102 January 24, 2002 29. APPOINT CESAR CARASA AS MEMBERS OF PROPERTY AND ASSET REVIEW COMMITTEE. Vice Chairman Winton: So, OK. Property and Asset Review. Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm going to need a four-fifths vote in here because I'm appointing -- I'm proffering Caesar Carasa for the Property and Asset Review Committee, Caesar Carasa is a City Commissioner for the City of West Miami. I talked to our City Attorney and asked him if there will be any kind of conflict or anything like that? He says no, due to the fact that this is only an advisory -- Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- committee. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE PROPERTY AND ASSET REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. 103 January 24, 2002 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Tecle, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 104 January 24, 2002 • 0 30. APPOINT ADOLFO RAMOS AND RUTH HAMILTON AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Code Enforcement Board. Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: I have Adolfo Ramos. Vice Chairman Winton: Adolfo Ramos. I'm going to reappoint Ruth Hamilton. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: And we have -- so, we have those two appointments. Do we have any Commission at large appointments? Commissioner Teele: Both have exceeded their appointments. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Tecle: Mr. Clerk, do you advertise the Code Enforcement Board? Mr. Foeman: No, we do not. Commissioner Teele: Say again. Commissioner Sanchez: There is no Code Enforcement. Mr. Foeman: We don't advertise that particular board. Vice Chairman Winton: Twenty-two, Code Enforcement Board. Well, I think all of us need to really -- this is such a crucial board, with such a heavy workload that we need to -- all of us thin]( about this and bring names back at the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Teele: Well, let me just say this. I think it's really important that the Commission at large appointees attend the meeting. .I mean, it's one thing for us to interfere with each other's individual recommendations, but if we're making a group recommendation, we've got to insist that those two people, you know, almost take an oath in blood to attend the meetings, at least. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 agree a hundred percent. Commissioner Teele: I mean, it's embarrassing that we have two Commission appointees who've both exceeded the -- you know, and this is just so important for the property owner that's there trying to have a quorum and really have a full hearing. And, so, you're going to set this for the next meeting? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. 105 January 24, 2002 0 i Commissioner Teele: To be reviewed -- rediscussed. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we have two appointments in. We need a motion on the two. Commissioner Teelc: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gonzdlcz: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second on the two. Any further discussion? .Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 106 January 24, 2002 0 0 31. APPOINT ARVA PARKS, DANA MANNER, TAMARA GORT AND JESUS CASANOVA AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Planning Advisory Board. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to appoint Arva Parks and reappoint Dana Manner. Vice Chairman Winton: Reappoint Dana Manner and Arva Parks. OK. Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: I have two appointments. Reappointment of Jesus Casanova and appoint of Tamara Gort. Vice Chairman Winton: What was that last name? Commissioner Gonzdlez: Tamara Gort. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: I would like to pass at this time. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. And in place of Michael Spetko on mine, I would like to nominate Maricarmen Martinez, And I will hold on my -- Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Commissioner, excuse me. This is an application board. We would need an application fi•om your appointee. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Mr. Foeman: We've only received two. Vice Chairman Winton: OK, fine. So, we need to get an application from her and then we'll bring it back. So, we now -- so that means we only have two -- let's see. We have Commissioner Sanchez' appointments and Commissioner Gonzdlez' appointments. We need a motion. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Cleric, did both of my appointments have applied? Mr. Foeman: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Were we on Planning or Zoning? Planning. Vice Chairman Winton: We're on Planning. Mr. Foeman: Planning Advisory Board. 107 January 24, 2002 • Vice Chairman Winton: So, we've got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS REGULAR MEMBERS AND AS AN ALTERNATE MEMBER OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 108 January 24, 2002 0 32. DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS TO PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ZONING BOARD. APPOINT JUVENAL PINA, ILEANA HERNANDEZ-ACOSTA AND GEORGES WILLIAMS AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF ZONING BOARD. Vice Chairman Winton: Twenty-four, Zoning Board. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, I would like to reappoint Juvenal Pena and Ileana Hernandez. Do they both have applications in? Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm going to defer mine for the next meeting. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner TeeIe. Commissioner Teele: Let me just say this, Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: There are only two names that applied, other than the ones that are there. One of them was just appointed by Commissioner Sanchez. The other name is a distinguished historian. If you're -- if you are not going to reappoint or if you would like to have your option preserved, you would want to move that there be a new advertisement for this, as well. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Commissioner Teele: At the close of this, just so that you know. These have to be appointed from an advertised list, is that right? Mr. Foeman: That is correct. Commissioner Teele: OK, Commissioner Gonzdlez: All right. So, I move to readvertise. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second on readvertising. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 109 January 24, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzdlez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-95 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE FOR ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ZONING BOARD. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Toole. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Winton: Back to nominations. Commissioner Teele, what did you say about your nominations? Commissioner Toole: Well, what I would like to do is appoint -- reappoint Georges Williams. Now, Mr. Clerk, Mr. Flowers has been called away by the federal government, as a result of 9111, on some aviation matters. How do we handle people who are going to be absent, that -- you know, national guard, you know, FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), sky marshal stuff, all that stuff? Mr. Foeman: I think, currently, the global boards ordinance -- I mean, section of the code does not provide for excusable absences. Maybe that's something we should address. Commissioner Toole: All right. Mr. Attorney, would you provide an ordinance at the next meeting that allows for a person that has been called away over the next year for the national guard or under federal orders or federal contract related to security aviation, transportation, to be given extended excuses, please? With that, I will reappoint Charles Flowers, with that understanding. Vice Chairman Winton: So, you can probably -- do you need -- you want to hold off on Charles Flowers and make a decision at the next meeting, when he brings us a resolution? Commissioner Toole: Yeah, I would. Vice Chairman Winton: So that it becomes -- so they both get done at the same time? 110 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But these board people stay there until they've been replaced anyway. Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And I'm going to defer decisions on mine, as well. So, we need a motion to accept those that have been -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: Moved. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: -- proffered. Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzdlez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teete, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 111 January 24, 2002 33. (A) DEFERRED: APPOINT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF DISTRICT FIVE HISTORIC PRESERVATION. (B) APPOINT CHAIRMAN REGALADO, ELI FEINBERG, COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, AL HUSTON, COMMISSIONER TEELE, DIEGO GARCIA AND ORLANDO GARCIA JR. AS MEMBERS OF MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY (MSEA). Vice Chairman Winton: Historic Preservation Board, number 25. Commissioner -- Commissioner Teele: Let me temporarily pass that. We're having some -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Twenty-six, Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzdlez: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority. Eli Feinberg and Angel Gonzalez are the two names. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Reappoint both of my appointments, Orlando Garcia and Diego Garcia. Vice Chairman Winton: And I'm going to wait until Commissioner Regalado gets back so we can talk about this. And Commissioner Teele? Commissioner Teele: I will reappoint the two, Al Gonzalez and myself. Vice Chairman Winton: Al Houston. Commissioner Teele: Al Houston. I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: And yourself. OK. We have a motion. Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chainnan Winton: We need a motion and a second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 112 January 24, 2002 • 0 Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO, 02-97 A MOTION APPOINTING ELI FEINBERG, COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ, ORLANDO GARCIA, ORLANDO GARCIA, JR., DIEGO GARCIA AL HUSTON AND COMMISSIONER TEELE AS MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTIIORITY (MSEA). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Tecle: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Yes, sir, Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Wait a minute. I also would move, on behalf of the Commission, the appointment of Commissioner Regalado as the Vice Chairman of the MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority), Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-98 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI SPORTS AND 113 January 24, 2002 EXHIBITION AUTHORITY ("MSEA") FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Winton: So, Item 27. Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton, I would just say to you that Mr. Gentry is an extremely -- Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I would say to you, on the record, that Mr. Gentry, Mr. Sam Gentry, is an extremely thoughtful individual and his expertise is a very real asset to the MSEA Board, in my opinion. Vice Chairman Winton: Well --and I'm going to reappoint him for sure. I just wanted to wait on the Miriam Salazar thing. 114 January 24, 2002 • 34. APPOINT COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ AS MEMBER OF COMMERCIAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: On 27, I would like to appoint Commissioner Gonzalez for the Commercial Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee. So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. We have a notion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMERCIAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you, Commissioner Sanchez and colleagues. 115 January 24, 2002 35. TABLED: APPOINT SEVEN MEMBERS TO DISTRICT 5 LITTLE HAITI JOB CREATION PILOT PROJECT ADVISORY BOARD. Commissioner Winton: That's all the appointments we have to make there, right? Commissioner Teele: Yeah. Commissioner Gonzalez: No, Commissioner Sanchez: So, 3 o'clock? Vice Chairman Winton: No. We have -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Commissioner Gonzalez: We have -- Commissioner Winton: Couple more to go. Commissioner Gonzalez: I have more appointments in my book here. Commissioner Winton: Right. Commissioner Gonzalez: And I have -- Commissioner Winton: Yes. Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chaim-ian, I would ask the Manager -- I'd like to temporarily pass Item 29, and ask if the Manager would consider nominating Rosa Lee Clement, the Branch Manager of Nation's Bank, on -- of Nation's Bank to the board as a business representative. And would you all look into that? And we'll take it up later on today. But I really want a banking person on this board. And with all due respect to lawyers and all that, a branch manager -- and I do know that Nation's Bank is having some issues in the Haitian community, and I'd like to at least get somebody on the surface. Commissioner Winton: So, do we need a motion? Commissioner Teele: No. Commissioner Winton: That's just a directive? Commissioner Teele: That was a request, that they would consider that name for a banking representative. There's just no banking -- it's too heavy with government people, and I just would like to get a banking person on there, as well. 116 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Winton: Makes a lot of sense to me. OK. Do we need to take any other action here, then, on 29? Commissioner Teele: We'll bring it up later on today. 117 January 24, 2002 0 0 36. APPOINT RALPH DUHARTE AS MEMBER OF BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST. APPOINT CAMILO NOGUERA AND RUBEN VALDEZ AS MEMBERS OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE BOARD (ITB). APPOINT GUILLERMO A. REVUELTA AS MEMBER OF NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD. APPOINT RICHARD DUBIN AND STUART SORG AS MEMBERS OF WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD, APPOINT ARMANDO J. SILVA TRUJILLO AS MEMBER OF MIAMI STREET _CODESIGNATION COMMITTEE. Vice Chairman Winton: And, Commissioner Gonzdlez, you had -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: OK. I have some other appointments. I don't know if you all want to take them now. Vice Chairman Winton: Sure. Let's do it. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, Commissioner Gonzdlez: It's Bayfront Park management. Commissioner Teele: Yes. Commissioner Gonzdlcz: The International Trade Board. Vice Chairman Winton: Go down the line one at a time and we'll -- Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. For Bayfront Park management, Ralph Duharte. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzdlez, who moved its adoption: 118 January 24, 2002 0 0 RESOLUTION NO, 02-100 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Winton: Next. Commissioner Gonzalez: International Trade Board. I have three appointments. I'm going to defer one and proffer two for now. Ruben Valdez and Camilo Noguera, Commissioner Teele: You need to say who they're replacing, if they're replacing someone. Are you leaving one on? Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm leaving one open. Vice Chairman Winton: One open. So he's essentially replacing all -- he's replacing all of his appointments and leaving one opening. So -- Commissioner Teele: He can't do that. He can replace two, but one of them has to stay under the rule until they've been replaced. Vice Chairman Winton: He doesn't -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Camilo Noguera. I'm reappointing him. Commissioner Teele: OK. So, you're reappointing one. Commissioner Gonzalez: One, And I'm -- Commissioner Teele: And the other two would replace the other two names? 119 January 24, 2002 0 Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Well -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, one, because -- but he can actually take one of his appointments - - it's not his. It was Willy -- it's Commissioner Gort's appointments. He can take them off and leave it vacant. Commissioner Teele: But the rule has always been appointments stay on board until they have been replaced. Vice Chairman Winton: ITD (hnformation Technology Department). Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Teele: In that way you don't ever have just a vacant slot. AIejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Exactly. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Camilo Noguera is going to be a reappointment. He's on the board now. I'm replacing Juan Linares with Ruben Valdez. And those are the two appointments Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Commissioner Gonzalez: And Castro-Molleda will stay there until I make the other appointment. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Lille sign opposed. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-I01 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE BOARD (ITB) FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 120 January 24, 2002 0 • Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Gonzalez: Latin Quarter Review. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Next. Commissioner Gonzalez: Latin Quarter Review, I'm going to defer for next meeting. Nuisance Abatement Board, I proffer Guillermo Revuelta. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02--102 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE NUISANCE ABATEMENT BOARD FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton 121 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm going to do Waterfront Advisory Board. Richard Dubin and Stuart Sorg. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion. We need a second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Discussion? Being none, all in favor «aye The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-103 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF THE WATERFRONT ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado 122 January 24, 2002 i • Commissioner Gonzalez: Miami Street Codesignation Board. I proffer Armando Jota Silva Trujillo. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Motion and a second. Discussion? Being none, All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-104 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING TAN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE MIAMI STREET CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Cleric.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Teele: You've been busy. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's it. Vice Chairman Winton: And that's it. OK. 123 January 24, 2002 37. NOTE PRESENCE OF DISTINGUISHED CITIZEN MS. ROSETTE LOVELL. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: It's 12:12. I would like to note the presence of a distinguished citizen in our audience, among others. Ms. Rosette Lovell is here. I also understand -- you're in law school also? Rosette Lovell: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: But Ms. Lovell's family is a third generation. They were up in the Upper Eastside area for years, and Ms. Lovell is now helping us in the downtown area, the Omni area, and I would like very much to afford her the opportunity to just put her name and information and introduce our out-of-town guests just for the record, because we're delighted that they're investing in our City. Vice Chairman Winton: Go ahead. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Lovell: Commissioner Teele, thank you. Articulate as always. Our honored -- the honored guests here are actually Dena Reese from New York, an amazing businesswoman. And her partner, Arver Jin, also from New York, and they have vision when most people don't and are invested heavily in the Park West and downtown Miami area. And I will turn it over -- and I'm going to be one of the good lawyers, by the way, just so you'll know -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, if they could just put their name and address on the record, so that it's a part of our deliberations. Vice Chairman Winton: Please do. Commissioner Teele: We'd like to honor them and welcome them and encourage them to invest more. Dena Reese: So friendly here in Miami. I think I'm going to make -- I'm going to leave New York. They never invite me to speak in front of the Commission in New York. Thank you. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Ms. Reese: I see. Wow. Amazing. It's great to be here. You live in paradise. Commissioner Teele: Just your name and address for the record. Vice Chairman Winton: What's your name? Ms. Reese: Oh, you want my name. OK. It's Dena Reese and -- 124 January 24, 2002 • Vice Chairman Winton: Address. We need your address, too, for the record. Sorry. Ms. Reese: Oh, really? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Ms, Reese: 222 Riverside Drive, New York, New York, Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Now you can say anything you'd like to say. Ms. Reese: Anything I want? How much time do you have? No. Just -- it's great to be here. You live in paradise. You're very lucky. It's so beautiful all the time, And I speak for myself and my partners in saying that it's an honor to be able to invest here in Miami. It's one of the greatest Cities in the states, and we are delighted. We have great vision, we hope, to making downtown a place that people will love to come to and thoroughly enjoy. So, thank you for being so cooperative with us. We appreciate it. Vice Chainnan Winton: Welcome. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Welcome to the City of Miami. Commissioner Sanchez: And you're right about one thing: This is paradise. Arver Jin: Thank you, Commissioner Teele. Again, our group has been very well received. Vice Chairman Winton: We need your name and address first, please. Ms. Jin: That's right. Arver Jin, J -I -N, 226 West Rivo Alto, and that's Miami Beach, 33139. And -- Vice Chairman Winton: Going to have to get you to move just a little bit to the west. Ms. Jin: I was on Biscayne Island, so I was able to vote in Miami, the City of Miami, for the last election, which I was -- and the referendum. Vice Chairman Winton: Very good. Ms. Jin: And we look forward -- again, the City's been very receptive to our being down Dere. I've lived down here now for two years. I came down, fell in love, and haven't left. So, we're very excited and we look forward to working with the entire Commission on our plans. Vice Chairman Winton: Welcome. 125 January 24, 2002 Ms. Jana: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Should we adjourn? 126 January 24, 2002 0 38. APPOINT COMMISSIONER JOE SANCHEZ AS MEMBER OF DADE LEAGUE OF CITIES. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, before we move on -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, Commissioner Sanchez: -- there is one more, I think, an important appointment here. It's the League of Cities. When Commissioner Gort moved on, he left it open and apparently, I think it's a vital position that we need to appoint somebody there. I was just in Tallahassee. There was some talk about that. Vice Chairman Winton: Doesn't -- does the Mayor -- Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez -- Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Teele: I would move the appointment of Commissioner Sanchez. He's in Tallahassee. He's our -- Vice Chairman Winton: He's perfect. Commissioner Teele: And he's -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Teele. -- perfect and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Love it. OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor -- or discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries unanimously. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-105 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER JOE SANCHEZ AS A MEMBER OF THE DADE LEAGUE OF CITIES FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 127 January 24, 2002 0 0 Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Motion to adjourn. See you at 2 o'clock. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Three o'clock, right? THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:16 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 3:18 P.M, WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT. 128 January 24, 2002 • 0 39. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD DECISION WHICH APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF TREES FOR INSTALLATION OF PLAYING (BALL) FIELDS, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2015 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE TO 5:00 P.M. AT COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 28, 2002. Chairman Regalado: Gonzalez is in the building. I think he is. Can you -- Peter, thank you. We have two items time certain, 5 o'clock and 6:30. We have PZ (Planning & Zoning) items to deal -- that we can -- I guess that we can take the PZ items until the time certain, where we come back to the regular agenda. First, I'd like to recognize -- and, Johnny -- Commissioner Winton, I've been requested to a deferral, PZ -19. It's in your district and we have the both -- both parties are agreeing in another deferral. Tucker Gibbs: Yes. A 60 -day deferral -- Chairman Regalado: Your name. Mr. Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs, offices at 215 Grand Avenue in Coconut Grove. The Ransom issue -- this is -- I think this is it. Vice Chairman Winton: Never-ending. Mr, Gibbs: Yeah. This is it, I think, for 60 days. We are very close. Vice Chairman Winton: Wonderful. I completely agree. Mr. Gibbs: Oh, could we have a time and date certain, if we have to be heard at 5 o'clock? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): March 28th, Mr. Gibbs: For the 28th -- Ms. Slazyk: March 28th. Mr. Gibbs: -- of March, at 5. Chairman Regalado: March 28th. Ms. Slazyk: March 28th, 5 o'clock time certain. Mr. Gibbs: Five o'clock time certain? Yeah. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second. 129 January 24, 2002 0 0 Mr, Gibbs: Thank you. Hopefully, this will be the last -- Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second to schedule PZ -19 on the March 28th meeting -- PZ meeting at 5 p.m. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-106 A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM PZ -19 (APPEAL OF HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD DECISION WHICH APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF TREES FOR INSTALLATION OF PLAYING (BALL) FIELDS, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 2015 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE) TO 5:00 P.M. AT THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 28, 2002. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 130 January 24, 2002 40. WITHDRAW CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 BY MODIFYING PARKING RATES TO BE CHARGED BY PRIVATE GARAGES WITHIN SD -17 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE OVERLAY DISTRICT. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, are there any other deferrals? Are there any other requests for deferral? Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner, the staff would like to withdraw PZ (Planning & Zoning) Item 15. Commissioner Teele: Move the staffs recommendation. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and it's second, PZ -15. Lucia Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, if I could speak on that issue? Commissioner Teele: Call the question -- on that item? Chairman Regalado: Yes. On the deferral? Ms. Dougherty: Yes. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Go ahead. Ms. Dougherty: I just want to know if the Commissioner would like to entertain, instead of deferring it but tabling it. I say that because, remember, this is the issue that deals with the parking in the Mutiny, and our thinking is that right now the client is actually going out and hiring a traffic study. He's trying to get the machines that would do this on automatic way. And I'm just wondering if the City Commission would just entertain a tabling of it. We'll notice the neighbors if it ever comes back. It may never come back. But this way you don't have to go through the Planning Advisory Board, the subcommittees, and first reading again to bring it back. And I'm just wondering if -- Chairman Regalado: Well -- Ms. Dougherty: It's up to you. I mean, it's not -- Vice Chairman Winton: It's our item. Ms. Bianchino: We're withdrawing a City item. Commissioner Teele: That's not what we did. We j ust deferred it. Now, if you want to withdraw it -- 131 January 24, 2002 Ms. Bianchino: No. I asked for a withdrawal. Commissioner Toole: Well, that's what you're asking for, too. Ms. Dougherty: I'm asking for it not to be withdrawn, but simply to table it. Permanently -- Vice Chairman Winton: No. She's asking for a permanent -- she's asking for a potentially permanent tabling. I don't know if I -- Commissioner Toole: I don't think she can -- I don't think we can -- Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): No. Deferral is the best you can do. Commissioner Toole: Well, I think we ought to withdraw it, as the Manager's requested. And that means, it's got to start all over again if it comes back. Ms. Dougherty: That's right. Commissioner Toole: And -- but I don't think we can instruct the Manager not to send us something back. Ms. Dougherty: I think it's within your jurisdictions at this time. It's really within your prerogative to do what you like. Commissioner Teele: I second the motion to withdraw it. Chairman Regalado: So be it. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. That's the motion on the table. Chairman Regalado: That's what it is. OK. Motion to withdraw Item -- Commissioner Teele: Fifteen. Chairman Regalado: -- 15. Fifteen. Mr. Maxwell: PZ-15. Chairman Regalado: PZ-15. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: 132 January 24, 2002 MOTION NO. 02-107 A MOTION TO WITHDRAW CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM PZ -15 (PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 BY MODIFYING PARKING RATES TO BE CHARGED BY PRIVATE GARAGES W.ITNIN SD -17 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE OVERLAY DISTRICT). Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 133 January 24, 2002 • 41. (A) RESCHEDULE SECOND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY, ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 28, 2002, TO TAKE PLACE ON MARCH 7, 2002, COMMENCING AT 9 A.M. (B) CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH DENIED VARIANCE TO ALLOW ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2201 S. MIAMI AVENUE TO COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002. Chairman Regalado: Any other deferral? OK. PZ -1 is the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact. Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): We have one more continuance, Commissioner. Chainnan Regalado: OK. Daphne Gurri: Good afternoon. My name is Daphne Gurri. I'm the applicant for PZ (Planning & Zoning) Item 6, 2201 South Miami. At this time, I'm asking for a continuance to a certain date -- date certain. Sorry. February 28th. Chairman Regalado: February 28th. Ms. Gurri: Twenty-eighth. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. We have a problem here. Commissioner Sanchez said that we nceded to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Change the date of the 28"i. And the reason is that Dade Day is in Tallahassee in February. So, if we could change it from. the 28th, which I will be out of town and maybe some of my colleagues will be up in Tallahassee. We could change it to the 22nd? I mean, 21st? Commissioner Teele: The 26th? You're going to be out of town the 26th? Chairman Regalado: When is Dade Day? I.s it -- Commissioner Sanchez: Datde Day, I believe, is the 28th, 29th? I'm sorry. The 27th and 28th. Chairman Regalado: You're going to be there, Johnny, too? 134 January 24, 2002 • Vice Chairman Winton: Dade Day is -- you know, I don't know what you get done on Dade Days, so -- Chairman Regalado: Well -- so, I guess that we -- Commissioner Sanchez: You'd be surprised what we get done on Dade Day. Chairman Regalado: While we find out, we'll defer to the second meeting in February. Is that -- City Attorney? Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): I would -- for notice purposes, you need a specific date in order to get around the requirement. Chairman Regalado: Well, we need to find out when -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Maxwell: But what you can do is -- Commissioner Tecle: You move it to the 28th. Once you -- Mr. Maxwell: Then you change that date. Commissioner Teele: -- determine you're going to move your 28th date, you move everything at that time. Chairman Regalado: OIC. Commissioner Teele: But the easiest thing to do now is defer it to the 28th. When we get around to moving the 28th, everything that's on that date -- Mr. Maxwell: Will move. Commissioner Teele: -- will be moved. Mr. Maxwell: That's right. Chairman Regalado: I was just trying to avoid a public notice and all that. OK. It's -- there is a motion to place this item on the 28th of February. Item PZ -6. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but let's -- listen, I'm going to be gone the 26th, 27th, and 28th. Let's just select another day. Chairman Regalado: I know. But since we can do -- move everything, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. When we know, we'll move the whole thing. 135 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Are you going to be gone the 26th, as well? Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty-sixth, 27th and 28th I'll be in Tallahassee. Commissioner Teele: We don't have but two choices; it's the 21 st or the 7th of March. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. And if we do it on the 21st, we've got to redo the directive for -- you know, because I think you -- I think we decided that on the City Clerk's resum6 that's coming in, that we wanted those in by the 21st, and then we were going to review them and make some sort of decision on the 28th. If we can move it backwards, we're not going to have enough time to do that, so we probably need to move that. Commissioner Teele: All right. So, why don't we move it to the 7th of March? Mr. Maxwell: It's the PZ agenda -- Commissioner Teele: No. Mr. Maxwell: -- for the second meeting -- Commissioner Sanchez: No. The second meeting. The second meeting we move to March the 7th. Commissioner Teele: I would move -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Teele: -- that the second meeting for the meeting scheduled now for the 28th of February be moved and all items contained therein be transferred to March 7th. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: OK. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-108 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RESCHEDULING THE SECOND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF FEBRUARY, ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 28, 2002, TO TAKE PLACE ON MARCH 7, 2002, COMMENCING AT 9 A.M. 136 January 24, 2002 • 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Bianchino: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Any more deferrals? Any more -- Commissioner Teele: This item is being deferred -- Chairman Regalado: March. Commissioner Teele: -- to the March 7th and I would call the question on that item. We just voted on the -- Chainnan Regalado: Right, right. So we need a second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's -- we have a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye" for this item to be placed on the March 7th PZ agenda. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: OK. 137 January 24, 2002 Ll The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-109 A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM PZ -6 (APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH DENIED VARIANCE TO ALLOW ADDITION TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2201 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE) TO THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 138 January 24, 2002 42. AMEND MASTER AND INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDERS OF DOWNTOWN MIAMI DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) TO EXPAND BOUNDARIES OF DOWNTOWN DRI TO MAKE THEM CONSISTENT WITH JURISDICTION OF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (Applicant(s): Patricia Allen, Executive Director Downtown Development Authority). Chairman Regalado: PZ -1, Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact. The administration. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. Lourdes Slazyk, Planning and Zoning Department. PZ -I is an amendment to the master and increment 1 dOCument orders for the Downtown Miami Development of Regional Impact. The amendment before you today is to change the boundaries of the downtown DRI (Development of Regional Impact) to match the boundaries of the Downtown Development Authority. There is no new development program being added at this time and no other changes. It's a simple boundary expansion to match the jurisdiction boundaries of the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Commissioner Teele: Do we have a request from the DDA on this matter? IVIS. Slazyk: We have Jeff Bercow here. Jeff Bercow: Yes, sir. Jeff Bercow from the Downtown Development Authority. I am the Chairman of DDA's DRI Committee. I'm here basically as the applicant and not as the lawyer. I agree with everything that Lourdes has said. Commissioner Teele: Are you suggesting that you're not being paid? Mr. Bercow: I'm suggesting I am absolutely not being paid, sir. Commissioner Teele: You're here pro bono? Mr. Bercow: I am here pro bono. Vice Chairman Winton: As a real volunteer? Mr. Bercow: Yes, as a volunteer. Commissioner Teele: Then I would be very pleased to move the item -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Teelc: -- and save you all of the frill explanation. Mr. Bercow: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. 139 January 24, 2002 0 0 Mr. Bercow: My consultants are here and they're being paid, but I'm not being paid. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, maybe they'll be paid a little less now. Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. Call the roll. Mr. Bercow: Thank you. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-110 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN MIAMI DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRi) MASTER AND INCREMENT I DEVELOPMENT ORDERS (RESOLUTIONS 87-1148 AND 87-1149 ADOPTED DECEMBER 10, 1987, AS AMENDED), TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA OF THE CITY OF MIAMI UNDER THE JURISDICTIONS OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN "EXHIBIT A") FINDING THAT THESE CHANGING DO NOT CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION PER CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA STATUTES; AND ALSO FINDING THAT THIS CHANGE IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. 140 January 24, 2002 0 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez 141 January 24, 2002 0 0 43. APPROVE MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TUTTLE STREET PROJECT TO ALLOW MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 115,000 SQUARE FEET OF DESIGN AND RETAIL SPACE AND 168,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USE, WITH 664 PARKING SPACES. (Applicant(s): Half -Circle Property, Inc.). Chairman Regalado: PZ -2. Now, we need to swear the people that are going to be testifying. So, might as well -- Mr. City Clerk. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): This is on all items, the entire P and Z (Planning and Zoning) agenda. Chairman Regalado: All items. So, anybody who is here, who is going to testify on a PZ item, please -- City Clerk. Mr. Maxwell: Any item on the PZ agenda. Chairman Regalado: Oh, there might not be persons here that are going to testify, but -- AT THIS POINT, THE CITY CLERK ADMINISTERED OATH, REQUIRED UNDER CITY CODE SECTION 62-1 TO THOSE PERSONS GIVING TESTIMONY ON ZONING ISSUES. Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -2, Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -2 is a Major Use Special Permit for the Tuttle Street Project, located in the design district on Biscayne Boulevard, between 38th - - 37t1i, 38th, up to 39'11. The Planning and Zoning Department is recommending approval with conditions. This is -- this project will consist of 115,000 square feet of design and retail space, 168,000 square feet of office use, and 664 parking spaces. The project has been through the Large Scale Development Committee and the Design Review Process. It has been recommended for approval throughout all of the lower boards and committees. The Department is recommending approval with all of the standard Major Use Special Permit conditions, with a couple -- with one extra. The additional condition has to do with the individual storefront facades that are going to be designed on the project. The way the applicant submitted the proposal, they left that open so individual architects could come in and design the storefront for the retail frontage of the project, but they developed guides and standards that went along with that, which the Department reviewed and we were very much in favor of. What we're going to add as a condition is that each of those individual storefronts, as they come in, the Department wants to be able to review and approve, to make sure they comply with the guides and standards that they set up in their own major use. If anybody wants to deviate from those for any reason, we would request that they get a separate and apart Class Il special permit, which is what is normally required in the district. But the guides and standards that were submitted with the application were excellent. They encouraged all of the ground floor retail, you know, frontage type design that the department is -- 142 January 24, 2002 Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): I'd just like to add that this is going to be a gateway between Biscayne Boulevard and the design district. Right now, if you drive down Biscayne Boulevard, you probably don't know where the design district is. This will be the grand entrance to the district. And we're very pleased to have this project before us. Chairman Regalado: OK. Santiago Echemendia: Santiago Echemendia, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of the applicant. This application is being brought forward by -- there's a development company, but it's basically Dacra and Craig Robbins. We have favorable recommendations from all departments. We have a lot of experts here, but rather than hear from our experts, they're really here to answer any questions. Walter Chatham has conic down from New York. He's done a beautiful job, especially in his treatment of the parking pedestal. And, maybe, if he could walk you a little bit through the project, show you the pretty pictures. Steve Gretenstein would then like to make a few comments, and we could take it from there. Commissioner Sanchez: Here you go. Chairman Regalado: Here you go. Commissioner Sanchez: We've gone high tech. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Walter Chatham: Good afternoon. I'm Walter Chatham, architect from New York. And I'm. going to attempt to be very brief. So, if I miss something and you have a question, please feel free to ask it. Commissioner Teele: Do you have a Miami office? Mr. Chatham: No, I don't. Commissioner Teele: You thought about getting one? Mr. Chatham: Yes, I have. Believe me. American Airlines doesn't want me to get one, but I'm thinking about it. Mr. Maxwell: We do need your address on the record. Mr. Chatham: Oh, I'm sorry. It's 580 Broadway, New York, New York, 10012. Commissioner Sanchez: We've got a lot of people from New York, New York today, right? Mr. Chatham: But my heart is in Miami. All right. Very briefly, this is Biscayne Boulevard here, Federal Highway is here, the design district, as it's generally known, starts across the railroad tracks here. This is the 195 expressway leading into the Tuttle Causeway. And one of 143 January 24, 2002 the things that Planning and Zoning has done is, they've incorporated this property into the SD -8 overlay of the design district, which is really a zoning provision that's meant to encourage design retail, pedestrian access, streets, off-street parking, et cetera. So, what we've done basically is, we've taken the entire site, which consists of two parcels on either side of Northeast 38th Street, and along the entire length of Biscayne Boulevard and along 38th Street and along Federal Highway, the entire project is being lined with two stories of retail stores, which Lourdes Slazyk mentioned, where actually you'lI see drawings of the retail stores, but they're meant to be just suggestive of what might come. We're actually hoping that the stores will be designed under our guidelines to assure a variety and not so much monotony at the street level, as is often the case with larger projects. So, basically, this is a view looking from 38th Street south, right in the middle of the project, and this is the two stories that I spoke of, which are retail stores. Above the two stories for -- 10 stories is an enclosed parking garage. And one of the things we've done -- it's actually to here in this drawing -- is we've incorporated the parking -- Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. Mr. Chatham: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: Pardon me. Excuse me for interrupting. But when you're directing the Board's attention to exhibits, we'd appreciate it if you could be more specific about what you're pointing at because there's a record being made and it doesn't reflect this here. You have to be more specific. And we would ask that of everyone making presentations. Mr. Chatham: OK. I apologize. All right. Let me put it this way. There's a two-story base of retail on the entire project. Out of that two-story base on the larger parcel, the south most parcel, we have designed a tower, which comes up -- and it's actually very easy to see in this drawing -- which comes -- Mr. Maxwell: Which is? Mr. Chatham: Pardon? Mr. Maxwell: Which is? Mr. Chatham: This is an elevation perspective from Biscayne Boulevard. Now I understand. I'm sorry. And what we've tried to do is incorporate the body of the parking garage into the body of the towers. So unlike most parking solutions, which depend on a very large base, with a tower coming out, we've tried to get this parking to work with the tower. And above it, above -- I'm sorry. This drawing here is a view from Northeast 38th Street and Federal Highway, looking back at the project. The tower comes up seven stories above the two stories of retail, with parking. And above that there's seven floors of offices. And the entire facade is going to be treated in a similar fashion. The only difference between the parking and the office building, in terms of the facades, is that the parking will have glass railings up to 42 inches high. And then above that it will have the same (UNINTELLIGIBLE) system as the offices, but they will be open. So, you know, hopefully the entire thing will appear somewhat seamless going up. And we've designed a special kind of an up lighting system, which, at night, will throw light up to the 144 January 24, 2002 0 ceiling of the parking garage and more or less, we hope mimic the effect of the ceilings of the office structures so you won't be looking at endless rows of fluorescent lights, which, I think, from a nighttime standpoint, is probably what most people find so objectionable about parking garages. I think that's everything I'd like to say, except just -- access to the parking will be -- again, this aerial view from Biscayne Boulevard -- access to the parking will be from 37th Street. You'll pull in and there are two four-story high spiral ramps that will take you up into the garage. And inside the garage there's an internal ramping system, which is not visible from the street. So, if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them. Chairman Regalado: What side of Biscayne is it? Mr. Chatham: It's on the west side of Biscayne. Mr. Echemendia: Mr. Chair, one of the highlights that Walter was commended on by the members of the Large Scale Development Cornmittec, which are architects, is his treatment of the parking pedestal in the lighting, et cetera. It really almost doesn't look like a parking pedestal and, hence, their unanimous recommendation of this board. If you can give Steve Gretenstein a second to comment on the project, we'd appreciate it. Steven Gretenstein: Thank you. Steven Gretenstein, 1632 Pennsylvania Avenue, Chief Operating Officer for Dacra. And on behalf of myself, Craig Robbins and Dacra, we're very excited about presenting this project and seek your approval. Reiterating much of what has been said and only taking a few moments of your busy schedule, this is a very important project, to transition from the Biscayne Boulevard area into the design district. It's designed as a multi use property to maximize the exposure of the property, to maximize the retail potential, as well as to generate additional parking opportunities in the area and to provide a pedestrian crossway from Biscayne into the design district. And we're very excited about Walter Chatham's involvement. We hope to bring additional world class architects to the table to design the individual facades. And we're very excited about it. We want to thank the Planning Department for all of its help in both going through this project, as well as the zoning issues that have arisen in this area, that have been resolved most recently, and we seek your approval. We're happy to answer your questions. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Anybody -- Commissioner Sanchez: Opposition? Chairman Regalado: Anybody else? Anybody in opposition of this project? Nobody. Vice Chair Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Move City staff's recommendation for approval of this project. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: The motion has been moved and second -- 145 January 24, 2002 i 0 Commissioner Sanchez: With conditions. Chairman Regalado: -- with conditions. Vice Chairman Winton: With conditions, obviously. Chairman Regalado: With conditions. Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. Chairman Regalado: What you're moving is the administration's -- Vice Chairman Winton: Staffs recommendation, which includes the conditions. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a resolution, so all in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Oppose? None. It passes five to zero. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-111 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 9, 13, AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO.11000, FOR THE TUTTLE STREET PROJECT, A PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3720, 3750 AND 3880 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, 399 NORTHEAST 38TH STREET AND 293 NORTHEAST 37TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 115,000 SQUARE FEET OF DESIGN AND RETAIL SPACE, 168,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USE AND 664 PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 146 January 24, 2002 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. Echemendia: Thank you. Mr. Chatham: Thank you. Mr. Gretenstein: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. 147 January 24, 2002 0 44. APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 612, SD -12 SPECIAL BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICTS, TO ALLOW SURFACE PARKING IN R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (Applicant(s): BF Hospitality, LLC). Chairman Regalado: PZ -3. This is a special exception requiring City Commission approval. Thirty-five -- Commissioner Sanchez: Out of curiosity, when are you going to start -- sir, when will you guys AM six to nine months? (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Commissioner Sanchez: I figured you'd say that. All right. Chairman Regalado: This is a special exception requiring City Commission approval. Number 35 to number 125 Northwest 42nd Avenue. And number 42 to 140 Northwest 41 st Avenue. It's surface parking for proposed hotel building. Is this where the restaurant was? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): That is correct. Chairman Regalado: OK. That is my district. So, Mr. Vice Chair, could you chair, if I -- like to make a motion? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, Ms. Slazyk: This application is a special exception that requires City Commission approval, as Commissioner Regalado stated. When an SD -12 is applied on a piece of property, in order to do surface parking for an adjacent use, it requires the City Commission approval of a special exception. The department is recommending approval, with conditions. The conditions from the department are first of all, the way the plans were submitted to the City, they had palm trees along Le Jeune Road, the Le Jeune Road Corridor. We recommend that they give us a revised landscape plan that depicts the combination of shade trees and palm trees, since it's going to be a hotel use, and there may be, you know, pedestrian activity. It would make it more comfortable to provide some shade trees. Also, we would like the applicant to include paint color samples, sign specifications, and illumination scheme for the proposed hotel structure, along with new elevation plans responding to the importance of Le Jeune Road at a pedestrian level. Remember, Le Jeune is one of our corridors coming in from the airport. It's an important corridor in the City and in order to try and improve the appearance of it, we would like to be able to review these items prior to their building permits. Other than that, we recommend approval. Vice Chairman Winton: And could I ask a question on landscape plan? What is the plan -- the landscape plan that's going to buffer the eastern boundary of the properly, that will abut the single family residential neighborhoods behind it? Is that addressed in this presentation? 148 January 24, 2002 0 0 Ms, Slazyk: Yes. What it is is they -- the SD -12 requires there to be a wall with a 20 -foot landscape buffer between -- Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Ms. Slazyk: -- the parking and -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, I'lI just wait and see. That's it. Ms. Slazyk: -- that's incorporated in the SD -12 as a requirement. Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Ms. Slazyk: It's not even a condition. It's mandated. In addition. to that, though, their Le Jeune frontage we were also concerned about. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Thank you. Sorry. Commissioner Sanchez: That's the old Sid Restaurant? Chairman Regalado: It is the old Sid Restaurant. And what I can tell you is that -- well, this is - - the problem that we have when -- for a long time, we have an abandoned building and then a demolished building. In the past two years, we had had more than 10 serious incidents because there are homeless that have built houses in that area. People are dumping illegal trash on the residential side of the wall that the restaurant used to have, because the restaurant used to have the same thing, the parking, the SD -12 parking, I think. That was the parking for the restaurant. I just hope that this kind of construction makes the people proud in the area. And Ijust hope that the management and the construction company will help us in fixing the sidewalks around the area. And I hope that with the landscape, there will be no more illegal dumping there. So, I'll move the item, Item PZ -3, for approval. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: With conditions. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: Do we need to -- we don't have to have anybody make any presentation, then? Commissioner Teele: They ought to give their names -- Vice Chairman Winton: In the PZ? 149 January 24, 2002 Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): The Manager -- I mean, the Chairman will open it up. You should ask if there's anyone who wants to address this issue oil the other side, so it -- right now, it is open. This is a public hearing item. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. But don't we need to do that before we -- Commissioner Sanchez: Put their name on the record. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Before we make a decision? Mr. Maxwell: Oh, yes. He has to open -- public hearing is still open. Chairman Regalado: Oh, yeah. I just move it. I just move it. Then we have the discussion and then we vote on it. Commissioner Teele: But what the Commissioner is saying is that the lawyer -- Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. I would suggest -- Commissioner Teele: The lawyer should at least be able to introduce herself and state that she was here for the record. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Before anybody makes a motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: That's all I'm trying to get cleared. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ines Marrero-Priegues: The client's here. He knows I'm here. So, he will pay me for my time here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Ines Marrero. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Akennan Senterfitt, with offices at One Southeast Third Avenue in downtown Miami. I'm the attorney for the applicant, BF Hospitality. I have a motion to approve, with a second. I'm just here to answer questions. We are in full support of the recommendations from staff and the conditions. And just for the record, there was a gentleman here who showed up at the Planning and Zoning meeting, who said he thought he was an objector but once we spoke to him, not only did he speak in favor of the application, he sent a letter to the file withdrawing his objections. So, it's our understanding we have full community support of this project, as well. Vice Chairman Winton: So, that's your presentation? Is there anyone from the audience in opposition to this project? Being none, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Regalado. 150 January 24, 2002 0 46 Chairman Regalado: I'll make a motion to approve item PZ -3, with the conditions by -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: -- the staff. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we have a motion and a second. Commissioner Teele: Question, Vice Chairman Winton: Discussion. Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele. Call the question. Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question. All in favor signify by saying "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Opposed, like sign. Motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-112 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF THYSSEN MIAMI ELEVATOR COMPANY, FOR THF; PROVISION OF FULL SERVICE ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS FOR VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING ON -DUTY MAINTENANCE MECHANICS AT ALL MAJOR ORANGE BOWL EVENTS, ON A CITYWIDE CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE (1) YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR PERIODS, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO.99-00-079R, AT AN ANNUAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $48,558.80; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFORE FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 2000 OPERATING BUDGETS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.670, DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.280701.6.670, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNT CODE NOS. 504000.420119.6.670 AND 503001.420905 .6.670, DEPARTMENT OF SOLID WASTE ACCOUNT CODE NO. 422001.320102.320102.6.670, AND DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES ACCOUNT CODE NOS. 415 000.350201.6.340, 450001.350509.6.670 AND 404000.350503.6.340. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Cleric.) 151 January 24, 2002 0 0 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Thank you. 152 January 24, 2002 46. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH DENIED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW MIXED-USE STRUCTURE INCLUDING SELF -STORAGE FACILITY AT 2322, 2332, 2336-44 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND 2323, 2329, 2339 AND 2347 N.E. 2 COURT TO 6 P.M. AT COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002. Chairman Regalado: PZ -5. I just have a request from the administration to continue PZ -5 for further study, until March 7th. Now, I think that we have the people here ready. The Commissioner from District 2. Commissioner -- Mr. Vice Chair, as Chairman, I've been getting this by the administration. Do you want to continue this item or do you want to discuss it? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think if the administration has good reason for a continuance and this is a crucial spot on Biscayne Boulevard, so I'm assuming they've got a real good reason. So -- Dona Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner, we would like to have time to work through this project a little bit more. It's Biscayne Boulevard. It is a very visible, highly important project. There's a lot of neighborhood opposition to this project and we would like to continue it until March 7th to try to come up with a better solution. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, on behalf -- Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: For the record, Vicky Garcia -Toledo with offices at 2500 First Union Financial Center. We are here on an appeal before you that was filed on behalf of the applicant and the property owners. We also have a great deal of number of individuals here from the neighborhood who are in support of this project. The City has rendered its findings. They arc part of the record. They're part of the record at the Zoning Board below. And we were not advised at any time that the City was going to do this. So, everyone is here. Several attorneys on each side. Court reporters. Neighborhoods on both sides ready to go. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton, it's your decision. Gill Pastoriza: May I? Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry? What -- Mr. Pastoriza: May I -- Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Chairman, Gi]I Pastoriza, 2665 South. Bayshore Drive. I'm here on behalf of Nonnan Braman and the Braman interest. We are here in opposition to this application and we strongly encourage you to work with your staff so we don't have a problem with you deferring this matter to whatever staff dates is available. 156 January 24, 2002 • Vice Chairman Winton: Twenty-third Street, which is roughly where this is, on Biscayne Boulevard. You know, this is a very crucial area. Is this the same self-service storage facility that we talked about a month ago or whatever it was? Ms. Bianchino: Yes. It was in regard to an alley closure. Vice Chairman Winton: An alley closure. And if you all remember, I said then that we had to move with very careful diligence, because there are some potential for major investment going on in that area. And this is a warehouse building on Biscayne Boulevard in an area that has huge potential. And, so, how this gets done is absolutely -- if we want to rush through this, we have, as far as I'm concerned, great potential to run off some major development. Done right, maybe it doesn't happen. Done wrong, absolutely it does happen. And, so, there's great risk here to both neighborhood community and our tax base. So, I think if there's -- if -- and there is neighborhood opposition. I think that this needs some additional attention. So, is staff recommending that we defer? Ms. Bianchino: Yeah, we would -- Vice Chairman Winton: Continue? Ms. Bianchino: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Before you make a motion -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, may we know why, if there is a full recommendation from staff and we've been working with staff for six to eight months? And the staff has required that we change our project six times. There's been six architectural changes that have been required and every one of those conditions have been met, and there is a recommendation, an official and formal recommendation. May we know why? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, if we go through all of that, then we're going to -- might as well have the hearing. I think the option here is not to have the hearing and continue this to some specific meeting, where you guys can all ask all those questions, get all these things answered, and we don't have to have the hearing here. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: But we have answered them, Commissioner. I guess is what -- to the staff, we have answered them. And after that full review, they have said, you know, this is -- this meets all the requirements and they have recommended approval. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Ms. Bianchino: There is one -- 157 January 24, 2002 • Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you are presiding and I respect that very much, but let me say this. Normally, if this is an appeal, the responsibility of moving the appeal is with the appellant, the party. Now, obviously, anybody can request a deferral. But that's very unusual. I am inclined, along with Commissioner Winton's statement, to grant the request for the deferral, assuming there are persons that are here that you brought that may not -- that may be so inconvenienced that they would like to be heard and their testimony put on the record. And, so, they're not inconvenienced with coming and going. But I think we need to be very careful. There was a -- because, Commissioner Winton, the comments that you're making -- and I'm in total agreement with you -- but we're dealing with property rights kind of issues, and anything that we want to do, we've got a right to do it, but we've got to do it perspectively. We can't do it retroactively. And, so, all of the comments that you're malting really deal with everything in the future. They don't deal, in my judgment -- and I want to be real clear, because the courts will not let us get away with that. You know, with trying to get an applicant and then make public policy about their application and what -- how the community should be in the -- Vice Chairman Winton: But the applicant asked me the questions. So, I didn't have any choice but to answer. No, I did have a choice. Don't answer and just say we're deferring. Commissioner Teele: We had a case similar to this before, where we start talking about this. This is the case of the -- I guess it was a used car lot/show room lot on Biscayne Boulevard. Mr, Maxwell: Milano Motors, Commissioner Teele: What was it? Mr. Maxwell: Milano Motors. Commissioner Teele: Milano Motors. And sonic of the comments that were being made by the dais gave me a lot of trouble in that case, because what we cannot do is, we cannot go back and do what we should have done two years ago with our land use and our planning process. And so, while I want to support what you're saying, I do not want to build a record here that we're trying to retroactively make decisions. And I'm really troubled by one thing. If, in fact, the City staff -- and not a board now -- but if City staff has asked you all to change your plans three times, as far as I'm concerned -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Six. Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm saying three times -- then that's it. That's enough. We can't let this thing wind up being where everybody gives their interpretation of art. You know, where -- if you've got seven people, you're going to have seven interpretations or eight. And the City has got to conform itself much more like a business. We can't send you through a mill and have you changing things and changing things and changing things. And, so, I can tell you right now, if the City has, in fact -- and if you provide evidence of that -- I'm going to be hard pressed to be supportive of the City's position. Because I just don't think we can have it both ways. We can't say we want development and then run you through the ropes. But I'm speaking in favor of the action of the Commissioner of the district to defer the item and allow a further discussion. 158 January 24, 2002 But I don't think we can go back in those discussions and reconstruct what our land use and planning process Vice Chairman Winton: Don't disagree with that. Commissioner Teele: OK, And I just wanted -- Vice Chairman Winton: Completely agree. Commissioner Teele: -- to support you on that. Vice Chairman Winton: In fact, that was a big part of our discussion when we were talking about the alley closure and the reason we finally voted on it. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's do the -- Mr. Pastoriza; Can I just say one thing before you -- Chairman Regalado: Yes. One second. I just want to say something. There are some people here that, as Commissioner Teele said, will be inconvenienced to come back on March the 7th. Now, Mr, City Attorney, can we have people speak on the record, provided that this will be used on the decision-making process on the 7th? Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You can -- you certainly could open the item, start the item, and hear public comments on it and then continue the item. And both parties could ask -- Chairman Regalado: Let's do that. Mr. Maxwell: That everything be incorporated. Chairman Regalado: Because I think it is unfair to everyone here, the applicant, the people -- the people that are for it, the people that are against, that -- you know, that we had this on the agenda and it is a last minute. I just got the note from the administration and I had to say it because 1 think that we have a code that the Commissioner from the district is the leading person on any matter regarding zoning in each district. So -- Commissioner Teele: But, Mr. Chairman, in opening this, the intent would be to hear from those persons -- Chairman Regalado: Exactly. Commissioner Teele: -- and then to defer the balance of the presentations to March the 7th. Chairman Regalado: Right. So, you're OK with that. So, let's open -- counsel. 159 January 24, 2002 Luis Rojas: Yes. Commissioner Regalado, Luis Rojas. I represent the applicant, the appellant in this case. And, really, I want to speak to the Commissioner oCthe district because -- Mr. Maxwell: Your address, Mr. Rojas. Mr. Rojas: My address, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3400. Commissioner, I've gotten to know you a little bit and your philosophy and this is a classic case of a developer who believes in a project and is being hammered by government and spending thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars, and a deferral here really is something that the opposition wants, which really other businesses that maybe want to buy this property, if they could, or maybe have other interests. Just to have more time to organize and bring a stronger front and cost a businessman thousands of dollars, which is what we, that are conservatives, believe government does, bureaucracy of government. So, I would suggest to you, knowing that it really is going to be your decision, because it is your district, that a deferral really is just a delay tactic to try to gat the opposition to get more ammunition. And we're going to have to deal with this today. We're going to have to deal with it in March and it's really going to be the same thing. I think to go forward and have some people put something on the record now, it's really counter-productive. If you're going to defer it, defer it, and have everybody -- Vice Chairman Winton: Then don't be putting anything more on the record. Mr. Rojas: Well, that -- we would like to go forward today. We believe that staff has given a positive recommendation, that that recommendation has been after six changes, that we have made. My client has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars. And he's going to do something that's going to beautify the area, and he's going to spend nine million dollars ($9,000,000) and add two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) annually taxes. We want to go forward. We would defer to you, because it is your district and we understand that. We think to piecemeal this today is not the proper way to go. And if you're going to defer it, lot us just all come back and do it right. We want to go forward.. Chairman Regalado: OK, Johnny, it's your call. Whatever you want to do. We stop this right now, but -- Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: But I don't know. Mr. City Attorney, I know that we have to make decisions here in public during a public hearing, but I just have a question. I don't know if staff can answer that question to me from -- between today or tomorrow and March the 7th. Is it true that they have been ordered to change the plans so many times and this is why -- and is that a question that we can ask the staff? Mr. Maxwell: That would be a -- that's a question that you can -- you can ask any question of staff. It wouldn't be a question of asking me -- Chairman Regalado: No. I know that. I know that. But I'm saying, not in a public hearing. 160 January 24, 2002 0 • Mr. Maxwell: You can ask questions of staff individually, outside of this hearing. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Maxwell: You can ask questions of them. They cannot advocate positions outside a public - Chairman Regalado: I understand that. Mr. Maxwell: The answer to the question is yes, you can. Chairman Regalado: But because I -- I just -- I cannot figure out why so many changes and then the deferral. I -- it's the Commissioner's district call and we're doing what he thinks is best, but I just want to understand what's going on. I don't know. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): The changes they're talking about have to do with the design review. You don't want the answer`? Chairman Regalado: No. I'd rather -- if we don't -- Ms. Slazyk: OK. Chairman Regalado: Not going to have anything on the record. I just would like to have information in -- maybe next week before the meeting. So -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: I happen to concur with my colleagues, this is something that is in Commissioner Winton's district and it's for him to make that decision. But something that really concerns me is -- and I happen to also concur with Commissioner Teele, when he was concerned and you also expressed special concern about these developers being asked to make six different architectural changes. As Commissioner Toole said -- Chairman Regalado: Angel, that's the question I'm asking. Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly. We're asking for people to come down to Miami to invest money, to come up with new developments, and then what we do is these type of things, if they were done, if it is true that we asked him to do six changes. I mean, we have to be more friendly toward this developer if we really want to finally build a heavy tax base in the City of Miami and if we really want to move forward. I mean, with this type of attitude toward developers and toward people that want to come down here and invest money, I don't think we're going to get ahead. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman. 161 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you. Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: There are some comments that have been made that I think need to be addressed, and those are the -- several comments have been made about whose decision it is. As I pointed out before in the past, it's really not a -- Chairman Regalado: No. Excuse me. All the comments that have been made regarding Commissioner Winton's district, it's about the deferral, not the decision to approve or disapprove. It's the deferral and his call is about hearing this now, hearing part, hearing none. No mention has been done here that it would be up to Commissioner Winton to lead the Commission in deciding if this should be approved or not. I think that the record will show, if we go back, that everything that we have been saying is -- well, Johnny Winton is the one that makes the decision, whether or not to do it today, March 7th, March 7th and a half or March Sth. So -- Mr. Maxwell: That's correct. And the record is made clear by that comment. And the fact that the final decision on whether the development would proceed, once it comes back, is a collegial decision. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. But not Johnny, not Angel, nobody has said -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Let ine also, for the record clear, that was a decision that I was talking about exactly. We were going to hear this appeal today or if we were going to hear it March 7th or 10 years from now. The decision finally about the project is a decision that has to come from the entire board and not from one single Commissioner. So, let me make it clear for the record, too. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I could assure you that until I listen to both sides, I'm staying out of this one. But let me just say something. I mean, six times back and forth, you know, it gets to a point where if we're not going to listen -- if we're not going to hear presentation today, then bring it back the next time and we should make -- Ms. Slazyk: I guess I'm -- about the sixth times what happens is an application is presented -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, it's been put on the record that they've changed their plans six times. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. The application -- goes through a design review process. Chairman Regalado: Look, Lourdes -- 162 January 24, 2002 Ms. Slazyk: That's -- Chairman Regalado: We better stop. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Excuse me. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that they've been accused of doing wrong, and y'all have supported that accusation. So, I think staff has an absolute right to respond to that accusation. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: If we want -- Vice Chairman Winton: And we ought to be willing to listen to it. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. But if we decide not to hear any mare, then we close the hearing, but go ahead. Ms. Slazyk: This is not going to go to the approval or denial, just the six times changing plans. When an application is filed, it goes through a design review process. That process comes out with comments about the design. The comments were negative originally because there were problems with the design. ,So, when we give them the comments, they come back with another proposal, and they kept coming back with proposals, but we didn't make them do it six times. They wanted to answer our concerns. So, they opted -- but they could have decided to file their original plans, even though we had serious problems with the design. That was their decision to respond to our comments. And, yes, it was six times, but we didn't make them. We didn't say, "Well, go back. We're not going to let you go forward until you have it right." That didn't happen. They kept coming in with designs trying to answer our concerns. It wasn't that we held them back for six times. Chairman Regalado: So, you're right and they're right. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And, Commissioner, if I may. Chairman Regalado: They're both right. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I did not say that as an accusation at all. In fact, I've always applauded the Department for being thorough. And it was my client's desire to make sure that we met each and every requirement of the code as staff was requiring us. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I didn't hear you come to the rescue of the staff when both of these Commissioners absolutely took that as a negative, spoke to it as a negative, and wanted to know answers from staff about how we're mistreating developers, that went on the record. 163 January 24, 2002 0 Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, my statement went to the fact that what further study do they need? Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think there's any reason for you and I to argue back and forth. I know what you said. It's on the record, what you said. And I've put on the record the fact that you did not come to the rescue and that is -- and they did take it as a negative. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have several people that are ready to testify and probably they will come back on March the 7th. Do you want a time certain for this item on March the 7th? What time you want? We already have -- Vice Chairman Winton: Is 5 o'clock already taken? Chairman Regalado: We already have a 5 o'clock time certain. We -- Vice Chairman Winton: Six o'clock. Chairman Regalado: We already have a five o'clock. So, if you want to do it 6 o'clock time certain. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Time certain, March 7th. Chairman Regalado: March 7th. Vice Chairman Winton: March 7th, Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Six o'clock time certain. Thank you. OK. You need -- yes, we do deed a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, so moved. Chairman Regalado: -- to place this -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Opposed? hone. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: 164 January 24, 2002 0 MOTION NO. 02-114 A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM PZ -5 (APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH HAD DENIED SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW MIXED-USE STRUCTURE INCLUDING SELF - STORAGE FACILITY AT APPROXIMATELY 2322, 2332, 2336-44 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND 2323, 2329, 2339 AND 2347 N.E. 2 COURT) TO 6 P.M. AT THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 165 January 24, 2002 0 0 47. TABLED: CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING CONCERNING 3163, 3165, 3171 AND 3179 S.W. 22 TERRACE TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544 BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND TO AMEND ORDINANCE 11000 BY CHANGING ZONING FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL (See 453). Chairman Regaiado: PZ -7. PZ -7, it's to amend Ordinance 10544 from duplex/residential to restricted commercial, to change the future land use element of the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. It's in my district. Can you chair this? Vice Chairman Winton: Sure, I can. And could I make a -- could I make a point before? And that is that this aerial, which you all know I have -- you know, these aerials allow us to figure out what the -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): This is two years old. That's why -- Vice Chairman Winton: I don't care if it's 80 years old. Ms. Slazyk: I know, I know. Vice Chairman Winton: How the hell can I make a damn decision if I can't see the aerial? I don't know what the surrounding land uses are. I mean, I've asked for this 50 times since, you know, in the two years. This doesn't work. I can't figure out how to study this stuff. Ms. Slazyk: Commissioner, you're absolutely right, and we will find another way to convey the infonnation so it's much clearer to you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Ms. Slazyk: On the new ones, we're giving you the color ones. But this one happens to be from before we changed procedures. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, go redo them some way or another before they get here. Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. I'm song. Ms. Slazyk: All right. Commissioner Winton: OK. Lourdes. 166 January 24, 2002 Ms. Slazyk: PZ -7 and 8 are actually companion items for land use and zoning change for the properties at 3163, 3165, 3171, 3175 and 3179 Southwest 22nd Terrace from duplex/residential to restricted commercial. The department's recommendation on this and the companion item were for denial. However, this is second reading. So it did pass on first reading on January 27, 2000 by the City Commission. I'll let the applicants speak to their proffered covenant. That's why 1 believe that the Commission at that time had passed it. The Department's recommendation was based on a finding that this would or could, without safeguards, introduce commercial intrusion into a residential area. Vice Chairman Winton: Is the applicant here? Chairman Regalado: Yes, I think she is. It's Vicky. 1 just want to say something. I don't know if you remember this, but this is -- Commissioner Sanchez: It says here the -- Ms. Slazyk: BAP, Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Oh, yes. Chairman Regalado: 7 and 8. Let me just say that this is something that it was planned long time ago. The lot became entangled on legal problems in court and they asked for a deferral. This is sort of an abandoned lot. And what I think we are doing here is exactly what we did on Coral Way and 37`x' with the extended stay, that the parking is in the back with some landscaping, and there is no -- and there is no -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No, that's not this particular project, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: I know. But what I'm saying is that we did something similar to this in Coral Way and 37`x'. So. Ms, Slazyk: No. The Coral View Project. The major use special permit for Coral View Project, which is under construction, was the one that was similar to this, where it was a residential tower on Coral Way with townhouses on the back, on 22ic1 Terrace. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Slazyk: That's the one that was similar. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And Commissioner, if I may. You're quite correct. There's been some legal lawsuits going back and forth. There were meetings to try to settle this yesterday at 5, and then again today, this morning. And we're waiting for one of the property owners to come here today and put on the public record some information that your City Attorney has required. They're not here yet. So if we could move this to the end of the P&Z (Planning and Zoning) agenda, hopefully, we will be able to resolve everything and move forward on this today. 167 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. At the end of the P&Z agenda may be the end of the day, because we have to -- but I mean, that's OK. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: OK. Chairman Regalado: We're going to be here, so. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: All right. I appreciate it. Thank you. Joel Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): Well, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: This item, really, until that's resolved, I don't think we're legally in a position to hear it at this point. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Exactly. Mr. Maxwell: Unless this property owner comes forward to clarify the legal issues that have forced this item to be held in abeyance for almost two years, unless they come forward and provide the information requested today, I don't think we legally should hear it. So they've indicated that they may be able to provide this person before the end of the day. Chairman Regalado: Right. That's what I said. Mr. Maxwell: That's all. OK. Chairman Regalado: That the end of the day will be a long day. That's what I'm saying. So. Commissioner Sanchez: Just for point of clarification, Mr. City Attorney, are you saying that because of the litigation, we shouldn't hear the item? Mr. Maxwell: It's not litigation. The litigation surrounds an issue of who owns the property, and whether or not they gave approval and so forth. And we haven't -- we understand that they've settled that issue. I need the property owner who had previously come forward and said that they would withdraw on their authority for their property to be involved to indicate on the record that they now are in agreement. Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Has that other person properly been notified to be here? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes. And they are on their way. They have called me several times during this hearing, because the City Attorney said they don't only want them here, they also want a legal document prepared, a letter that is an affidavit form stating what they're going to say on the record. So that's taking a little bit. But we should be able to hear the matter at the end if you are so inclined. Thank you. 168 January 24, 2002 E 0 Chairman Regalado: OK. We're going to listen to this if everything that the City Attorney has requested is complied with. V 169 January 24, 2002 0 0 48, DENY PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 TO CHANGE ZONING DESIGNATION AT 3225 FRANKLIN AVENUE FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO SD -2 COCONUT GROVE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. Chairman Regalado: Item PZ -9 is a first reading ordinance 3225 Franklin Avenue, in Coconut Grove. The staff and the applicant -- go ahead. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. PZ -9 is a change of zoning for the property at approximately 3225 Franklin Avenue, in Coconut Grove. This is a single-family residential lot that's adjacent to the SD -2 property that you know in the Grove on Main Highway as the Taurus. The Department is recommending denial of the zoning change. The land use designation was changed on this in 1990. There was a request made to amend the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from residential to restrictive commercial so that the zoning change could subsequently happen. The Department had recommended denial of that, but it was approved nevertheless. This is the companion zoning change that didn't occur at that time, but is being filed at this time. The Department is recommending denial finding that this particular piece of SD -2 commercial property that fronts Main Highway also abuts a residential area to the rear, and this -- you know, the expansion of the SD -2 by even one lot towards the residential area, what it does is not only present possible commercial intrusions into the residential area and all the affects associated with that, but it also compiles a bigger piece of property in the front on SD -2 that could end up with another development fronting Main Highway that, you know, may have a scale and character issue. So, you know, with regards to the comp plan, this is commercial intrusion into residential zoned land, and we would recommend denial. Chairman Regalado: On behalf of the applicant. Lucia Dougherty: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, my name is Lucia .Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of the owners, as well as the applicant. The owner is with me here this -- today, which is Dave Hill. I`m sure you all know him as the long-time owner as the Taurus Restaurant. Also with me this afternoon is Gino Falceto, who is the contract vendee. Gino has actually had many projects -- several projects on Miami Beach that he's constructed. This is his first new venture in Miami. Although, he is the principal owner's representative at the Grand Hotel. So, he is the owner's representative of that hotel in the City of Miami. He is seeking a rezoning of one lot adjacent to the Taurus. Now, just a way of example. The Taurus Restaurant, as well as the one lot, is -- has a Comprehensive Plan designation of SD -12 -- I mean, SD -2, excuse me. So, this comp plan is already -- comp plan already designates this one lot as SD -2. We are asking for the City Commission to make this by rezoning it, this one lot consistent with your comprehensive plan. This one lot is zoned single family at the present time. We are not seeking a rezoning of the rest of the lots, which currently are the parking lots of the Taurus. So, those -- rest of those lots will remain single family. And we believe that the City is actually obligated to rezone this piece of property under Florida law. And I'm just going to read you what the Florida law says. A development order -- and this rezoning decision regardless of whether or not you make a positive decision or a negative decision will be a development order. It says a development order or land development regulation shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan if the land uses, densities and 170 January 24, 2002 • intensities and other aspects of the development permitted by such order or regulations are compatible and with -- and further objectives, policies, uses and densities and intensities of the Comprehensive Plan. What I'm suggesting is that, as a matter of law, having said this -- as a matter of law, I think you're obligated to rezone this property to be consistent with your Comprehensive Plan. Having said that, I think that there are many reasons why you should do that, even above an obligation under law, because it's the right thing to do. I don't think anybody, anybody would dispute that Coconut Grove has changed. It has changed over the last 10 years. It used to be a vibrant and the only destination -- retail destination in South Florida. Now, we have lots of competition. We have South Beach. We have Lincoln Road. We have South Miami. We have now the Rouse Project in Coral Gables. So, it's sort of taking it away from what we used to have in Coconut Grove. So, from many people's standpoint and .from those who actually prepared your Comprehensive Plan, we're going to have some testimony from that -- what they're suggesting that other uses take that place. Other uses that would actually be users of your retail. Sadly, I just learned yesterday that even the News Cafe is going out of business. If Soyka can't make a living -- it's probably the most brilliant. Restaurateur that we have in South Florida -- he can't make a go of the News Cafe. We do have things that are changing in Coconut Grove. Commissioner Teele: You're speaking now of the News Cafe in the Grove? Ms. Dougherty: 1 am. Commissioner Teele: You're not speaking of -- Ms. Dougherty: I am not speaking of the one on Lincoln Road. I mean, on Ocean Drive. Now, in terms -- pardon me? Or boulevard either. I'm only speaking of the one in Coconut Grove. Commissioner Teele: Certainly not the one on the boulevard. Ms. Dougherty: We hope that doesn't happen. Anyway, with respect to the Taurus itself, in 1994, Mr. Hill sold the property to a restaurateur, who owned 40 restaurants. He owned Dan Marino's, Cafe Iguana, the Brasierre Max. I mean, many different restaurants. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that guy's run all of his restaurants out of business. So, he may not be a good example here. Ms. Dougherty: What I'm telling you is that Dave had to take it back in 1999, and currently he's running it as a restaurant. He's running this restaurant. And he has allowed me to tell you that at the present time, his income is -- does not meet his debt service on the property. That is a fact. So, Mr. Falceto, he has a desire to have a small European boutique hotel at this corner, which would anchor this corner. It's the style of -- he would have a condo hotel on the corner that we thought would be a great thing. The restaurant that would be at the bottom floor would not be bigger. In fact, it would be smaller than the current Taurus Restaurant. The Taunus Restaurant, I believe, is about 10,000 square feet. The restaurant that's planned in this boutique hotel would only be 7,000 square feet. So, the retail or the commercial area would actually be less. We're trying to address some of the issues that were brought up by our neighbors and by the Planning 171 January 24, 2002 0 • Department. For example, we've ;net with Tucker Gibbs on behalf of his folks. We've met with John Shubin. We've proffered a covenant, and I'd just like to go over that with you. Their concern seems to be that we don't have a Coco Walk. We don't want another Coco Walk. This covenant will address those issues. Another concern seems to be -- well, let's put it this way. They would like to have a fully residential property. This is going to be a condo, but it's going to be a condo hotel, meaning that the folks in the condominium can actually lease their property for less than six months a year and be much like the Mutiny, for example. Now, I'd like to read the covenant that we proffer to you -- we proffered to the neighbors. At this point, it's not acceptable to them. I don't want to imply that it's been acceptable, but I just want to read some of the conditions. We're happy to amend it even further, if it's something that the City Commission would like. The height, not to exceed 50 feet. That is the law right now, but we would also proffer in this that we wouldn't seek any variances any time in the future and if the law changed, we wouldn't seek to increase it based on the law. The design. The Main Highway Franklin and north elevations would have a residential design in character above the second floor. And we have actually some designs to show you. The setbacks. We have a covenant that the 4th and 5th floors would have a minimum setback that would be shown on Exhibit C. The parking would be located at grade parking lots, screened by a coral rock wall. Landscaping to be approved by the Planning Department in a Class 11 permit, which leads me to another thing. In this application, we actually submitted plans. We didn't have to submit plans because it is a rezoning, as you know. And typically, you never see plans with a rezoning. We actually took the next step forward and presented plans to the Planning Department, as well as the Zoning Board, which gave us unanimous recommendation of approval, by the way. Another one. Egress and ingress. There will be no vehicular ingress or egress from Main Highway, and egress on Franklin Street should be limited to a left turn. So, those are the things that we thought we could proffer that would address some of the concerns of the Planning Department. Again, we have prepared plans -- something that developers don't do on a rezoning. I don't think you've ever seen plans that's been presented with their request for a rezoning, again, for one lot, not the entire parking lot, but just one lot. And with that, we have Les Belinson, who is the architect, who is here today to talk about that. Gino Falceto is also engaged. Richard Millard, who is the Manager -- who is a hotel manager and consultant. He will be the person who will manage this hotel. And he is going to be responsible for getting the referral agencies, such as the preferred hotels or the leading hotels of the world, or the (UNINTELLIGIBLE), those kinds of hotels. And I'd like Richard to come up here and talk about that kind of project. I'm going to submit, for the record, his curriculum vitae. Richard Millard: I'm Richard Millard. I live at 2901 South Bayshore Drive. And my offices are at 300 Biscayne Boulevard Way, in the City of Miami, Mr. Commissioner. We live here, work here, been here for 16 years. My company, Techon, owns and operates around 20 hotels around the United States. I was part of the team, with Woody Weiser, that put together the Grand Bay and built that hotel. The hotel that we have in mind for Coconut Grove, as I live here, obviously I want it to be something I want to be proud of. The hotel that we have in mind for Coconut Grove would be what you would all know as a traditional boutique European style hotel, kind of user friendly. The restaurant that we plan on having in that hotel is much more of a -- kind of a yesterday European kind of a restaurant. If you think of the Capital Grill, it's not that. But we have a lessee who is something like that. That kind of a restaurant. Very -- I guess I'll use the word quiet, old fashioned, customer friendly kind of a hotel, In Miami, I don't think we have 172 January 24, 2002 such a thing. Grand Bay is designed that way. Today it's not the same way as it was. Certainly, for those of us that live here, as opposed to those of us that visit, would be the kind of hotel I think we'd be proud of. If you know what a preferred hotel is or a leading hotel of the world, the Mayfair Hotel is part of the leading hotels of the world, I believe. It's that kind of a hotel. Certainly is not the going to be a Delano kind of an experience. I think it would be fabulous for the Grove. Absolutely fantastic. I'm excited about living here and seeing it happen. I think it's for that location, as much as I love the tourists and Dave hill, I think you're going to find that it's a much more subdued, quiet, gentlemanly kind of a place. I'd be happy to answer any questions about that. Those kind of hotels, you know, the kind that we've run -- just for your information, I've lived in Miami for a long time. I was the opening general manager of the Sheraton River House at Miami Airport when it opened. If you remember that hotel, which was a pretty successful hotel. I was the general manager of the Hyatt Regency in Dallas for a long time. So, I'm kind of used to high end stuff. One of my associates in my company was the general manager of the Grand Bay for a long time, and that's the kind of hotel we like to operate. So -- Vice Chairman Winton: How many rooms is this? Mr. Millard: Seventy-two, 1 believe. Very small. Questions? None. Thanks. Ms. Dougherty: The owner has also engaged Jack Luft, because we initially presented our plans to the -- to the Planning Department and they did not -- they did not receive them well, and they said, basically, this does not look like a Grove kind of place. So, we asked Jack to please give us some guidance in the kind of place that he believes that the Grove would like to see. And I'd like Jack to talk about that. Jack Luft: My name is Jack Luft, Professional Planner, 32 years experience. I'd like to submit to the Clerk, it's L -U -F -T. My resume is on file. As Lucia said, I was brought in somewhat late in the project, about December, after the staff had, 1 think, been somewhat concerned with the massing and the scale and the impact -- what is, quite frankly, one of the most important gateways to the village. And they did not want to see a massive project rise at that corner that would be an abrupt, stark change in scale. It would be not only incompatible with adjacent residents, really not in the spirit of the Grove generally. So, we -- Les and 1, and Gino, we sat down, had some long talks about this. I did want to underscore that, in my opinion, my professional judgment, the conclusion that Lucia has, that it is consistent with the comp plan and the State ,Statute 163.31294113 does -- is pretty clear. When the Commission made the decision to change the comp pian from low density residential to commercial, that was a policy directive and, ultimately, you do need to follow through and express that. Of course, we know the restaurant has been a fixture on that site for many decades. The European scaled hotel is really the kind of thing envisioned in the Coconut Grove master plan. The need is to create anchor developments on the south of Main Highway to reinvigorate and reenergize the pedestrian traffic along the highway. On a personal note, I'll interject that yesterday my son purchased the oldest business in Coconut Grove on Main Highway, the Leathery. And I can tell you from his experience that traffic has not been, in recent years, what it should have been. He, along with the other merchants along that street, are hopeful that there can be that kind of energy on Main Highway once again. A European scaled hotel can only do good things in that regard. So, it's consistent with the Grove master plan. The plan was concerned with tired -- quoting from your 173 January 24, 2002 • • master plan -- tired and dated store fronts and a growing number of vacancies. The issue here is regeneration and renewal. The problem is -- and 1'd like to direct your attention to the graphics over here -- the problem is is that the peculiar part of the historic zoning on this site is that we have a very narrow triangular shaped property at that point shown in SD -2 that is, at best, an extremely difficult site to redevelop. It's probably why that 1912 wood framed houses remained there for some 90 years, because it is a difficult site. But at some point in time, the City needs to regenerate itself, redo itself, and we think that time has come. But to try to do it on that property would be almost a fruitless effort. That is why the next lot over was petitioned for a comp plan change, so that SD -2 would give some depth, some regularity to the site so that building that could make sense would work. As to the concern about impacts to the west on the neighborhood, I would remind you, those R-1 lots, which are part of this property, would remain single family zoning. That's effectively 150 -foot setback from the nearest property to the west. And those properties to the west are not single family residential. There is a synagogue, 'There are parking lots. There's a real estate office across the street. So, this is hardly -- the synagogue property is hardly surrounded by low density residential. So, with that 150 foot setback, we think there's plenty of reason to believe that this has a substantial buffer. Now, a lot of people talk about the vacancies and some of the problems of the commercial. We just heard about Soyka and News Cafe. I think that's the reason not to just buy any project or push another project through just for the sake of development. I think -- and I'm sure Commissioner Winton agrees with me -- it's all the more reason to insist on quality and the best design possible so that we set the pace and set the tone for what we want to come. This is not an excuse for just approving something to get something done. Now, when I sat down with Les, we talked about some important things to do on this site. I agreed completely with Lourdes and staff. It should not be a five -story wall rising up here. Really, the building that is the scale is the flay House. That's three stories. What we wanted to do is come in with a design that would articulate the second and third floors with balconies, with screen walls, trellises, and a setback at the fourth and fifth level that would effectively take it out of sight from the street. What you're really going to see -- this view here would be actually so far across Main Highway as to be almost on the Ransom property. You would never see it from this distance. Up close, on a closer view, what you're going to see is a three-story building wrapping around with the corner element to hold that corner. We asked for an arcaded area along the bottom, wood trellises again, screens, and awnings, vines covering those walls so that there's a rich texture of natural materials, stone, the kinds of things that are typical of the Grove. The old stonewall across the street that goes along the Barnacle. All of those are elements that Les will talk to you in one moment that lie's tried to pick up and echo. So the building sets back and then behaves itself. Additional screening and buffering on the north phase. Charles Avenue was something we were very concerned about. Thelma Gibson has worked with us. She's been a big supporter of this project. She couldn't be here today. She was ill. But this project will appear as a residential townhouse from the Charles Avenue side. And because of the trees and vegetation, you probably won't even see the building. So the transitions on all the edges are very carefully thought through. Lucia has taken you through the covenants that describe this. What I'd like to do is introduce Les Belinson, who has reworked this building, in fact, the last project. I think this is his third or fourth generation, and he will tell you about how he's resolved these details. Thank you very much. Les Belinson: Good afternoon. My name is Les Belinson. I'm the architect for the project. My office is at 790 Northwest 107th Avenue. Like Tack said, this is a view from looking -- this is 174 January 24, 2002 0 i Main Highway, Franklin. This is a view that's shown -- that you'll never really see. It's just to show you the whole building in a model form. This is looking from Main Highway across the street. Again, we've removed all the existing landscaping in order for you to see what the building looks like. As you can see, we've broken the building down, the mass down, into modulars to mitigate the scale of it. We've set back the fourth and fifth floors so they cannot be seen from the street, which we will show in further slides. These are just some quick studies that we used to show the staff how we set the property -- the building back at the fourth and fifth floors. So it only appears to be a three-story building. You can see here the arcade. That's a street. Here is a view looking north on Main Highway. This is Franklin. This is actually seen in context of the site, with the existing landscaping in place. Here's a view looking south on Main Highway. This is the bank on the right and this is the building as you see it from the street. Ms. Dougherty: Les, I don't want to interrupt you, but when you say existing landscaping in place, you're going to keep the landscaping that's there today? Mr. Belinson: Absolutely. Yes. This is another view -- I'm looking south on Main Highway, from across the street. l'm looking back at the site. And you can see, this is all the existing landscaping. This is a view along Franklin. The entrance to the parking lot. We plan to keep the access to the parking lot where it's located now, off Franklin. There will be no traffic either coming on or off Main Highway, This is a view from Charles Street. This is the bank, looking back through the drive through entrance at the bank, looking back at the -- at our property. And you can see basically it's all buffered by existing landscaping. This is an artistic sketch looking basically from the street level, showing the character of the building. Basically, it fits into the Coconut Grove vernacular and the scale is really -- appears to be a very small building. And that's it. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, ma'am. Lucia. Ms. Dougherty: Further on. I have never said that the City is obligated to give the developer the highest and best use of his property, but the City is obligated to give an owner of property a reasonable use of his property. And I'd like Randy Hill, who is a realtor, as well as the son of the owner of the property, to come forward and tell you why he doesn't believe that the existing single family residential zoning district is reasonable for this piece of property. Randy Hill: Good afternoon. My name is Randy Hill. My offices are located at 3560 Main Highway, in Coconut Grove, Florida. I have been a licensed real estate broker in Coconut Grove for 16 years. Currently, the senior vice president of Esslinger and Maxwell Wooten. Real quickly, after Lucia and Mr. Luft, there's not much that anyone else can add, except for a couple of brief things that came up plainly during our discussions early on with the Planning Department and their insistence on the fact that this should remain single-family. The fact of the matter is, their current parking lot has been an unencumbered -- excuse me -- uninterrupted use as a parking lot for almost 60 years. The lot that we're asking for currently to be zoned is well 175 January 24, 2002 within that parking lot, and as Lucia said, is within the comp plans to be zoned commercial. But what I did want to point out -- and I'll make it part of the record -- is that all of the homeowners to the west of us that were displayed in the pictures, the Shabad, the Vectory, all of those people have been using it as somewhat commercial, church or religious affiliated uses. The current parking lot that we're going to keep in place provides that 150 -foot setback from those uses. And the fact that the Planning Department kept insisting that single family was the highest and best use is the farthest thing from the truth. In fact, what I've done -- that will be entered in the record -- is demonstrated properties that are on the north side of our parking lot, and their current values as single family homes, which run in a price range from 30,000 to sixty-three thousand dollars ($63,000), and pretty much have been flat for the last 20 years. So, 1 guess I would suggest that continuing to say that our parking lot would be best utilized as a single-family home site is probably not accurate. And if you have any questions, feel free. Currently, our taxes on that one lot -- and 1 don't have it in front of me -- approximately six to seven thousand dollars ($7,000) a year. Approximately130,000. OK. Ms. Dougherty: We have letters of support from many of our neighbors. We have one -- and we submitted these for the Zoning Board earlier. We have one from Mark Sarnia -- Mike Simonof, Rabbi Falu (phonetic), who is just down the street, Joaquin Diaz, who owns the two single family houses immediately to the north or on the Charles Avenue side, behind our parking lot. We have Steven Massey, who is at 3185 Main Highway. And, by the way, Mike Simonof is 3503 Biscayne -- Camp Biscayne, and the rabbi is 3291 Franklin. And we have Ryan Investments, which is the owner of the property immediately across the street, and the largest owner of the property in between Carnp Biscayne and Ransom School. And also at every meeting that we've had, Commissioner Gibson has come and supported this project. She owns property on Franklin and she, unfortunately, is ill today and could not make it, but otherwise she would be here and supportive of this rezoning. With that, I'd urge your support and we'd be happy to answer any questions and proffer this covenant. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. This is a public hearing. Ma'am, name and address. Lola Czarnecki: My name is Lola Czarnecki and I live at 3353 Franklin. The way the scale fed up with the parking lot, if you looked at the back part of the parking lot, it's under 500 feet straight back on Franklin. Otherwise, when you go down Franklin, you'll hit a little street and if you make a left coming right there, it's a little dead end area, and there's a group of 10 town houses that have been there for 20 some years. And I guarantee you, they don't run 30 and 40,000 at -- when they were built, they were, but they're not any longer. And the houses on Franklin have gone up in price. The biggest problem with doing anything that causes more traffic on Main Highway, Main Highway, when you come in, going toward the schools, there is a turn. It turns this way. And there's some very large trees that sit next to the real estate office on the side. Between the morning traffic coming in from the south going downtown, which you cannot even get out of Franklin Avenue. You have to go up toward Douglas to even get out of it, because they won't let you through. They're just going dead on, and between the schools, dropping off the children. And his parking lot, I think he's been renting out spaces to students that drive, which is great, because at least they're not parked all over the street in the Grove. And that includes our street. But the traffic there in the morning going into town and in the afternoon coming out of town, there isn't room -- you cannot even get through that area. And, truthfully, 176 January 24, 2002 we need a light. I mean, we need a light on Franklin because we cannot get out, and it's a very dangerous thing. So, I don't think we need any tall buildings there. The street on the other side that goes up from the -- from the bank, those are all -- I think those are historic little houses on that street, and all families. So, I -- you know, I'm sorry. I absolutely disagree and a number of people do and have written in. Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Is anybody else in favor of this project, other than the -- anybody else oppose that wanted to speak? OK. We've got -- all right. I'I1 tell you, what we can do -- we'll start here, but some of you can core up to this side, if -- so we don't waste time switching from one to another. Whatever you want to do. But go ahead, sir. Name and address. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me one moment, Chair -- Mr. Chairman. All those people who raised their hands, if you're going to speak, you need to come up so -- I mean, raising your hand doesn't do much, OK? John Shubin: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name is John Shubin. I'm a partner in the law firm of Shubin and Bass at 46 Southwest 1st Street in the City of Miami. I'm here today representing a number of residents in the Camp Biscayne community at 3505 Main Highway, many of whom are here today. I'm going to make the legal arguments for them and address a few of the issues in Ms. Dougherty's presentation, and many of them will speak individually. I've asked them to speak briefly and not to be repetitive, but there are a few issues that were made in the applicant's presentation and I think it's critical that I address them and distinguish they. The first is the applicant made the argument that you are somehow compelled to rezone this property by virtue of the fact that the Comprehensive Plan allows a restricted commercial use. Essentially, you heard the argument that state law compels you to rezone consistent with the master plan. Let me make it very clear to you that the case law, from the Florida Supreme Court, is to the contrary. In fact, in the landmark decision, Board of County Commissioners versus Snyder, at 627 Southern Second 469, the Supreme Court of Florida made it clear that the Comprehensive Plan -- and I'll try to make this argument -- it's a ceiling on development, not a floor. It doesn't mean that it's the minimum development. It means it's the maximum that can be allowed over time. And in fact, what the court said was that when a land owner seeks to rezone property, they have the burden to prove that their application -- in this case the rezoning application -- is consistent with the master plan and complies with the procedural requirements of the zoning ordinance. They've done that. That's all that it means when they say it's consistent with the master plan. But what the court then went on to say -- and this is significant -- at that point, the burden shifts to the governmental board to demonstrate that maintaining the existing zoning classification, with respect to the property, accomplishes a legitimate public purpose. So, the test is maintaining this as residential. Is it somehow furthering a legitimate public purpose? We would contend to you -- the neighbors would contend to you, and we would back up staff in that regard, that maintaining the residential integrity is a legitimate public purpose. Very briefly -- and I sort of jumped into my argument. The neighbors that I -- Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, counsel. What jurisdiction is that case? 177 January 24, 2002 Mr. Shubin: It's Florida Supreme Court. Commissioner Teele: No, no. What County? You said Board of -- Mr. Shubin: Oh. Versus Brevard County. Commissioner Teele: Brevard County? Mr. Shubin: Yes. But it applies -- if there is one case in the state of Florida that it applies almost universally is the Snyder case. The second point that I think is very important is, under your zoning ordinance -- and it's different, for example -- Commissioner Teele will tell you this -- it's different from Dade County. In Dade County, when you apply for a rezoning, you're compelled to submit a site plan. In the City of Miami, a rezoning is a rezoning and unless there is some specific limitation in the form of a covenant that is binding on the successors to that property, the applicant, once they get the rezoning, is under no obligation whatsoever to build what they show you. So, if you're in Dade County and they show you a project, you know that as a condition of their rezoning automatically that they have to build that project. So, when you look at all the pretty pictures -- and some of them are not so pretty -- but when you look at the vision and when you have the architect and Mr. Luft share with you the vision, that vision, if you just grant them the rezoning, is not the vision that you may wind up with. You may wind up with the photographs that you saw of closed -- you know, shops for rent, of closed restaurants. You don't know exactly what you're getting. Once you rezone it, they can do anything they want within that rezoning category, and that's something that is very, very important and it's important for a critical reason. In all of the plans that they're showing you, they show the parking for this condominium hotel on the residential lots going back into the residential district. But what I want to introduce into the record is a zoning fact sheet that was pulled -- that incorporates a resolution I believe from 1970 -- 1969, resolution 41276. This is the resolution that granted the conditional use for parking in the residential lots, but it makes it clear that it only can be used to support the restaurant, meaning the Taurus Restaurant or the restaurant in that place. So, when they show you plans saying that all of our parking is going to be in the back, those plans, even though they're not binding, aren't even accurate because, as a matter of law, they can't put the parking in the back. It can only support a restaurant. It cannot support a residential hotel. And I think it's also important that you know that. Another issue. You heard Mr. Hill's son testify regarding the inability to develop the property as residential. Be very careful about drawing any conclusions from what he said, until you think through exactly what he said. He never said that the property, without the existing lot being rezoned -- meaning the Taurus property as it presently exist in the SD -2 -- cannot be developed economically. He never said that. In fact, there's no evidence in the record that the Taurus is an SD -2, without getting the existing rezoning, cannot be developed according to its SD -2 use. All he said was, we think that a commercial use is more appropriate and a higher and better use than a residential use but you don't really need an expert to tell you that. That's just obvious. The other issue -- and there are two hearings in this case, and we've been unable to get this information to you. Mr. Luft has also suggested that the comp plan, when it was amended, was really done to accommodate some future commercial use on this site. It is the community's distinct recollection -- and we're trying to pull the records and we hope to have them for you -- that the reason why the comp plan was amended in 1990 was to accommodate the house on the corner across the street, the real estate 178 January 24, 2002 i 0 office, which was a commercial use, and was not part of some objective on the part of the City of Miami to further commercial development into the residential area. It was essentially done to make sure that the real estate house was not inconsistent with the master plan. But, again, we're going to find those documents and hopefully have them for you at the next hearing. One thing is certain. When you saw the photographs of the distress in Coconut Grove, there was no distress - - and there is no distress in the residential market. And oftentimes I've come before this Commission or I've come before other Commissions -- and I represent neighbors who are concerned about their community and the Commission says, "Well, these neighbors just want to see nothing on that site. They don't want to see any development." And a developer has to make some money on their property. Well, one, forgetting that there's been no evidence that the developer can't make money on this existing property as it is presently zoned, what the residents of Camp Biscayne want is, they want permanent residents. They want people who live there, who have a vested interest in the community, who are going to care about the community, and people who "own" an interest in a condominium hotel, who may use it two to three weeks out of the year and then put it into a hotel pool, are a lot different in terms of the concerns that they have for their community, as those who live there full-time and have an ownership interest. And the key to the Grove solving the problems that it has is to give everyone a vested interest in its future and home ownership or single-family ownership, at any level, is the best way to accomplish that. And the residents of Camp Biscayne support some sort of residential project on the back lots, and would certainly not want you to encourage the developer to go -- to have further commercial intrusion by giving him the first lot, leading to the Dominos falling in place. One thing that I didn't do for the record is read my client's -- some of the clients' names into the record. They're Mr. David Sweatland, Phil and Linda Corey, Phillip and Ellen Freidin, Lisa Braden, Joe Velasquez, and Joe Harrison. They're here today. I've taken up time. I know you have a busy agenda in front of you. I've asked them to be brief, if they want to speak. And, again -- but I'm here to address the legal issues. There is a legitimate public purpose in maintaining the existing residential category. You have staffs recommendations that are substantial competent evidence under Florida law to support this. Your staff will also give you further justification for maintaining the existing zoning classification if you asked them. We believe that rather than sending this to a second hearing, that this application should be rejected here today. You have the power to do so and we suggest that you do. Thank you. Robert McGrift: Chair, good evening. My name is Robert McGrift. My address is 3326 Charles Avenue, Coconut Grove. I'll be brief. I'm really opposed to the rezoning change. A lot of people here that have come to the Grove have done so in the last maybe 15, 25 years. Me, myself, I was born and raised in Coconut Grove. I moved to Charles Avenue in 1962. I was there before the Taurus house. I was there before Mayfair. As a matter of fact -- well, Mayfair and Coco Plum was a mangrove and we used to go over there and get mangoes by the basketful. But the thing is, Charles Avenue and Franklin Avenue, as it is now, it handles more traffic than it should. I came home one afternoon because of activity was going on up at the -- up in the Grove. I couldn't get in any driveway. Progress is good. But when it comes at the expense of the homeowners and the property owners, sometimes you must take a step back and say, is this really and truly what the people of that area want? And I think the people in Coconut Grove, Charles Avenue and Franklin, in particular, this is not what we want. I'll be brief and that's my say. Thank you. 179 January 24, 2002 • 0 Elizabeth Braden: My name is Elizabeth Braden. I'm also known as Lisa Braden. I live at 3505 Wildwood Circle, Coconut Grove, Florida. Commissioners, I've lived in Coconut Grove for 11 years. I choose to live here because I enjoy its sense of history. I love the big trees. I like this eclectic mix of architecture. I like the mix of races and I like the mix of economic levels. It's my home. I oppose the rezoning of the tourist property because it will enable developers to build this large condo hotel. They keep calling it small, but we see the pictures. In an area that needs residential housing, Mr. Hill is entitled to develop his property, but he does not need to develop it with. commercial hotels or retail space. There are better choices for the development of our neighborhood. The Taurus property is an important one for the residents of the Grove. It borders family homes on Franklin Avenue, Charles Avenue, and on Main Highway. It has the potential to bring together the African-American, Hispanic and Anglo communities in the Grove. If it were developed as affordable residential housing, more families would have the opportunity to live in and take pride in Coconut Grove. That's what I want to see. I want to see more good neighbors who live here and care about the quality of life in their neighborhood. Thank you. Jill Velazquez: My name is Jill Velazquez. 1 live at 3500 Monroe Drive. And I just want to briefly say, I came here to Coconut Grove for the first time 20 years ago and I moved to Coconut Grove seven years ago. I fell in love with it 20 years ago and in the time -- from the first time 1 visited until now, it has changed drastically. And I think it's very important that we preserve the charm of the Grove. So, I don't want to see this rezoning happen. Thant{ you. Suzanne Wheeler: Suzanne Wheeler, 3048 Virginia Street. I'm the Chairman of the Coconut Grove Village Council. Less than 10 days ago I tools an oath to promote, protect and preserve the unique character of Coconut Grove, including its historic character, and I can do nothing but take a position that you should not support the zoning change, especially when we have a lot of congestion. We have a lot of traffic and density issues already in that area of the Grove. Condo hotel is not going to contribute to the unique character of the Grove. And losing the Taurus as an institution is not going to help that either. Thank you. Vice Chainnan Winton: Before you go, are you speaking as an individual or on behalf of the Village Council? Ms. Wheeler: I'm speaking -- if I were speaking only as an individual, i would come out probably more strongly, but we have not yet passed a resolution and discussed it in a formal meeting. We've discussed this in a workshop somewhat, but I don't want to say that we -- Vice Chairman Winton: But there is no Village Council position, so you're speaking on behalf of yourself? Ms. Wheeler: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ma'am. 180 January 24, 2002 Ellen Freidin: Mr. Commissioners, I am Ellen Freidin. I am a lawyer. I practice law with Akerman Senterfitt, but I'm here today as a resident of Camp Biscayne. I live at 3182 Monroe Drive, just a couple hundred feet from this proposed new development. I've lived in Coconut Grove for over -- almost 25 years now. Lived in Miami -- born in Miami. Lived in Miami my whole life. I must tell you that we -- my husband and I strongly object to the proposed rezoning. I don't want to be repetitive. I don't -- I think that Lisa Braden really expressed all the good reasons why this should be denied. There is a very great opportunity here to have this property developed as residential property that can increase and enhance the residential character of the Grove. We do not need right now more commercial property in the Grove, and we do need more residential property in the Grove. What a great spot to provide this opportunity to bring the different parts of the Grove all together in some affordable housing or other good residential -- permanent residential property. I thank you. I urge you to oppose -- to vote against this rezoning. Chairman Regalado: OK. Tucker Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs, at 215 Grand Avenue, in Coconut Grove. And I'm involved with the Coconut Grove Cemetery Association, which owns property behind this on Charles Avenue. We're restoring the historic Mariah Brown house in Coconut Grove. We, too, are opposed to this rezoning, as it does not fit in with the historic character of Coconut Grove. In addition, the Coconut Grove Civic Club has asked me to relay their opposition to this, as well, and support the Camp Biscayne residents and the community in opposing this project. And urge you to support your staffs recommendation to vote no on this. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Lucia. Ms. Dougherty: Yes, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. This piece of property, the Taurus, is zoned SD -2. We're seeking to have this one additional lot, not the entire parking lot, but one more lot in SD -2. SD -2 is a mixed use commercial residential zoning district. In the SD -2, they actually give bonuses if you put a residential structure or residents in the building. We have two buildings in Coconut Grove, commonly referred to as the white elephant and the pink elephant. They got additional FAR (Floor Area Ratio) bonuses for their commercial by putting one or two residential structures at the very top. They had been a failure. This is the one and only building that has carne to Coconut Grove which is, in fact, a mixed use project, with a restaurant down in the bottom floor and a hotel -- residential hotel on the top floor. It is our experience in the Grand, for example, that the folks who owned their units in the Grand, about 25 percent of them put them in the resident -- in the hotel pool. We think that there's going to be more, frankly, in this project. But there are going to be some people who -- they lived there frill -time, but again, this is the only project that has come before Coconut Grove since I've been there, that is truly a mixed use project in the SD -2 district. We can't build a commercial -- or a mixed use project on just those lots that you see there without this one lot. It's physically impossible to do a mixed use project. You can build a 15 -floor -- I mean a 50 -foot building that is totally commercial on that property, but it won't be a mixed use project. As far as the traffic, a residential hotel is going to have less traffic than if it's a full residential project, which everyday, everybody leaves at 9 o'clock and everybody comes back at 5 o'clock. At peak hours you have people corning -- you won't have people coming to the hotel at the same time as the residents coming from the -- 181 January 24, 2002 0 i coming back home or the kids going to school. So, from peak hour traffic, it's less for a hotel use at this corner than you would have for residents. But I want to strongly suggest to you that this is the last time you would possibly see this project. It's not the last time that the neighbors would see this project, because we are only seeking a rezoning at this time. We still have to go through the Class II permit process. Even though we showed you a set of plans, you can hold us to it by both the covenant, as well as the Class I1 permit process. We go there. If they don't like our project, they appeal it to you. Again, if the Planning staff is not supportive of the project, we would end up before you anyway. So, this would not be the first time you see it. You have a way of holding our feet to the fire, as I know you would. As far as the residential parking that Mr. Shubin raised, whether or not we could use the parking in the back for residential parking. This is the very first thing we ever checked with the Zoning Department, but worse comes to worse -- and their opinion is incorrect, that this is a nonconforming parking lot that's been there for 90 years to service commercial and that this -- we could -- as long as we don't expand the parking lot -- and we are putting, by the way, parking underneath the building so we don't have to expand the parking lot -- then it's legal. However, let's assume that they're incorrect. We can still have an SD -19 -- excuse me. SD -12 overlay for parking. Your code anticipates that that's something that could be done. So, with that, 1 would urge your support of this application. and look forward to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Dougherty: -- an exciting project. Commissioner Sanchez: But let's say that we do rezone it and for some reason, you don't develop it, then what? Ms. Dougherty: I don't understand the question. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, let's say that we approve the rezoning -- Ms. Dougherty: You have a covenant -- you now have a covenant that we have proffered that whatever gets developed there has to have no more than 50 feet; that it can only have residential on the top and restaurants on the floor -- on the bottom; that the parking lot is going to be a surface parking lot with this undulating wall. You still have all the protections that you would otherwise have if we don't develop it. More protections -- by the way, more protection than you have today, because you know what you have there today? You have a potential nightclub. You have a person who's got a restaurant that's not working right now, with a liquor license, that he could sell to almost anybody. That's what you have there today. So, what we're saying to you is that we are really frankly surprised that we don't have the support. We wish we did. We tried to get it. We're still willing to work with our neighbors and this Planning staff to continue working with this, if you would see fit to grant this in first reading. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 182 January 24, 2002 • 0 Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, who was the traffic engineer? And refresh -- show me or -- Ms. Dougherty: I don't have a traffic plan -- a traffic engineer. That would become something that you would need in connection with the permit or a Class II. But generally speaking, that is true of hotels and we can have Jack, who's a planner, testify to that. I think everybody would tell you that hotels don't have the peak hours that residential does. Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, Ms. Dougherty. Ms. Dougherty: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: You did not have a transportation consultant, as a part of your team, is that Ms. Dougherty: We did not. Commissioner Teele: Well, one of the troubling aspects of this is that at least half of the people who testified against it testified based upon the incremental increase in traffic that they perceive. Now, you're suggesting to me that it's not appropriate at this point to have a traffic engineer, even though we have a specific request for a hotel? And the question that I would ask rhetorically is, does the hotel generate more traffic than the existing use? And where are those peaks and valleys? And I think only a traffic engineer could help answer that question, in my mind. Second question is, you made reference to a structure that was 90 years old. Ms. Dougherty: No, the parking lot. I don't know about the structure. The building is also 90 years old? Commissioner Teele: Someone made reference to -- Mr. Luft, you made reference to it. Mr. Luft: Yes. Commissioner Tecle: Define and tell me a little bit about that structure. Mr. Luft: The structure is wood framed Dade County pine. It has been expanded a couple of times. In the `50s, it was the La Casita house. It's -- it has washed into several different restaurants in succession. It's been a restaurant for well over a half a century. Commissioner Teele: Are you referring to the Taurus itself? Mr. Luft: The Taurus itself, the building. And then Mr. Hill had it for 30 years. So, since the 60s, he's been operating a restaurant. It's an established use in the Grove and, in fact, it's one that's proven to be very popular with the neighbors. Any time you go over to the terrace, you'll see -- I could name names. People from across the street and -- Commissioner Teele: Well, please don't name names. 183 January 24, 2002 • Mr. Luft. I won't. But it's definitely a neighborhood place. It's the kind of facility that residents use, We think they will use this facility. I don't think anybody has a problem with the concept of a quality place, a little cafe, a sidewalk area to gather. Commissioner Teele: Well, let me just say this on the point. If the structure is, in fact, over 50 years old, some of my liberal view that a property owner ought to be able to do pretty much what they want to within the law gets raised and limited. Because I really do think in historic areas, such as the Grove, such as Buena Vista, Lemon City, Overtown, we really should proceed with tremendous caution in the destruction of those buildings or those -- so -- and I think there's an item on the agenda today that clearly underscores at least some of the concern that the City has about preserving these buildings. Are you, at all, suggesting that any of the historic structure or any of the historic architecture or facade would be retained as a part of this? Or is this a typical bulldozing and -- Mr. Luft: It would have to be removed to be redeveloped. I should just simply say that from a historical architectural standpoint, I did write the first preservation ordinance in the City of Miami in 1974. This building has been modified so many times and adjusted and rebuilt that any notion of an architectural style, other than the fact it has Dade County pine in it, really disqualifies it from any kind of architectural integrity. It's a amalgam of pieces that have been added to the bar, the service areas in the back. So, it would be hard to come to the conclusion that this would qualify as a historic site. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Luft, I would very much -- Mr. Luft: It is old. Commissioner Teele: -- like to support any property owner's desire to reconfigure and to upgrade. And the leading hotels or the preferred hotels -- our leading hotels in the world chain is one that I'm very familiar with, and I think there is a clear market that this community needs to have filled. I think, if more time had been spent educating and sharing with the neighbors what that chain is, and the fact that that is not your Lamborghini, Porsche crowd, you know, in and out with a beer or two, but it really is your discreet European business people -- you know, I'm sure we're trying to get Audi here for the Grand Prix, for example. That's the kind of chain that those folks would be used to using. But I'm -- I want to make this point. You have made a tremendous debt service to this community and I personally can attest to a lot of things that you have done, but the one thing this Commissioner has been very, very concerned about is the lack of historic preservation and enforcement of historic preservation. So, that's not something I think you ought to -- you ought to spend your time talking about what you did in Park West and Overtown, but don't talk about the historic, because we've got a long way to go. And I'm really concerned about this property and the neighborhood and the surrounding neighborhood. If this project had a historic motif, I quite candidly, wouldn't care what Commissioner Winton may or may not do on this. Vice Chairman Winton: You usually don't. 184 January 24, 2002 • 0 Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean, I think it's very clear on the record that each of us have to vote our own conscious on zoning matters, and the Chairman has tried to reiterate that and I'm only trying to say it in a different kind of way. I do care what Commissioner Winton thinks, but he doesn't control my vote. But let me say this. If this were a historic motif, if this were something consistent with Charles Street in that area, without regard to the traffic, I kind of would be enthusiastic about it. But I'm very, very hesitant to move ahead on this issue until I hear what Commissioner Winton and other Commissioners and the debate is. Because I really do think we have a unique character in this area, and I don't think there's anyone that has been in this community who will deny that Coconut Grove, as Lucia said in her excellent start off, is sort of the well spring of commercial activity and historic preservation in this County. The oldest black churches in the whole city, some of them are right there. So, this is well known and we need to be sensitive to that. And I'm just looking for some hook that you all can give me that would make me more comfortable. Mr. Luft: OK. Commissioner, as you know, the dilemma is, as Mr. Shubin so aptly pointed out, nothing we say here means anything because you can't attach it to a rezoning. But we know that your concern, the neighbors' concern about what this thing's going to look like and how it's going to act on that corner is critical. Commissioner Teele: I beg to differ because I think you could proffer, if the attorney would agree, as a covenant, a historic designation -- and I think we have enough in the state law, in the federal law, and in our City's historic legislation, which you so aptly have written -- that you could proffer and run something with the layout on that kind of issue. But I don't want to debate it with you, at all. I want to hear what Commissioner Winton has to say about this, because it's already 5:23 and we want to give adequate discussion on this. But at the same time, we don't want to beat it up. Mr. Luft: Just one final thought. We've come a long step from the first project that Lourdes saw. A long way. And this is our best effort to date -- and you're right. In the Class II process, if we need to move closer to a vernacular statement for the Grove, the old Bahamian, the Conch Village, the Barnacle, to take any reference of historical framework that you wish, those things can be adapted. Clearly, traumatic changes have been made to this point and we're prepared to move in that direction, if that's what you want. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Luft, let me just -- have you read PZ -14? Mr. Luft: No, sir. PZ -14? Commissioner Teele: Fourteen. Well, I would urge you to read it because it's on point and it specifically goes to whether or not we're going to allow the demolition of such a building that you've identified. But I don't want to make that the issue because I think there are certain property rights that really have to be given great deference and this ordinance, PZ -14, doesn't grant a demolition. It merely says that we have a right to have a hearing on it. But it just underscores this Commission's concern, and I know you're aware that Commissioner Winton is leading the charge in his district in establishing historic oversight boards. So, I just am looking 185 January 24, 2002 0 0 for a hook that would help your -- you and your client, that will help the neighborhood. And I just -- I'm not hearing that right this moment. Mr. Luft: We could do a charrette. We can -- Ms. Dougherty: Let me say this to you. We have to go through a Class IT permit process. We are willing to do -- if you want us to save a facade of the Taurus -- Les is a very, very creative architect. He -- I mean, he's done more historic preservation projects in Miami Beach than any other architect that we know of. This is one of the few ones he's done in Miami. But if that's something you want us to do -- if you want us to work around the existing facade or even the original Taurus, we will do it. But what we're telling you is that we cannot put any project on that SD -2 site as it is. We need the depth for the commercial. Chairman Regalado: OK. I guess that we close the public hearing. Anybody else -- I guess no one. So, Commissioner. Not that you're going to make the decision, just to be clear. Vice Chairman Winton: No question about that. And it's quite clear that the only decision I will make here tonight will be mine. I've been kind of all over the map on this, as I've listened to everyone discussing this because there are parts of the neighbors' arguments that, frankly, I'm not sure I fully -- I guess I understand them. I'm not sure I buy them, because the Taurus has historically -- and I've been there probably way too many times myself -- has been a very popular watering hole for many, many years and literally hundreds of patrons there on any particular given evening, which creates a lot more traffic than a 70 some room boutique hotel. So, the traffic argument, in my mind, isn't a very strong argument. But the issue here -- and Commissioner Sanchez, I think, really hit the nail on the head. Because the issue before us isn't what they're going to build here. The issue is us creating an opportunity for a developer to have a bigger developable commercial site than he currently has today, and we are under no obligation to grant that additional development right. We don't have that obligation. And the fact of the matter is that -- and you know, many times I'm very sorry. When I talk to lots of my brethren who are saying, you know, geez, I can't build something bigger on this site because it's too small. So, I need that over there. I need this one. Well, you know, I paid too much. Well, you shouldn't have paid too much. Should have paid less. Then you could have built what's allowed there. And, you know, if that site were a lot bigger and it was already zoned for that, then they'd bringing it forward and the neighbors couldn't have anything to complain about. But the fact of the matter is, it is R-1 right now. That it's zoning. And the issue over quality of life in the Grove and in particular in the site, which is y'all look at this -- at this aerial photo, where you really are transitioning out of the principally residential portion of the Grove and you go another block and you jump into the more commercial oriented portion of the Grove. And it also backs up to the West Grove. And, so, the issue of changing the zoning -- and there's been times that I've sat here and thinking, well, maybe we could do that. But here's the biggest worry that I have. If we agreed to this change in zoning and they offered a covenant that gave its all the protections we wanted, two things can happen: One is, they can decide not to develop the site. And so we all go away. The Commission comes in in two years or three years and the new developer says, I've got commercial zoning here. Ought to be able to build this great big thing, which could be very different than what we're talking about here. And that Commission can choose to change or erase the covenant, if we're a party to that covenant. So, there's no -- we're not -- it's very 186 January 24, 2002 • 0 different than zoning, where it's a lot more work to get that ]rind of change. That covenant could be changed fairly easily. And if the developer -- because they run out of money, because the market turns bad, because they can't really get the hotel, 1 mean, whatever the case may be, anything can delay a development. And when you don't get it done tomorrow, it could go the next year, the year after next, the year after next. And what we could create then is a huge nightmare, not only for all of the neighbors around there, but for the future Commission. And we don't have to create that nightmare for these neighbors. We're under no obligation to do that. So, I have to -- and, frankly, as a guy who has the overall responsibility for the economic livelihood of the entire Grove, which includes the commercial Grove, which lots of the residents don't like, but it's there and it needs to be successful. There is a big part of me that says a boutique hotel on that site would be good for the Grove economically, but that's just my particular point of view about the commercial side of it. The residents' point of view abort the residential side of it is one hundred percent right on. If we maintain a residential neighbor -- a residential zoning there, enforce residential development on that site, which it's zoned for, and they can do whatever they can with that piece of commercial land, whatever that may allow, then I think we've frankly done the appropriate thing in doing our piece to try to promote the appropriate quality of life there, without getting into a whole new battle. Now, that said, I can also tell you -- and the neighbors are going to have to deal with this issue at some point -- they still have a right to redevelop the site that's there. Now, Commissioner Teele and I are going to be one hundred percent together on this historical nature of that particular property. I don't know what that means, yet, in terms of what kind of controls we have, but its a huge concern. It was the first thing that I wrote down here on illy notes, historic building. But if they were able to tear that building down and build something else, they could build something else much worse that could be allowable, which -- and a much worse use that could be much more intrusive to the neighbors than the thing that's here, but the neighbors don't want to have to deal with -- are willing apparently to deal with that kind of future issue. So, I guess my view is that, at this point, I'm going to move a motion that supports the Planning Department's denial of a change in zoning for that one R-1 site. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second on this item. Public hearing is closed. Any more comments from the board members? Commissioner Teele: The issue comes to us on a 7-2 vote and is that 7-2 vote supporting the Department or is it supporting the applicant? Commissioner Sanchez: The applicant. Ms. Slazyk: The 7-2 vote was supporting the applicant. Commissioner Teele: Let me ask you this. Madam Attorney, the first part of Commissioner Winton's statement, how can you create a legal instrument that safeguards the neighborhood and safeguards future development that runs with the land? Or, Mr. Attorney, can that be done? 187 January 24, 2002 • 0 Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): They could certainly proffer or voluntary -- voluntarily proffer a covenant that may give you the safeguards you want. But the Commissioner -- Commissioner Winton, that is -- is correct that, of course, that -- if the City is a party to that covenant, it certainly could be changed in the future. But they could proffer such a covenant that would be effective and recorded and would run with the land until such time as it's changed. Commissioner Teele: That was what I was trying to distinguish. They can proffer a covenant that we're not a party to, but runs with the land, which means, as long as that land is there forevermore, it would run with the land; is that -- Mr. Maxwell: Until it's changed. It would run with the land until changed. Yes. Ms. Dougherty: The other way that the City has done this in the past is that we would proffer a covenant that would run with the land, that would be proffered to the City„ but also to residents within 375 feet, which would not allow us to break the covenant, even if the Commission wanted to, without going back to the people within 375 feet. Commissioner Teele: Let me ask the other question. Commissioner Winton has touched upon this whole issue of the buffer. He didn't use that term, but retaining the residential character. And, you know, once you move the commercial one block back, now you've got a residential with a commercial. What safeguards do we have -- could you proffer on that? Ms. Dougherty: The covenant could say that they would never seek a rezoning of those lots Commissioner Tecle: But they don't own those lots. Ms. Dougherty: Of course, we do. We own the whole site. We're only asking for a rezoning of the one, but we own the entire site. So the covenant would be placed on the entire site, including the parking lots. One of the things that we offered to the Planning Department -- Commissioner Teele: So, in other words, what you're saying is, you would offer a covenant that pledges never to seek rezoning? And that only means until the next time you come before us? Ms. Dougherty: Well, it would go -- it would be a covenant to go to you, as well as to the neighbors. And, so, we'd have to get their support as well, is what I'm trying to say. I can't break that covenant. I can't seek the rezoning if I don't get their approval, as well. Commissioner Teele: Well, what about a covenant -- I want to avoid certain implied contractual issues. But what about a covenant to the Coconut Grove Village? Ms. Dougherty: Yes. It can be done. Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean, I'm just -- if that doesn't address the motion -- you've got a motion. You've got a second. And i guess my unreadiness is simply the fact that the Taurus has been there and the Taurus itself does not represent -- with all due respect to the Taurus -- and I have beQn seen there on one or two occasions -- it does not represent, I think, where we want to 188 January 24, 2002 be going forward in 2002, as the kind of duality development that we're looking for in our community. And I'm just not sure doing nothing -- the motion would have us, in effect -- that's the end of it pretty much, but now, so we do nothing -- now, that would mean that they could come back at a later date. Can they come back? Vice Chairman Winton: Sure. They can go meet with the neighbors and come back with anything. Mr. Maxwell: There are restrictions in the zoning ordinance as to when they could come back, unless the Commission makes certain findings and waives those limitations. You have 18 months -- 12 months of limitations, depending on what they're asking for. But the Commission can waive that under certain conditions. Commissioner Teele: Then I would request, respectfully, of the maker of the motion, that the motion include a waiver or without prejudice for the applicant to collie back with greater community support. Mr. Maxwell: Well, there are certain findings you would have to make. I would suggest, respectfully, that if -- that that be separate and the Commission act on the motion before them. And if the applicant wants to refile at some point, they would then present the information for you to make a determination on the waiver. Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, if the board really wants to see some kind of development, at least from my client's standpoint, probably the thing to do is to defer the action and give us some guidance as to what you would like to see. That's if you want to. Give us -- give my client, who's now had four public hearings on this matter, been to the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board), been to -- no. I'm sorry. He hasn't been there. But give us some guidance, if that's what -- something that you would like to see us do, and we'd be happy to work with the neighbors. Commissioner Sanchez: Guidance. It's an R-1. Should stay an R -I. "That's my guidance. Commissioner Teele: Well, the guidance that i think -- and I think part of the issue is, I don't think you all have done enough work, objective work, with the community -- you need a traffic study. You need a study that is actually going to show what the uses are and what the traffic impact is going to be. And it may be that the traffic impact is greater; it may be that it's less, depending upon what other commercial activities are there. You ]chow, I'm suggesting that the traffic impact could actually be less during the time that it's busy around there, but I don't know that and that's why you need a study. I think anything that's in that area is clearly going to have to fit within the historic motif -- and I'm not talking about preservation now. Ms. Dougherty: I understand. Commissioner Teele: But certainly within the historic motif of Charles and the surrounding neighborhood. And I think -- obviously, greater community support is going to be necessary, as well as, you know, whatever any other Commissioner thinks. But I think this is a little bit -- I 189 .January 24, 2002 • 0 think this may be premature, in that there's just not enough infonnation to even explain to the community what is -- what you're proposing from a traffic point of view. Ms. Dougherty: We'd be happy to get a traffic study, if you care to defer it. Chairman Regalado: So, what she just said, that they will be happy to bring a traffic study, but there is a motion that doesn't require any traffic studies. I mean, it's gone, it's gone. So, there's no amendment. Just make sure. No amendment to the motion. OK. There is a motion to deny. That is the motion, right? Vice Chairman Winton: The motion is to support the Planning Department's denial of a change in zoning for this site. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Oppose? None. The motion passes. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-115 A MOTION TO DENY PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION AT 3225 FRANKLIN AVENUE FROM R -I SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO SD -2 COCONUT GROVE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalcz Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 190 January 24, 2002 49. RECORD STRAW VOTE TO REMOVE PROVISIONS OUTLINED IN PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP): SECTIONS (1)(b) AND (2)(a). RECORD STRAW VOTE TO PROVIDE THAT CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) MAY PROCEED WITH INVESTIGATION AFTER CONSULTATION WITH INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, WHO SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONSULT WITH APPROPRIATE PROSECUTORIAL AUTHORITY. DESIGNATING THAT CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) BE COMPOSED OF FIFTEEN (15) MEMBERS. RECORD STRAW VOTE TO STIPULATE PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP). (See Chairman Regalado: 'So, now we're going to -- Lucia Dougherty: Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: -- defer any other, and we have several items on the PZ agenda, because we had a time certain, and we apologize to the people that were here. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You're -- Mr. Chairman, you're recessing the P&Z (Planning & Zoning) agenda at this time? Chairman Regalado: We are recessing the P&Z agenda, and we are going to the -- Mr. Maxwell: Regular agenda. Chairman Regalado: -- regular agenda. It would be Item 30. So, when — I think we're pretty much organized. However, while we take the seats and the persons attending the PZ agenda are seated -- so, we are going to take Item 30. It's a first reading ordinance. It's a public hearing, CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel). Before we open the floor, we need to establish several things on the record. It is important that everybody understands that to reach this point, we had had several public hearings advertised, noticed, televised, non televised; many meetings with the City Attorney and the community groups. Anybody here who wants to address the Commission on this issue is welcomed to do it. We have the time for this. We are willing to listen, and hopefully, we will make a decision today in terms of this ordinance, according to the mandate of the voters. Mr. City Attorney, could you just briefly tell the people here and watching about the different public hearings that you had organized, even those besides the City Commission hearings? Alejandro VilareIlo (City Attorney): Since the matter was approved by the electorate in November, we've conducted three public hearings, where, in the first two instances, we simply received comments from the general public with regard to drafts of the ordinance that we had prepared. Each time we took the comments that we received from the public to the extent that we could incorporate it into the drafts, we did. Two of those meetings went along that same line, simply taking comments from the public. At the last public hearing, what we did is, we actually went through, in a very detailed way, each and every section, each and every paragraph of the 191. January 24, 2002 0 ordinance, and we've distributed to the Commission a matrix, which attempts to run down the particular sections of the ordinance and incorporates all the comments that we received from the various groups that attended the several public hearings, including PULSE (People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality), the Police Department, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union), what's been generally referred to as the Coalition, Brothers of the Same Mind, the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police), which was present at most, if not all, of the meetings, and any other concerned citizens that might have attended. At that last discussion -- at that last meeting, we were on draft number 5 of the -- in any event, at this point we're at draft number G of the ordinance, and we have incorporated a few minor changes from the draft that was distributed to the City Commission, which were just generally related to the requirement of having written reports with regard to any recommendations and policies and procedures from the CIP to the Police Department, that would include comments with regard to training, recruitment, any early warning systems, notification systems, et cetera. In terms of substantive changes, there were a couple of other changes that were made to make the articles read more clearly. However, the only substantive changes take place in Section 42-88, where there was a provision that, generally, we felt that was one that was desirous of the Coalition; that the Coalition and the various members of the public who commented were not in favor of it. So, we tools it out and we did incorporate a series of provisions that had been suggested concerning the notice to anybody who would be subpoenaed. So, that's Section 42-88. And we also added the section that had been discussed at many different meetings, but we inadvertently had not included, which -- and which is typical of many of our boards, and that is that they provide annual reports to the City Commission on the status of the board and the work they've conducted over the years. Chairman Regalado; Mr. City Attorney, just for the benefit of the TV (Television) viewers and the residents and visitors present, what we're doing on this first reading ordinance, if we were to adopt it, is detailing the way that this panel will function in terms of concurrent investigations with the Police Department, Internal Affairs, and also the way that the members will be chosen by this City Commission. Is this basically -- well, not only that. Several attendants and -- it establish officially what the voters approved, is that correct? Mr. Vilarello: That's correct. The question that the voters approved in November simply authorized the creation of a Civilian Investigative Panel. This ordinance -- Chairman Regalado; But what were the specific powers that the voters gave this Committee? Mr. Vilarello: As y'all know, the question by law is required to be -- is limited to 75 words. Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Vilarello: And if I could, I'll just read it very quickly, because I think it does guide the creation of this ordinance in the big picture. And it reads: "Shall the City Commission, by ordinance, create an Independent Civilian Investigative Panel to investigate misconduct and review policies of the Police Department, composed of a Police Chief appointee, and exclusively of civilian members, nominated by the public and approved by the City Commission; staffed with professional personnel, operating on an annual approved budget, and authorized with subpoena powers, used only upon its counsel's approval and in consultation with the State 192 January 24, 2002 • 0 Attorney's Office?" That was the full text of the question. The resolution that the City Commission adopted also included the language in the broader sense that was included in the City Charter, which incorporates all of those elements in a little bit greater detail. But the question contemplated the adoption of an ordinance, which would detail just exactly how the CIP would operate, and that's the ordinance that's before you for first reading. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, looking at what's in front of us and being that they have amended this six times and things keep changing, I am glad to see that we are making progress on this matter. I am glad to say that if we've all been focusing on one word, that word has been "fairness." And I think that, in this process, we're all going to have to strike a balance through the art of compromising. One thing is that we must all be open-minded in this process. I have looked at the recommendations that are given to me by all parties, and all the public hearings that they have, and I am here to say that although I am very content with some of the language that was placed in this recommendation, I am glad to see, for one -- I marked it down here -- that the initiating nominee committee shall draw its nominations from names submitted by community- based organizations, and individuals who are not City of Miami employees or relatives of employees of the City of Miami Police Department, Initial Nominating Committee members and officers, organizations representing therein are prohibited from serving on the CIP. I think it's also important that we have people that are appointed to or on the CIP not be involved in any type of litigation with the City, to assure that we have fairness in the process. Now, if there's one thing that I was glad to see here was the recommendations that was placed forth by my office, which was to have the appointees go through and complete what I consider to be a citizen police academy training, approved training through NACOLE, which is National Association of the Citizens Oversight of Law Enforcement. I think that is paramount to this, because if you're going to be participating in this and judging someone, you need to know and have a knowledge, understanding of what these individuals do. I am also glad to see here that -- well, that I don't agree with, is that complaints should be signed. If you're going to accuse someone, I think it's important that you know who you're being accused by, and what the allegations or the crime may be. It needs to be put, Now, there are other things that I want to look at here. And pertaining to NACOLE, I think that no case monitoring should begin until training is completed and the board's executive director or chairman is comfortable that the board is competent to review the cases. I think it's very important. There's also been some talk in some of the recommendations made in the community meetings, through the different organizations that participated in this process, where some have made statements that felons should serve, or a convicted felon should serve as an appointee. Well, I don't agree with it, and I will argue that. I think anyone who is a convicted felon puts himself in a situation where he could be biased, and I don't think it's appropriate. But I'm sure that other recommendations will be made here. Also, a very important matter on this was that the CIP shall not accept complaints concerning incidents predating the effective date of this article, when this is implemented. The CIP may examine incidents predating the effective date of this article, for the sole purpose of proposing policy and procedures, recommendations through the Chief of Police. There's another one that I was glad to see there, and it's been put forth by the recommendation. I believe this is one of the recommendations from the Mayor, where it says, "CIP may subpoena witnesses and documents by issuing a subpoena under the following circumstances: `A,' a request for a subpoena must be 193 January 24, 2002 presented to and reviewed by the CIP independent counsel; `B,' the CIP independent council may deny or approve the request after consulting with the State Attorney's Office, and `C,' if approved by the CIP independent council, the CIP may issue the subpoena after an affirmative vote by a two -third vote of its members." Once again, we get back to the appointment, and whether it's going to be 9 or 15. I could support 15 and I could support 9. But if we're going to do this, I think that we need to have a balance and do it right. Because I think I made a statement the last time that we met here, is that we're only going to have an opportunity to do this once, so let's do it right. Because if it doesn't work, I guarantee you, there'll be fingers pointing in all directions on this. So, you know, taking that into consideration, when this is voted on, those are some of the recommendations that I would like to see in there. And above all, emphasizing on NACOLE standards, that whoever is appointed to serve on that Independent Civilian Panel must have proper training to assure that that individual person is going to do what I consider to be an honorable job and such a responsible -- big responsibility he's taking on. So, Mr. Chairman, that is all that I have to say now. And later I'll elaborate a little bit more as we go on. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Teele, you wanted to -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I do want to thank the public for their deliberations and their considerations. And the City Attorney has provided a grid, and C would hope that everyone here has access to this; certainly the public needs to have access to this grid, which reflects some of the concerns of at least PULSE, the Police, the ACLU, the Coalition, Brothers of the Same Mind, the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) and numerous miscellaneous citizens. And I think that is going to be very helpful. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that I think we need to establish today: Today, for the first time, the Commission is going to take up the potential of an ordinance for first reading. We will not come to any decisions today by the mere format of our laws and our rules. First reading means that we will agree, or at least try to agree, on certain subject matters and wording, followed by further discussions and deliberations and possibly even public workshops, and, hopefully, by the 7th -- I'm sorry, the 14th of February -- that's Valentine's Day. That may be a good day that we can all have flowers and kissy kissy -- that on the 14th of February, we should adopt this for second reading. And I think it's very important that no one assume, as we leave here today, that any position that you're advancing is won or lost. This is the first meeting of at least two. And I think, in that way, we need to make sure that the ground rules are straight. The thing that I am most concerned about that is in this ordinance is what is not in the ordinance. And I want to say that again. The thing that this Commissioner is most concerned about is what is not in the ordinance, not what is before us. And while I have great respect for the discussion and the debate that has gone on, I am deeply frustrated that the debate has not expanded to what I believe to be the most important issues that will be confronting neighborhoods and communities in the years to come, and that is the discussion that we had when we approved the draft -- I mean, the language for the Charter change, and Al go right into this. Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, Commissioner Sanchez said that we need to be open-minded and we need to be fair, and I want to basically bring us up-to-date. I think the process has not only been fair. The public and, particularly, the advocacy organizations have gone the 5150 step on this hundred -mile journey. And let me just bring us back to the fact that when we approved the language for the Charter, there was a big debate and a compromise. And the compromise was that the Chief of Police would be able to make an appointment. There was strong opposition against that, very strong opposition. But in a spirit of cooperation, all of the 194 January 24, 2002 • organizations came together and allowed for the Police Chief to make an appointment. And I think that is something that does not need to get overlooked. I think there has been a clear collaborative effort to give this the balance. Now, I don't want to get into the membership at this point, but I do want to say this: A person who has been convicted of a felony or a crime, who has served his time, who is drug -clear and drug-free today, I'm not sure we ought to spend a lot of time on it, but I think that's a question that we all need to do -- Nelson Mandella couldn't serve on this board if we used some of these tests. Martin Luther King very well., with his convictions and records, could not serve on this board if we -- so, we need to be very, very careful as we go down this road that we're talking about, and we do need to be fair. I'm going to tell you something. I don't know if it's in here, but I think anybody who serves on this board ought to be the same way every employee of this City is, and that is, you have to take a drug test. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, that's coming. That's -- Commissioner Teele: And I don't know if it's in here. Commissioner Sanchez: It will be. Commissioner Teele: But I'm going to tell you -- you know, and i don't want to create any problems for anybody, but I'm just putting it out -- because I'm not going to say it to the Attorney and not say it publicly: Whoever serves on this board should have been exposed to the same requirements as a Secretary I or, for that matter, a person who works in Technology or Solid Waste in the City of Miami; is that correct, Mr. Manager? They have to take a drug test. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir, they do. Commissioner Teele: And, so, I think one of the things that we need to stay focused on is not something that someone may have done in the past, but who they are today. In that regard, I want to just drop this little statement, because this is going to change a lot of the focus down the road. This Commissioner has advanced and will continue to advance that this board -- we don't - - Commissioner Sanchez is right, we don't need to do this a hundred times. We need to get it right. But this board needs to be the only real Oversight Board that this City takes on to look at misbehavior for the next 10 or 15 years, while the focus was -- and we all admit and we discussed this -- that only a police officer has a gun that can kill you. Only a police officer. But I believe, and I have said many times, that all sworn personnel of the City of Miami should come under this board for statistical record keeping purposes. And I'm telling you, ladies and gentlemen, the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Offices, those persons who were sworn, can create more potential problems and confrontations with our citizens than Police. And I think we're missing a big part of how we really change the culture in this City if we don't include all sworn officers, as we discussed when we first talked about this. I think, in terms of the sworn officers and all other code enforcement, Mr. Attorney, I would like to make sure that we've got a title drafted up that includes that. And in this regard, while the focus of this will be the Police Department, and while the only language in the Charter speaks of the Police Department, this board is going to be broader, in my opinion, than the Charter language. It is going to be a board that helps us identify problems that we are having with sworn people in our 195 January 24, 2002 9 community, as it relates to the public. And I would only ask, Mr. Attorney, that we deal with that issue now, and that we make this board broad enough so that we're not out here chasing behind NET inspectors, but statistically we're keeping records, and we're gathering information on persons that may or may not need to require further training, supervision, or possibly even disciplinary actions. I would hope, Mr. Chaim-ian, that rather than giving everybody an opportunity to give a speech on a hundred issues, that we could do this sort of in a workshop format initially, and start with the beginning of this, and go sort of section by section to see if there's a consensus on what the ordinance would be, in that -- somebody's going to want to talk about composition. Somebody's going to want to talk about Nominating Committee. Someone's going to want to talk about the various issues. And I think the best way to keep everybody talking about the same thing at the same time is at least we go through this sort of section by section, or at least the big areas, maybe even as outlined in the Attorney's document, and see if we can reach some consensus on the various items -- at least he's got about 10 or 12 items -- 8 or 9 items here that we can at least agree on or come to some consensus, section by section; otherwise, we could be here all night if we let everybody start at the top and go through, and come down and we'll never get to the end of it. So, that's only a recommendation, Mr. Chairman. But I do think we've got to bring some focus so that we're all talking about the same thing at the same time, not necessarily for a vote, but so that the Commission can determine how we shake out individually on those issues. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Johnny, just to respond to Commissioner Tccle. I think that what we should do is take the most controversial issues, and the City Attorney knows those issues because they've been hosting the meetings with members of the community. I just want to say something before Vice Chairman Winton takes the floor. I just want to say that it's been 86 days since 72.8 of the voters that went to the polls in the City of Miami General Election of November the 6"', approved what is now the CIP. There is no other Charter amendment, nor a candidate that received that amount of votes. If you look at the election results, you'll see that in every corner of the City, in every community of the City of Miami, the CIP Charter Amendment passed with more than 60 percent, no difference in any area or community. So, I just urge the members of this Commission to do this today, to bring to the people of Miami, to the voters, what they wanted when they went out in a massive way to support this committee. Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I guess the first thing I might do is respond to that last comment by you, because it's amazing how perception works. Because my perception was -- you know, I came to the same number of days conclusion here, but my conclusion was, man, there's been a lot of volunteers working really, really hard on a very, very, very complex issue for our City that may be the biggest thing this City has to grapple with in the next 20 years, and I thought they've done a hell of a job in 86 days. So, t -- but my question was, Commissioner Teele -- Commissioner Teele, you started off by saying that what bothered you most is what was not in this ordinance, and I couldn't figure out what that was. Commissioner Teele: Very simply -- thank you, Commissioner Winton. Very simply, the ordinance should provide oversight, in my judgment, over sworn Police Department, sworn personnel -- Vice Chairman Winton: Got it, then. OIC. 196 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Teele: -- and other enforcement officers of the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Winton: I understand now. Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK. So, this is a public hearing. We are going to open the floor for members of the public. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I know that we have a very distinguished person who would like to speak, and I certainly want him -- H. T. Smith, who's well-known, but I really do think we ought to try to focus this, as opposed to just having a public hearing, on the various sections of this, and maybe let the Attorney lead us -- maybe we could allow maybe the five or six organizations, if they want to make general opening comments -- Chainnan Regalado: Right. I was going to say that, that the principals on this issue that -- and I agree with Commissioner Winton. They have spent so many hours, so they really deserve, in this public hearing, which we're going to take a vote, hopefully, to make general comments, and then the City Attorney will guide us through the sticking points, if there are any left. So, good afternoon, sir. H. T. Smith: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, first time I've said that to you. To Mr. Diaz, first time I've had an opportunity to appear before you, and for the senior members of the Commission, who have been around. I'm happy to be here today. And this is a very important Process that we're in the midst of. And just as you have complimented your staff and the public for the hard work. that they've been involved in, we're not unmindful of the fact that this matter got to the voters as a result of you voting to put it on the agenda. And for you aggressively advocating that the Charter Amendment and the ordinance encompass both the spirit and the intent of real civilian oversight. Not make-believe, not watered down, but real civilian oversight. Commissioner Sanchez, I join your colleagues in saying that fairness has to be the watchword with regard to what we're doing. And as an activist, you know, compromise is something that I had to learn to like, because it's always been difficult for me. And I understand, in a legislative process, there's got to be compromise. And, so, while there are quite a few things in here that I have -- I wouldn't have written it the way your Attorney wrote it. I want to focus on what I consider to be the poison pill. Because whether it's 9 or 15, there are colleagues of mine who feel strongly about that one way or the other. And with regard to Commissioner Teele's concern, I hadn't thought about it, but thinking about it, it makes sense. It's more work., but it males sense, especially in terms of statistics. So I think that, with regard to the process, if the spirit oP the people is kept in mind, we can make this work. The poison pill is found in review of complaints, which states, "The Chief of Police" -- Vice Chairman Winton: Can you show us where that is? I'm sorry. Mr. Smith: Yes, Page 8, Subsection (2)(A). Commissioner Teele: Is it 6th amendment? 197 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. Smith: Thank you. Sixth amended. Thank you very much. Commissioner Sanchez: That's page 8? Mr, Smith: Yes, Commissioner, page 8, (2)(A). Page 8 of the sixth amendment -- amended draft. And it provides in paragraph -- I mean, sentence number 2, "The Chief of Police shall review the complaint and then transmit a written response to the CIP within 7 days of the receipt thereof, indicating whether the complaint is the subject of a pending or potential criminal investigation or prosecution." Now, the reason why, across this community, we had such overwhelming support for civilian oversight is not just because of what happened during the protests after Elian. It wasn't just because of the indictments of 13 police officers, after Internal Affairs investigations and State Attorney's investigations. It wasn't just because of the shooting of unarmed men. It was because the cumulative effect of people from all over the community seeing this persistent pattern having empirical data for what is axiomatically true in theory, and that is, no matter how well intentioned, no matter how competent, the police just can't police themselves. And so, the provision of the Charter provides for independent review. And so, after the Richard Brown shooting, we had an Internal Affairs investigation. The police told you and all of the City, there was nothing wrong with that shooting in terms of any crime. When we asked about the funds in the -- what it was -- Do the Right Thing, the Police Chief says, "That's fine, too. " When we asked about the 395 shooting, after Internal Affairs investigation, it was the Police Chief that came forward and said, there was nothing wrong with that shooting. After the Elian, you saw the Police Chief stand and said, "Hey, our police were doing their job. There was nothing wrong with that." And so, now, after the people have heard that, they've seen the evidence and they say, "Wait a minute. We can't put the police in that kind of position, with his men and women and the labor union, telling him, `you've got to protect us,"' And so, we say in this ordinance, we're going to let the Chief of the Police be the gatekeeper, not as to whether their investigation will be thorough and concurrent, but whether or not: !:here will even be an investigation. No matter what the situation is, all the Police Chief has to do is say, there is a potential for a criminal investigation. That's almost in every situation, that there's a potential for a criminal investigation. And so, this then rolls into the issue of whether or not then there should be concurrent investigations, because that's the true underlying motivation for the police, not to have it go concurrently, because they say it will mess it up. It just so happens that today Enron is being investigated. They're being investigated by Florida Attorney General, Bob Butterworth, Criminal investigations; John Ashcroft, Attorney General, criminal investigations; other attorney generals, criminal investigations. And concurrently, today, there is congressional committees -- Commissioner Teele: Twenty-three. Mr. Smith: Twenty-three were concurrently calling Arthur Anderson and Enron people forward to find out about civil and administrative and other problems. The SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission) is conducting an investigation. And, just like the CIP, Congress has stated they're not going to grant immunity. We can't -- we -- the CIP can't, by law. So, if, in fact -- because there was no example that could clearly crystallize it in your mind, that this can be done, having concurrent investigations, being either done by the State Attorney's Office or the Police and the CTP, there is absolutely an example that's going on -- that you're watching on CNN (Cable News Network) every day or, like I do, on the Internet. And so, whatever you do -- 198 January 24, 2002 s • I've got to leave. I've got to go to the Judicial Nominating Commission -- 9 or 15 -- Commissioner Teele's concern about bringing those -- all the sworn officers in, issues like that, I'm sure we can work out. If, in fact, you want the people's intent to be carried out, this is a poison pill. This undermines independence. This puts the whole authority to be able to move forward in the hands of the Police, right where we were trying to take it from. Lastly, as I close, let me say this, Commissioner Sanchez, I have always had that concern that you had, about individuals making accusations and not identifying themselves. Commissioner Sanchez: Anonymously. Mr. Smith: Anonymously. When the State Attorney's Office stands up, because they're honorable people, ask them. They do it every day. The police get anonymous tips -- as a matter of fact, the police have something called a hot -- what do you call it? You can call in and get money. You don't have to even give them your name. A police can come and get me and take me to jail, crime stoppers, based upon somebody calling a hot line. And every day in court, people are prosecuted based upon anonymous tips. Commissioner Sanchez: But is it right? Mr. Smith: Right. OK. Is it -- Commissioner Sanchez: Is it right? Mr. Smith: Is it morally right? Commissioner Sanchez: No. Mr. Smith: I don't think so. Is it legal? Yes. And so the question becomes, then -- what I'm saying is, the question becomes whether or not, as an investigative tool, the same investigative Cool that the police can use, the same investigative tool that the prosecutors can use, are you going to deny that same investigative tool from the CIP, which is supposed to have been taking over the jurisdictions of the police in these investigations? You're allowing the police to do it. If you're going to substitute the CIP, then why take away the authority from the CTP that you had always given to the police and you never questioned it? You always gave it to the State Attorney's Office and you never questioned it. And so, I would like to respectfully pose the question backwards: Is it fair not Co give it to the agency that will be doing the same thing that the police used to do? Is it fair to have given it to the police and not given it to the CIP? I think that's a fairer question. Because if it was wrong -- if it's wrong now, and I believe that you personally feel that way, it was wrong when the police had the authority and it should have been changed then. So, lastly, I'd like to say that independence is the watchword, and I think that if we focus on providing independence to this Commission, we will have a Civilian Investigative Panel, that not only last 10 years, 20 years, but last for the rest of this century. And we'll be proud of it because it won't be an anti-police thing, and it won't be an anti-community thing. It will be something worked out between the community, the Commissioners and the police that works for all of us. I really appreciate the hard work that you've put into it. I respect the legitimate differences of opinion. But I just want you to understand that in spite of all the other 199 January :?4, 2002 0 • things, that particular provision will kill the deal in terns of malting it really independent. Thank you very much. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Do you have a suggestion then for modifying 2A.? Mr. Smith: Yes, there is a suggestion for modifying it. Vice Chairman Winton: And y'all are going to hand that out? Mr. Smith: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Thank you. Mr. Smith: Unfortunately, I have so be somewhere at 6:30. I appreciate you allowing me to go out of turn, Commissioner Regalado and Commissioners. Thank you very much. Vice Chairman Winton: Now, what's more important, this or nominating.judges? Chairman Regalado: Well, but I'll tell you something -- I'll tell you something, the fact that you mention -- I personally appreciate it, and I think it's important that we consider that change, eliminating the potential possibility. The people of Miami voted for what they thought was an independent panel who had powers to bring police officers and make decisions. They understand and they understood at that time, when we campaigned for it, that the committee will not have the power to hire and fire, but they did understood at that time that this committee will have power. And the Chief of Police has the magic wand to say no investigation. That is not what the voters intended. That's what I think. And I hope that the rest of the Commission understand that. Mr. Smith: Can you imagine if Kenneth Leigh, the head of Enron, had the magic wand to say investigation or no investigation? Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Mr. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 200 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: I don't -- I really think -- before Mr, Smith leaves. L don't think we need to hear a lot on this. I mean, we all know pretty much -- I think we ought to close the public hearing right now and have a straw vote, if nothing else, on where we are on that one issue. Because to me, Mr. Smith was being overly polite. It really undermines independence for this process to have to be referred to the Police Chief, And I've discussed this with the Attorney. But what I'd like to do is just close the public hearing, receive any documents that the public may have on language that you'd like to see, and let's just see, first of all, if we are in agreement on that issue. Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Tecle: And then, if we're not, can we just agree on some possible language? Chairman Regalado: Right. But what I think you're saying is close the public hearing now -- Commissioner Teele: Just for a moment. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, exactly. And decide -- so, don't think that we're going to just close the public hearing forever. But I think you're right, because that way we diffuse an issue that could be coming back. It is an ordinance. Commissioner Teele: Over and over again. And we -- Chairman Regalado: Exactly. So, a straw vote is important so the people here and the City Attorney understands what the way of this Commission is going on this matter. Commissioner Teele: Let's find out if we -- I mean -- because I don't think we ought to fuel this community by having passionate arguments about something that we all pretty much agree on, at least three of us. I mean, what I'd like to do -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Let me -- no. We're -- Commissioner Teele: What I'd like to do is just offer a motion that that provision be deleted, substantially deleted, without regard to what we're going do put in in its place. But remove the authority of complaints to be forwarded to the Police Department, as read into the record on "B'" on page 8. I would so move. Vice Chairman Winton. I'll second the motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. We are going to do a roll call for -- Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr, Vilarello: If I could just make one suggestion, before you take a roll call? 201 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Yes. Mr. Vilarello: First, I'd like to clarify, the provision I believe that Mr. Smith takes objection to -- Chairman Regalado: Potential, potential. Mr. Vilarello: -- is not necessarily the notification to -- Chairman Regalado: No. He -- Mr. Vilarello: -- the Chief of Police, but -- excuse me. Chairman Regalado: Possibility. Mr. Vilarello: But the Chief of Police's ability to say no to the concurrent investigation; although other members of the Coalition object also to the notification to the Chief of Police. But before you take the straw poll on that, I thought that this would be an appropriate time for you to hear just the one other group that has an interest in the potential compromise of the criminal investigation. And I have representatives here today from the State Attorney's Office and from the U.S. Attorney's Office that if they could speak to that issue to give you that information before you take this straw poll on that, and that is simply the impact on the criminal investigation. Let me say that the Charter provision specifically provides that the Civilian Investigative Panel shall not interfere with ongoing criminal investigations. The language in the ordinance, as proposed, simply assures that. But it does in fact do what Mr. Smith said, the Chief of Police will be able to prohibit it from going forward in a concurrent investigation unless lie signs off on it. There may be other ways to protect that, and I think that's what the Commission is going to, but if maybe Ms. Novicki can speak to the issue for a moment and give you that information. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's the purpose, to clarify and come to an agreement that they will not be interfered with. That's -- we could do that through going through the section we're going to do afterwards. Go ahead. Mr. Vilarello: No. I guess -- Trudy Novicki: If I could be heard, Commissioner Teele. Thank you. Thank you. First of all, the State Attorney could not be here tonight, and I'd like to make part of the record a letter that she has drafted, stating our office's positions, and if I could make that part of the record? Commissioner Teele: Just give us your name and address for the record, as well. We'll make copies. Ms. Novicki: Do you have copies? Chainnan Regalado: We'll make copies and bring it to you. 202 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. We'll -- Ms. Novicki: I'm sorry if 1 don't know all your procedures. This is the first time I've had the pleasure of visiting with you. I am Trudy Novicki, formally known as Gertrude Novicki, Chief Assistant at the State Attorney's Office. My duties at the office -- we have three chief assistants. I'm in charge of all special prosecutions. For the last 20 years, I have been in charge of our police corruption investigations, which includes everything, except police shootings, which arc handled by the major crime part of our office. However, I have been on the police shooting team for our office for the last 15 years, and I take responsibility for that. In reading the provision that was suggested by the Police Chief, and in reading the position that will be presented to you by the Coalition, we found that both of them were extreme. They were at opposite ends. And the State Attorney hopes to present a compromise to you. I will tell you, in fairness, to the ACLU, that I have spoken with Ms. Baker from the Coalition. She does not agree with my compromise, and I'm sure she'll explain to you why. But I present this to the Commission as the thought of a compromise. The Charter provision made a provision to say that the State Attorney's Office -- that the -- excuse me -- that the Independent Review would not interfere with police investigations. What we're really grappling with here is how do you determine whether or not they're interfering with a criminal investigation? And I focus you on criminal investigation. I'm not talking about an administrative investigation. I'm not talking about Internal Affairs. I'm talking about an ongoing criminal investigation. And you know what, I agree with Mr. Smith, that the -- we can't use the word "potential investigation," because anything could be potential, and you will see that I crossed out that word in my proposal to you. But if there is truly a pending investigation, it seems to me that someone in law enforcement has got to have input on whether or not that's going to interfere, because how is the Independent Review Panel to know whether or not it will interfere unless there is some input? The proposal that we have brought up is that there would be an agreement between the Chief of Police and the Independent Review -- the Independent counsel as to whether or not it would interfere. If there was a disagreement, the matter would be brought to the court. This isn't a case of the Chief of Police controlling things. This is a vehicle to prevent something that you can't take back. I would tell you that there had been some immediate reaction that it seems to be, it can't be the Chief of Police. I had been asked by Ms. Balser and actually by the Chief, as well, if the State Attorney's Office would be willing to serve with the Independent counsel in that capacity. Like it or not -- and as we all have -- we have certainly taken a lot of criticism. We are ultimately the people that have responsibility for the criminal prosecution. And realizing that, we would stand in that Function of deciding, with the Independent counsel, if you would want us to substitute for the Chief of Police. We're told that from the City Attorney, they didn't feel they could direct us to do anything, since we are not part of your municipality, but we certainly would offer our services in that regard. I also ask you to consider, when you're talking about a criminal investigation and prosecution, don't forget, you could be in a situation where you have a case ongoing in court, and the Independent Panel decides on its own that them talking to these witnesses in the middle of discovery process, in the middle of court process, wouldn't interfere with the prosecution. I don't know how they can snake that decision in a vacuum. And that's really our only purpose here, is to protect, that we work with difficult laws, talk to you -- I think this Commission is fully aware of the problems we have with the laws on police shootings. We have a hard job, yes. There have been some cases that had mistakes. But you know what? Those cases that Mr. Smith 203 January 24, 2002 0 brought up, I'm very familiar with; the Brown case, the 395 case. Had this Panel been in place when those cases were completed by our office, or by the Police Department, they would immediately have taken over, and if they are doing what I hope they will do, they would have brought forward issues in those cases at that time that had been missed. I know that when you talk about prosecution, you're also talking about potential federal prosecution. You're not only talking about the City of Miami as your investigator. They might also be a Florida Department of Law enforcement investigation, might be an FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigations) investigation, might be a Miami -Dade Police Department investigation. So, I'd ask you to please consider all those things in taking a balanced approach to how you're going to decide whether or not the Review Panel will interfere with a criminal investigation and prosecution. I'll present you now with my proposal. I shared it orally with Ms. Balser, and I'm sorry I don't have a copy. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, if I can. Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney. Thank you very much. Mr. Vilarello: Ms. Novicki, I need to ask you a question, because the Commission is doing -- is focusing in on a very narrow issue to detennine -- Chairman Regalado: Yes, exactly. That's what we said. Mr. Vilarello: -- what direction they want to go. And the question that they really -- the question that I -- the information that I need to get to them is, does the mere concurrent investigation by the Civilian Investigative Panel, in and of itself, interfere with the criminal investigation? Ms. Novicki: I can't say that as an absolute. I think that there may be cases where you can go forward. Mr. Vilarello: So, it may or may not, depending on the circumstances of the particular case? Ms. Novicki: That's true. And I'll -- I could compare it -- the experience I have is, we often tell the police to hold off on their administrative case, while we're going forward in a prosecution, because they have -- their officers have rights to hearings and statements and different things as they go along. Sometimes we say, "No. Go ahead. It's all right. We've completed everything. You know, that's not going to interfere. Go ahead with the investigation." Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, I think that that's the information 1 wanted to get to the Commission before -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Vilarello: -- it took a vote on this straw poll. How we solve the problem later can be dealt with, but in terms of the concurrent investigation, it's going to have to be a case-by-case determination. This ordinance, as it was drafted, attempts to deal with it in a concrete way. 204 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Alex, my understanding is that you know that the Mayor had a definite position on this, and they have researched the state laws and they think that the concurrent investigation, it's OK in terms of -- Mr. Vilarello: Well, Mr. Chairman, what -- I'm not sure what state law they've determined. The issue is this, if they -- if the CIP, or anybody else, interferes with an ongoing criminal investigation, there's consequences to that. This attempts to shield it from ever having to face that potential consequence. If you don't have this language in, they have some exposure. But ultimately, they have to comply with the law. So, in any event, with regard to the matter in the straw poll that you were taking the motion on before, I just wanted you to have that information before you proceeded. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, and that's always been a concern. We don't want -- you know, interfere with a case is what I consider a Defense Attorney's dream come true. You know, two investigations contradicting each other is a nightmare. You're going to have bad cops that need to get fired that are going to keep their jobs. So, this is something that we need to workout, and this and many other issues, that if we could just go through the sections as it is here and bring them out, and you'll hear what the concerns are, and then we'll work them out. But you know what? We can't continue to push this along and say we'll fix it later. I mean, we've got to identify them today. We'll have other meetings. Come back. It's the art of compromising. I think that we have made progress. But we need to work together to make this happen. I have other -- several concerns that we -- if we go through section by section, we could bring them out. You'll know what my concerns are. The Florida Sunshine Law doesn't allow us to communicate and that's a big problem, because most of the time we have to bring it out in the Commission and we can't communicate. But if we put it out on the table, then you know what our concerns -- or at least my concerns are. And then either, you know, we could -- you could agree witli me or disagree with me. That's the beauty of democracy, and that's why we love this great nation we live in. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's have this vote on this just one issue. Alex, Alex. Yeah, but the U.S. Attorney's Office -- and we need to please hear from them. It doesn't -- what he's going to say, it doesn't address this. We're voting on deleting "potential." That is what we're doing. Is that -- Mr. Vilarello: No. I think, Commissioner, the question before you simply says, are you going to have concurrent investigations or not? And the only information that I wanted you to have was from the -- Commissioner Teele: No, Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. Commissioner Teele: That's not my motion. 205 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. The motion was -- Commissioner Teele: Let me tell you, this process -- Alex, you know, let's be real careful here now, because we're mixing up apples and oranges, and I'm not at all confused about what my motion is. Whether we have the compromise that has been proffered by the State Attorney, which I think goes half as far as they should have gone, the answer is, in my judgment, using your compromise, is that there should be a memorandum of agreement among, not between, but among the State Attorney -- no -- the State Attorney, the Police Chief, and the CIP. And it doesn't make sense for me -- for the State Attorney to try to say make an agreement between those two people -- and, by the way, we would be willing to. I mean, the problem is, we wrote you all into this thing from the beginning. I respect what Alex is saying, but I talked to the State Attorney. She indicated that she had no problem being a legitimate partner in trying to develop a solution in this. But having a process right now where you have the Police Chief with a veto -- and that's what my motion is over. There's a hundred ways to get at this, Alex, other than this. I can come up with four ways to have a process that tries to prevent concurrent investigations, other than what's on this sheet of paper. And what I'm seeing that's on this sheet of paper is horrible in terms of the commitment that we've made to the public, and that is that there's going to be independent investigations. And what Mr. Smith said -- (APPLAUSE) Commissioner Teele: You know, what Mr. Smith said -- and it makes us look like we're playing games, because that's not what our intent is. This language is offensive. It's offensive. And I don't want to get political or emotional, but the whole idea that the Police Chief shall be forwarded to the Police Department, and they've got to determine whether or not there can be an investigation, well, you know, I can tell you: You know, why have the Panel then? So -- but there's a lot of ways to get -- I'm not offering any solution to that. I'm willing to say that we ought to talk to the State Attorney, we ought to talk to the U.S. Attorney, we ought to talk to the Police Chief. But what I'm saying is, the Police Chief or the Police Department should not determine whether an investigation goes forward or not. Some other mechanism ought to be the way to handle that. And that's all I'm trying to get to, is that we agree or we don't agree -- Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, let's have the first test of the will of this Commission. Let's -- your motion -- I understood your motion perfectly, and your motion is a very narrow one. It's about line, it's about the concept. So, the motion -- everybody knows what the motion is. Let's have roll call -- this motion has been moved and seconded. Let's have a roll call so we can show the will of the City Commission. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Tecle? Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Vice Chainnan Winton: I mean, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. 206 January 24, 2002 • • Vice Chairman Winton: You say we all know. Now, I thought I knew what I seconded. Chairman Regalado: Yes, he did. You seconded to delete the potential investigation. Vice Chairman Winton: No, I didn't hear him say the potential investigation. Chairman Regalado: Yes, you did. Vice Chairman Winton: Well., that isn't what I thought I seconded. Because I thought what he was saying --and, so, here's the point. I want Commissioner Teele to repeat -- Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Winton: -- the motion that he made, because I'm not at all clear that we're all clear about what we're voting on here, so I'd like to hear that again. Commissioner Teele. This is a straw vote. This has no binding effect. And the motion would be to eliminate, under Section 1B and ,Section 2A: "The complaints received by the CIP shall be forwarded to the Police Department." Hold it. That's under 1 B. And the reference to under 2A, that "Complaints received by the CIP shall be forwarded to the Chief of Police and the Chief of Police shall review them, and the CIP shall not" -- and the reference is that that is the procedure. Now, we're going to have to come up with a better procedure to avoid the conflict issue. But this isn't the way I think we should approach this, that whole section under 1 B and 2A. Vice Chairman Winton: The whole section is what we're really talking about, and we've got to come up with -- Commissioner Teele: As it relates to the concept of how -- Vice Chairman Winton: Precisely. Right. Commissioner Teelc: And as it relates to the concept of haw these complaints are either initiated or received by the CIP. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: And that's all that I'm moving. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm seconding that. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: It's been seconded. Go ahead. Commissioner Sanchez: It's still under discussion. 207 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Commissioner Gonzalez had requested -- Commissioner Gonzalez: What we're discussing and arguing here is about one word. It's about Chairman Regalado: The power of the Police Chief. That's all. The power to reject or to agree to an investigation. That's all he's saying. Commissioner Gonzdlez: The power of the Police Chief or the word "potential." Chairman Regalado: Potential, Exactly. Commissioner Gonzdlez: The word "potential," is that what we're voting on? Chairman Regalado: Exactly. Exactly. Commissioner Teele: The power of the Police Chief to stop or start an investigation, or detennine whether an investigation -- Chairman Regalado: See, the question -- Vice Chairman Winton: Because it isn't just "potential." Chairman Regalado: No, no. But what I'm -- Vice Chairman Winton: It's pending more -- that whole process -- Commissioner Teele: That whole process. Vice Chairman Winton: -- where the Police Chief can -- Chairman Regalado: But what I'in saying, Johnny, to him, is that H. T. brought the fact that -- you know, the fact that it said a "potential investigation," it means that in the future. It means that he could apply to every case his judgment. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's what I'm trying to make -- to clear. Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But see, the way this is -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: Because one thing is to say an investigation, a subject investigation, an investigation that is going to take place and something different is to say a potential. Anything could be a potential investigation. Commissioner Teele: But, Angel, the way this is written, it's written carefully. And it says that when a complaint is filed, the investigation doesn't start until the Chief says it starts. That's what 208 January 24, 2002 0 . this says. So, what they're creating is a new category. In other words, a citizen comes in, files a complaint. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. But if we read -- Commissioner Tccle: They're saying that's not a complain until the Chief of Police has certified or said that this is a complaint that is not under -- that's going to conflict with something. And for that purposes -- and that's crazy. Commissioner Gonzdlez: OK. May I finish my -- Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Commissioner Gonzalcz: -- my concern. If you read furthermore, I believe that it concurs with what the State Attorney j List presented to us, where it says, "The CIP shall have the authority to challenge the determination of the Chief of Police as to the establishment of any criminal investigation related to the subject complained by seeking a judicial order in equity, in a court of competent jurisdiction." So that -- you know, what I understand -- and I'm not -- you know, I'm not an attorney, OK? There's a -- we had brought an attorney, and we have another attorney here, and we have this room full of attorneys. But common sense tells me, if I'm interpreting this right, that if the Chief says there is not going to be an investigation, the CIP Panel could go to court and bring the case before the court, and the court could determine, yes, Mr. Chief, there is going to be an investigation. So, if we are arguing about -- Chairman Regalado: That's the compromise. Commissioner Gonzalez: If we're saying that we are trying to limit the Police Chief into playing around with this, I will vote, you know, on that. I don't want the Police Chief or anybody to play with the authority of the power of this board. Now, what we're talking is about a simple word, just delete the word. Just delete it. Chairman Regalado: No. The question came because of the whole argument of H. T. about the whole paragraph, was that the Chief not only had the power to veto an investigation, but a potential investigation. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's what I said, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: And that is why it came -- the motion -- this is a straw ballot. It's just to show where we are going -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, Mr. Chairman. 1 understand what you're saying. I understand what we're trying to do. When you say, when we refer to this paragraph, the paragraph was not read on the entirety. It was just read one or two lines of the entire paragraph, OK. I read the entire paragraph and that's what I found, where the State Attorney just presented to its, the fact of going to court. Now, if we're talking about a word -- and I know this is some way of playing games, OK. When you say a potential investigation, there could be a potential investigation in 209 January 24, 2002 0 i anything at any time, anywhere, or any time. Now, if the Chief says this is -- this case or this complaint is subject of an investigation and the Police Chief already determined that the case is going to be investigated, then we're talking about two different scenarios. So, that's, you know -- I'm just trying to be clear on what I'm going to vote on. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: My understanding, there's two channels. if the Chief says no, you could go to court and you could go that way. Well, here's a suggestion. Why not bypass the Chief and take it to the State Attorney's Office? Commissioner Teele: That's what we're saying. Unidentified Speaker: Take it to the State Attorney's Office directly. Commissioner Sanchez: Directly. You rule him out. Commissioner Teele: That's exactly what I'm preparing to say. But all we're saying is, let's take it one step at a time. Chainnan Regalado: Right. Commissioner Tecle: I'm not coming in -- I'm not proposing a solution. 1 think we should hear from the various people, the State Attorney, the Federal -- U.S. Attorney, the citizens, but I think we need to deten»ine whether or not we want to engage in that discussion. And we all appear to be saying we don't want the Police Chief to determine if an investigation is -- Chairman Regalado: So, let's -- why don't we take a vote on this straw ballot. And, please, Mr. City Clerk, do a vote. Commissioner Sanchez: I want to know the exact language that this will basically just send them Commissioner Gonzdlez: Exactly. Commissioner Sanchez: You know, I don't want -- Chairman Regalado: City Attorney. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Me, too. I want to know how -- you know, I want to vote on the legal views, but I also want to vote on what is going to be replacing this section. Commissioner Sanchez: If we agree that we're going to bypass the Chief of Police and go to the State Attorney's Office, that's fine with me. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Fine with me. 210 January 24, 2002 0 . Commissioner Sanchez: Because that way, what it does here, it protects that we don't have, you know, interference in investigations. That's -- my only concern here is, I don't want interference in investigations. That's issue number one. Mr. Vilarello: It's somewhat difficult to draw a compromise. I think, as Commissioner Teele has made his motion, you would remove the provisions of 2A and you would come back later with a solution to that. Commissioner Teele: But the next motion should be -- Chairman Regalado: The next motion is the substitute. Mr. Vilarello: As Commissioner Gonzalez discussed, you would remove "potential" or "potential" -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, hey, listen, I'm not a mind guesser. Mr. Vilarello: -- in front of "criminal investigation," and substitute, for example, the State Attorney, where it says the "Chief of Police." Jeanne Baker: Or possibly the Coalition's proposal, which hasn't had an opportunity to be vetted, yet. Chairman Regalado: Well, we're voting on the concept -- Commissioner Sanchez: We're getting there. Little by little. Chairman Regalado: I mean, we're trying to help you. Ms. Baker: I just want you to know we have one. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Call the question. Ms. Baker: And it's different. Chairman Regalado: Call the roll, please. 211 January 24, 2002 1-1 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-116 A MOTION RECORDING STRAW VOTE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO REMOVE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS REFERENCED UNDER PROCEDURES OUTLINED IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP): • SECTION (1)(b): THE COMPLAINTS RECEIVED BY THE CIP SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; • SECTION (2)(a): THE COMPLAINTS RECEIVED BY THE CIP SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE CHIEF OF POLICE AND THE CHIEF SHALL REVIEW THEM. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I move that we -- I would ask that we open the public hearing now for language that could be used to substitute for that section. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Just a discussion on that. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Go ahead. We're going to now reopen the public hearing. Yes, ma'am. Lida Rodriguez-Tasef: Yes. Good afternoon. Good evening, Commissioners. Lida Rodriguez- Tasef, President of the American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Miami Chapter, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. Our intern, Sophie Brion (Phonetic) is handing out to you the CIP/Coalition's version, which has been turned specifically -- what we did in this version is, we compared the draft from the City Attorney to our draft, and we struck out the language in the City Attorney's draft that we found unacceptable. And what we've set .forth on page 16 is the 212 January 24, 2002 proposed language that the Coalition proposes substitute for the language that this Commission just voted in a straw poll to delete. There are two issues, and Mr. Smith raised them at the beginning of his presentation earlier, that we are concerned about here in creating a balance between protecting ongoing criminal investigations and preserving the independence of the Civilian Investigative Panel. I would like to remind you that over 70 percent of the City of Miami voters voted that this panel be fully independent. And independence means that the City of Miami Police Chief should not be the person guarding the gate as to what gets investigated. And the concept needs to be that the panel that is being created will create a system so that if there are possibilities of concurrent investigations that might harm a criminal investigation, that those possibilities are brought forward and that those investigations do not go forward. We oppose a proposal from the state -- we propose they do it in the following manner. This Commission voted, when it prepared the draft of the Charter amendment, to give the CIP the ability to retain an Independent counsel, who serves, who serves -- and this was a compromise -- who serves at the pleasure of the City Attorney, who can terminate that Independent counsel. That Independent counsel, according to what this Commission voted, will have experience, knowledge, and will be a lawyer. Therefore, that Independent counsel can consult with the CTP in order to determine whether or not an investigation will harm an ongoing criminal investigation or prosecution. That way the CIP is not going at the issue blindly. It is looking at the issue with the aid and assistance of able counsel. That way the City Attorney can have control over this counsel, and that way we protect the independence of the Commission -- of the CIP by ensuring that the Police Chief does not act as the guard at the gate to what gets investigated. Our language -- and Ms. Baker, Jeanne Baker, who has had many, many phone calls with the State Attorney's Office, and who also was the architect of the compromise language that went into the Charter, will address the specific wording of our language. Our proposal proposes that there be an avenue to stop investigations that might hann -- that might actually harm a criminal investigation or prosecution, and that that avenue has to be an impartial one, not the Chicf of Police, not the State Attorney's Office, who has an interest in making determinations about what gets investigated and what doesn't, but an even better option, and that is the existing judicial system, the judicial process, that is even cited in the draft that was prepared by the City Attorney. Only we have the process backwards. We believe that the process should be that the CIP, in consultation with counsel -- and let's remember that this Commission requires CIP counsel to consult with a State Attorney anyway in issuing subpoenas. So the CTP, in consultation with its counsel, that is already in consultation with the State Attorney's Office, because it's required to be in order to issue subpoenas, makes the determination. If the State Attorney's Office doesn't like it -- and that would be rare, since they're already talking to the Independent counsel -- or if the Police Chief doesn't like it, or if the federal government doesn't like it, they can go into court and use existing process to stop or stay the CIP investigation. It is the most fair process that preserves the independence of the CIP and that doesn't make anyone a gatekeeper, but creates an ability for everybody who's interested in the process to have their say. Now, Ms. Baker could remind you all of how it is we got here, and why it is that this is the best compromise, in light of the Charter that was approved by the voters. Chairman Regalado; Thank you. Your name and address. Ms. Baker: Yes, Jeanne Baker. I'm with the ACLU and with the Coalition. My law office is near here at 2937 Southwest 27th Avenue, Coconut Grove. And good evening. The exact 243 January 24, 2002 0 • language I'm going to read out loud so that members of the public, who may not have a copy in front of them, will be able to hear it. This is our proposal and, of course, we are open to some compromises, and some that may have even really arisen from this discussion. Our proposal is "A decision of the CIP made, after consultation with its independent counsel to proceed with an investigation, creates a rebuttable presumption that the investigation will not interfere with any pending criminal investigation or prosecution. Any challenge to such a decision by any agency engaged in such investigation or prosecution shall be made in a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with general law." I want to briefly explain what some of these words mean, and why they work so well. You, in enacting the Charter language, this Commission oversaw a series of compromises focused on exactly the same issue we're debating right now. When the Coalition first came -- Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me for a moment. Could y'all let this lady talk so I could hear her, please? Thank you. Chairman Regalado: I am not talking. Ms. Baker: When the Coalition first came forward with its proposal, there was an outcry from the police side of the room, so to speak, that any of these investigations by the CIP would interfere with ongoing -- or pending criminal investigations. So, the first compromise -- I think, actually, Commissioner Teele hit the nail on the head. The very first compromise to prevent such interference was that the Police Chief has a member of the CIP sitting there on his behalf. The next compromise was that subpoenas would not confer immunity. That was critical to resolve this very objection that the CIP would interfere with criminal investigations, and that was already a compromise and we came forward with that initially. The Coalition agreed subpoenas would not confer immunity. That, we thought, should have been enough. But the police side of the room still claimed there would be interference with criminal investigations. So, then, the Coalition agreed, in consultations -- as a result of consultations that I had with the State Attorney's Office, that consultations with the State Attorney would be essential before subpoenas, and that was done -- that compromise was made so as to answer the concern about interference. And we thought that would be enough, but it wasn't enough. And then the Coalition agreed here on the floor, in this chamber, in a very hectic night, in the summer that most of you remember, that in addition to consultation with the State Attorney, there would be an independent counsel and the independent counsel could veto a subpoena, and that was a compromise specifically so that there would not be interference with criminal investigations, and the Coalition accepted that. And that wasn't enough for the Police. Right here on the floor another compromise was forged, where the City Attorney would have the ability to remove the independent counsel if the independent counsel was maybe too independent, or whatever. But for whatever reason, the Coalition agreed because we were being -- we were responding to the cry for protections against interference, and we thought that would be enough. But after that, and before you voted on the Charter language, you gentlemen put into the Charter language the mandate of non-interference, and you made it a legal obligation of the CIP to exercise its power in accordance with that mandate, and we thought that was enough. We thought, when the Charter language was finally enacted after many, many compromises that the Coalition accepted, that all of the complaints and concerns about interference had been resolved. So, then we start a new ordinance, and what do we find? The very same thing that we thought we had already 214 January 24, 2002 • compromised ourselves down to the max was now raising its head once again. We have now come up with additional language, in the spirit of compromise and sensitive to the concern, that we have not yet been able to silence. So, our language makes it clear that the CIP will remain independent, but it obligates the CIP to take consultation with its independent counsel and not to act on its own, and it obligates the CIP to act in accordance with the mandate of the Charter. Now, all their rebuttable presumption means, in this instance, is that if the CIP, after consideration with its independent counsel, believes that it can go forward in a given instance, it will proceed, But any agency, the Police Department, the State Attorney's Office, the Federal Government, can rush into court -- they have the person power to do so -- and they can easily get an injunction. Now, why should it be that way? It should be that way because otherwise you are placing a burden on the CIP. If the CIP, which is, in the City Attorney's proposal, the CIP has to go into court every time, what you will have, if you place the burden on the CIP, is the CIP will be required, every single time it wants to open an investigation, to first have a lawsuit. You cannot, I suspect, appropriate sufficient funds, in a sufficient counsel's office, to handle that ]find of ongoing litigation. You would be creating a monster, a litigation monster, in the CIP if you required it to have to bring a lawsuit in order to do its job every time it wanted to do so. So, we've created what we think is an efficient mechanism. It's very common in the law to have a rebuttable presumption. It certainly can be overcome. It could be overcome easily by the agencies that would have the interest in doing so. Now, I want to mention something further. Ms. Novicki spoke quite correctly about the fact that she and I have conferred in the last 24 hours, and she asked me a question and I thought it was a very good one, and I told her that. She said, "How would the CIP, operating on its own, know whether or not what it's about to do would interfere with a criminal investigation?" And my answer -- and Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef just mentioned it, to some extent. The answer I gave was, well, its independent counsel will be in consultation with the State Attorney's Office, as Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef just mentioned. That's already the procedure built in with respect to the subpoena that consulted a process. Now, I haven't had a chance to confer with Coalition members, but I think that if there is a strong feeling that the consultation with the State Attorney needs to be built in, that would be, yet, a further compromise that might be, you know, acceptable at this side. Because I thought that was a good question. Does the State Attorney have a concern that is legitimate, where it wants to make sure that the CIP is informed? Not that the CIP -- the suggestion there is not that the CIP cannot make the decision, but just that it should be an informed decision, And that may be, as I said, yet a further compromise, that consultation with the State Attorney, just like we have it on the subpoena issue, which is more narrow, on the general subject of interference. If there's a concent, that would be a way, consultation. But beyond that, anything beyond that, is ceding the independence of the CIP. It must be the CIP. I think that what I have said may have gone beyond anything that the Coalition can accept. So, I just want to say that I was not speaking for the Coalition when I was throwing out ideas. But I want to emphasize where the Coalition is absolutely in line and unified. We cannot cede to the State Attorney, we cannot cede to the Police Chief, which you've already voted on, which I think was an excellent starting point, we cannot cede to the United States Attorney the authority of the CIP. It must be the decision -maker and it must have the power that the voters gave it. Otherwise, it simply will not be independent. (APPLAUSE) 215 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. OK. And we are going to follow the public hearing. Yes, sir. Mariano Cruz: Me? Chairman Regalado: Yep. Mr. Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I'm. going to be, like Mr. Teele said today -- what he say, tree shaker? Yeah, tree shaker. Not jelly maker, right? Tree shaker. Because I'm not talking as a member of ACLU or as a member of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) of America, or American Legion or AFP, all those different things. I am talking as a taxpayer and a citizen, resident of Miami and as a father of a police officer, father of another daughter who's also another police officer, father-in-law of four police officers, and a father-in-law of my -- that was my ex -son-in-law. So, I mean, four police officers. That's that. And what I'm going to talk about is the law -- that law part I leave it to the lawyers or whatever thing about the different thing potential and the little word there, and the litigation. That's what -- but I'M going to talk about is the composition of the board because, regardless, it's going to be CIP. Chairman Regalado: Mariano, we're not addressing this issue. We -- i really ask you to wait a while, because we want to try to have some order here. We're addressing the police -- Mr. Cruz: The law. Chairman Regalado: No. The Chief of Police role in this -- Mr. Cruz: Right. Chairman Regalado: -- substitution. Mr. Cruz: OK. But I am going to address the State Attorney. Chairman Regalado: The composition. The composition. Mr. Cruz: The State Attorney. Whatever they say before about different thing about prosecutions and that. I don't know about -- Chairman Regalado: You can do that. But the composition, we're not doing right now. Mr. Cruz: Not now, OK. But somebody from the State Attorney's Office talk here about what they do the prosecutions, how they are, and all that. But I've read many times in the papers, in the political advertising, that the PBA (Police Benevolent Association) is not backing up the State Attorney's Office on many things. So, a lot of things are happening at the State Attorney's Office and that we have to be aware of it, because they affect us. Prosecution affect us, because they are being selective of prosecution. They even put in jail 85 years old ladies on the election thing, violation and all that. Then the criminals are free, roaming the streets. So, that's 216 January 24, 2002 something I think, though, and people lmpw with the Elian things and -- you ]snow, so, I leave my other thing for later on. I'm just setting up now. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. 1' m sorry. Go ahead, sir. Barry Sabin: That's OK. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Mr. Sabin: Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Your name. Mr. Sabin: My name is Barry Sabin. I'm with the United States Attorney's Office here in the southern District of Florida. I am presently the First Assistant United States Attorney. I've served in the U.S. Attorney's Office here since October of 1990. I'm a trial prosecutor, variety of supervisory positions, including Chief of the Criminal Division, and now presently First Assistant United States Attorney. I was asked to provide general thoughts with respect to the federal prosecutorial perspective on the issue before the Commission. And I wanted to make it clear that our office has taken, and it will continue to take, an aggressive and strong commitment with respect to civil rights investigations, whether those occur in the civil realm through pattern and practice matters or through criminal prosecution and indictments returned by federal grand juries. Generally, we support the idea of the Panel. We believe that it can provide an important and meaningful contribution to the community. We asks that you take care and thought with respect to the overall purpose and the vision of what you seek to accomplish with respect to the nuances. And we don't -- I don't pretend -- I don't speak with respect to the details of the proposed language before you. I have not engaged with respect to the actual drafting, or have specific suggestions as to what might be the most appropriate language to include. But with respect to the general idea of impact and interference and how it will play out with respect to criminal prosecutions in the federal realm, I asks you to consider some general concepts. With respect to the types of cases that will be brought before the Panel, whether they're harassment cases or profiling cases or excessive force cases, generally what will occur- in the federal realm are cases involving police misconduct, shooting cases, excessive force; that these are very difficult cases to make with respect to seeking sufficient and competent evidence to bring to a grand jury; they are painstakingly and thoroughly investigated, and they often take a great deal of time with respect to bringing that evidence, those witnesses, those documents to the grand jury in order to obtain sufficient evidence to charge individuals. I ask you to think about the type of evidence that the Panel will be seeking. Is it through testimony through the subpoenas? Are you seeking documents? What items are you going to be subpoenaing? The specific firearms that may have been involved in a shooting? Those types of evidence. I ask you to consider the timing of all that with respect to the forensic capability. When you have, as pointed out by Ms. Balser -- I think it's a good point -- what thought processes and what information is in the Panel so that they can make intelligent decisions about how to proceed, what information do they have at that time and how will that impact on a potential concurrent criminal investigation? The immunity implications. Mr. Smith spoke eloquently to the point with respect to compelling testimony and the Enron investigation. I refer you to the Oli North investigation, where there 217 January 24, 2002 were congressional hearings, and the District of Colombia Circuit has issued certain rulings that, and an opinion, that impacts not only upon the information that is directly provided by a witness in -- with a conferring of immunity, but the attendant consequences of that public dissemination of that information, and how that would impact upon a prosecutor or a trained investigator's ability to interview or pre -try witnesses without the conference of immunity, without compelling the testimony, but that general dissemination of information negatively impacting on the Oli North prosecution. Similarly, the Webster Hubble prosecution, which involved the compelling of documents in a tax fraud investigation. And the mere production of documents, which would -- had been thought to be not something that would have triggered or negatively impacted a criminal investigation, was determined to be something that did, and negatively impacted the criminal justice procedures with the Hubble case. So, I ask you to think carefully about what you're going to do with respect to timing, in terms of the ability to effectively mount a criminal investigation. You had issues dealing with tacigar (phonetic), the fact that you have to prove that there's no evidence obtained from a tainted source, indeed affirmatively have the United States government prove that there is an independent source for that information. I'm not saying that these are insurmountable obstacles. I'm just saying that you should carefully think about how you structure a concurrent investigation, where you have the potential for inadvertently conferring immunity, the potential sanction power of the panel, and how that can play out for the ability to have a witness, whether that be a target of the investigation or someone who's not, at that stage, a specific target or who is a subject of the investigation, or is even a civilian witness. And then you're going to have the potential for inconsistent statements. One witness saying one thing, another witness saying another thing. And the ultimate goal of seeking competent evidence, obtaining sufficient quality and quantity of materials can be negatively impacted so that, at the end of the day, while you're seeking to have a court of law and a fair trial and appropriate information presented to that tribunal, you may not have that because of steps that may have been taken early on. So, I'd ask you to carefully consider the action that you take and the manner in which you set up the procedure before you go forward. Chairman Regalado: I've got a question. Mr. Sabin: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: You mentioned the Hubble and the Oli North cases, but I thought that most of the cases that U.S. Attorney get from law enforcement is sort of civil rights violations; is that - - on the part of the law enforcement officers. Is that -- what I'm talking is about volume, the number of cases that you get. This is not the Hubble -type case. The regular case that you get from law enforcement officers. Mr. Sabin: Well, the regular -- it could be anything. We could have cases referred to us, in a general sense, relating to obstruction of justice, narcotics trafficking, the economic crime or fraud matters. But what is, I think, the crux before -- that the community is concerned about -- Chairman Regalado: Civil rights. Mr. Sabin: -- is the civil rights matters -- 218 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying. Mr. Sabin: -- and police misconduct. Misconduct. Yes, those are matters that are carefully scrutinized and, as I said, generally involve excessive force or police shootings. And we consult with the Department of Justice, Civil Rights Section, in Washington, to carefully proceed in those matters. But if I understand your question, yes, those are the specific civil rights matters Chairman Regalado: The bulk of the cases that you get, the civil rights violations. Mr. ,Sabin: That deal with this issue. As I understand it -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Sabin: -- the purposes of the panel would be impacted. Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: Right. That's what I meant. Mr. City Attorney, you want to address, just to get out of the way, some of what could become points of discussion or controversy? Commissioner Sanchez, what I was asking, if you wanted to address some of the concerns that the U.S. Attorney had. Mr. Vilarello: I think the language that was presented assures that all of the issues that Mr. Sabin brought up will not happen. The question ultimately comes down to the language, which is contained in the Charter already, and that is -- notwithstanding the Charter, it's also in the State Statute -- and that is that the CIP shall not interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation. The language in the ordinance assures that that will never happen. The language that Ms. Baker suggests also gives great assurance that that will not happen, but it --- you know, like Commissioner Teele said, there are many ways to address this issue. The question is, how does the City Commission want to do it? The concurrent investigation, I think, is the crux of the issue, of whether you allow it to happen or not. These are vehicles which will allow it to commence and continue or not. Vice Chairman Winton: Would you repeat the statement you made in reference to the Coalition's language, or recommended language? What did you say about that? Mr. Vilarello: That language, also, gives great assurance that there won't be interference with an ongoing criminal investigation. What it doesn't do, it doesn't assure that there will not be interference with an ongoing criminal investigation. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez, you wanted to -- Commissioner Sanchez: No. l believe that the State Attorney's Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office both expressed concern that the last thing that they want to have is interference in concurrent investigation, where evidence could be contaminated or evidence could be -- you know, all kinds of things could go wrong. They've both expressed it here today. Chairman Regalado: OK. 219 January 24, 2002 Ms. Baker: May I briefly add a point? Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman. Ms. Baker: Sure. Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait. Wait a minute. Vice Chairman Winton: I think that when you make this argument, you know, that we want to absolutely assure, the fact of the matter is that if everything in the system was already working perfectly, we wouldn't even be here. The system hasn't worked appropriately, which is the reason we're here. So, because we're here, we're probably going to have to make some decisions that do create some potential compromises about certain kinds of things that, frankly, would be hard pressed to be any worse than the system's been. And I think where we're going here is in a direction where we're trying to enhance the system. And will it be mistake -free? No. Is this current system mistake -free? Absolutely not. So, I think we have to look at this carefully. As I see it, our job is to appropriately empower this group so that they can be an asset to what we're all trying to accomplish, and that is appropriate independent review of particularly police officers, but as Commissioner Teele -- well, of police officers, because there is no review of anybody else. There's data collection and so I don't want to expand it, but -- and so that's what we're trying to do. And it isn't going to be -- whatever we do isn't going to be a foolproof system no more so than the current system we have is foolproof, because it absolutely is not. Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, let me answer that one, and I'm going to answer it -- I agree with you, except one thing. What they're -- the language that they're putting forth here is -- first of all, if they consult with the State Attorney's Office and the State Attorney's Office says, "No. You know, stay back," whatever reason, they're going to go to court and they're going to go to court and let's say the court system says, "yeah, you could go ahead and investigate," then you're going to have two investigations going on at the same time. And what we don't want is, a year from now or two years from now coming back -- and the whole purpose here is to get rid of the bad apples; that we end up keeping the bad apples because of technicalities. So, yeah, it -- can it be a beautiful world with sunshine? No. But we have to be very careful how we do it. I mean, if we just say, OK, let's go ahead and do that -- if they do that -- and she stated -- Ms. Baker stated very clear, if it gets to that point, that they'll go to the State Attorney's Office and the State Attorney's Office says, no, we're handling the investigation, and they go to court, then be prepared to write them a budget of about five million dollars ($5,000,000) because every case, they're going to end up taking it to court. So, there's a lot of things that we have to iron out here and there has to be agreements, whether they weren't happy with the Chief of Police. Well, the Commission said, "OK, fine. You're right, you're overseeing the Police Department. The Chief has no right to tell you you can investigate or not investigate. There are other avenues. The State Attorney's Office. You know, you're not overseeing the State Attorney's Office. You're overseeing the Police Department. And I think that you have to work with the State Attorney's Office. That's my opinion. Ms. Baker: May I just respond and add one thought? 220 January 24, 2002 0 i Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait, wait. Vice Chairman Winton: But -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioners. Vice Chairman Winton: -- it seems to me also that in your example, where the budget gets out of control, we do have control over that. They can't have an out -of -control budget, because the control we have -- Commissioner Sanchez: Then you're funding them not to succeed. Vice Chainnan Winton: No, no. No. If they're doing what you said, which is out of control in terms of filing appeal on every single case so that every single case goes before -- and we've got a five million dollar ($5,000,000) bill, we have a number of options. You know, we can fire their legal counsel, that apparently isn't very good. We can also revisit the ordinances we've created. And we have that right any particular Commission meeting we want to revisit the ordinance. Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, if we do it right, we may not have to do that. Vice Chairman Winton: I agree with that. I agree. Commissioner Sanchez: And that's what we need to do here. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: It's called the art of compromising. Maybe they could enter an agreement with the City -- you know, building -- the Attorney's Office and work it out. But they're basically -- the language that they put out is that if they go to the State Attorney's Office and the State Attorney, for whatever reasons, may not agree with you, you're going to say, well, we're going to go to court. Ms. Baker: No, no. Commissioner Sanchez: That's -- Ms. Baker, that's what I understood when you said that. Ms. Baker: No, no. The State Attorney's Office could, if it wished, go to court. Easily they have a world of -- you know, a whole tear of lawyers who are in court all the time. They can easily go into court and quickly deal with the matter. Our proposal is that the CIP would not go to court. Somebody else, the State Attorney's Office, could go to court against the CIP, which they can easily do and it wouldn't impact your budget, at all. The only thing I'd like to add -- and I'm going to be very brief about it -- is I think the U.S. -- Mr. Sabin's comments about the interest of the United States Attorney's Office really points out why the Coalition's position is right; that we shouldn't build in that there has to be consultation specifically with the State Attorney's 221 January 24, 2002 i i Office. We should make it the responsibility of the independent counsel to do his or her job, and the independent counsel should be charged with the responsibility of doing whatever research is necessary in each case, whether it is to talk to the State Attorney's Office, to talk to the U.S. Attorney's Office, perhaps to talk to Florida -- you know, FDLE (Federal Department of Law Enforcement), perhaps to talk to, you know, neighboring counties, certainly, perhaps, to talk even to the Police Chief, to talk to perhaps Miami -Dade Chief of Police. Many, many resources could be and perhaps should be the duty of the independent counsel to access and research so that the independent counsel can go to the CIP and say, I've talked to all of these different agencies and I'm comfortable that you cannot or I'm comfortable that you can go forward in this case with this criminal investigation at this time, because I've done all that research. And I'm -- I was really alerted by Mr. Sabin's comments to the realization that the Coalition's position is right. We shouldn't build in a consultation with one particular law enforcement officer. We should require the independent counsel to make -- to do whatever research is necessary, and that is implicitly part of the independent counsel's job. And, you know, I think that the ordinance, as we've proposed it, does that. It doesn't mean we won't obviously participate, you know, very constructively in the process of compromise, but we really think that our language does do that job. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I have a question. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Go ahead, Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: The independent counsel that we're talking about is going to be -- yeah, I know it's going to be an attorney. But it's going to be a criminal attorney, I hope, right? Ms. Novicki: Well, that's not the requirement. Ms. Baker: The City Attorney has some control over this process, and I think seven years experience -- Mr. Vilarello: That kind of experience, yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Pardon use? Mr. Vilarello: With that kind of experience, obviously, that's critical to the Independent Panel. Commissioner Gonzalez: It's critical to everybody. Ms. Novicki: What your Charter says, I believe, is that he should be an expert in municipal law. It doesn't speak to criminal law. I just want to point out a couple things. The first thing that Ms. Taseff said was interesting, because it was that there was already this provision that they were going to be consulting with the State Attorney's Office. So, you know, it was already going on. Why say it twice, or something like that? First of all, I think consultation was a -- we had talked a lot about compromise. I think consultation was a compromise and a trust issue for the State 222 January 24, 2002 Attorney's Office, because the State Attorney said, "It's OK. I want this Civilian Review Panel to happen. And I don't need approval. I will agree with you and trust you that if you consult with me, that's enough for issuing your subpoena. I'll be happy with that." But a subpoena, in an investigation, call often come long after the investigation begins. And I believe Mr. Sabin, from the U.S. Attorney's Office, brought up a lot of things that can happen in terms of witness interviews, in terms of evidence, in an investigation before you get to the point of issuing subpoenas. And because of the provision in the ordinance that the CIP would not interfere with a criminal investigation, the State Attorney's Office never envisioned that we would not have control over whether or not it was interfering in a criminal investigation. We have responsibility for that investigation and prosecution. You know, there is a lot of talk about consulting and talking to us about it. We may not he able to share the details of the criminal investigation with the CIP, but we will be able to tell them that it interferes, OK. So, let's say they bothered to ask, which isn't even part of their proposal now, and they ask us, and we say, for our investigative reasons, we can't give you details because you do operate in the Sunshine. We can't have that information out in the Sunshine. We can't tell you that where the person was shot or who our witnesses are, for reasons of our investigation. And they say, "OK. Well, if you can't give us the information, then we're going to proceed." So, they proceed. They bring in witnesses. We can then go to court. Well, how far have we gotten along in the interference in our investigation while this is in the court process? Aren't you putting the cart before the horse? I f we say there is interference in our investigation, then why can't, at the very least, we go before a neutral judge who would say, we could -- he could review the information in camera. It would not be public. And he could mala the decision. That, at the very least, is what we're asking for here, and we're willing to talk that responsibility ifyou don't want it with the Police Department. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. Ms. Baker: If I -- Vice Chairman Winton: For some reason or another I thought that was there. 1 mean, did I miss something, that piece -- Chairman Regalado: Excuse mc. The City Attorney wants to clarify something. Mr. Vilarello: It's not a clarification, but maybe it's to offer a compromise that might address some of the concerns that have been raised by everyone. And my suggestion is that we start working from the language of the Coalition. It simply says that "the CIP may proceed with an investigation after consultation with its independent counsel, who shall be required to consult with the State Attorney." And then their last sentence, "Any challenge to such decision by any agency engaged in such investigation or prosecution shall be made in a court of competent jurisdiction, in accordance with general law." Chairman Regalado: OK, Mr. Vilarello: And -- but this -- the compromise -- that's not the total cornpromise. Because in order for us to accept that language -- or I should say for the Police Department and for the prosecutors to accept such, they have to be notified of the complaint. That way they can look 223 January 24, 2002 0 • into the issue and if -- because this has shifted the burden. It places the burden back on the investigatory agencies to challenge the decision of the CIP. And if that's the will of the City Commission, then you have to notify the department that, in fact, there is a complaint. And that was taken out of the original -- Chairman Regalado: Let me just propose this to you. We have taken some of the language. Now, the City Attorney has offered some compromise, new language. Using his knowledge and some proposals from the Coalition, do you want to take another straw vote and decide if we want to substitute what we took with this? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, with the consultation of the State Attorney's Office. Chairman Regalado: OK. Is there a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Regalado: Is there a second? Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's take a straw vote. Commissioner Tecle, you -- do you agree with the straw vote that we're going to take? Commissioner Teele: I mean, the language that's in there is the language that I came up with. Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: It's a consultation. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. But, remember, we're working on the steps. Commissioner Teele: I don't have any -- Mr. Vilarello: We'll write it down. Chairman Regalado: Let's vote then. Commissioner Teele: The consultation language is in the Charter itself-- Ms. Balser: With respect to subpoenas. Commissioner Teele: -- with respect to subpoenas. Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Vilarello: Exactly. 224 January 24, 2002 • 0 Commissioner Teale: So, it's simply agreeing with that which is -- Mr. Vilarello: It may be with respect to subpoenas, but not in this context. So I think we need to say "in this context" that they shall consult with the appropriate prosecutorial authority. It could be the State Attorney's Office. It could be the U.S. Attorney's Office. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Let's take the vote. Roll call. Commissioner Sanchez: Maker of the motion accepts. Commissioner Gonzalez: I second. Chairman Regalado: Roll call. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-117 A MOTION RECORDING STRAW VOTE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO PROVIDE THAT THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) MAY PROCEED WITH AN INVESTIGATION AFTER CONSULTATION WITH ITS INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, WHO SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONSULT WITH THE APPROPRIATE PROSECUTORIAL AUTHORITY (STATE ATTORNEY OR US ATTORNEY). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Sanchez: Let's move to something else. Chairman Regalado: OK. Something else. Now, Mr. City Attorney, what are the other issues that we should discuss right now, so we get the input from the groups and the public and -- 225 January 24, 2002 Mr. Vilarello: Well, Commissioner, there is -- there's not too many paragraphs in the ordinance that there's not someone who has an issue about. However -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. But we're talking -- Mr. Vilarello: -- the most significant issues -- Chairman Regalado: The most significant issues were -- Mr. Vilarello: You've dealt with one. Chairman Regalado: Right. We -- it was this that we just dealt with, and also the Nominating Process. Mr. Vilarello: Exactly. That's the other more significant -- most significant. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's take the Nominating Process. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So, we're not going to take the purpose, powers and duties. That's been agreed on? Chairman Regalado: Huh? Commissioner Sanchez: Has that been agreed on? I don't have a problem with the purpose, powers, and duties. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: But we're taking -- Joe, what we're doing is, we're taking the most controversial. This is first reading. And, you know, you can always work around -- but the most controversial is the one that we just did. Now, the members and the Nominating Process. I would propose something -- and if you all want to vote straw ballot again on this -- but I think that it's important that we agree on a number. And I would tell you that it's important that we have in this committee representatives from every community and every area of the City of Miami. That is why I have thought -- and I would propose to you, that's up to you -- a 15 - member group. I spoke to the City Attorney. The Chief of Police has an appointment. Fifteen members, because the Mayor needs to also appoint the members, and then the members will appoint, from within, the Chairman. I would say that 15 members will give the Nominating Committee and the City Commission the flexibility to choose amongst every community in the City of Miami. So, if you all want to just give us an idea of the number of members, I think that that would help the City Attorney to work around the ordinance. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that we have -- let the public make coninnents on their preference of nine members or 15 members. I'm reading from their chart -- 226 January 24, 2002 0 0 Lida Rodriguez-Tasef: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: At least three people want nine. I'm open -- I prefer 15. I'll say that here, because I think the larger the number, the greater the potential. That doesn't mean that the committee, once it sets itself up, has to have 15 members to make all decisions. Obviously, you can have committees, you can have, you know, two or three different committees that would wind up making recommendations that would come to the Board. But what I'm saying is that I'm in support of what Commissioner Regalado has advanced, 15, because that gives you a better chance for diversity and pluralism within the context of our very diverse community. I'm very interested in hearing why PULSE (People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality) and some of the other organizations, I think, want nine. And I think it would be fair to just let them speak to this, and then we could have a straw vote on nine or 15, or whatever number anybody wants to propose. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. I think -- excuse me. I think, you know -- I'm saying -- I mean, I'm saying 15, and I will tell you that the Mayor of the City of Miami supports the number of 15. Why? Because it's more inclusive. We have Nicaraguans in the City of Miami area, municipality, Columbians and, you know, Haitians. We need to be inclusive of all the groups that live in the City of Miami, and work in the City of Miami. The Police Department touches the Iives of one million people daily, and it's important to be inclusive. And, you know, you heard one member of the Commission say 15. 1 say 15. And I think it's important that we have that many members, because it will give the people of Miami assurances that they are represented well in that committee. But we're going to hear the public, and that is what we're here for. And then, if you let us, we will just take a straw ballot, and we work our way into the most controversial issues. Yes, ma'am. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: Thank you very much, Commissioner. I am only here to register the objection of the community groups, with regard to the amendment in the -- to the last provision dealing with concurrent investigations. It is a bitter irony that a State Attorney's Office that has been, at best, ineffective and, at worst, truly negligent in its investigations over the last 10 years in this City and County, to be pushing to have oversight because it feels that it is the only one that can have the ability to make sure that no investigations are botched. Out of 102 -- Vice Chairman Winton: I thought we were talking about number of members. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: That's correct. I wanted to -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I respectfully take exception -- I take exception for the characterization of that office, in this context. Look, what we're trying to do is get down to, are we talking about 15 people or nine people or some other number? The State Attorney's Office has nothing -- 227 January 24, 2002 0 i Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: We've registered our objection. And Ms. Me Elroy -- Chairman Regalado: Look, look, the problem is -- Max Ramaeu: The reason we feel an obligation to say it now is because we didn't get an opportunity to counter what was said by the State Attorney's Office before. So, we don't feel that we got a fair shake in this. And we do feel that there has been a -- Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait, wait, wait. How many public hearings have we had here? Don't be unfair to us. Mr. Ramaeu: No, no, no. In fact, I'm glad that you mentioned that, because in every single public hearing that we've had, not only the public hearings here, but before and the one in the room in the back last week, we have stated again and again the importance of independent investigations, and, yet, we get back a document, which Commissioner Teele called insulting, which we called worse, last week in the room. So, our input -- Chairman Regalado: And what happened? We voted down. Mr. Ramaeu: Our input -- Chainnan Regalado: We voted down. Mr. Ramaeu: OK. We understand. That's one aspect of it. And there's another aspect -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, in fairness -- Mr. Ramaeu: Our input on this has not been taken seriously. Commissioner Tecle: Max, Max, Max. Chairman Regalado: No. It has. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, in fairness to this process -- look, Max, this is not -- and that's why I started out by saying, this is not the day where the decision is made. Mr. Ramaeu: We understand. Commissioner Teale: The day the decision is going to be made will be when we go from first reading to second reading, and I -- if you feel offended or slighted in our desire to try to get out of here before one o'clock tonight and come out with something, then I apologize. But what I would be willing to stipulate, if the rest of the Commission will agree, that everyone, especially the named organizations that have been here, would be afforded a five- to 10 -minute presentation at the final reading of this, to say anything that you want to say -- 228 January 24, 2002 0 Chairman Regalado: And today. Commissioner Teele: -- as opposed to two minutes. Chairman Regalado: And even today, Max. Even today. But what we're trying to do is trying to narrow -- Mr. Ramaeu: We understand. Chairman Regalado: -- the issues. Mr. Ramaeu: All we wanted to do was put on the record our objections in that. That's all. Chairman Regalado: Well, you have. You have. Mr. Ramaeu: OK. So, we're done. So, now we can move on to the other things. And we'll do our incendiary comments at our five-minute follow-up. Commissioner Sanchez: It's on the record. It's on the record. Chairman Regalado: You have. Mr. Ramaeu: OK. Then, obviously -- then we'll move on to membership. Obviously, with membership, there is no magic number here. It could be three. It could be five. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. We are voting on this -- Mr. Ramaeu: I understand with nine and 15. 1 understand. Vice Chairman Winton: He's addressing the issue. Mr. Ramaeu: That's exactly what I'm addressing. There's no -- we're not going to sit here and say that there's a magic number that -- our initial idea was to have seven and, for the purposes of diversity, specifically the issue (UNINTELLIGIBLE) we want to expand to nine. With the research that we have done, it has been suggested that the larger the group, the more unwieldy it is. The Commissioners mentioned at one of the public hearings, well, you know -- you know, the County Commission has 13 and, et cetera. We know the larger groups were concerned about the group getting too large and too -- and making it difficult to make decisions, and that's why we went with nine. Our ideal number, in terms of efficiency, would have been seven, but our number in terms of diversity, had to grow to nine. And that was -- incidentalIy, that was the information that we had gotten when I spoke to the people from NACOLE (National Association of the Citizens Oversight of Law Enforcement), the vice president up in, I think it's Connecticut, and she had suggested to me -- I can't remember her name right now. She had suggested to me seven. And she said, "With that, you should be able to get everybody in the community happy." And, you know, I told her, well -- she obviously hasn't been to Miami, because she doesn't know 229 January 24, 2002 • the -- so, we had to expand it to nine in order to make sure that we include -- we just feel that the 15 would make it too unwieldly. Chairman Regalado: OK. Anybody else on the numbers of the committee? Bess Me Elroy: Yes. My name is Bess Me Elroy, President of PULSE. My address is 150 Northeast 19th Street. The Coalition had recommended nine. We felt that nine was a workable group. Sometimes -- oftentimes, the larger the numbers, the more difficult it is to come to conclusion -- reach decisions, etcetera. We believe that from the number nine, we can get a good cross representation of the City. Our interest here also is one of fairness. Membership, how the people are going to be selected is a very, very controversial item. Chairman Regalado: Wc'rc going to do that in a few minutes. Discuss that. We're discussing how many members -- Ms. Me Elroy: Right now we're recommending nine. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Me Elroy: We believe that is a workable number. Chairman Regalado: I just wanted to ask you, how many members does a jury has? Ms. Me Elroy: How many members does a jury have? I'm not an attorney. I don't know. Twelve, l guess. A dozen. Chairman Regalado: How many members -- an attorney here, how many members does a jury has? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: In capital cases -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Normally, it varies From six to 12. Ms. Me Elroy: This is not a jury. Commissioner Sanchez: Depends. Six to 13. Commissioner Teele: Six to 13, isn't it? Chairman Regalado: Six to 13 Ms, Me Elroy: Well, how many City Commissioners do we have? Chairman Regalado: Well, we have five. Ms. Me Elroy: And we're talking about nine. 230 January 24, 2002 (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Chairman Regalado: No. But, I mean -- Ms. Me Elroy: It's not a -- that's not a justified question, as you can see. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, no. What I said to him is -- Commissioner Teele: I'll go with seven Commissioners. Chairman Regalado: Hey, look, we have 13 NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Tcam). So, we could easily have 13 Commissioners, but that's not the point. What I said is, that the number -- the more members of the Commission -- and Commissioner Teele rightly said, you know, this could work in committees. Now, this is going to be very important people, people that probably you would recommend to the City Commission for appointment. And some of these people may not be able to attend some of the meetings. You have said that you want 50 percent, plus one, in order to have a quorum. Well, you know, if we miss some people out of 15, 50 percent, plus one, will be less than nine. So, I don't see the problem -- i mean, I don't really want to get into how the City should be mirrored. But you know this City. This City has many nationalities, and I think it's only fair that the people of the City of Miami will be represented in that committee. That is why I offered the number of 15. I spoke to the City Attorney, and that is why the Mayor supports the number of 15. So, we just want to hear what you have to say. Dr. Osvaldo Soto. Dr. Osvaldo Soto: Osvaldo Soto. I'm the Chairman of the Spanish American League Against Discrimination. My offices are 2151 South Le Jeune Road, Suite 310, Gables, Florida. At the beginning I -- we thought that, perhaps, I I or 13 would be a better number, but when you look at the composition of the City of Miami and the numerous groups we have, we have come to the conclusion that perhaps the idea, whoever it is, of 15 members is not a bad idea. We need to have true representation. We have to be sure that nobody's left out, and then everybody's going to be represented on that committee -- on that panel. So, because of that, we would like to express our support of the idea of the 15 members. Any questions? Chairman Regalado: Well, I just want to say, Osvaldo Soto was one of the founders of the Miami -Dade County CIP Committee, and I think that SALAD (Spanish American League Against Discrimination) will hopefully give us an input in all this process. A new person, I mean. Dr. Soto: When I was the Chairman of the Independent Review Panel at the County, it was six members. And, actually, it was posed another African American organization recommended to enlarge the number of the members of the Independent Review Panel so there would be better and true representation of the County, and the number increased substantially since that moment. And I -- it's my understanding that the panel has been working perfectly, and I think it's going to be a good idea that everybody, you know, can come in and have a true representation. I cannot see why people would object to the fact that we have representation of all groups and all people 231 January 24, 2002 E in the City of Miami. And, by the way, Mr. Sabinas advised me that he is also supporting Manny Diaz. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, first of all, I would guess -- Dr. Soto: That's what I said, he's the Chairman and president of CAMACOL, the Latin Chamber of Commerce. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 would guess that there's more than 15 nationalities in the City of Miami, so I don't think it's going to be possible to represent all people in the City of Miami. We're going to need a committee of probably 75. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's why we have here "miscellaneous citizens." Dr. Soto: But you can make the best effort to have as true representation, as possible. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, this isn't a very complex issue. You know, this is pretty simple, and I'm -- I have a sense that everybody up here has got their mind made up. This isn't -- we don't need a lawyer, we don't need 10 lawyers, we don't need five different writings, we don't need 16 paragraphs. I'm ready to vote. Chairman Regalado: OK, Commissioner Sanchez: We've got to listen to the public. Chairman Regalado: Let's vote. Let's vote -- Vice Chairman Winton: I would move -- Commissioner Sanchez: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the public. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'm going to move a motion. I would move -- because I don't happen to agree that a large number is going to be more effective. I think it is going to create gridlock. And I thought at first, well, maybe -- you know, gridlock. Let it be gridlock. That's not our mission here. So, I'm going to move that we create a panel of nine CIP members. Chairman Regalado: We have a motion. Is there a second? Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, now, go to the next number. Let's keep going down the motion. We can get this done fast. Commissioner Sanchez: Motion for 15 members. Vice Chairman Winton: I started at the bottom. Let's go to a new motion. 232 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Motion for 15 members. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second for a 15 -member committee. Roll call, please. Commissioner Teele: Could we -- Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Roll call. Walter Foeman (City Cleric): Roll call. Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: No, Commissioner Teele: Before you do the roll call. These are straw votes. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Straw votes are not binding. Chairman Regalado: No. What we're -- Commissioner Teele: And if -- with the discussion, something else comes up that it's conforming -- because I've got a sense that I'm not with nine, but I really do think 15 -- I mean, I could have gone for 11, 1 think, but -- Vice Chairman Winton: Should have made a motion. Commissioner Teele: No. But -- I mean, we're at 15 and there's -- so, let's just -- as long as we understand that this is straw vote, and that's where we are right now. Chairman Regalado: Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-118 A MOTION DESIGNATING THAT THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) BE COMPOSED OF FIFTEEN (15) MEMBERS. 233 January 24, 2002 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzdlez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez NAYS: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton ABSENT: None. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Regalado: OK. So, the Nominating Process. That is the difficult issue. Well, it's not difficult. I think that -- I sense that many of the groups have proposed something that most of the members of the Commission agree. At least, I've seen that published. So, I don't know. Mr. City Attorney, give us an idea of what is -- and what we are going to vote tonight regarding the Nominating Process. Mr. Vilarello: Particularly, with regard to the nominating -- Commissioner Sanchez.: Nominating Committee. Chairman Regalado: Nominating -- the Nominating Committee and the nominating -- to nominate the Nominating Committee, and the Nominating Committee nominating members. Mr. Vilarello: Simply, the City Commission will pass a resolution selecting not less than nine or more than 15 members of the Nominating Committee. The Nominating Committee will be composed of nominations from community-based organizations, which submit names to the City Commission, and the City Commission will select from nine to 15 members. That will be the Screening Committee for the ultimate members of the CIP. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Members of the public on the Nominating Process. Commissioner Teele: Before you do, I'd like to ask the Chairman one -- the City Attorney one thing. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Did the public -- is this the initial or is this the permanent? Chairman Regalado: No, initial. 234 January 24, 2002 0 • Mr. Vilarello: Well, Commissioner, the way this is written -- the way the ordinance is written that's before you, there's a Nominating Committee created initially, and every two years the Commission does it again. It passes a resolution selecting LBOs (Community Based Organizations) that will nominate individuals that the Commission selects to be members of the Nominating Committee. Chairman Regalado: And, in the meantime -- just to follow on Commissioner Teele. In the meantime, if there is a vacant -- Alex, in the meantime, if there is a vacant, is the CIP, who nominates the people, to -- if there is a vacant -- Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no. Chairman Regalado: I'm saying -- between that two-year window, if there is a vacant on the committee, the members of the CIP nominate some of the members -- chooses some people so the City Commission can nominate. Mr. Vilarello: The Nominating Committee will give the Commission a list of names. Chairman Regalado: I understand that. Mr. Vilarello: Right now it's written 24. If you want to do three times as many, it will be a larger number. But any vacancies would be filled from those names. Chairman Regalado: Oh, from the pool? Commissioner Teele: From a pool. Mr. Vilarello: From the pool. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Tecle: OK. Let -- Mr. Vilarello: By the Commission. Commissioner Teele: Let me ask you this, and I want you to hear me on this. Because what I'm really concerned about is the creation of two bureaucracies that wind up with something -- was there any thought given to -- forget the initial. Was there any thought given to the fact that the CTP would be able to nominate to the Commission vacancies after it's been constituted? Let's assume we figure out how to constitute it. Was there any consideration given to the CIP being able to nominate, you know, two or three names for each vacancy? Mr. Vilarello: Yes. We have considered it or reconsidered it. And we only evaluated it in the context of our experience in the City, and with particular boards that nominate their own 235 January 24, 2002 • 0 membership. And this Commission -- not all of the members of the Commission, obviously, because Mr. Gonzalez is new to the Commission -- has periodically had problems with that process. Commissioner Teele: Let me ask you this. Was that something that the organizations were interested in or not? Mr. Vilarello: No. The organizations were interested in having those vacancies filled by -- names nominated by the CIP. Commissioner Teele: OK. Mr. Vilarello: That is -- that provision was addressed, really, by my office. Commissioner Teele: OK. So, we do have -- let's get past the initial, because we're going to have a problem with the initial. But we do have two approaches we can take for vacancies, once this thing has been created; that is, we can have a Nominating Committee process to continue to do this or we could let the CIP, much like we do, for example, with the Off -Street Parking, where we had a deadlock some time ago, but that was only five members. But Off Street Parking is a board of the City, a very powerful and important board, where the members nominate -- now, in that case, they only nominate one name -- but the members nominate to the Commission the persons to be done. So, that needs to be given a little bit of intellectual thought. The other question that I want to have -- and I want Commissioner Winton to hear this, and Commissioner Regalado, especially -- because my concern is creating two boards. And I've looked at this thing for the last two or three weeks. Was any thought given to boards that we already have in the City, that have a role as making that board's additional duty a Nominating Committee? Was there any discussion about that? Mr. Vilarello: Yes. I mean, we Iooked at everything that we do -- Commissioner Teele: What board, in particular? Because, to me, the board that I think -- if I were being asked to make a recommendation, I would go to the Community Relations Board. Chairman Regalado: Of course. Commissioner Teele: I would go to the Community Relations Board and Iet them be a nominating board for us. Commissioner Sanchez: Noway, Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE) awful. Commissioner Tecle: Well, it may be awful, Johnny, but their mission is to promote community relations. 236 January 24, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: That may be their mission, but they need to -- that board needs to go to -- create its own Community Relations Board. I mean, that Board's a mess. Unidentified Speaker: That's right. Chairman Regalado: Well, because -- Vice Chairman Winton: They've got their own community non -relations going on on that Board. Commissioner Teele: But, Johnny, I'm only asking the question. I respect your opinion. I'm through with it, if that doesn't work. Chairman Regalado: But I just want to say that this Board has been sabotaged, but we'll take that somewhere -- sometimes -- so, what do we do? Commissioner Teelc: And the third point that I wanted to ask this: We gave -- and I want everybody to hear me before anybody reacts -- we gave the Police Chief the authority to make appointments or nominations. Is it a nomination or appointment? Commissioner Sanchez: Appointment, Chairman Regalado: Appointment, appointment. He's Commissioner Teele: Was there any thought to designating -- and this is the old divide and concur, perhaps, in somebody's mind -- was there any thought to designating three or four organizations that are representative of this community -- and forget the politics, because we're the ones that have to decide. And I'm saying -- I'll put it on the line, SALAD. I'll put it on the line, PULSE. I'll put it on the line, ACLU. And I know they said they want to opt out, OIC? But was there -- these organizations that are long-standing, that have diversity, and letting them just nominate a panel of four or five names. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, in fact, this is an attempt to forge a compromise between the Coalition's suggestion that nine organizations, specifically, be named in the ordinance. The reason we didn't name nine specific organizations in the ordinance is because the ordinance is designed to last for a long period of time. Organizations ebb and flow, and therefore we felt that it was not appropriate to specifically name them. Commissioner Teele: But I don't Mr. Vilarello: This resolution -- the way this is written, the City Commission would make exactly that selection, and would take only nominations from the particular community-based organizations, such as the ones that you mentioned. Commissioner- Teele: But just hear what I'm saying, Alex. I hear what you're saying, and organizations do come and go. But the fact of the matter is, we could risk, if we chose to, to select four or live organizations and give them the right to hold community workshops, and to 237 January 24, 2002 0 • submit not less than three or five names for every vacant -- for a certain number of vacancies, if we chose to. Mr. Vilarello: This would be for the Screening Committee or the Nominating Committee. Commissioner TeeIe: No, I'm saying that would come directly to us. I'm only -- that's another way to get nominations through that are not "political," but are community. And I'm just suggesting to you that, if we can give that power to the Police Chief, one way to be fair is to give some of the power, as opposed to having just one process, where we have, in effect, three processes. We already have one. That is, the Police Chiefs going to make nominations or appointments, OK. I'm saying, on the other hand, why don't we consider designating three or four organizations and letting them make nominations for certain vacancies on the initial list? And then have a panel that we create that will do for the public at large. But I think it would be of tremendous value -- and I'll say it on the record -- for the ACLU, for SALAD, and for PULSE or PULSE with the NAC -- PULSE to make recommendations to us of a list of names. And I just say that as one Commissioner. But I'm very interested in hearing what the recommendations would be from the public. Chairman Regalado: OK. Now, we're on the nomination -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, afterwards, I like to be recognized of the Nominating Process. Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry? Commissioner Sanchez: The public. 1 want to hear what (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: OK. We -- this is about the Nominating Process. Bess Ms. McElroy: All right. In regards to the Nominating Process, I want to go back to the question, whether or not the Nominating Committee would be an ongoing process? Or once the panel is seated, who would make the nomination for the vacancies? Well, we're recommending that a Nominating Committee be established to -- for the initial selections, and that it will be a one- time operation only for the initial selection. Once the panel is seated, vacancies thereafter would be recommended by the CIP itself. The CIA would do the screening -- Commissioner Sanchez: Who selects the initial -- Ms. Me Elroy: Now, who selects the initial Nominating Committee? That has been the sticking point. And I hope we don't need the Fire Department in here before we are finished with this point. Commissioner Sanchez: We need to clarify it, because we don't do that Chairman Regalado: Huh? 238 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: We select the nominees. Ms. Me Elroy: However, what we, the Coalition, is recommending is that community-based organizations make a selection for an appointment to the Nominating Committee. Now, another question that has -- let's say that you all agree to that, that the community-based organizations would do that. Another question has come up is to whom would. the community-based organizations submit the names to? Would they submit it directly to the Commissioners? Chairman Regalado: You submit it to the City Clerk, and the City Clerk (INAUDIBLE). Ms. Me Elroy: That is -- you must be reading my mind, because that is exactly what I was about to say, that the community-based organization would collect the names and submit the names to the Office of the City Clerk. Chairman Regalado: And he'll distribute -- Ms. Me Elroy: And the City Clerk would then forward those names to you. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Me Elroy: We think that is a fair process. We think that we have enough community-based organizations that are willing to participate. There are many that supports the ordinance -- I mean, supports the concept, but everybody does not necessarily wants to have hands-on involvement, but it should be open up to those who want to participate, And we did solicit names of organizations to you, which are included in our proposal for your consideration. We think that that is a fair process. Again, we're only talking about an initial -- the initial process. But it's important -- it's very important to us that all of this get off on the right hand. It is -- our interest is that of the people, to make sure that this is a fair process to the complainant and to the Police Department. So, it is very important who sits oil this panel. So, therefore, we think it is also important, the Nominating Committee must be people who are capable and able to screen people who would make good panelists. That is the key point. We can make it or break it with what we do initially. So, those are our recommendations, and YOU do have that in your draft from us. I think that is the most sticking point. The other process to this is the term of office. We have that listed three years. And we also recommend that there would be staggering terms upfront. All of that, I believe, we sort of have a meeting of the mind, but the most sticking point is how do we get the process started? And we think it should start with a Nominating Committee that will operate solely for the seating of the initial panel. And once that panel is seated, the function of that Nominating Committee ceases. Those are our recommendations. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez was going to say something. I just -- brief comments. The idea of CiP members nominating any people for the vacancies is not a new one. Off -Street Parking does that. It's an agency of the City of Miami. DDA (Downtown Development Authority) does that. I don't see why -- and, I mean, the initial group of members of the CIP will be persons with. roots in the community, persons that are dedicated, and I think that they would have the knowledge to appoint or to nominate new members. So, I don't disagree with that. Commissioner Sanchez. 239 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Ms. Me Elroy? Ms. McElroy: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: I agree with you on that issue. I stated it when 1 first opened up, that I spoke. But I just want to add further to make sure that we agree on something else. "The, initial Nominating Committee members, an officer of the organization represented therein are prohibited from serving on the CIP board." Do you also agree with that? Ms. Me Elroy: Yes, we did. The nomination committee -- Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Perfect. Ms. Me Elroy: -- persons would not serve on the panel. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm OK with this. Ms. McElroy: Yes. Chairman Regalado: OK. On the nomination process, anybody else? Ma'am. Elsie Hubbard: Good afternoon. I live at 1610 Northwest 4th Avenue, Miami, and I've been living there for 30 long years. Chairman Regalado: Your name is? Ms. Hubbard: My name is Elsie Hubbard. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Ms. Hubbard: And we have -- we work with the Police Department. You know, all the police officers down there is not bad. We have some police officers work very diligently in our neighborhood. So, I feel like, with all these boards the City Commission have picked to put in our neighborhood, they hadn't been no help to us, because he have chaired him. But what I feel like, if all these boards gonna be, why can't the Police Department pick a board out of Miami or the citizen? What respect them to be on their side, if you don't give them no thing? You can't judge one bad apple by another one. And, you know, we -- I mean, do you live in Overtown, Bessie? Ms. Me Elroy: I used to. Ms. Hubbard: Yeah, but I'm talking about now. We have some officers, we can go down there and talk to and they give us plenty good time. When you get it out in our neighborhood to the young people, that every officer over there is bad, then they ain't gone respect the officer. So, I feel like you should give the officer the same thing you giving these boards, the City 240 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commission. These City Commission boards was put over here, he chair, they ain't even fair to the people in Overtown. They recommend they self. So, I would ask them to give us a board from the -- let the City Commission -- City police officer pick us a board from Overtown, because they do know us. And I deal with them and I do understand them. Ms. Me Elroy: I just want to -- if I may, I want to make sure that I understood the question about members on the Nominating Committee serving as panelists. I was speaking of individual persons. And any individual who serve on the Nominating Committee -- Commissioner Sanchez: Cannot sit -- Ms. Me Elroy: -- cannot serve. Commissioner Sanchez: Cannot sit on the panel. Cannot serve on the panel. Ms. Me Elroy: Cannot serve on the panel. That's the individual, not the organization that they represent. I just want to make sure I'm clear on that. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. The language that's here -- let me just read it again. "The initial Nominating Committee member and officers of the organization represented therein are prohibited from serving on the CIP board." And I think what it does -- it's fair, because what I does is that, if I'm a representative of my organization -- first of all, if I make an appointment, I can't sit on it. But then, again, I can't put somebody from my organization to sit in the panel. I mean, it's all fairness here. Ms. Me Elroy: You're saying that if I served on the board -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's section 42-83. Ms. Me Elroy: OK. Just one moment, Mr. Rameau: Forty-two eighty-three what? Ms. McElroy: No, 42-83. Mr. Rameau: Which sub? Ms. Me Elroy: Which sub? Commissioner Sanchez: No. These are recommendations made by the Mayor. Ms. Me Elroy: Oh. We have to go to a different draft. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. But, I mean -- you know, I will feel comfortable that if the initial Nominating Committee member, at least a member, can't sit and serve on the CIP. If he makes a nomination, I mean, what is he, going to nominate himself? 241 January 24, 2002 Ms. Mc Elroy: No, he cannot. He cannot sit. Chairman Regalado: Well, everybody agrees with that. Ms. Mc Elroy: No, I'm agreeing with that. We're in agreement with that. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Ms. McElroy: Right. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, can -- Commissioner Teele: I just need some clarification on what the proposal is, Mr. Attorney, in language. How many members of this Nominating Committee are they talking about, based upon your understanding? Mr. Vilarello: The Coalition has suggested nine members. Commissioner Teele: Of a Nominating Committee. Mr. Vilarello: Nine specific community-based organizations nominating those nine members. Commissioner Teele: Then let's read them into the record. Mr. Vilarello: I don't have -- Chairman Regalado: No, no. Commissioner Teele: But, see, I think we're talking a previous proposal and a current proposal. Mr. Vilarello: They have them. Vice Chairman Winton: That's right. Ms. Me Elroy: Yes. They're in our draft on page 4. Commissioner Tecle: Why don't you read them into the record, so that the public knows what we're talking about. Ms. Me Elroy: All right. Brothers of the Same Mind, CAMACOL, Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, Haitian American Grassroots Coalition, NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), PULSE, SALAD, Unidos and Vecinos Conneccion. 242 January 24, 2002 • 0 Chairman Regalado: Vecinos en Accion. Commissioner Sanchez: Vecinos en Accion. Mr. Ramaeu: En Accion, Ms, McElroy: En Accion. Chairman Regalado: These are the groups that are proposed. 1 would request that you include in that list Community Relations Board of the City of Miami, the CRB. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Ms. Me Elroy: If I may -- Commissioner Sanchez: That -- and just that -- we have other organizations that would Iike to participate in that. I think we're leaving good organizations in our community. I cannot support that concept. I think the best one was the one that was established by you, where any organization in the City of Miami can make a recommendation for someone to sit on the Nominating Committee. If we start excluding people out, people are going to come back and say Vice Chairman Winton: They're not saying that any organization can't submit a name, but the name has to go somewhere. What they're suggesting -- Chairman Regalado: Let ine say -- Commissioner Sanchez: It has to go to the City Clerk. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. But let me -- Vice Chairman Winton: Am I not allowed to finish? Chairman Regalado: Yes. No, no. But you're right. What you're saying, you're -- Alex, he's right. What he's saying is that what we are saying here is not that only these groups will be able to nominate; that this group could get names from every sort of the community, and then -- Mr. Vilarello: And nominate those for membership ultimately on the committee. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Mr. Vilarello: The Coalition, i believe, those nine organizations would nominate an individual and those individuals would be the Nominating Committee. Commissioner Teele: Is that what you're saying? 243 January 24, 2002 Mr. Vilarello: Are we clear on that? Ms. Mc Elroy: That's exactly what we're saying. This would be the Screening Committee. These would not be your panelists. Commissioner Sanchez: And then we -- let me get you what we're going to get to here. And we're talking about the word "fairness." Fairness. Let's not exclude anybody out that's going to say, 7 voted for that. However, I didn't participate." Why are we naming organizations? Any organizations in Dade County, any organization -- because you're going to exclude some individuals. So any organization that wants to submit a name could send it to the City Clerk. Any organization. Mr. Ramaeu: We'll do one better. Any organization and any individual would submit a name to a Screening Committee. Commissioner Sanchez: Why do you have a Screening Committee? Vice Chairman Winton: Because somebody's going to screen them. Who's going to lake all these names and screen? Mr. Ramaeu: If you get -- if you get -- let's say the community submits -- everyone is excited about this. It passed 73 percent. Let's say the community submits a thousand names. Are you all going to go through a thousand names? Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: We're going to decide it at the end. The Commission is going to decide Mr. Vilarello: Max, now you've created two Screening Committees. Dr. Soto: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, Let's -- one second. Let's hear from SALAD and Osvaldo Soto. Dr. Soto: We are flattered by the idea of being recognized by them, by Commissioner Teele, and by everybody. But our concern is that who are we to tell the people of Miami that they cannot recommend somebody who really wants to and love this City and wants to work for this City? I think that SALAD is going to be making nominations. But I think if any citizen of the City of Miami is entitled to come in front of this Commission or that committee and says, "I'm selecting" -- "I'm nominating so and so would qualify" -- Vice Chairman Winton: No one's arguing that point. Everybody's saying that. Dr. Soto: No, no. 244 January 24, 2002 0 • Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Everyone is saying that. Yes. Dr. Soto: No. We are limiting the -- Vice Chairman Winton: No, we're not. Dr. Soto: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: No one has liunited -- who -- no one. They haven't, we haven't. No one has said that there's a limit to who can nominate or how many people can be nominated. No one said that. Dr. Soto: Well, that's not what I read here. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Excuse me. Dr. Soto: That's not -- Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton is thinking exactly what I'm thinking. These groups were named, read into the record, but SALAD will be a recipient -- because this is supposed to be publicized and noticed in the press. But SALAD will be a recipient, not for the people that SALAD think or pose that are good for this, but anybody can show up at SALAD and say, "Osvaldo Soto, I want to participate. Here is my resume. PULSE, I want to participate." I think that the reason -- and what Johnny's saying -- is that we are not limiting this to what SALAD think. SALAD is a recipient of names throughout the City of Miami. Because we have a problem, and Joe Sanchez is right. I mean, if we say we limit every organization, this will become, you know, a monster. How can we deal with so many groups and names? But people, like the Vecinos en Accion or CAMACOL, we can publicize that and they can get the names from different areas and sectors and communities of the City. Dr. Soto: Commissioner, what I want is this Commission to be able to listen and hear and be -- have the -- be the recipient of as many names as possible, so you have -- Chairman Regalado: But that is your job. Dr. Soto: OK. But what I don't want is to ]lave anything that would prevent any other group that is not SALAD, who is not PULSE, who is not CAMACOL, who is not NAACP, from making recommendations to the Commission. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr, Chairman. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: These nine organizations will act as a screening -- 245 January 24, 2002 Mr. Ramaeu: Right. We're calling it a Nominating Committee. But what happens is -- Commissioner Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait, wait. No, no, no, you're not a Nominating Committee. Unidentified Speaker: Yes, they are. Commissioner Sanchez: They're not a -- no, they're not. Commissioner Gonzalez: They're a Screening Committee, Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): That's what they're proposing. They're proposing that nide -- Commissioner Sanchez: No, you cannot -- no, no -- Mr. Gimenez: The nine organizations -- Commissioner Sanchez: That's not fair. Then what happened to the, you know -- is a Puerto Rican -- Safe Base in Puerto Rico, or Safe Dade, or any organization, that's -- it's not fair, Who are these nine organizations? Mr. Ramaeu: Commissioner, OK. Can I finish explaining? OK. Anyone with an interest in the City of Miami, individual or organization, can make a nomination to the Nominating Committee, or nominating Screening Committee, whatever you want to call it. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no. bet's -- we've got to be very clear here. Let's not "whatever we call it." We have -- you want it fair`? Let me put it how I think it's fair. Mr. Ramaeu: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Mr. Ramaeu: Go ahead. Commissioner Sanchez: There is no Screening Committee, OK. Any organization out there in the City of Miami, Dade County, OK? Mr. Ramaeu: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: You have to be in the City of Miami or have a business. Mr. Ramaeu: Submits it directly to the -- Commissioner Sanchez: Straight to the City Clerk. You know why? Because those nine organizations are going to screen the process -- it's laughable. Is it fair? I don't think it's fair. 246 January 24, 2002 • • Mr. Ramaeu: OK. All right. OK. Listen -- and then -- hold on. And then the City Clerk -- let me just make sure I understand the process. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Excuse me. But, Joe, that's -- you didn't want that when we discussed that -- Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no, no. I've always had a problem with that. I've always had a problem with that, and that's why we continue to say, "No, this is first reading. We'll deal with it." Well, there are certain issues here today that I'm prepared to stay here until one o'clock in the morning. I don't know if you guys are. But we're not going to pass onto second reading without discussing those issues, because we're going to only be allowed to do this one time. And once you say these nine organizations, you know what the other organizations that are being left out saying, "Hey, wait a minute. I voted for that. I supported it. Why am I being left out?" No, you're not being left out. You could go through me in the process. Is it a fair process? No, because, basically, those nine organizations are going to try to put somebody in there. So, let's make it fair. Anybody -- no, no. At the end, the Nominating Committee will be decided, you know -- if we go ahead and put the people that are going to be the Nominating Committee -- I think there shouldn't be a Nominating Committee. It should just -- the application should go straight to the City Clerk and, at the end of the day, we're going to make the selections to the panel. That's -- you know, that's fair. Mr. Ramaeu: OK. Let me just make sure I understand. So, all the applicants -- all the submissions, all the nominations will go to the City Clerk, and the City Cleric would evaluate them or you would just get the thousand nominations and, during a Commission meeting, you would go through all thousand and decide? Commissioner Sanchez: Or -- Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez is going to be a committee of one (INAUDIBLE). Commissioner Sanchez: No. No I'm not. No, I'm not. No. Hey, Commissioner Teele, but 1'11 tell you what, we've got to be fair. If you're going to have a Nominating Committee, don't let it just be anybody. I mean, it could be people that send in an application and they want to be -- they could sit on the Nominating Committee, but then they can't serve on the panel. Mr. Ramaeu: No. Exactly. We understand that. No problem. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Well, how do we select the Nominating Committee? Is it going to be just nine. Mr. Ramaeu: We're saying that the organizations would each select a member to go on the Nominating Committee. Commissioner Sanchez: And it's -- Mr. Ramacu: These nine organizations -- 247 January 24, 2002 E • Commissioner Sanchez: And it's 15 that we've agreed upon so far, or -- Mr. Ramaeu: I'm sorry? Mr. Gimenez: On your first -- Mr. Ramaeu: Fifteen what? Mr. Gimenez: Straw ballot, it's 15. You said, on your straw ballot, that you wanted 15 organizations to submit a member -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. On the straw ballot, we said 15 members. Commissioner Teele: Of the CIP. Chairman Regalado: -- of the CIP. We did not -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: The board will be composed of 15. Commissioner Sanchez: Listen, what I'm looking for here -- what I'm saying here, we've got to be fair. Mr. Ramaeu: Let's be fair. Commissioner Sanchez: No. Don't laugh and say you're being fair because you're not being fair, because you're one of the organizations that's going to sit in. Mr. Ramaeu: We'll remove ourself from the organization. What I'm laughing at is, I'm thinking about this guy going through a thousand applications and submitting it to you. That's what I'm laughing at. Commissioner Sanchez: We've got to find out -- Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, yes, yes. One second. One second. No -- I mean, Walter is leaving, so, -- the City Attorney. First of all -- one second. Commissioner Gonzdlez. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. One thing that we're going to do -- we're going to have to do is we're going to have to have a term limit of time to send in those applications. Because Commissioner Winton has a concern, which I also -- which would -- I concur. And it's the fact that if we have an open process for an extended period of time, we may have five thousand people nominating themselves or other people to this committee, and that will be a process that we would need to hire -- I don't know how many people to screen all these members, all these applicants. So that's one thing that we're going to have to do. Also -- I believe I also -- I'm also 248 January 24, 2002 in agreement with sending the applications -- the applicants send the applications directly to the Clerk's Office, and then this nomination committee will select from the people that apply. Chairman Regalado: OK. So, here's what we are facing -- the City Attorney wanted to say something, but I guess -- let me -- Mr. Vilarello: I think there's some confusion, and I wanted to try to clarify that and offer a compromise, if I can. The conversation -- or the focus has been on the Nominating Committee, and we've gone from the Nominating Committee to the actual membership. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. We're talking about the Nominating Committee here. Mr. Vilarello: In that case, what I would suggest is, the language, as it's written in 3A, gives the City Commission the right to establish from nine to 15 community-based organization, which will give you nine to 15 names that will form -- Chain-nan Regalado: Nine to 15 names three times, right? Mr. Vilarello: No. See -- we're only talking about the Nominating Committee. Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Sanchez: No. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. I know what you're saying. OK. Mr. Vilarello: And the City Commission will select from those names, and that will be the Screening Committee, OK? The issue -- the controversy that has existed mostly in regard -- because this is very similar to the Coalition's suggestion. The only difference is, we didn't name the nine organizations, which give as names. The friction has been on how vacancies get filled. And the vacancy -- my concern with regard to vacancy -- I wrote it in to have Nominating Committees continued. However, that was based on my experience with the City Commission. Today, you've expressed not much concern about the Commission -- the CIP renominating itself. Chairman Regalado: But, Alex, if the Off -Street Board, DDA, names itself, why the CIP cannot do it? Mr. Vilarello: Which is exactly -- my concern was that in the past, the Commission has had issues with some of those boards. Today you've expressed you don't have much concern. Fill the vacancies from the CIP. The CIP nominates at least three names for every vacancy, and then the Commission selects from those names. I think that's a compromise and it does address the friction that all of the members of the Coalition had expressed; that is, how do you fill vacancies. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr, Vilarello: They all wanted the CIP to nominate names to fill the vacancies. 249 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez, you want to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. No, no. Wait. I'm going to make a recommendation here. Mr. City Attorney -- Chairman Regalado: This is a straw ballot, but we need to tell the -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: -- City Attorney and the Coalition where we're going. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney, to put together the Nominating Committee, why don't we do similar as to the appointee? Have the organizations that are interested, through properly advertised, through the paper, through Net 9, through whatever means we can, have those associations -- organizations present their letter of interest to the City Clerk, and then the Commission, the same way we are selecting the panel, do the same thing. Once we put the Nominating Committee together, then the Nominating Committee will have open to all organizations who want to put in their name, and then we take the process forward. Is that fair? Mr. Ramaeu: Basically, you're saying, you would have a process by which you would choose by separate -- Commissioner Sanchez: No, no. Exactly -- Mr. Ramaeu: Whatever number of organizations. Commissioner Sanchez: In other words -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, no. Commissioner Sanchez: No. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Chairman Regalado: No, no. Wait, wait, wait. Joe, what he's saying is -- Commissioner Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) what lie's saying. Chairman Regalado: No, no. But what he's saying is that organizations that are interested in participating in the -- Mr. Ramaeu: Nominating Committee. Commissioner Sanchez: In the Nominating Committee. Chairman Regalado: -- Screening Committee will send it to the City Clerk, and the City Commission will confirm it. That way you are protected because you're all going to apply. But 250 January 24, 2002 0 lie's protected because he wants to be more inclusive. Maybe more organizations will participate. Ms. Me Elroy: Exactly. We do not oppose to that. The list can be expanded, and we've said that in our discussions with the City Attorney. Vice Chainnan Winton: Let's vote. Commissioner Sanchez: So, I -- Chairman Regalado: It's a straw ballot. Dr. Soto: We're in support with that because that's inclusive -- it will have -- we will have all -- Chairman Regalado: On the mic. Dr. Soto: NAACP, CAMACOL, PULSE, everybody will have a chance to submit to the Clerk as many that are interested, and then with the Commission will select these people and allow this committee then to make the nominations to the committee. Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. Bingo. Dr. Soto: And that will include everybody. Chainnan Regalado: Let's vote on that. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chainnan Regalado: And there's a second. Commissioner Teele: What's that? Chairman Regalado: You wanted to -- Mr. Mariano Cruz: Yeah, I want to say something, because you told me to come back later. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Cruz: For the nomination. My name is Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. And you know all this nomination, appointments. Well, it boils down to control. And I know, by experience, that organized, local small groups control. And you are forgetting the public out there. There's 72.8 percent, plus the people that they involve, the residents, the people, they are 251 January 24, 2002 not here, but you have to answer to them in election day, because a lot of people that conic here and speak, they don't even vote in Miami. And, you know, you've got to realize that because you all got to answer to the voters. And I see a lot of hypocrisy when they talk about, "Oh, politics. We have to keep politics." Everything is politics in this country. You know, everything is politics. And politics, the etymology of the word politics is public city. I mean, it encompass everything, the City. That's what politics is. So, I am for the nomination, like they got now the system, if you want somebody for the Planning Board, whatever, you advertise, and the Commission appoints them. The Commission appoints them. Because a lot of people in Allapattah are going to be left out now, because they don't even know what's going on. And, remember, like I said, I live in Allapattah. My son have been -- I've been arrested by the police in Allapattah for defending people there and taking to the lA (Internal Affairs). 1\lothing happened. That's what I tell the police. They brought this onto themselves for the lack of action. They should have been a little more -- you know, it is your word against them. Nothing we can do. Three times -- no, but -- Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Mr. Cruz: Now, guidelines for screening. What are the guidelines for screening the candidates? I haven't heard any yet. Mr. Vilarello: We haven't gotten there yet. Chairman Regalado: That would -- Mr. Cruz: For the appointees. Chairman Regalado: Mariano, that would -- Commissioner Sanchez: We'll get to there. We'll get there. Little by little we're making progress. Chairman Regalado: We're doing it step by step. But I'll tell you something, the people in Allapattah will find out about it, as the people in Flagami or Little Havana or West Little Havana or Little Haiti, because if we were able to put in place a campaign to publicize the bond issue election, we can do this. We can do it in the parks. We can do it in the NET Offices. We can do it in the visible places that the City of Miami has. We can do it through the NET Office. We can do it through the media. Mr. Cruz: I hope so. Because I tell you, the Coral Gables lawyers don't vote in Miami. Chairman Regalado: No. Of course. But if they work, they will be able to participate. We have a straw ballot vote on the selection process. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 252 January 24, 2002 • • Commissioner Teele: OK. Now, we're talking about the Nominating -- Chairman Regalado: The Nominating Process Commissioner Teele: And 1 just need to understand three quick things. Number one, how many names are -- how many names will be nominated for each vacancy? Mr. Vilarello: How many names will the Nominating Committee nominate for each vacarncy? Commissioner Teele: Yes. Mr. Vilarello: Three names for each vacancy. That is, in future vacancies, they'll nominate three names. Commissioner Teele: No. We're Calking about initial. Chairman Regalado: Oh, you mean -- Mr. Vilarello: We haven't addressed that issue, yet. Chairman Regalado: No, no. You mean the nominating -- Mr. Vilarello: As written, it's 20 -- it's twice as many as there are members. Commissioner Teele: OK. As written? Mr. Vilarello: As written. Commissioner Teele: And we're talking now about the nine organizations. Chairman Regalado: About what? Mr. Vilarello: Now you've went back to the Nominating Committee. Commissioner Teele: I'm asking -- Mr. Vilarello: That's right, we're talking right now about the Nominating Committee. Commissioner Tecle: Let me tell you -- I think I have a compromise. Look, when we started out, we were talking about nine members on this Commission. That's what the recommendations -- Mr. Vilarello: Of the CIP. Commissioner Teele: That's the -- the CIP recommendation from the Coalitions essentially are nine members. This Board, on a three to two vote, had said -- 253 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. Vilarello: Fifteen. Commissioner Teele: -- we're going to have 15. Why don't we give those nine organizations -- just hear me now -- the opportunity to nominate at least three names as a -- in effect, nominating -- in effect, creating a Nominating Process for nine slots? For nine slots. Commissioner Sanchez: You want a reason why not? Commissioner Toole: Why don't we allow the nine organizations that they have worked -- and, obviously, to come up with these nine names, there's been a lot of going back and forth. You know that. They didn't just come up with these nine names, There's been a lot of discussion. Why don't we give them -- why don't we grant to them that amount of public input, and allow those nine organizations to nominate at lease three names for nine slots? That means you have five additional slots; the nine, plus one is the Police Chiefs recommendation, so that's 10, and you have five slots. And allow the five to be selected from applicants at large, who just come in to the Clerk's Office. Chairman Regalado: How many does the Mayor has? Commissioner Teele: Forget the Mayor now. Let's just -- Chairman Regalado: No. Commissioner Toole: Total of I5. It's a total of 15. How we divide our part up is totally different. But it's a total of 15, based upon what you all voted on. Chairman Regalado: But, Arthur, you know, I think that they have all the right in the world to do it, these nine great organizations, because they have done most of the work. But my question is, if they -- if we give them the right to three direct appointments -- Commissioner Toole: No, I didn't say that. I didn't say that. Chairman Regalado: You didn't — Commissioner Teele: No, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: It's nominating. Commissioner Teele: I said they -- each of those nine organizations will be able to nominate three persons. That is for us to make a decision of one of those three people. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. And my question was, would they be excluded of the other process? Commissioner Sanchez: No. 254 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: Nominate the rest? Commissioner Teele: No, No. But what I'm listening to is what everybody says, they want this to be wide open and in the public Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying. Commissioner Teele: OK. So -- Chairman Regalado: I think -- you know, I think that Joe Sanchez' motion address all the concerns of everybody. Commissioner Sanchez: It's fair. They -- Commissioner Teele -- Chairman Regalado: I really think so. Commissioner Sanchez: -- they did this, because they feel that it's the best thing for the City of Miami. Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE) your motion again. Commissioner Sanchez: My motion is simple. My motion is just pertaining to the Nominating Committee. We had to make it a fair process. Those nine organizations, if they do that, other organizations in our community are going to feel that -- Commissioner Teele: But what's the motion? Commissioner Sanchez: The motion is -- Vice Chairman Winton: Repeat the motion. Commissioner Sanchez: I'll repeat the motion. The motion is that any organization in the City of Miami or in Dade County, if they're based here, can put an application through the City Clerk. We would select the nominating, the Commission, in the same process as selecting the appointee to nominate the Nominating Committee, which later on will select the appointees. Vice Chairman Winton: So we would advertise and notice -- Commissioner Sanchez: Advertise, properly notice -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- and encourage all community-based organizations to -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's fair. Vice Chairman Winton: -- to submit their name or resume to serve on the initial -- 255 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Although, you did all the work -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- Nominating Committee. Commissioner Sanchez: -- and you did a great jab, you didn't do it self-serving. Vice Chairman Winton: And that list would be compiled by the City Clerk, would come before the Commission. We would go through it. The list could have 15 names. It could -have 45 names. Commissioner Sanchez: Organization. Vice Chairman Winton: And we're going to narrow it down to whatever. Commissioner Teele: Would it be organizations or would it be -- Mr. Ramaeu: Organizations. Commissioner Sanchez: Organizations. Vice Chairman Winton: Organizations, not individuals. Commissioner Sanchez: Not individuals. Chairman Regalado: No, because those organizations will get the individual's names. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, later. But we're only -- the Nominating Committee -- Commissioner Sanchez: Do we understand that? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. Chairman Regalado: OK. Roll call on this straw vote. 256 January 24, 2002 0 i The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-119 A MOTION, RECORDING STRAW VOTE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO STIPULATE THAT THE PROCEDURE FOR APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) WILL BE AS FOLLOWS: 1. THE CITY SHALL PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PUBLIC NOTICE AND SOLICIT ORGANIZATIONS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI OR IN MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, IF BASED WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI, TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY CLERK, NOMINATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE FOR THE CIP; 2. THE CITY COMMISSION WILL SELECT FROM SAID NOMINATIONS THE INDIVIDUALS TO SERVE AS MEMBERS OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE; 3. THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE WILL APPOINT THE MEMBERS OF THE CIP. Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None, Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a bunch of people, including expensive lawyers, here for P&Z items. Chairman Regalado: I understand that. Vice Chairman Winton: They have -- at least a number of them. Chairman Regalado: And let me say, Mr. Vice Chair, I was going to ask you guys if you decide now to vote, on first reading, on this ordinance, because I think that we have done all the controversial issues. And Commissioner Teele has committed that every person and group will 257 January 24, 2002 have five minutes on the second reading of this ordinance, on a public hearing. You promised that. And so, if we can vote now on first reading, then we -- I think that we have done a lot. Commissioner Teele: I think you've got some more issues here, but I think what you're going to have to do, in fairness to the attorney, is give a break from this item and let them get the language up the way they want it, and bring it back up in say, 30 minutes. But the one thing we don't want to do is just to start drafting and not let them go into a room and at least agree on everything that they've agreed. Is that a fair position? So, we can get right into the PZ items. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I don't know -- that's sort of -- going to find out whether we're going to pick those up or -- so, does that mean we think we're going to go to PZ items soon? Chairman Regalado: No. We are going to the special -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the question then -- may I finish my original question? If -- I. think what we need to do, as a matter of courtesy, is let them know whether or not we think we're really going to finish the P&Z items. If we're not -- Chairman Regalado: Oh, yes, we are. Vice Chairman Winton: -- we ought to continue them now or make an absolute commitment that we're staying to hear them through. Chairman Regalado: No. We -- Commissioners, we -- what we -- we have the discussion concerning the problems with density in the Brickell area. That was a time certain. I think we owe it to the people that are here. And then we have some few PZ items. And then the final thing will be to regroup on this item. I think we can do it. Vice Chairman Winton: OK, fine. I just wanted to let them know. That's fine. Chairman Regalado: And we can do it. So, we'll be back with this item after the City Attorney drafts the language as -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Tecle: May I just inquire? Are there any other controversial issues on this? I mean, have we addressed all of the controversial issues? Nis. Baker: There is an issue in the subpoena area that is -- Chairman Regalado: Well -- but that's very technical. You have to bear with us. Talk to the City Attorney. And if he feels that, we'll discuss that publicly or in the second reading. Mr. Ramaeu: And policy, also. Policy Review. 258 January 24, 2002 Ms. Baker: Policy Review. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Toole: All right. Ronald Cohen: And, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Cohen: Ronald Cohen, 5100 Oak Lane, Suite 403. I'm an attorney. I'm here on behalf of AFSCME (American Federal, State, County, and Municipal Employees) Local 1907. And we're here, because we learned today and we heard Commissioner Toole's remarks, about the possibility including certain inspectors within the ordinance. And if that's going to happen, I do want to be heard on it. 1 don't know if there's going to be an amendment made today or not, but that is -- that's a controversial item. Commissioner Teele: This is controversial. Chairman Regalado: I don't know that it's going to happen today, sir. I don't know. It's up to the Commission. Vice Chairman Winton: Controversial to whom? Commissioner Teele: Why is it controversial? Mr. Cohen: We think you have to bargain that with us. We think it involves the terms and conditions of employment. Commissioner Teele. We'll meet you in court. Mr. Cohen: Excuse me? Commissioner Toole: We'll meet you in court. Mr. Cohen: Well, actually, it goes to the Public/Employee Relations Commission. But I think we're ahead of ourselves. I think, if Vice Chairman Winton: Wherever it goes, send it. Mr. Cohen: I think it's -- excuse me? Vice Chairman Winton: Send it. 259 January 24, 2002 n U n LJ Mr. Cohen: Well, I would like to be heard on it before we -- I mean, ifthe Board doesn't want to hear me on this and just wants to do it without us being heard, I -- Vice Chairman Winton: It's gathering data. It's not doing anything else. It's gathering data. That's all it's done. Mr. Cohen: Well, as I -- Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, I suggest that -- he's simply stating that if the Commission wishes to do that, that he wishes to be heard. Chairman Regalado: Of course, of course. I mean -- Mr. Vilarello: And I don't think the issue needs to be debated to its conclusion at this moment. Chairman Regalado: But we don't have to do it -- we won't do it tonight. That's -- Mr. Cohen: OK. I just asked, Commissioner, because he asked if there were controversial items. Chairman Regalado: You are? Commissioner Teele: I am going to bring it up tonight. Chairman Regalado: OK. Then you've got to stay. 260 January 24, 2002 0 • 50. DIRECT MANAGER TO INSTRUCT APPROPRIATE CITY STAFF TO COORDINATE TOWN HALL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 24, 2002 IN CONNECTION WITH QUALITY OF LIFE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH DENSITY AND CONSTRUCTION IN BRICKELL AREA. Chairman Regalado: OK. We are -- Commissioner Winton, we are on Item 31, time certain. The problems associated with density in the Brickell area. Is that the item you want to take now? Vice Chairman Winton: What item is this? I'm sorry, Commissioners. Mr. Chairman, what item are we on? Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): PZ -- Chairman Regalado: Brickell Area Density. That's a special discussion item that was time certain for 6 p.m. Then we said 6:30. And I'm sorry, Tory. Vice Chairman Winton: It's close to 6:30. Chairman Regalado: It's close to 6:30 a.m. Vice Chairman Winton: In fact, it is 6:30 somewhere. Tory Jacobs: I think in Japan or somewhere like that. Chairman Regalado: In Dominican Republic, No. In Dominican Republic. We have about two hours. So go ahead, sir. You want to start the presentation now, Johnny? Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not giving a presentation. I think that Brickell Area Homeowners Association is giving it. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Is that correct, Tory? Who is giving this presentation? It isn't me. Unidentified Speaker: Brickell Homeowners' Association. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Mr. Jacobs: We'd be very pleased to make the presentation. You all have been acting with great patience. If you will permit rrs, we'd be glad to go ahead or we'll defer it to your next meeting. Chairman Regalado: Tory, you know, i f you want to do it on the next meeting, I will do -- Vice Chairman Winton: I think you ought to do it now, Tory. You've got people here and you're here and we've got time. 261 January 24, 2002 0 E Chairman Regalado: The problem is that next meeting is everything. Mr. Jacobs: I think I should wait for the quorum. Chairman Regalado: No. We have a quorum now. We have three members of the Commission, plus another Commissioner behind you. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you. I put one of those up there for you. Gentlemen, you have displayed a great deal of care and patience with a very difficult situation. It's quite something to watch you at work, and I commend you for your approach to what we've seen. Good evening, Commissioners. Tory Jacobs, for the Brickell Homeowners' Association, 145 Southeast 25th Road, Miami. Thank you for this opportunity to share with you the neighbors' concerns about the impact of continued development in the Brickell neighborhood and the concurrent deterioration in traffic movement. We offer this resolution, passed unanimously by BHA's (Brickell Homeowners Association) board of directors on November 14th, last year. The resolution asks the Commission to call upon City staff to come back to the Commission with proposed rules, regulations, ordinances, as necessary, to implement the needed protections occasioned by the ongoing, very intensive development and the concurrent increasing traffic congestion. All of us are inconvenienced and very much concerned by and about Brickell's traffic congestion. There are a number of programs in the planning stage to case this congestion. However, currently, the problem is more than a quality of life matter. And the adverse economic impact is growing with offices moving out of Brickell to Coral Gables and elsewhere, and companies deciding not to take advantage of Miami's good weather and other great amenities because concern over employees getting to and from work. We would like to see the City take a holistic approach to development. Rather than just consider each individual project, recognize the cumulative impact of all of the proposed development. We would like to seek to approve only development that can be supported by existing infrastructure. We call on the City to find the means to coordinate the work of all entities digging up the streets and sidewalks or blocking same with construction and filming equipment, to minimize disruption to the public's use of these facilities. We would like to see the police, flagmen or traffic aides on hand to enforce regulations and to facilitate traffic movement. Obviously, this will be no easy, coordinating several jurisdictions and entities involved, FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation), the County, several utilities. But the City must control by whom, when and where use of our streets and sidewalks is impaired. The City is to be congratulated on its foresight. Almost 20 years ago they offered FAR (Floor Area Ratio) bonuses to encourage development. This has been spectacularly successful. A very successful program was witnessed by what has happened. As you know, Brickell, Brickell Key, Brickell Bay Drive and what is happening right now on Brickell Village for the last -- we believe that while these programs have well served their purpose, those that permit increased density should be eliminated. Now, let me make it clear. We're not talking about increased FAR that permits larger units, inore luxurious units that attract the rich from overseas. We're talking about only increased density. We also want you to know that BHA is definitely not against development. We are for development, but only as it can be supported by existing infrastructure. Let us not add anything that diminishes this prime neighborhood or any other in any respect. Now, today this date, Miami Today, front page, an article in which they quote Michael Canon, and he says, the Brickell market area, south of Miami River, east of I-95, west of Biscayne Bay and north of -- Southeast and Southwest 26th Road has 262 January 24, 2002 about 1400 condo units under construction, 2000 planned. It also has 1,000 rental units being built and 4500 proposed. There are 29 residential projects going up or planned in the area, Mr. Canon said. That's 8900 units; an average of 307 units in those 29 buildings. That's a lot of impact. We definitely are not suggesting moratorium on building, but we feel that developers who have come up with projects in good faith, under the rules and regulations that exist, should definitely not have the rug pulled out from under them. But I do think the City and the Commission should direct staff to try to take this holistic look at all that's going on and make this area all that it should be. We are joined here this evening by representatives from other Brickell area associations, as well as from other City neighborhoods. BHA's concerns are specially applicable to any neighborhood that's poised for growth. Now, if you will, please give them your attention. Thank you. ' Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Colin Veater: Good evening. Colin Veater, 41 Southwest 18th Terrace. I'm here as president of the South Miami Avenue Homeowners' Association and in support of the resolution being put forth by the Brickell Homeowners' Association. The residential neighborhood -- single -fancily neighborhood that is just south of the areas is where South Miami Avenue Homeowner is located, and we have been experiencing the impact of development just north of us, just north of 15th Road. I echo the same consideration of Tory, that we are in support of development in this area. We think it's going to be a very exciting and wonderful area, but we -- we're asking for responsible development. And that we had been to this Commission and to other boards of the City in support and against developments the past two years, but always with the vision of improving what's going to be taking place. We're the long-term investors here as residents of the City and we think that there's extremely important and exciting time to take advantage at this stage of what we have envisioned in Brickell Village. I want to commend Commissioner Winton, who has helped us, as well as the past Commissioner, Gort, in the process of -- with DDA (Downtown Development Authority) reviving the Brickell Village Plan, which will help provide some urban guidelines, street scapes for Brickell Village. So, we're supportive of continued responsible development and we're extremely concerned with the fact that traffic is becoming intolerable and really impacting our neighborhood, as well as others south and north of us. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Robert McCabe: Robert McCabe, 1601 South Miami Avenue. I wanted to speak to the issue of the development in the Brickell area, particularly Brickell Village. It's a dynamic place. Things are happening very rapidly and they're happening independent of any kind of comprehensive plan. The elements are in place. The Brickell Area Association has done some development and planning work. The work has just been done on Brickell Village. The work has been done and sponsored by the Brickell Area -- by the Brickell Homeowners' Association and these pieces need to be put together in a plan that will result not only in a constructive development, but one that results in a positive good place for people to live. I want to make one further comment. And I know your time is low. But developers don't know what they can do either. The way the situation is now, you could not build out what the zoning permits and you would never approve it. If you think of the prospects of what could go in there, it wouldn't work. It would be fair to 263 January 24, 2002 developers and in their best interest also if they knew really what could work, because there was a plan that pointed that out. Economics of small projects can be good, too, based on what they paid for the land. But we want Brickell Village to turn into a unique walking village in Miami; that can be a place that will sponsor development, that will bring people who had good incomes into the City, as urban places in America are being redeveloped. This development -- this kind of work is needed and there are pieces in place. And we call on Commission to sponsor an effort to put together a real plan to that area that is comprehensive and holistic. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Daniel Ponce: Good evening. Danny Ponce, representing the Brickell Key Master Association, Brickell Key is composed of about 3500 residents. And, basically, this evening I'd like to express their real concern. A few days ago we had a meeting to basically discuss matters related to traffic flow on Brickell Avenue. So, we're very much in support of the Brickell Homeowners' Association resolution. There is a number of developers that, quite frankly, are not focusing on the problem. They're zeroing in on their profits and thinking that they can do more and more, and has been well expressed before me that some control needs to happen. There's master plans that have already been approved and, obviously, those will probably continue moving forward. But for the most part, it appears that there has to be some control as it relates to the developers. There's police money being spent right now on overtime hours to try to control intersections, like Brickell Avenue and 8th Street and, quite frankly, they, too, need to be commended because they're doing a fabulous job. It's a tough assignment to direct traffic on an intersection such as that. However, it's putting a real good Band-Aid on the problem. It's not solving the problem, obviously. A lot more needs to be done about it. And we're looking to also have a town hall meeting at the end of the month, probably around the 28th of February, to try and bring this to light furthermore. However, I'd like to express the fact that as you look at future developments, you ought to seriously look at what the developers are going to be doing for the City in relation to this problem. Right now developers simply put up a barricade and block your streets, our streets, and that sign can sit there for days. Although the road may be open and free for traffic flow, that sign is a deterrent and people are obeying that sign. There's no follow up on the removal of that sign. There is very little attention given to direction traffic. As a matter of fact, they're not impacted by the need to provide police officers to direct traffic intersections. They need to do more. Some of these construction projects bring in two, 300 people to work on a daily basis. They come in at the same time that the office workers come in. They leave about the same time that the office workers leave. Some of the developers are doing things, being very proactive about it. So our properties -- for instance, they rented locations in the City of Miami parking facilities to be able to park those construction workers. They're bussing them back and forth on a regular basis to those parking lots. They're spending well over a hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($130,000) a year just to be able to contain traffic flow problems in that manner. If you would give your attention, please, to directing intersections by means of police officers, impacting the pocketbook of those developers, those developers really have the room to be able to accommodate those expenses. And if you think of that option, the option of having the Public Worms Department follow up on issues such as signage, and making sure that those signs go up when they need to go up and come down when they need to come down, we're in full support of this resolution. And we wish that all of you could attend the town hall meeting on the 28th. Thank you. 264 January 24, 2002 • Robert Flanders: Good evening. I'm Robert Flanders. I live at 720 Palm Bay Lane, City of Miami. We're here in support of the resolution, but as I understand it, the City has reached the crossroads where we have to make a decision, where we're either a big city, where we have density that can support the cost of a Transportation Plan that includes mass transit or, as a friend of mine said, if we want to go around and buy the development rights of all the properties that are available and stay the same size. But as I understand it, this body really doesn't have the authority to develop that Transportation Plan. That rests in the hands of the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization). It's at the County level. What we would like to see in the Upper Eastside is a proper Transportation Plan that ties the City together in proper relation to the rest of the County, and the only way we can do that is if this body, in conjunction with the leadership and the Mayor's Office, goes to the County and begins to grapple with that issue. Thank you. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: The Chairman's not here. Vice Chairman Winton: I thought the Chairman -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: I happen to sympathize with these gentlemen's concerns about traffic and all these problems on Brickell, but traffic is not a problem only in Brickell. Traffic is a problem today in the entire City of Miami and in the entire County. I believe it was two years, three years ago, it went to the ballot to vote on one penny tax for transportation and the voters of the County voted against that. Now, the Mayor, the County Mayor, is talking about a half a cent tax also to try to be able to get some money to alleviate the traffic problems in Dade County, and I don't know if that's is going to happen and I don't know if the people are going to vote for it. But traffic is something that is going to affect us. Each day it's going to be more and more and more. The City of Miami is receiving people from all over Central, Latin American, Caribbean, and, you know, Europe. People are coming from all over the world to the City of Miami. And many, many, many thousands of people are coming here daily to stay and live in the City. Now, the problem in the development, the way I see it, is that because years and years and years in the past the City of Miami only concentrated to develop downtown Brickell, what we call the privileged areas. Nobody ever concern themselves about the neighborhoods. We don't get -- Commissioner Teele doesn't get any of these big developments in his district. I don't get them in my district. None of us get them in our district. Why? Because we never -- the City never took the position to address what was going to happen in the future and now it's happening. And let me tell you, Mr. Manager. I hope that we start working on the Miami River Development pretty soon, because I would love to get all of these developers in my district and I have a long, long stretch of the river of Miami from Northwest 7th Street to 27th Avenue. We can build 20,000 apartments, maybe 50,000 apartments there. And we will be able to get the jobs. We will be able to get the tax base. And the traffic is not going to affect us that much, because we have 265 January 24, 2002 never had development in our district for many, many years, for as long as I remember. And this goes back 30 years ago, when we started building Brickell Avenue. All the hotels went to Brickell Avenue. All the banks went to Brickell Avenue. All the big developments went to Brickell Avenue. And now Brickell Avenue is saturated. And they're right: Pretty soon they won't be able to get out of their houses; that they're going to have to buy helicopters, in order to move around in the City of Miami. So, I understand your point. 1 appreciate your problem. And I hope that these developers start moving into our neighborhoods. We love them. I'm -- I love developers. Mr. Jacobs: Well, Commissioner -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: And more than developers. The money they're going to bring to my community. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you for those encouraging remarks, Commissioner Gonzalez. If you, the Commission, will ask your staff to develop the incentives that work so well in Brickell, to put them in your area -- and I believe the City is planning to do incentives north of the river and downtown in Commissioner Teele's area, with market price housing. God bless -- let's go ask them to put these nice people -- Commissioner Gonzalez: And I also -- Mr. Jacobs: Put these professionals to work. Commissioner Gonzalez: And I also understand the situation with some developers being unconscious on the things that they do. Right now I have in my district a project that is being built and the trucks are going into that project and they're sending all the dust into the entire neighborhood and we already working on that problem. But that's a problem that I have in my district now. So, I understand what your problems, too. OK. Two weeks ago we had signs on the street to -- one lane was closed for a week. Nothing was being done. We have all these pipes laying around. We have all these trucks. All this equipment and nothing was being done in the street for an entire week. People from the buildings could not go out on the street. Thcy had to go around the block and go through the back of the building. So, these are the things that we have to take care of. And if you know who's the developer that is doing this, you should notify the City and we should, you know, find them or do whatever we have to do in order to make them be more responsible to you people. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, Tory, i apologize. I was in the office. I was hearing you over the TV(television). I just have a question. Does this -- would this pertain to any permits that have already been pulled? Vice Chairman Winton: No. 266 January 24, 2002 0 • Mr. Jacobs: I thought I made that clear, that we recognized that developers who have, in good faith, developed projects within keeping with the guidelines set up by the City, shouldn't be penalized. Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Mr. Jacobs: Or the rug pulled out from under them. But there comes a day when you have to lock the barn door, nomatter how many horses have gotten out, you know. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Does the administration support this? I'd like to hear from the administration. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): We would like to take the opportunity to go through all the bonuses that are allowed and that would be up to your direction. If it's going to be citywide or are we talking about the Brickcll area? Commissioner Sanchez: No, just -- I believe it's just the Brickell area, correct'? Ms. Gelabert: And is it from the Miami River all the way down to 25th Street? The Brickell area -- are we talking about the whole Brickcll area? Commissioner Sanchez: Well --Tory, let me just say that I'm prepared to support it. Mr. Jacobs: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: However, I do have a problem with the south bank of the Miami River, because as it is right now, that area is starting to pick up. If you're talking about the south bank of the river past First, does that include this? Mr. Jacobs: From -- yes. From 1-95 to the bay and fi-om the river to Rickenbacker Causeway and 26th Road, Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: Actually, before you go there, I would rather -- because, frankly, I'm reading this. I understand where Tory's coming from. I've talked to hila about it. But I would rather have staff go back and analyze this and tell me what the impact is and tell me what the recommendations are that we could quickly, what the recommendations arc that take a little longer, and define the impact. Because I don't have an appreciation for the impact of all of the things that are requested here. And I think the FAR bonus thing is a no brainer. But 1 don't have a clear appreciation for what the impact of the other things that are being asked for in here are. And I don't -- I'm not prepared to make a decision to support all of these things until I have a clear understanding of what that impact is. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 267 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Teele: Let me -- Mr. McCabe: I just want to make a quick comment. The key thing is to have a plan, and we've got some elements in place that need to get done and be in place, considers all. these things so there's a context. The problem is, we've got a project going here, one going there, one going over there, unrelated to each other, unrelated to what the impact will be in terms of quality of life and the potential -- my particular concern is Brickell Village, but the real potential to have a real walking section to the City that works is not going to work if we over pile it with things -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the plan part is not articulated in this resolution. Mr. McCabe: I'm articulating it. Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- but that's my point. I mean -- Mr. McCabe: Right. So I'm suggesting that's the way that we ought to go -- we ought to have that planning thing move forward and more support from the Planning Department Cor it. Vice Chairman Winton: So that this really gets expanded because -- and we all -- there's none of us disagree with the fact that we need -- you know, master plan is one of the things we've all talked about over and over and over again and we've got limited resources and limited people and I know you guys are working like crazy. But the master plan for this area needs to be a part of your recommendation when you come back, just in terms of timing and how we can get at this. Ms. Gelabert: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: First and foremost, I'm in agreement with what Commissioner Winton has said, with one caveat. This needs to go to staff immediately with a high priority, and to come back and give us a report within some reasonable amount of time, because these things have a way of languishing. For two years now I have suggested that one of the critical areas that we need to focus on is the planning process and, to my knowledge, you know, we talked about doing these plans district by district. We talked extensively about the Coconut Grove Plan, which is the only Plan that really has been done and the need to really do it. The Manager has made recommendations and made dollars available for the first time this year for planning, and I think you have to understand and appreciate for the last 8 to 10 years, the City's been doing nothing but reacting. We've done very little planning. However, I am in one hundred percent agreement with everything that Mr. Jacobs has said from a -- from looking at it and not really having the benefit of all of the facts. I was at a restaurant the other day, Portalia -- have you been there, right -- going -- it tools me 10 to 15 minutes to go two blocks. That's the old Four Ambassadors to 8th Street, just -- it's a mess. And I will say, I told you so, Johnny, when the vote was four to one about the baseball stadium. And in my vote, I said I'm not voting against the baseball 268 January 24, 2002 0 i stadium, but I am voting against what this is going to do to the Brickell area, because we're getting ready to make Brickell the new Kendall, I think I said, of Miami. It is here today and I think the only way we can sort of begin to unscramble this egg is go through this piece by piece by piece and this is what I was talking about, Commissioner Winton, earlier today, when we say we've got an opportunity to look at how we begin to slow some of this development down, but we can't do it when we've got a project before us. And what they're asking for is simply, first, let's look at the FAR. And it's sort of like Homestead Exemption. When we would try to get folks to move down here, you know, 80 years ago and drain this swamp and run, you know, alligators out of their homes and build these areas that we built, it made sense to give -- what is it, a fifty thousand dollar (S50,000) Homestead Exemption or twenty-five thousand. But let me tell you -- and I know, politically, nobody agrees with this -- but a Homestead Exemption makes no sense today, but it's -- we're locked in. And what these people are saying, Johnny, is don't let us get locked in on this because what's going to happen is, every lawyer, every property owner is going to have a lawyer coming down here saying, vested rights and all the magic words that get them into a court case. And there is a way to do this, and I think we've got to get the Planning Department working with the Public Works Department and working with the Police Department and the other departments to, step-by-step, slow this down over there, because it is -- we just don't have the transportation infrastructure to support the amount of development we're putting in there, and it's really sort of a good problem to have in one way, but we've been too successful. And the Key is the worst example or the best example of success. I mean, Brickell Key -- six years ago -- when did we have the Summit of the Americas? That was in '94. Unidentified Speaker: Six years ago. Commissioner Teele: Six years ago there was so inuch land over there, we had -- you know, we even threw the vice president's party over there, the vacant land. There's not a foot of land over there now. We've had so much success in just six years, the thing has just gone up. So, Commissioner Winton, I think three things need to be done. Number one, we need to advise thein -- the 28th, apparently, is going to be a City of Miami or Miami Dade Day in Tallahassee and virtually everybody of elected position, I assume, is going to be in Tallahassee. That was one of the reasons why we had a Commission meeting scheduled for that day, and we're going to have to cancel that. I'm sure there will be people here. But we do need to coordinate that. I would be very pleased to support Commissioner Winton, if you would instruct the staff to work with them on their -- you said public hearing or town hall meeting. And we need to arrange for staff to support that town hall meeting by going there and making presentations and doing those kinds of things. Mr. Ponce: Well, we've actually had other dates available, too. So, if that's the case, we can revisit that and come back with a better date that works for everyone. Vice Chairman Winton: No, no, no. Your -- the town hall meeting is February 28th, isn't it? Mr. Ponce: Twenty-eighth, right. Vice Chairman Winton: And is that Dade Days, February? 269 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: That's the Dade -- that's the official -- Commissioner Sanchez: That's the official Dade Days. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, it's not January. Oh, OK, Commissioner Teele: That's not in the fly -in date. That's the -- Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Commissioner Teele: That's the Dade Days where, you know, everybody will be in -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. So we better look at some new dates then. Mr. Ponce: As you give charge to staff to move forward in reviewing this matter -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, actually, I'm not going to Dade Days, and we have the City Manager and others already committed to that date, I think. So, we'll figure this -- we'll talk about that. Mr. Ponce: I think -- I was just advised that it was probably going to happen on the 24th, so that's better. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, is that right? OK. Mr. Ponce: But as you gave staff marching orders to review this matter, could you kindly ask them to review night time work? Many construction projects are happening at broad day light, right on our roads, digging the roads, and creating a mess during the day hours. On Brickell Key we've done large enlargement of sort lines from eight inches to 12 inches and all of that had been done at night. Obviously, it presents a little bit of a disruption. Noise can be controlled. Backing whistles or buzzers can be disconnected legally. So, all those things can be taken in consideration as you formulate your plan. Yes, they may have to pay overtime hours to do this work, but so what. Developers typically have deep pockets and they can afford it. So, let's not impact the people anymore. Let's try and figure out a way to where everyone can enjoy life, quality of life, on an area of -- really, it's the highlight of our City. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, we have marching orders? We don't need a resolution, do we? Do we need a resolution? Commissioner Teele: No, you don't. Mr. McCabe: I don't want to bother you again, but today -- Vice Chairman Winton: We just --we've directed -- 270 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. McCabe: Can they also include working on bringing forward those plans that they've done good work on as soon as possible, so that we begin to develop a plan and not just deal with one specific issue. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't know. I don't understand what you just said. Ms. Gelabert: Mr. McCabe is referring to the Brickell Village. We have -- we're finalizing the draft. We're reviewing the last -- we would like to take it back to the community, since everyone has worked on this plan, and then bring it back to you. And what he would like to see is just moving forward on that quickly. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Which is fine. I mean, that fits in terms of the overall scheme here. Ms. Gelabert: Yes, yes. Chairman Regalado: OK. Now, we go back to the PZ (Planning & Zoning) items. Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Maxwell: Just to -- your last act to staff was -- should be in the force of a motion, directing them to do the things that you wanted to. Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE) need a motion. Mr. Maxwell: No, no, they don't need a motion. I was just saying that it's being -- that's a motion you just gave them, directing them to do these things. Chairman Regalado: So, we need to vote on that? Mr. Maxwell: You should vote on that. Chairman Regalado: So, there is a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, there is a motion. Chairman Regalado: -- by Commissioner Teele, second by Commissioner -- Commissioner Teele: No. It's a motion by Commissioner Winton. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton. Second by Commissioner Teele. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 271 January 24, 2002 0 E The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-120 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT APPROPRIATE CITY STAFF TO COORDINATE A TOWN HALL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 24, 2002 IN CONNECTION WITH QUALITY OF LIFE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH DENSITY AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE BRICKELL AREA. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 272 January 24, 2002 51. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL". (Applicant(s): Parkshore on the Bay, LLC.). Chairman Regalado: OK. Go back to PZ Item 10, 1852 and 1900 North Bayshore Drive. Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. PZ -10 and 11 are companion zoning and land use change items for the 1852 and 1900 North Bayshore Drive. The request is for the land use from multifamily high density residential to restricted commercial and for the zoning to go to SD -6. These are the properties that continue that fan shape around, you know, fronting on Margaret Pace Park. Most of the properties along that circle have already been rezoned SD -6 and the property just to the north, where the Finger Project was just approved, was also SD -6. So, this is consistent with the established character that is developing in that area, and we recommend approval. Vice Chainnan Winton: Mr. Chairman, can we find out if there's -- is he here? Could we find out if there's any opposition to this? Chairman Regalado: If there -- excuse me. If there is anybody in opposition to Item 10. It's Bayshore Drive -- North Bayshore Drive. You are? Unidentified Speaker: No, I'm not. Chairman Regalado: Oh, he's not. OK. Vice Chairman Winton: So -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: Move it. Vice Chairman Winton: Then, being no opposition, if you close the public hearing, I'll move -- Chairman Regalado: I am closing the public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: I'll move -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. It's a first reading ordinance. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 273 January 24, 2002 0 An Ordinance Entitled --- • AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1852 AND 1900 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 274 January 24, 2002 E 0 52. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ZONING DESIGNATION FROM R-4 MULTIFAMILY HIGH-DENSITY .RESIDENTIAL TO SD -6 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, 1852 & 1900 N BAYSHORE DRIVE (Applicant(s): Parkshore on the Bay, LLC.) Chairman Regalado: Item l 1 is a companion. It's a first reading ordinance, too. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner Gonzalez. All -- read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled -- AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, AMENDING PAGE NO. 23 OF THE ZONING AT LAST OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-4 "MULTIFAMILY HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO SD -6 "CENTRAL COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL" DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1852 AND 1900 NORTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A"; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzdlez, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney, 275 January 24, 2002 53. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING CONCERNING 3163, 3165, 3171 AND 3179 S.W. 22 TERRACE TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544 BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND TO AMEND ORDINANCE I1000 BY CHANGING ZONING FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002 (See 447). Chairman Regalado: PZ -- Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, if I may? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Items 7 and 8, which we had tabled earlier in the meeting, at this time, I would like to request a continuance on those items. Commissioner Sanchez: Move. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): To March 7. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Time certain, to March 7"'. Chairman Regalado: We cannot give you a time certain, I'm sorry, because we have already announced two times certain. If you all want to come back at 3:00 and do it at 3:00, but we have given already 5 and 6 as time certain. And you know what happened today with the time. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I'm sorry, my error. Date certain, not time certain. Chairman Regalado: Oh, date certain. Commissioner Gonzalez: Date certain. Commissioner Tecle: March 7t" Chairman Regalado: March 7"' Commissioner Sanchez: You got that. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: You can be here from 3:00 to all day. But we already have two times certain. 276 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: PZ -- Ms. Slazyk: So that was 7 and 8. Chairman Regalado: 12, 7 and 8 are deferred to March 7"'. We need a motion. Commissioner Gonzalez: Move it. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved for its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-121 A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING CONCERNING 3163, 3165, 3171 AND 3179 S.W. 22N" TERRACE AGENDA: ITEM PZ -7 (TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, THE COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL) AND PZ -8 (TO AMEND ORDINANCE 11000 BY CHANGING ZONING FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL) TO THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 7, 2002. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 277 January 24, 2002 0 0 54. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL". (Applicant(s):Fortune of the Chi, Inc.) Chairman Regalado: PZ -12. It's a zoning change, single-family to restricted commercial. Since it's my district, Vice Chair, could you chair the meeting, please? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I would. So -- Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: -- staff, you're going to -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes. Thank you. PZ -12 and 13 are companion land use and zoning change items for the properties at 2725, 2731, and 2733 Northwest 6th Street. The requested change is from single-family residential to restricted commercial, and the zoning change to C-1. The planning and Zoning Department is recommending denial, finding that this change is a commercial intrusion into a stable single- family residential area. And unprotected, this is something that could have an extremely adverse effect on the neighborhood. And PZ -13, the companion zoning change, we also recommend denial. It was recommended for denial from the Zoning Board and recommended denial from the Planning Advisory Board. Santiago Echemendia: Mr. Chair, Santiago Echemendia, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of the applicant, The owner of the property is the Chi family, all of whom are here. The applicant is Eckerd's Drugs. This is on 27th Avenue and Northwest 12th Street. Part of the site - - two out of 15 lots we're proposing to rezone from SD -12 to C-1, the C-- the SD -12 already permits parking. We're proposing a rezoning of those two lots. Mark, if you -- I'm sorry, three lots. If you can show them exactly where those three lots are. The remainder of the site is already commercial, so it really is a minor part of this entire site. What I'd like to do is have .Tack Luft, who is our expert, refute the testimony or give you some general comments regarding why he disagrees with staffs recommendation, then I would like to have some neighbors come up, specifically Dr. Dennis Rod, who was the most vociferous opponent to this application two years ago. Commissioner Regalado, you may remember that two years ago, there was a lot of opposition to this application and you will find that, tonight, there's not one neighbor in opposition. And then, finally, I'd like to discuss -- Chairman Regalado: But I've got to say that Dr. Dennis Rod was vociferous because lie's very active in every aspect. He will -- he is still vociferous in crime and graffiti and trash. So, he's -- he does that with all issues. Mr. Echemendia: He is. And he is the president of the Homeowners' Association. He will tell you tonight that he does not have any objection to this application. And then, finally, I would like to discuss with you the covenant that we would like to proffer. Time as to site plan., time as to building a wall, to buffer from the residential area, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So, maybe if 278 January 24, 2002 0 we could start with Jack, then the neighbors, then myself, we could get through this fairly quickly. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Jack, what you guys outlined -- I can't figure out what part requires zoning change. (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You need the microphone, Mr. Luft. Mark Wallace: My name is Mark Wallace. I'm from 2665 South Bayshore Drive. I'm with the developer that's trying to develop the property. The entire site that we're discussing is this outlined here. This portion is already zoned commercial. This portion comprising three residential lots, which are currently zoned SD -12. Those are the three lots that we're requesting to rezone, which is C-1 commercial. Vice Chairman Winton: What is -- but whatever direction that is to the left, across the street -- no, no. Left. Left. Mr. Wallace: This way? Chairman Regalado: Northwest 6th Street. Mr. Wallace: This is Northwest 6th Street. There's a Don Pan on the corner here, correct. Commissioner Sanchez: Where the old Kentucky Fried Chicken used to be. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, what's across the street from the residential lots? Mr. Wallace: Across the street from the residential lots are several other residential lots. Chairman Regalado: So, you've got a Don Pan, which is close to -- Mr. Wallace: Which is right here. Chairman Regalado: Close to -- Vice Chairman Winton: But you have residential across the street, then, and you have residential behind it? Mr. Wallace: Back here. And along -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, right behind it. I'm looking at a single-family house right there. 279 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: Right behind it. Mr. Wallace: Correct, right here. And then along Northwest 27th, the commercial. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I know it's all commercial, but -- Mr. Luft: So, essentially, what you have today, if you recall SD -12 overlay takes a residentially zoned property and allows commercial parking, sewing the adjacent retail to be built on that residentially zoned lot. So, effectively today, you can build a commercial project within this retail boundary and have commercial parking on these properties, as it stands today. OK. The issue, however, is the ability to develop a contemporary footprint in a modern branded retail development within the strip piece that's left. It's all effectively a commercial or a commercial - related supporting use, but we're talking here -- the issue now becomes a footprint and a layout of the site that really works, as opposed to trying to confine it to this edge. Now, I think what -- I listened very carefully to what Ms. Slazyk said, and basically she concluded by saying, it's without the proper safeguards; without the kinds of site plan protections and buffers and guarantees and limits on access. A pure commercial encroachment. A rezoning of retail into this area could pose some serious problems. And that, on principal, to simply drop a C-1 zone or commercial zone across the street from these residences would be an open invitation to the kinds of edged conditions and relationships that would be unfortunate, undesirable and improper for the neighborhood. Now, why doesn't SD -12 work? Because SD -12 is a common mechanism that you provided. It is in my best professional opinion -- I should introduce myself. Jack Luft, 1900 Tigertail. My resume is on file with the Clerk. This is a small project. It's a small rezoning, but it is part of a much larger, and I think, a much more important issue that I wanted to address very quickly, to set the stage, as to why, with the proper safeguards, with the kind of assurances that the Department is looking for, this can be a responsible and a correct land use decision and one that will not create a cascade or effect on the neighborhood. And, in fact, will provide a service, a vital reinvestment, redevelopment, reorganization of retail services that is long overdue for these kinds of neighborhoods. I listened with considerable interest to the last discussion about Brickell, and while, for the last 20 years, there has been massive land use changes and plan after plan for areas like Brickell and Omni, and even portions of the river, what we have for the most part in the rest of the City is essentially a strip zoning pattern that dates back to the 1940s. Very little has fundamentally changed in the land use pattern and development patterns in the rest of the City. And while we've been malting extraordinary accommodations to create density and intensity and mix of uses in some of the high end and more desirable locations, we've essentially taken a kind of a hands off treatment, a lot by lot, property by property approach to dealing with infill development. But something that's extremely important has happened in the last decade and that is major plan retailers, commercial investors across this country have discovered the inner city. They've discovered neighborhoods within communities and cities, like Miami, have tremendous purchasing power. There are tremendous commercial opportunities awaiting them, but unfortunately, this City and most cities have still left their land use patterns basically untouched. It is becoming extremely difficult, and frustrating and discouraging for contemporary retailers who are finding larger floor plates, much more complex retail operations that combine many more services within that one roof to find suitable locations. This is a recent publication by the Urban Land Institute. It's called Reinventing America's Suburban or Retail Strips. Throughout America, these strips are 280 January 24, 2002 • 0 declining, property values are declines, conditions are declining, and the answer is to define markets, different markets, different demands, and to go to nodes of development around section line roads. The County has already adopted in their Comprehensive Master Plan -- and, remember, the County is essentially suburban. It's essentially a pattern that isn't a lot different than 27th Avenue and 7th Street. The County has adopted an urban design guideline and a standard that talks about section line roads and intersections where nodes of development can occur; where, in fact, there can be larger assemblages, depending on the scale of development we're looking for, that accommodate the kind of infill development that we're looking for. It is simply not possible today, in most cases, to attract the kind of national retailers that we want on the old 1940, 120 -foot deep strips that are left over. So, the urban nodes of development is something that we're promoting throughout many cities. And if you really look at it, this is kind of, in a simple, direct way, a reflection of that. This is 7th street. There is 27th Avenue. Typical, lot depths along here run from 100, 125 feet along the street. If you're trying to build a 30,000 square foot floor plate with accompanying parking of another 30, 000 square feet, typically, what you end up with is a store about 80 feet deep and about 300 feet long, and nobody in a branded retail environment is going to build that kind of store, as we see, even -- the competition is so intense that even the big ones, like K -mart, unless they have their formula right, unless they have their program tight, are vulnerable. So, time and again, national retailers - - we're talking about one tonight -- are frustrated and turned away because the reason is, substantive direction. You have a chance -- in fact, you've already got the beginnings of it -- in some way, those corners have already been widened and the commercial extended. All of these pink zones are SD -12 overlays, where you essentially conceded the necessity of expanding the depth of retail properties. Now, I understand -- and I cannot fault the Department for being particularly careful about neighborhood intrusions. And, particularly, as a rule, running along strips on an endless strip, you can't just start biting off back into neighborhoods without creating havoc. But where you have section one arterial, 27th Avenue and 7th Street, where you have the chance to create nodes of development and do it in a controlled way -- and this is where the urban design guidelines become important, something that the Department continually talks about -- where you have a chance to create, not just a concession, a minor treatment like an SD - 12 overlay with a parking lot, but the chance to create a footprint in the development site that makes some sense. These are the locations and this is one of them that I think it is certainly responsible and could become a model for future planning to allow a commercial or retail zoning framework that will work. I'll let the architect talk to you about how they have managed to work this out, particularly with the neighborhood residents. Mr. Echemendia: I guess I'll play the role of the architect for a second. We've -- I've handed out a covenant. Maybe -- the sheet that you have in front of you that's highlighted talks about one of the objectives -- it's one of the objectives of the comp plan. A few pages in, you have a Declaration Of Restrictions, which we've negotiated with the neighbors, and we've proffered that to the City Attorney's Office, to be finalized prior to second reading. I believe that was sent to Mr. Maxwell. You've discussed that with Bob de la Fuente of our office, and we discussed finalizing it before the second reading, I believe. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): That's correct. We have not completed review of it yet. That would have to occur before second reading. 281 January 24, 2002 • • Mr. Echemendia: Fair enough, This covenant, which is in your packet, ties us to a particular site plan, which is the site plan that's in front of you. That site plan is supported by all of the neighbors. There's a gentleman here, Hank Teutscher, who wants a confirmation that there is going to be an 8-foot high wall along 6th Street, and that will be incorporated into the covenant. That is not in the covenant, the draft that you have in front of you. That's part of the negotiation that we had here earlier tonight and we're proffering that verbally tonight to be incorporated into the covenant before the second reading, for his benefit. It ties us to the site plan that's here before you, which the neighbors have embraced. It provides that we will include approximately a 20-foot landscape buffer along the west property line, as well as the landscape buffer along 6th Street, between the western boundary and the proposed driveway entrance to the property on Northwest 6th Street. It further provides that the property shall include and 8-foot high masonry wall along the western boundary line, subject to review and approval by the City of Miami Planning Department -- Department of Planning and Zoning, and the 8-foot high wall along 6th Street. It further provides that the use of the property will be limited to retail, including but not limited to sundries, pharmaceutical products, photo processing, beer, wine, liquor, groceries and all other uses consistent with typical drugstore operations. In light of this covenant, in light of the testimony that you heard from Mr. Luft regarding this particular intersection line road and on the corner of a section line road, and the counter availing policy and objective of your comp plan, which is urban infill and redevelopment balanced against what the Department perceives to be a minor intrusion into a residential neighborhood, insofar as those three lots are currently already zoned SD-12 and allow commercial vehicles to park there. We would add furthermore, in light of the fact that we brought on board an entire neighborhood, which, just two years ago, was adamantly opposed to rezoning these parcels, we would urge you to approve this application. We've worked long and hard with the neighborhood. I think the doctor will tell you -- Dr. Dennis Rod will tell you that, on behalf of his association, that the neighborhood and he are supportive. And I am hopeful that Mr. Teutscher, who's been the only gentleman who has opposed this application in the past, will also confirm that insofar as we're voluntarily proffering this 8-foot high wall along 6th Street, that he is also supportive. Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: Is the doctor here? Mr. Echemendia: He is. And he's going to come up right after me. I'd like to reserve a little time for rebuttal in case anything comes up. Commissioner Sanchez: Could he speak, on the record supporting this? Dr. Dennis Rod: Good evening. I am Dr. Dennis Rod. And for the record, I want to say that we still don't have a homeowner association, so I will be just as simple community leader speaking on behalf of my neighbors. I only happen to have a few neighbors tonight. Two years ago, when I was here, I was, like I am now, still the leader of my neighborhood because I've been living there for the last 41 years. So, you know, I went there, like I said before, on the other stand, to elementary schools, junior high was called at that time senior high -- well, was the Vietnam War, but it was the Filipine Islands where I was stationed. And then the University of Miami. So, I've lived there all my life, or at least a good portion of my life. And I wanted to tell you now that, at that moment, the Commissioners wanted us to sit down with the fabulous Chi family and we just sat down and we were able to talk. We were given two years and we were 282 January 24, 2002 • 0 able to communicate. And I learned a lot of things, personally, and I think a lot of my neighbors did, too. Sometimes, when we have lack of communication, we tend to disagree on many things. And then we sit down and we talk and then we find out we've got more in common than we do have against. And I think this is one of the triumphant products of what everything that's developed here. My neighbors and myself -- I usually hold my meetings in the front yard of my house. We were able to meet with the family and -- on and off -- and we agreed on so many things that it was amazing. We had no lawyers there. We had no Commissioners there. Not anything against you guys, but, you know, we had nobody there. Only ourselves. In other words, we were sitting there talking like normal human beings and we agreed in mostly everything. It might have taken this time, but today, I will be very proud to tell everybody here, the Commissioners and the City Clerk and City of Miami, and everybody else in the audience that we have agreed wholeheartedly in the project that the Fortune of Chi and his family is entailing to us. Commissioner Sanchez: Doctor, do you live near the property or -- Dr. Rod: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: -- or do you live far away from it? Dr. Rod: No. I live at 2759 Northwest 6th Street for the last 41 years. Commissioner Sanchez: Can you -- is that your house, the second house from the -- Dr. Rod: My house is the second house now, right. Because the first three homes -- there were three homes -- actually, when Mr. Chi bought the lot, I'm not sure what he did, but the first home was already destroyed. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the first home was an abandoned house that was there -- Dr. Rod: It was never abandoned. Chairman Regalado: No, it wasn't -- Dr. Rod: It was destroyed way before Mr. Chi bought it. It was part of the parking lot. Commissioner Sanchez: It wasn't a pretty sight. Dr. Rod: It never got to be a bad one because it never was there. You know, when he bought this, it was never there. So, when they bought it, they bought -- probably, he bought the first lot, but there was not a house in existence at that time. I mean, I remember the house, but it wasn't there. The second and the third home. Ms. Peggy Lee, a registered nurse, used to live there but she died of 87 years of age. So, I think that is when Mr. Chi bought the house, and then Fernando's house next to it. So, I am the second house. I am still living there and so are any neighbors around there. The bracket age is between 76 and death and, therefore, I am the youngest one and I'm 49. So, I've been there for a long time. 283 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) Dr. Rod: I cannot hear you. You have to speak up. Commissioner Sanchez: The last building on the back, is that -- Chairman Regalado: Burned down. Commissioner Sanchez: That burned down, right? Chairman Regalado: It burned down. Commissioner Sanchez: And it's still there? Dr. Rod: Well -- but that's not -- you're talking about the -- Chairman Regalado: No. That's on 7th -- Dr. Rod: The Tire Shop. That's on the other side. Chairman Regalado: Northwest 7th Street. Dr. Rod: Close to 7th Street. Chairman Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Regalado: If -- I work one block away from there, and I have -- I know the neighborhood very well. I have been invited by Dr. Dennis Rod several times to his community meetings on his porch, and this is a neighborhood of families. This is a neighborhood of people that care. Whenever there is a solid waste hole, he will call me or I -- my office will send an email or memo to Public Works, because this is a residential area that cares. And the only component that we need in that area for this area to try to look nice -- because they want it to look nice -- is a new construction. I don't know if you all read this, that the City Manager sends every year. I mean, every month. It's the Major Construction Report. And, you know, it's by district. I don't want to tell you the numbers of other districts, but I will tell you that for the last eight months, District 4 only has eight new constructions, which, by the way, has been going on for more than eight months. That's why I am, if the public hearing is closed, ready to move. Vice Chairman Winton: Is there opposition -- ani I chairing this at the moment? Dr. Rod: Thank you. 284 January 24, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Is there any opposition to this item? Anyone else from the public would like to speak? Commissioner Sanchez: In opposition? In support? Hank Teutscher: At this point -- my name is Hank Teutscher. I reside at 1560 Southwest 150 Avenue. I speak on behalf of my father-in-law, my sister-in-law. They have requested that I speak for them. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Mr. Teutscher: For the last two and a half years, three years that this has been going on, I was -- we were strong opponents of this whole plan. As of last Saturday, when we finally sat down with the final plans and we came up with the idea of separation of an 8 -foot wall with proper plantings on the neighborhood side and plantings on the other side, so over the years, it will become like a green zone in between the new commercial property and the neighborhood. At this point, that will be then the best -- in our eyes, our best solution. My father-in-law lives directly opposite. Is right in the middle of it. He lives on 2730 Northwest 6th Street, which is exactly in the middle of the whole thing. But due to the fact that the three properties, as such, we know the neighborhood. Houses will not be built there anymore because the cost of building new houses are restrictive and no developer would aver make money on it. So, after looking at all the things that have gone on and plans and the traffic flow in the Eckerd's situation, where basically on the neighborhood side, there will be a drive through that most of as know and pharmacy neighbor -- drive throughs do not really get frequented that often as in comparison to McDonald's or something. All the parking is set out on 7th Street and 27th Avenue. That's where the main parking areas are. So, that, again, on the opposite side of the neighborhoods, we felt at this point -- or my in-laws felt at this point that yes, OK, we'll have to agree with the plan. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you for -- Mr. Teutscher: That would be the best for the neighborhood at this point. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you for your comments. Any other -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: You know what -- Vice Chairman Winton: Let me find out if there's anyone else from the public wants to speak. Being none, we'll close the public hearing. Yes, sir, Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: What's the gentleman's name that just spoke? Mr. Teutscher: Commissioner Teele, my name is Hank Teutscher and I reside in South Miami. 285 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: You've made one of the best, most intelligent presentations. In fact, your presentation is as persuasive. You've talked about the change in the character of the neighborhood, the fact that this will never be residential again, and it's a very intelligent -- and I just wanted to compliment you. You did your homework and thank you for coming -- Mr. Teutscher: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Teele: -- prepared. Chairman Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Regalado: I'm ready to make a motion. I move that we approve the change of zoning from single-family residential to restricted commercial; to change the future land use element of the Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. We have a motion and a second. I have two questions. I want to understand a little bit more about this 8 -foot wall, and I'm -- I have particular interest in what's going to be on the public side of the 8 -foot wall on 6th Street, not the 8 -foot wall that's going to be up against the residential neighbor to the back of the property. Mr. Wallace: Mark Wallace again. What we're planning to do on Southwest -- on Northwest 6th Street is place the wall, which sets approximately three feet back from the sidewalk so that we have a landscape strip in front that we can plant a hedge, which will grow up to cover the wall. Not only will that make the green wall Mr. Teutscher talked about, but also will prevent or help prevent graffiti of that wall. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Very interested in that. Ms. Slazyk: Just for the record, it would also need a Class II Special Permit because of the drive through component of the pharmacy, if this plan were to come about. And through the Class 11, we're going to review and approve that landscape plan. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Perfect. OK. And the second question is, more to staff, and it's to the point that Jack was malting, which I think is absolutely one hundred percent right. You know, all of our commercial corridors were built, were designed, were zoned with these -- Unidentified Speaker: Linear. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, linear, and we're not -- and it's really a challenge getting appropriate retail services back into our neighborhoods, which is a major negative. So, I didn't understand everything Jack was talking about there in teens of how that's supposed to be 286 January 24, 2002 • 0 working. But are y'all working on a plan that will create an environment in the City whereby we can encourage retail to come back in and still protect the quality of the residential properties that are either adjacent or near a bigger square that we could create? Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. It's the Node Concept and we have looked at it before. What we had done by way of that in the ordinance, was SD -12, because what that did was put the parking back in the building up on the urban edge. But the Node Concept can be studied again to see if there're other ways to do it, and we'd be glad to do that. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Because if you don't -- if you don't create a big enough -- Ms. Slazyk: Floor plate. Vice Chairman Winton: -- footprints, still doesn't work. I mean, if you, you know, pushed all the parking back there, but you still have these goofy buildings that nobody really wants, we create parking but we didn't solve the building footprint problem. Ms. Slazyk: Right. And with these guys, the big problem was that the SD -12 didn't quite work with the building up front on the street because the drive-through isn't allowed to be in the SD - 12. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Ms. Slazyk: So they had to get a change of zoning or they couldn't do it. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: Just to speak on the area itself. That has been an eyesore for about three years. If I was a local -- if I was an investor that wanted to invest in there -- and there's no doubt, anyone would dispute that that area doesn't need a jump-start. If l was an investor that wanted to invest in the surrounding properties -- and I would look at that property as it is today -- I would put my money some place else. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Any further discussion? Commissioner Sanchez: None. Vice Chairman Winton: Being none. What is this? Mr. Maxwell: It's an ordinance. Chairman Regalado: It's an ordinance. 287 January 24, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Read it. Mr. Cleric, call the roll, please. An Ordinance entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2725, 2731 AND 2733 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCY; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Chairman Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Mr. Echemendia: Thank you very much. 288 January 24, 2002 i E 55. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ZONING DESIGNATION FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WITH SD -12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL (Applicant(s): Fortune of the Chi, Inc.). Chairman Regalado: Move -- move -- Lourdes Slazylc (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -- Chairman Regalado: Move Item 13. It's a companion. Item 13 is a companion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a -- Chairman Regalado: Mr. Chair, Item 13 -- Commissioner Tecle: Mr. Chairman, second the motion on 13. Chairman Regalado: OK. Read the ordinance. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 33 OF THE ZONING AT LAST OF ORDINANCE NO, 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-1 "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" WITH SD -12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO C-1 "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL" WITH SD -12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2725, 2731 AND 2733 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A"; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Chairman Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 289 January 24, 2002 • • The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, Commissioners Mr. Echemendia: Thank you, Commissioners. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Vice Chair. 290 January 24, 2002 • 0 56. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 23-5 OF CITY CODE RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION TO MODIFY PROVISION RELATED TO PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION AND GUIDELINES FOR UNREASONABLE OR UNDUE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: We're going to do Item 14, first reading ordinance. It's about historical. Go ahead. Sarah. Sarah Eaton: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Sarah Eaton, Preservation Officer. This ordinance would amend the demolition provisions of the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance. At the present time, the Historic and Environmental Preservation Board can only delay the demolition of important historic sites for up to six months. Actually, our ordinance has very little teeth. This amendment would give the board the authority to deny request for demolition. The ordinance would assure the preservation of important historic sites. However, it also provides safeguards that would not allow the board to create an undo economic hardship for property owners. The City recommends approval. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman, I would like to move the -- I mean, if there -- is there - - a public hearing. I'm sorry. Vice Chairman Winton: Let's open the public hearing. Would anyone from the public like to speak on PZ -14? Becky Rober Metcov: Good evening. I'm Becky Rober Metcov, Executive Director of Dade Heritage Trust, the largest historic preservation non-profit in Miami -Dade County. And we are here to very eagerly support this amendment. Ever since this past summer, when we had the debacle of the Dr. Jackson house demolition, we have been working with staff and many of you supported -- Commissioners -- to improve this ordinance and we are very enthusiastic in endorsing this. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, Becky. Anyone else from the public would like to speak? Leona Pinto: My name is Leona Pinto, 925 Castille Plaza, Coral Gables. I'm here as president of the Villagers, Miami -Dade County's oldest historic preservation organization. We're in full support of this ordinance because it is for important historic structures. To cite a few examples: Throughout this City, that are really the heart and soul of the surrounding environment, we have the Lyric Theater, which is vitally important to Overtown, the Wornen's Club of Coconut Grove, the heart and soul of Coconut Grove, the Tower Theater, which is helping bring back the East Little River -- East Little Havana River area. Those are important historic sites, and that's what this ordinance is for, is to save those things that we, as locals, know and understand to be the heart and soul of our community. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. 291 January 24, 2002 0 0 Patrick McCoy: My name is Patrick McCoy and I'm president of the Morningside Historic Education Society and I just wanted to step forward and tell you that we're strongly in favor of this particular resolution. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr, Flanders. Robert Flanders: I think I've identified myself already. Vice Chairman Winton: But you have to do it again. Mr. Flanders: Robert Robert Flanders, 720 Palm Bay Lane. Miami, Florida. Vice president Upperside Miami council. We heartily endorse this resolution. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Anyone else from the public? Luis Penelas: Luis Penelas, 133 Northeast 47th Street. All the hard work that we do to declare properties and sites historic means nothing unless you pass this ordinance. Please help us out. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Anyone else from the public? Being no one else, we'll close the public hearing. Comments from Commissioners. Commissioner Sanchez: None. So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: None. Second. Vice Chairman Winton: There's a motion and a second. Commissioner Teele: Moving it. Vice Chairman Winton: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor -- is this an ordinance? Commissioner Teele: Ordinance. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's an ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: Read it, please. Mr. Maxwell: And Ms. Eaton wants to put something into the record. Ms. Eaton: I'm sorry. Just a slight correction on the record. Section 23-5, Sub -Section 6A. Instead of "chapter," it should be "section." Just not (INAUDIBLE). Mr. Maxwell: So as of that motion, if you will, Commission, it will be as amended. 292 January 24, 2002 • 0 Commissioner Sanchez: Maker of the motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: So a motion, as amended. Commissioner Sanchez: As amended. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second as amended. Chairman Regalado: OIC. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Clerk -- oh. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. It's a first reading ordinance. Read the ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: No. We read it. Commissioner Teele: We read it. Commissioner Sanchez: Just read it. Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, l just would Iike to clarify one thing. This gives -- is there an appeal? Ms. Eaton: Yes. Commissioner Teele: And that appeal is to this board? Ms. Eaton: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: And that, I think, needs to be very clear, that there is a safeguard on this issue of economic disincentives or hardships and that it will be -- it's not something that a board will make a decision and it can't be appealed to this board. And I do know that there have been several concerns about that. I've talked to a number of people. But, ultimately, this board will make the decision in those cases where a business owner or a property owner feels that it's an economic hardship, if he's not satisfied or they're not satisfied with the decision below. I just wanted to put that on the record. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Regalado: Roll call. 293 January 24, 2002 0 An Ordinance entitled L AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION, BY AMENDING SECTION 23- 5 TO MODIFY PROVISION RELATED TO PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION AND GUIDELINES FOR UNREASONABLE AND UNDO ECONOMIC HARDSHIP; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Commissioner Sanchez: Don't let them tear it down. Vice Chairman Winton: Does that include the Taurus? Mr. Maxwell: No, no. Chairman Regalado: Item -- Item 15. Commissioner Sanchez: Do what you've got to do, Luis. Don't let them tear it down. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Fifteen was withdrawn. 294 January 24, 2002 i • 57. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION 906 TO ALLOW BUSINESS CENTERS AS ACCESSORY USES AND AMENDING SECTION 2502 TO PROVIDE NEW DEFINITION FOR "BUSINESS CENTER". (Applicant(s):City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: Item 15 was pulled by the administration or deferral or whatever you want to call it. Item 16 is a new definition for business centers. Vice Chairman Winton: Second reading. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes, this is second reading. Chairman Regalado: Second reading. Any -- do we have a motion? Commissioner Gonzdlez: Move it. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Anybody -- this is a public hearing. Anybody in favor? Anybody against? Read the ordinance. Close the public hearing. Roil call. An ordinance Entitled -- AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE 11000 TAS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 906, CONVENIENCE ESTABLISHMENTS AS ACCESSORY TO RESIDENTIAL OR OFFICE USES, AND ARTICLE 25, SECTION 2502, IN ORDER TO INTRODUCE PROVISIONS AND A DEFINITION FOR "BUSINESS CENTER" AS AN ACCESSORY USE, SUBJECT TO A CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 295 January 24, 2002 0 was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 15, 2001, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12183 The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 296 January 24, 2002 i 0 58. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL" (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: Seventeen, first reading ordinance. To amend from major institutional, public facilities, transportation and utilities to general commercial, 5590 Northwest 7th Street. It's in your district, Commissioner Gonzdlez. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. It's been approved by Planning, also by the Board, so I'll move it. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a public hearing. Anybody on this item, PZ Item 17? Anybody oppose? The item has been moved. Is there a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: Second by Commissioner Winton. Read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5590 NORTHWEST 7TH STREET AND 5594 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL"; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chainnan Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 297 January 24, 2002 E 0 The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 298 January 24, 2002 59. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN 1989-2000 (MCNP) TO AMEND MCNP GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES TO IMPLEMENT EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) GROUP III RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT, AFFIRM DESIGNATION OF URBAN INFILL AREA, AFFIRM DESIGNATION OF NEW CATEGORY OF PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES ENTITLED "URBAN STREETS" AND RESPOND TO NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: Item PZ -18, appraisal report. Whatever. You want -- Clark Turner: For the record, Clark Turner, Department of Planning and Zoning. This is an amendment to the Miami Comprehensive Plan transportation element. It accomplishes four major things. One, it completes the amendments that were recommended by the evaluation appraisal report on the Comprehensive Plan. Secondly, it affirms the urban infill area that was previously adopted as an amendment to the land use plan and now appears in the corresponding form in the transportation element. It meets a few miscellaneous new state requirements, especially regarding cooperation with schools in making sure that the zoning ordinance allows schools to be located in the City of Miami. And, finally, it adopts the urban streets designation for streets in the City of Miami that was authorized by the -- or directed by the City Commission in a resolution adopted last October. So, this will wrap up all of the amendments that are currently required to the plan and we recommend its adoption. This would be on first reading and it would go to Department of Community Affairs for its review and come back here after their approval for a second reading. Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Commissioner Tecle: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 299 January 24, 2002 0 An Ordinance entitled • AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT; SAID AMENDMENTS MAKING SUBSTANTIVE ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS, TECHNICAL CHANGES, AND UPDATING OF TIME FRAMES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF. "THE 1995 EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN 1989-2000" (EAR) ADOPTED NOVEMBER 16, 1995 BY RESOLUTION 95- 830; THE REPORT ON "SUFFICIENCY ISSUES WITH RESPONSES BY THE CITY OF MIAMI, INCLUDING REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS (DCA) LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 13, 1996" ADOPTED OCTOBER 24, 1996 BY RESOLUTION 96-796; IN AFFIRMATION OF DESIGNATION OF AN URBAN INFILL AREA ADOPTED NOVEMBER 16, 1999 BY ORDINANCE 11864; IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DESIGNATION OF A CATEGORY OF PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES ENTITLED "URBAN STREETS" ADOPTED OCTOBER 24, 2001 BY RESOLUTION 01-1126; AND/OR IN RESPONSE TO STATE REQUIREMENTS AS DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 163, F.S. AND CHAPTER 9J-5, F.A.C.; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Torras Rcgalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 300 January 24, 2002 60. AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF STREET BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT CITY THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE ST. SOPHIA GREED FESTIVAL. Chairman Regalado: Item 19 has been deferred. So, this is the end of PZ (Planning & Zoning). I would request, if you all do me a great favor, because I have three pocket items, two of them are banners. One is a street naming. The reason that I need to do this street naming is because the Street Codesignation Committee is meeting on the 30th of January, and the banners are for the Miami Grand Prix and also the St. Sophia Church Greek Festival. So, 1 -- can you chair, Johnny? Johnny's chairing. So, I'll move the St. Sophia Church Greek Festival banners in the City of Miami. Commissioner TeeIe: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-122 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT OF STREET BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MIAMI THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE THE ST. SOPHIA GREEK FESTIVAL. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Tecle, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez 301 January 24, 2002 • 61. AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT CITY THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE GRAND PRIX OF AMERICAS EVENT, Chairman Regalado: The second banners issue is the Grand Prix of Americas. It seeks permission to place street banners throughout the City of Miami. I move the motion. Commissioner Teele: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO, 02-123 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF MIAMI THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE THE GRAND PRIX OF THE AMERICAS EVENT. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez 302 January 24, 2002 M 62. REFER TO CITY'S CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE REQUEST FOR CODESIGNATION OF SOUTHWEST 2NQ STREET FROM SOUTHWEST 27'x' AVENUE TO SOUTHWEST 30""' AVENUE AS DR. DIEGO MEDINA WAY. Chairman Regalado: And the third is Dr. Diego Medina was an outstanding citizen, who made significant contributions towards improving the quality of life in the City of Miami. I propose to send to the Codesignation Committee Southwest 2nd Street from Southwest 27th to Southwest 30th Avenue as Dr. Diego Medina Way. Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Chairman Regalado: That's the motion. Chairman Regalado: It's -- Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion. Do we have a second? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: OIC. Motion and a second. Discussion? Being none, all in favor 1paye.11 The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-124 A MOTION REFERRING TO THE CITY OF MIAMI CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE, WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION, REQUEST FOR CODESIGNATION OF SOUTHWEST 2N° STREET FROM SOUTHWEST 27''x' AVENUE TO SOUTHWEST 30"" AVENUE AS DR. DIEGO MEDINA WAY, IN RECOGNITION OF HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE CITY OF MIAMI. 303 January 24, 2002 0 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 304 January 24, 2002 • 0 63. APPOINT EUSTACHE FLEURANT, ROSALIE CLEMENT, MARIE ESTINE- THOMPSON, PA., SAMUEL FREDERIQUE, DIRECTOR OF CITY'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR DESIGNEE, DIRECTOR OF CITY'S DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR DESIGNEE, NET ADMINISTRATOR FROM CITY'S LITTLE HAITI NET OFFICE, DIRECTOR OF CITY'S DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OR DESIGNEE TO DISTRICT 5 LITTLE HAITI JOB CREATION PILOT PROJECT ADVISORY BOARD. Chairman Regalado: We have -- if you want to come back to the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel) or you want to do any pocket items. We still have two pocket items from the Parks Department that needs to be done, but if you want to do it now -- you want to come back to the CIP? Commissioner Teele: Could we finish the agenda, then? We have 28. Where is Gwen Warren? Chairman Regalado: Twenty-eight? Commissioner Teele: Was it 28 or 26? Chairman Regalado: Let's see. Oh, item 28, it's about Commissioner -- Commissioner Teele: I'm sorry. It's item number 29. Chairman Regalado: Twenty-nine. Appointing seven members to District 5, Little Haiti .lob Creation Pilot Project Advisory -- Commissioner Teele: I would so move the item for discussion. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. Discussion. Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren, did you all -- where you all able to make an additional appointment? Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Yes, sir. And one on Rosa Clement. Commissioner Teele. Is that the person from the bank? Ms. Warren: Yes. Commissioner Teele: The person that -- what is that? Ms. Warren: Bank of America. 305 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Teele: Bank of America. I would accept that as an amendment to be a member of the Loan Committee. All right. Call the question. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-125 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE DISTRICT 5 LITTLE HAITI JOB CREATION PILOT PROJECT ADVISORY BOARD. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Tccle, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez Chairman Regalado: Anybody else has a pocket item? Commissioner Winton, do you have any pocket items? Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalcz, would you -- one second.. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: One second. Yes. Ms. Warren: Excuse me, sir. Chair, for the record, the Commissioner said Loan Committee.. It's for the Little Haiti Job Creation Advisory Board. Commissioner Teele: Job Creation Advisory Board, I'm sorry. Chairman Regalado: I read it into the record, Gwendolyn. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. 306 January 24, 2002 0 0 64. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 99-564 AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 01-751 TO PROPERLY REFLECT ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FROM CORRECT ACCOUNT CODES AND IN PROPER AMOUNTS FOR SHENANDOAH PARK PROJECT AS FOLLOWS: $51,506 FROM PARK DEVELOPMENT REVENUE FUND AND $45,088 FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzdlez, would you move these two resolutions from the Parks Department, please? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved, the Shenandoah resolution by Commissioner Gonzalez. It's been second by Commissioner Teele. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-126 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 99-564, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 01-751, TO PROPERLY REFLECT THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FROM THE CORRECT ACCOUNT CODES AND IN THE PROPER AMOUNTS FOR THE SHENANDOAH PARK PROJECT AS FOLLOWS: $51,506 FROM THE PARK DEVELOPMENT REVENUE FUND, ACCOUNT NO. 1100008, AND $45,088 FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 331360. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez 307 January 24, 2002 0 • 65. AUTHORIZE USE OF PORTIONS OF WATSON ISLAND BY NATIONAL MARINE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (NMMA) FROM FEBRUARY 6 TO FEBRUARY 26, 2002, FOR 2002 INTERNATIONAL BOAT SHOW SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 14 THROUGH FEBRUARY 19, 2002, AT $13,000, FOR "PARK AND RIDE" AREA AND $2,000 FOR "BOAT TRANSFER" AREA, TOTAL FEE $15,000. Chairman Regalado: The other one is also from the Parks Department. Would you move it? Commissioner Gonzalez: Move it. Chairman Regalado; It's been moved by Commissioner Gonzdlez. Second by Commissioner Teele. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Oppose? None. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-127 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE USE OF PORTIONS OF WATSON ISLAND DESIGNATED IN "EXHIBIT A", ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, BY NATIONAL MARINE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, INC. ("NMMA") FROM FEBRUARY 6 THROUGH FEBRUARY 26, 2002, FOR THE 2002 INTERNATIONAL BOAT SHOW SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 14 THROUGH FEBRUARY 19, 2002, AT A FEE OF $13,000 FOR THE "PARK AND RIDE" AREA AND $2,000 FO A "BOAT TRANSFER" AREA, FOR A TOTAL FEE OF $15,000, SUBJECT TO NMMA OBTAINING A CLASS I SPECIAL PERMIT; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION TO ISSUE A PARK PERMIT. 308 January 24, 2002 • 0 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chainilan Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez Chairman Regalado: OK. My appointments will be deferred to the next meeting. 309 January 24, 2002 i 0 66. RECORD STRAW VOTE STIPULATING THAT CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) MAY ISSUE SUBPOENA(S) WITH AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF EIGHT OF MEMBERS OF CIP. PROVIDE THAT ANY MEMBER OF CIP WILL HAVE DISCRETION TO REQUEST INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO CONSULT WITH STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, ATTORNEY GENERAL AND/OR CITY ATTORNEY BEFORE VOTE IS TAKEN BY CIP TO ISSUE SUBPOENA (See #49). Chairman Regalado: We are back into the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel) discussion. We left it on -- we haven't voted yet on the first reading of the ordinance, but, you know, I guess that everybody has an idea of what is the will of the Commission and the will of the community groups. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I would like to try to extinguish a lot of the debate and discussion about the one item that we've talked about since we've proposed this issue. My draft ordinance does include statistical oversight, policies and procedure review, but not investigations, OK, of all sworn people. In other words, we don't need to have everybody doing all kinds of studies. And part of the challenge here is to get one group to look at the overall picture of the City of Miami as it relates to the sworn officers. And, so, if we've got one body that's constituted to do that in detail, as well as do investigations for the police, but there will be no investigations per se by the CIP of other sworn officers, the area that you all are concerned about. But they would gather statistics, they would review procedures and policies, and they could review investigations that have been done and make reports to the board and the Manager. I'd just like to see if that clarifies the issue that you were concerned about. This does not include investigations -- initiating investigations of anyone, other than the Police Department or police issues. And, Mr. Attorney, is that your understanding? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): We've drafted the caption to encompass exactly what you just said, that the -- it would be limited to a review of statistics -- of documentation related to disciplinary action, certain other enforcements sworn and fire officers. So, there's no investigation power associated with the review of other departments. Ronald Cohen: If I might? Commissioner Teele: Your name and address, please. Mr. Cohen: Yes. Ronald Cohen, 8100 Oak Lane, Suite 403, Miami Lakes, Florida. I'm here on behalf of AFSCME (American Federal, State, County, and Municipal Employees). Thank you, Commissioner. I believe that goes a long way. We reserve the right to look at the language and see exactly what the review is going to entail. If we have a problem with it, we will notify the staff and we'll be present at the second meeting. 310 January 24, 2002 0 0 Commissioner Teele: It will come up for second reading, and I will make myself available to you and to my dear friend, Mr. Cox, before that meeting, because I think the idea here is that we don't have a whole lot of people looking at different people. And let's let one organization Deep all of the records and statistics of the same caliber and class of potential allegations and offenses. And what we're really looking at is how we can improve procedures. And I just say, gratuitously, to you, I think the greatest advantage of the CIP, contrary to all of the debate and discussion that's going on now, is really going to be, I think, in helping to look at issues, like policies and procedures of recruitment, and training and reoccurring patterns, so that we avoid the kinds of unfortunate and tragic shootings that we continue to be confronted with in this community. So, I -- and I think you all will help us in that regard. Mr. Cohen: Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. City Attorney, any other -- Mr. Vilarello: In a brief discussion with members of the Coalition, I think we've resolved most of the other issues. There remain two issues, which I would consider to be significant, related to the issuance of subpoenas. They object to the language that's presented in our ordinance -- in our draft of the ordinance. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Is this anything that we should discuss now or that we should discuss throughout the process of the -- until the second reading? Mr. Vilarello: If I can capsulize the discrepancy. Basically, this ordinance provides that one, a subpoena is to be issued; that that subpoena be issued by an extraordinary majority of the CIP. We believe that the issuance of the subpoena is the most significant power that this board has, and therefore we attribute an extraordinary majority in order to issue the subpoenas. They have significant investigatory rights, outside of the issuance of subpoenas, and that can be exercised at their discretion. However, we think that that is a significant event, and therefore called for the extraordinary majority, Then we also required that before the independent counsel consults with the State Attorney, that the CIP board act. In other words, the board needs to make a statement that a subpoena should be issued before that consultation takes place with the State Attorney. The Coalition feels that any one of its members and/or staff members should be able to ask independent counsel to make that communication to the State Attorney's Office or consult with the State Attorney's Office. That's the major points of this agreement. And, of course, they feel that a subpoena that should be issued by the panel only with the majority vote of those present, and I've -- the ordinance is written with an extraordinary majority. Commissioner Teele: With an extraordinary what? Mr. Vilarello: An extraordinary vote of the board, two thirds or -- Commissioner Teele: Of the board or the board present? 311 January 24, 2002 • 0 Mr. Vilarello: No. Of the appointed members. So, in other words, 10 always. Commissioner Sanchez: So two-thirds? Chairman Regalado: So, how do you get all the board members together if they cannot show up? Mr. Vilarello: At the meeting. Chairman Regalado: Huh? Mr. Vilarello: Before the subpoena is issued, the subpoena has to be issued at a meeting. Chairman Regalado: I understand that. But -- Mr. Vilarello: The same thing as the City Commission has to (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: But what is the number that they propose? Mr. Vilarello: Well, we're talking about 15 members. Well, they're talking about a simple majority. The ordinance is written -- Chairman Regalado: I thought you said extraordinary majority. Mr. Vilarello: The ordinance is written to require an extraordinary majority. That is a two-thirds vote. Two-thirds vote would require 10 members -- Chairman Regalado: Two-thirds of the members or two-thirds of the present? Mr. Vilarello: Two-thirds of the membership. Chairman Regalado: How do you get two-thirds of the members? Mr. Vilarello: Exactly the same way it happens with the City Commission. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but they don't get paid five thousand dollars ($5,000) a year. Mr. Vilarello: In fact, if there's 15 members, only -- you know, only 10 have to -- Chairman Regalado: That's my paint. I just wanted to make that point. Commissioner Teele: Well, look, we don't have to debate this. As far as I'm concerned, at least 51 -- 50 plus 1 percent of the approved members. Now, let me just say what this means. Let's say they have a board meeting that has 12 people, they still have to have 7 votes to do that. In other words, 50 plus 1 percent of the board members that are appointed, not the ones present. I mean, because what could happen is the reverse of this could happen. What's a quorum? A quorum is going to be eight members, right? 312 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. Cohen: Right. is Commissioner Teele: If you don't have some standards, you could have five people issuing subpoenas. Look -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's 51 percent, Johnny. Commissioner Teele: If the quorum -- Mr. Vilarello: It's nine. Commissioner Teele: How did the quorum get to be nine? Mr. Vilarello: Because it's 50 percent plus 1. Commissioner Teele: And -- Commissioner Gonzalez: No. Mr. Vilarello: It's seven and a half plus one is eight and a half, and you round up. So, you make Commissioner Teele: No. Commissioner Winton: That's how the math works, and you can't help that. That's the math. Commissioner Teele: It's 5 t percent. Then 51 percent. It's a big number. That's one whole person. Fifty-one percent of 15 people is eight people. Max Rameau: It's eight people. Commissioner Teele: Fifty plus one percent is nine. (COMMENTS OFF THE RECORD) Commissioner Teele: So, why don't we just agree on 50 --is eight -- Mr. Vilarello: We actually made a modification here, at the request of the Coalition, and we changed it to 50 percent plus one for a quorum. So, I think Commissioner Winton is correct on the math. You don't count the half a body. You go up. That's how we do it with the City Commission, as well. Commissioner Teele: Well, no. But if you're saying 50 percent plus one -- 313 January 24, 2002 0 Unidentified Speaker: There might be -- we might have not had the mathematicians on our side - Mr. Vilarello: We didn't have it on our side, either. Brad Brown: We said five. That's what it says. We said five because we were talking about nine. So, five of nine -- Commissioner Teele: I think, in fairness to the record, you're going to have to identify yourself. Otherwise, the computer won't be able to -- Mr. Brown: I'm sorry. Brad Brown, Miami -Dade branch of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). When we were talking about nine, we said five. If it's 15, we think eight. But we also agree very much with 10 as an impossible number. And our opposition is that we think Roberts Rules of Order ought to be sufficient, and that would mean that if there was eight, yes, five could issue a subpoena. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Commissioner Teele: Well, hold it, hold it. I don't agree with that. Mr. Brown: That's fine. I'm just saying that's what our position is. Commissioner Teele: I don't agree that five people ought to be able to issue a subpoena. Mr. Brown: We respect your opinion. But I'm just saying, I just want to make it our opinion -- our position is clear. We have one other issue on the subpoena power that we think's important. Commissioner Sanchez: Let's try to get -- let's try to clear it up as we go along. What's -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Why don't we decide on this item, and then we'll go on to the other -- anybody wants to make a motion for this straw ballot process that we're following on this matter? Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Teele: What does Roberts Rules of Order say for a quorum? Do they say 50 plus one or 51 percent? Has anybody Iooked at any rules of order? Let's don't make this up as we go. Let's -- Mr. Vilarello: I could -- we'll tell you what Roberts Rules says. I have to look it up. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Let's skip that one. Mr. Vilarello: It's always been, you know, the -- it's 50 percent -- 51 percent. Commissioner Teele: And do we all agree that 51 percent is eight? 314 January 24, 2002 0 0 Chairman Regalado: Fifty-one percent is not eight. Commissioner Teele: Well, it's -- Chairman Regalado: It's seven and a half. Commissioner Teele: It's seven �- Unidentified Speaker: Seven and a half. Commissioner Teele: -- point seven. Vice Chairman Winton: It's nine. No. It's seven and a half, plus one point five. So, that's nine. Because one percent of 15 is one point five. Commissioner Teele: Look, Johnny -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): That's 10 percent. Commissioner Teele: Fifty percent -- Mr. Gimenez: Plus 10 percent, one point five. Commissioner Teele: Fifty percent of 16 -- Mr. Gimenez: Well, can we take a vote on that? Commissioner Teele: Fifty percent of 16 is eight. Mr. Gimenez: One percent -- Commissioner Teele: Fitly percent of 16 is eight. Vice Chairman Winton: Is eight. But we don't -- we've got 15. Commissioner Teele: So, 50 percent of 15 is less than eight. Commissioner Gonzalez: Seven and a half. Mr. Rameau: Seven point six five. Unidentified Speaker: Seven point six five. Vice Chairman Winton: Fifty percent of 15 is seven point five, I don't care how you do it. Commissioner Teele: Exactly. 315 January 24, 2002 • 0 Unidentified Speaker: Right, Commissioner Teele: Exactly. Unidentified Speaker: Fifty-one percent? Vice Chairman Winton. And -- Commissioner Teele: Fifty-one percent. Vice Chairman Winton: And one percent of -- Mr. Gimenez: Seven point six five. Vice Chairman Winton: -- 15 is one point five. So, seven point five and one point five -- Mr. Gimenez: No. Eight -- Unidentified Speaker: Seven point six five. Unidentified Speaker: No, no, no. You've got your -- it's seven point six five. Mr. Gimenez: Eight of 15 is 53 percent. Commissioner Teele: Seven point six five. Commissioner Sanchez: Meaningless. Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, eight of 15 is 53 percent. Eight of 15 is 53 percent. You're Math is one point five of 15 is actually 10 percent. Commissioner Teele: Where is the guy with the horn rimmed -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, where's our calculator? Commissioner Gonzalez: It's seven point six five. Chairman Regalado: OK. You guys want to -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I respectfully believe that any subpoena should be issued by at least "X" number of votes. Now, I think the number should be eight. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Regalado: That is the number. 316 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Or not less than eight votes. Chairman Regalado: Not less than -- Commissioner Teele: Eight affirmative votes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion that's a straw ballot process continuance. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Opposed? None. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-128 A MOTION RECORDING STRAW VOTE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION STIPULATING THAT THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP) MAY ISSUE SUBPOENA(S) WITH THE AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF EIGHT (8) OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CIP. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: That's a lot better than 10. Chairman Regalado: Now, the other issue -- Commissioner Sanchez: Are you comfortable with that? Are you comfortable with that? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef. No, we're not, Commissioners. 317 January 24, 2002 Mr. Vilarello: Can I identify the other issue, though? Ms. Rodriguez Tasef: We're registering our -- Chairman Regalado: You want seven and a half? Commissioner Sanchez: Seven and a half is not going to make a difference. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: Fifteen -- we've already increased the size of this Commission to 15 -- of this panel to 15. The concept that it would require eight votes to issue a subpoena is going to paralyze the CIP, and it is going to absolutely alter the will of the voters, and basically render this null and void. There is no way you're going to get -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's your opinion. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: -- eight votes out of 15. Vice Chairman Winton: That's an opinion. That isn't a fact. That's an opinion. Chairman Regalado: And how do you know that? Commissioner Teele: Are you suggesting that less than a majority should issue the subpoena? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: No. A majority of the vote -- the people who are attending the meeting, just as -- would happen with a properly called meeting of this body if this body has a quorum to act. If it is therefore empowered to act, it should be able to issue a subpoena based on the majority of the people who are attending that meeting. Commissioner Teele: If you read this agenda packet that we have — Commissioner Sanchez: Four/fifths. Commissioner Teele: -- 50 percent of the items that we do in the morning require at least a four- fifths vote. Using your own analogy, and if you just go through this agenda and take the first 10 items, I'd be willing to bet you, without even looking at it, half of them require a four-fifths vote. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: But this body is made up of five Commissioners. When you require that sort of majority or super majority with a body that is made up of 15 people, you are creating and ineffective system of operation. Commissioner Teele: And I would agree with you if we required an 80 percent. Four-fifths is 80 percent. We're talking about a simple majority of the frill membership. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: But it is not a -- but it is -- one hundred percent majority of those that would constitute a quorum. So, basically, you can have a quorum; therefore, have a properly called meeting and it would require a hundred percent of those votes in attendance. 318 January 24, 2002 i • Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. I don't understand. Do you think that in the case of issuing a subpoena -- we're just going to be a front page, at least in the local news, the next morning -- the members of the committee properly noticed will not attend in the majority? Because we are here guessing that most of the people -- members of the committee will not be attending; is that what we are doing? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: What we've done by raising the number from nine to 15 is, we're creating an even bigger body; therefore, making it more unwieldy in its functionings. Now, when you add to that the requirement that this body have a hundred percent of any quorum be required to issue a subpoena, you're creating a -- you're slowing down a process Chat would be proper because you already have safeguards, such as the consultation with independent counsel, prior to the issuance of a subpoena anyway. Therefore, by creating this additional burden, you may be disemboweling the CIP. You may be basically creating a system where the CIP can have a quorum, but if there is one dissenting vote in the issuance of the subpoena, even though there is a super majority of those who are in attendance, you still cannot issue a subpoena. Seven people can agree -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Wait a minute. Vice Chairman Winton: If -- we've all talked about how important the formation of this group is. And I will tell you right now that, if the people that are chosen to serve -- Chairman Regalado: That's what I said. Vice Chairman Winton: -- don't go, throw them off. Because if the best you could do is always simply get a simple majority, then we've got the wrong people serving on this thing. Chairman Regalado: That's what I said. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I respect -- what's your name again, please? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: Lida Rodriguez. Commissioner Teele: I respect Ms. Rodriguez' point of view. But I must say to you, Ms. Rodriguez, I think we're missing the point, completely. We don't -- we're not limiting the CI-' from doing anything, except in one narrow area, which is the controversial area of issuing a subpoena. Clearly, that should be done in a deliberate, in a thoughtful manner in which the evidence is somewhat overwhelming that a subpoena is needed. This is not a power that boards have. And I'm going to be very honest with you. I think you all need to -- not you all, but I think you need to really look at what's going on in this community, and the ability to transport, to export, if you will, the deliberations of this Commission to other jurisdictions and bodies. If you're not careful with this kind of discussion and debate that would suggest that once you get the CIP, you really want it to have powers that are not going to be carefully and thoughtfully and 319 January 24, 2002 deliberately considered, that we're going to have a board that's going to consistently not have a quorum. I mean, you know, you're giving arguments to people who, I think, need to be listening to why there ought to be some more CIPs in this community, as to why they shouldn't do anything. I think you've got the best deal going right now, and you've got a good vehicle to export CIPs throughout this state and throughout this nation. But to make an argument that we're not going to have a quorum or we're going to barely have a quorum, or the notion that people aren't going to take this seriously is to give testimony candidly that I think you're making Al Cotera, who's not even here, you're making his job and the big guy -- Chairman Regalado: Martinez. Commissioner Teele: Huh? Chairman Regalado: Raul Martinez? Commissioner Teele: No. I won't call his name. He's always been a friend of mine. But the big guy over at Metro -Dade, you're reading his script for him. I mean, you're writing his script for him. And I just want to say this. I served as a County Commissioner. I did not support the CIP in the County. If I were a County Commissioner today, I would support the CII', because of what has gone on for the last seven or eight or ten years in the County, which is really disgraceful, in my opinion. But I think we need to be very, very careful that we don't give ammunition as to why there shouldn't be one. And then somebody's going to say, well, why don't we wait and see what happens over there in the City? Can they really get a quorum? We're in this thing together, Ms. Rodriguez, and we want to make this work. And if we've got a problem with getting a quorum, we need to go back and revisit how we're going to select people, right here and right now. Because I'm not doing this, and we're not here until I I o'clock at night to just carefully -- I mean, to just gladly hand over subpoena powers to a body that's not going to take this job seriously. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef. That was not my position, and that is not the position of the Coalition. Commissioner Teele: I would hope no not. Mr. Ramaeu: We'll put our concerns on the record. At the second reading, we'll come back with information about how other boards and other places with subpoena power handle that particular issue, OK? Chairman Regalado: Let me -- Commissioner Gonzdlez: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Teele: I would think that you're not going to be issuing; subpoenas at every meeting. I mean, I would certainly think that you're going to get cooperation. And I would think the subpoena power really should be viewed as almost -- I don't want to use the word "club," but almost as the leverage that we're trying to give you to ensure that people cooperate with you; that the Manager cooperates, that the Chief cooperates, that the various -- the majors 320 January 24, 2002 and division Chiefs cooperate. But hopefully, you know, the subpoena power will never be used. And if it is used, it would be done so in a very judicious manner to avoid the unintended consequences of the lawyer -- the U.S. Attorney cited the Oli North, but the real case was the Poindexter. The Poindexter case is the one that has turned this thing upside down. So, there are implications of using subpoena, even in using H.T. Smith's analogy, where you've got all those smart people up in Washington, and they really screwed it up. Chairman Regalado: And, you know -- Commissioner, if I may, just -- Commissioner Gonzalez. And you know, Commissioner Teele is right. I know the City Manager of the City of Key West, Julio Avaelo. They watch our local channels in Key West. They don't have like a local network station. So, for several months they have been following this CIP ordeal. And the City Commission, last month, directed the City Manager to impanel a Charter Review Committee to create a CIP, because of the pressure of the residents of the City of Key West to the elected officials. And this is going on the ballot, as a Charter reform issue, on the November elections in the City of Key West during the gubernatorial election. So, you know, this is good. But at the same time, it's bad because luckily we have no print -- electronic media now that will be reporting the doubts that we have that the people would want to serve. And if we keep expressing those doubts, people would think that this committee is not important. I see that as a journalist. I mean, 1 see the thing -- I understand the legal issues, but the legal issues are not important. What you're saying -- what the ACLU is saying, that you don't think that the people will show up to participate. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: No, that's not it at all, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: But that's -- that's what -- Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: May I please respond? Chairman Regalado: -- people would understand. Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Could I interrupt just for a second? I have to -- I don't -- I have to give a speech in the morning at 8:30. l don't even have it started. It's 10:30 at night. I hope -- you know, I'd like to move -- Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Winton: -- something along here. Chairman Regalado: But I will tell you that you don't need to write a speech. You're a very good -- doing it ad -Iib. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 have to say nice things about the County. Chairman Regalado: Then don't go. Commissioner Sanchez: It's going to take you 12 hours to write. 321 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Then don't go. Vice Chairman Winton: So, I have to write -- Chairman Regalado: Just call in sick. Call in sick. OK. What is it that you all want to do? Because they express their concerns. We have first part of the subpoena controversy. What else -- is there anything else, Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Vilarello: Yes. The other -- we've reached an agreement on pretty much most of the other issues. There might be some grammatical issues that we want to address. But the other issue was one of process, in the issuance of the subpoenas. The Coalition or members of the Coalition -- let me say how it's written in the ordinance. The ordinance requires that the CIP, the panel, decide when it wants to consider issuing a subpoena, and that is the only time the independent counsel goes and speaks with the State Attorney. The Coalition feels that any member of the CIP, any staff member can request that independent counsel go to the State Attorney's Office and inquire with regard to an issuance of a subpoena. So, they would be able to act prior to the panel deciding whether or not to issue a subpoena. Commissioner Sanchez: Through a vote or just one person saying it? Mr. Vilarello: Any member of the panel, any member of staff could ask independent counsel to consult with the State Attorney's Office. Commissioner Sanchez: Can you clarify that? Mr. Brown: Let me just clarify what we're saying here. We think that, in most cases, we're going to have an investigation that's ongoing. Staff, during that investigation, is going to come to the conclusion that they need a subpoena power to subpoena somebody to complete their investigation. We think that the next step should be that the independent counsel consults with the State Attorney, so they could detennine whether or not it is appropriate to issue a subpoena from the standpoint of interference. Then it should go to the panel, and the panel will have to make a policy decision on the advice of staff (INAUDIBLE). Commissioner Sanchez: That makes sense. Mr. Brown: Now, that's the way we do it. Now, when we said "any member of the CIP," it could be that you had during an actual hearing process, during a hearing process, somebody could come up that we're missing a witness. Why don't we get a subpoena for him? Again, before they vote on it, we would want the staff to make sure it's a good job -- good idea for the investigation, the independent counsel to determine that it's appropriate and then vote. Otherwise, we think that we're going to get -- we're going to look foolish. The panel's going to vote for a subpoena because it's a good idea, and then the independent counsel is going to come back and say, can't do it. Commissioner Sanchez: I don't have a problem with that. 322 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. Brown: And that's our thinking. Commissioner Teele: I don't have any problems with that. In fact, I think counsel ought to be free to confer with the State's Attorney, the Attorney General, the City Attorney on any matters that the Attorney feels to be -- Mr. Brown: Absolutely. Chairman Regalado: If we have a motion that would finalize the controversial issues and the (INAUDIBLE) Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Opposed? No. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-129 A MOTION IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROCESS OF ISSUANCE OF A SUBPOENA FROM THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL (CIP), TO PROVIDE THAT ANY MEMBER OF THE CIP WILL HAVE THE DISCRETION TO REQUEST INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO CONSULT WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND/OR THE CITY ATTORNEY BEFORE A VOTE IS TAKEN BY THE CIP TO ISSUE A SUBPOENA. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 323 January 24, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. So, that's -- Vice Chairman Winton: Did you vote "no?" Chairman Regalado: I vote "yes." Everybody vote "yes." Nobody oppose it. Now we go to the first reading ordinance. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. Chairman Regalado: Yes, yes, yes. Commissioner Sanchez: I have some issues that I have to clarify today, why I would not -- you know, I would vote no on it, and I made it very cheer. I am still not comfortable with convicted felons serving on the panel. Chairman Regalado: But I thought -- that's what I thought. So, it was my -- it's my mistake. I thought that we decided to work on this most controversial issues and vote on first reading, and then, during the process until the second reading, we'll -- if not, we're going to be here. Commissioner Sanchez: What I would respectfully -- Chairman Regalado: And we'll go with Johnny at 8:30. Commissioner Sanchez: What I would respectfully request from the Chairman is that I put issues of concern on the table so they know, and then on the next reading, we need to address. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Absolutely, absolutely. I mean -- absolutely. And that is what has been said here. They are going to have sufficient time to address their issues and, of course, you, as a member of the Commission, have all the time that you need. But there are some issues that even the City Attorney said that we need to discuss, so -- but this is first reading. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I'd still like to put them on the record so they know and -- Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Go ahead, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: At the next meeting, they'll be prepared for it. One of the issues is that the appointees should go through drug testing, a background check, and a psychological check. I'm going to leave out the polygraph. But I think it's appropriate to have the people that are serving there be -- you know, they've got to be in good standings. That's just that one. Now the other one. You know, I'm -- Commissioner Teele: Can I just inquire about one thing? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. 324 January 24, 2002 Commissioner Teele: What -- I have no problems with a background check, but as long as the background check -- who's going to get it and what is it going to be used for? Because, you see, that's a confidential document. Now, what could be argued is, what you're giving now is the police -- you know, God knows this City doesn't need to start -- Commissioner Sanchez: It doesn't have to be the Police Department that does it. But -- Commissioner Teele: That's the only person that can do a background check or law enforcement Commissioner Sanchez: You could hire somebody else. Commissioner Teele: FDLE (Florida Department of Law Enforcement), but it's a law enforcement agency. I mean, background check -- are we talking about a law enforcement background check? Commissioner Sanchez: Background check. Law enforcement does background checks, but there's other people that do background checks. I think it's important to know. It's important to have .._ at least anyone who's going to serve there, I think has to have -- be checked out. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, do you mean with regard to convictions of crimes or -- Commissioner Sanchez: Finance. You never know. You never know. You never do know. Mr. Vilarello: As board members, they would be required, under state law and local law, to comply with financial disclosures, et cetera, like other board members. When you say background search, you need to define that as to how far you're going to go with that? Because that by itself could be a little or a Tot. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I could always be voted down here, but I mean -- I just want to make sure that whoever's on that panel are good abiding citizens, that are going to have a big responsibility. And you don't want to have someone later on bring something up that may be an embarrassment to the panel and to this Commission. Chairman Regalado: But that would be a pending issue. We're not going to discuss that tonight, right? Commissioner Sanchez: OK. No. I'm putting that out. We could come back. And it's the art of compromising. It's coming -- Commissioner Teele: For the record, I think this City has had too long with too many so-called files where the real are perceived by so-called law enforcement people for political or whatever purposes, whether it's true or false, there's a perception out there. And I think that's the worst connotation of the City of Miami -- of all of the things other than killings, that the worst connotation is an agency that's running something like a Gestapo or SS operation, and I don't want to convey for one minute that the Police Department should have files on the CTP. 325 January 24, 2002 0 • Commissioner Sanchez: I'm not saying the Police Department. Commissioner Teele: Well, I don't know anybody else that's sworn around here that could do background checks. Unidentified Speaker: Metro -Dade. Commissioner Teele: Metro -Dade, that's the same thing. I mean, you know, you've got high -- you know, you've got officers over there and officers over here. I mean, you know, that's -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, it's just on the table. We'll dispute it at the next one. The other one is, once again, the convicted felon, which we'll also dispute. Commissioner Teele: It should be. You have a cop following you? Didn't I read a memo about a cop following you? Commissioner Sanchez: Cops don't follow me. Now, one of the things that I'm concerned with is, -- and I want to make sure -- and I think it's in the language here, that members shall complete training in ethic, conflict and interest, Florida sunshine law, and should therefore complete the citizens panel academy training, an approved training through NACOLE (National Association of the Citizens of Law Enforcement). Is that -- you have agreed on that? Ms. Me Elroy: We do agree that once selected, that the panel should go through some training. But the items that you just read are good, and there may be some additional. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Ms. Me Elroy: But we do support training, by all means. Commissioner Sanchez: You do support training? Ms. Me Elroy: Yes. And also -- Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, you can't have somebody sitting on the panel that doesn't know what they'll be investigating or -- Ms. Me Elroy: That's why they need to be orientated. That's why the training is needed. Commissioner Sanchez: Just not orientation. Training. It's very important. Ms. Me Elroy: Training and ongoing training, to keep people updated. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. And, once again, I want to try to have something in language there which clearly says that no case monitoring should begin until training is completed and the 326 January 24, 2002 0 0 board's Executive Director or Chairman or Chairwoman is comfortable that the board is competent to review cases. Do you -- would you agree on that? Ms. Me Elroy: There should be a time specified to provide this training in order for the board to begin to adequately do their job. Come again, they may not -- they don't have the necessary training, perhaps. So, there should be a time specified. And that needs to be worked out. Commissioner Sanchez: And another issue that I would like to further discuss, would be that the complaints should not be -- you know, should be -- whoever files the complaint should be in writing and signed. In other words, you know, I'm very skeptical of people just calling, you know, complaining on something and not even showing up, and being over the phone. You know, there's people that are going to get tickets and basically, you know, they're going to upset people out there and they're going to have a way to just pick up the phone and say, hey, such and such officer did this to me, and there we go. You might have numerous complaints on that. And that concerns me. Mr. Rameau: Well, there should be a way for that to be dealt with on a staff level. In other words, if someone calls in and gives an anonymous things and says, so and so was rude to me, and there were no other witnesses, then there's way to check that. But if someone calls in and says they saw a crime committed and they're afraid to give their name, because the crime was committed by a police officer, and therefore can be retaliated against, and there are other ways of verifying it, that crime actually occurred, then there should be some options available besides throwing away a possible criminal investigation just because someone is afraid of being retaliated against. Commissioner Sanchez: I agree with the point you're making. But in another sense, if you call a complaint and you don't give your name or anything, and it gets to where you go to court and you have no one to prosecute or in the process, you're basically, you know, chasing your tail. You're wasting your time. Mr. Rameau: Well, I mean, if there's no other witnesses, there's no one else, then the CIP would not be able to do an investigation. There has to be some mechanism on the staff level to deal with that. If they start an investigation and there's nowhere to go because there's no one else there, then there's nothing they can do with the file. But if there is something that they can go on, besides one, you know, witness who saw something and who doesn't want to reveal their name, then they should be -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's unfounded; it'll be unfounded, right'? It doesn't go in any file or -- you know, yeah, the officer got seven complaints and, you know, nobody signed thorn or anything, and it goes in an officer's file. These are the things that we have. Mr. Rameau: OK. I understand what you're saying. Commissioner Sanchez: Those are the things that we have to look after here, you know. We've got to make sure that it's done right. 327 January 24, 2002 0 • Mr. Rameau; We understand. OK. So -- well, then, there needs to be a classification that nothing happened to this and therefore it doesn't go into the officer's file. I understand that. When one person makes 50 anonymous calls on one cop, and so it's 50 different files. There has to be a way of dealing with that. But that can be done on a staff level. And there still has to be room -- Commissioner Sanchez: You know, the divorce rate to police officers is pretty high. I'm sure you're going to get a lot of complaints. Chairman Regalado: OK. So we have pending those issues for the next meeting, public hearing. We have pending the "X" files on the CIP members. Mr. Rameau: The other issues that we had pending were the Policy Review Board -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Rameau: City have a Policy Review Board. Chairman Regalado: Right. Mr. Rameau: And the staff, the funding for the staff. Chairman Regalado: And all the members will be afforded, of the Coalition and the public, time to -- when -- Mr. City Attorney, we're doing this on the first reading. When are we coming back with this? Commissioner Teele: Fourteenth of February. Mr. Vilarello: It would be the second meeting in February, which is now -- Chairman Regalado: There is no second meeting -- Mr. Vilarello: March 7th. Commissioner Sanchez: March the 7th. Chairman Regalado: You cannot do it on the 14th of February? Mr. Vilarello: We're not going to meet our advertising time. We have to advertise it 10 days in advance. I think the deadline, Mr. City Clerk, is tomorrow at noon or before the end of the day tomorrow? Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Friday, the 1st, at noon. Chairman Regalado: Friday. We're talking one week away. Come on. Let's do it on the 14th. You've got plenty of time to advertise. 328 January 24, 2002 0 Mr. Vilarello: We haven't -- Chairman Regalado: Come on. You've got plenty of time. Alex. Mr. Vilarello: I just need it advertised 10 days in advance. If he says February I st is fine, there's not a problem getting it ready by the -- Chairman Regalado: It's the 24th. We're talking about the 14th of -- January runs to the 31st. OK. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Tecle: Mr. Chairman, the attorney passed out eight things, and what I really want to do is try to get these issues resolved. This list has eight things. Have we gone over this so that there's no big issues? We may not come to a conclusion, but -- the first one was the purpose. The next one was this membership. The third one is officers. There's five people saying something about the chair. Chairman Regalado: Not being appointed by the Mayor, but by the CIP members themselves. Commissioner Teele: I mean, all you have to either agree on is that the Mayor will appoint the chair, or the chair -- or just some simple language that says, the CIP shall organize itself -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: -- in accordance with Roberts Rule of Order. Ms. Me Elroy: That's right. That's what we proposed. Chairman Regalado: And the Mayor would have -- the Mayor will have regular appointment. Commissioner Teele: The Mayor has -- and I think it takes away the -- Chairman Regalado: The pressure Commissioner Teele: The pressure, or even the impotence that it's a political appointment. I think all of these people want to try to get here without us, and the less we do is going to be the better. But we are going to give up our right to make the appointments, so -- Ms. Me Elroy: No, we're not asking you to do that. Commissioner Teele: But is it OK -- I mean, would the board -- if we gave them the language to just say, is that the CIP shall organize itself in accordance with Roberts Rules of Order? 329 January 24, 2002 E E Chairman Regalado: The Chairman or the Vice Chainnan, of course. They should name -- Commissioner Teele: Some language like that? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. You want to include that in as an amendment to the ordinance? Commissioner Teele: Or some words to that effect, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Vilarello: If that's the will of the Commission, that's fine. Commissioner Toole: Now, the quorum. Did we agree that the quorum should be -- Chairman Regalado: Nine. Commissioner Sanchez: Eight. Chairman Regalado: Eight. I'm sorry. Commissioner Toole: And I really want to make Ms. Rodriguez satisfied on this. I mean, Ms. Rodriguez, are we satisfied on the quorum issue? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: (INAUDIBLE). The quorum should be at least (INAUDIBLE). Commissioner Teele: So we're all in agreement that quorum will be at least half the -- the other issue is -- that was the big issue, number five. Six is the cooperation. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef That -- I think we've dealt with that. Commissioner Teele: OK. Seven is administrative assistant, and everybody's saying eliminate specific reference to the Office of Compliance language? Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: Correct, Commissioner Toole: How is that dealt with, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Vilarello: I'm sorry, with regard to -- Commissioner Teele: The second to the bottom, administrative assistant. Mr. Vilarello: We can modify it -- the Manager can appoint staff, as necessary, in the transition period, before they -- and remove OPC (Personal Computer) from that, if that's -- that seems to be the unanimous suggestion. 330 January 24, 2002 0 • Commissioner Teele: Now, you're saying that the Manager will assign staff, appoint staff, or you're saying that the Manager will make staff available for the board's appointment -- for the board's acceptance? Because I think it's a dig difference. Mr. Vilarello: Whatever y'all want. Ultimately, as they are appointed, they are not going to have staffing. They're going to -- the Manager -- my thought is that the Manager needs to provide staff to them in a transition period, while they get established, while they select their staff, that ultimately will take over. Commissioner Teele: I hilly agree. But I think the language needs to be a little bit more artfully drafted to say the Manager shall make staffing available to the board, and then give them the right -- if they -- you know, we've been to this thing about the police being -- Internal Review being in the Police Department. You know, these people -- I mean, not -- I don't mean City people. But everybody's so paranoid. I'd at least like for them to be able to have some feedback with the Manager so that if a staff is not acceptable, for whatever reason, that they can have that consultation through the Executive Director of it. But I think it should be very clear that the Manager shall make staffing available to the CIP, But to assign staff, in effect, implies now that the staff doesn't work for the Executive Director, or the persons that we've authorized them to hire. So, I mean, I just think there's some twitching to make sure that there's some consultation -- Vice Chairman Winton: I thought they didn't have staff, yet. I thought this was transition staff so that they can go out and do their interviewing and choose their own people. Ours go away. Commissioner Teele: I would hope -- I'll be very honest -- I would hope that the CIP would draw from some of the professional staff that the City has. We've got a lot of good people. There are a lot of good people in Professional Compliance. Vice Chairman Winton: But that still will be their choice. They'll interview them. Commissioner Teele: I think that's their choice. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: But I think, in making them available, they have the right to use them, and I would hope that they would use the staff that we have available. It's a lot faster to use -- but what you don't want to do is order them to use it. Then it's that issue of the independence again. It's the same thing about the attorney, where we went through -- they said they don't want the attorney, but let them use the advice. And then the last thing is the budget. And I just -- I think that the budget is simply a matter that the Manager and the Commission have to agree on a budget, and I don't think we can grant away our rights to -- and Mr. Manager, I don't want to say the wrong thing here, but I don't think we can delegate our duties, under the state law, et cetera, to provide budget. I think we should have a language that the CIP shall have the right to appear during the budget hearings; that is, you don't have to come through the Manager. You can come independently. The same as the Clerk can do and the same as the Attorney can do. But that the Manager shall make a recommendation and -- on your budget. You shall submit your budget to the Manager, the same way every other department does, and that you'll have the independent 331 January 24, 2002 0 0 right to appear before the Commission during budget hearings and make any requests that you would need. And I think that balances everybody's right. Mr. Manager, do you have a problem with that? Mr. Gimenez: No, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. Is there a motion for the ordinance? Commissioner Teele: Could we get the title read, so we know what we're -- Chairman Regalado: The title of this ordinance is -- Commissioner Teele: Let the attorney read it. It's long. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, I know. Commissioner Sanchez: It's first reading. Chairman Regalado: It's first reading. But the title is amending City Charter, police complaints against police -- entitled police complaints against police officers. Mr. City Attorney, read the ordinance. Mr. Vilarello: This is an ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending -- Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. We don't have a motion and a second. Commissioner Taele: I'll be pleased to move it for purposes of discussion. Chairman Regalado: Do we have a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. Now, we have a motion and a second. Roll call. 332 January 24, 2002 0 An Ordinance entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 42, ARTICLE 3 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF M [AMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED POLICE COMPLAINTS AGAINST POLICE OFFICERS; TO AMEND THE TITLE TO COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION AND REVIEW TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH THE CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL TO SERVE AS INDEPENDENT CITIZENS OVERSIGHT WITH AUTHORITY TO REVIEW ALLEGATIONS AND CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS RELATED TO POLICE MISCONDUCT, REVIEW REPORTS OF INVESTIGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT, AND POLICIES OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS FOR COMPLAINTS ALLEGING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY TO RELEVANT AGENCIES, AND EMPOWER TO ISSUE SUBPOENAS FOR CERTAIN INVESTIGATIONS AFTER CONSULTING WITH THE STATE ATTORNEY; PROVIDED THAT NO IMMUNITY BE CONFERRED BY THE CIP; REVIEW DOCUMENTATION RELATED TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION OF CERTAIN OTHER ENFORCEMENT SWORN AND FIRE OFFICERS, AND ,SETTING FORTH THE CIP'S PURPOSES, POWERS AND DUTIES, MEMBERSHIPS, NOMINATION OF MEMBERS, TERM OF OFFICE, VACANCIES, OFFICERS, PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY, RULES OF PROCEDURE, MEETING, VOTING AND QUORUM, ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS, PROCEDURES, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AND COUNSEL; AND MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-892 AND NEW SECTIONS 42-80 THROUGH 42-91 TO SAID CODE; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION AS TO THE TOTAL ESTIMATED DOLLAR ALLOCATION NECESSARY TO COVER THE EXPENSES TO INCURRED BY THE CIP DURING THE EXECUTION OF ITS DUTIES AND PRESENT SAME TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR ITS REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. 333 January 24, 2002 E 0 Was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Tecle, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. It passes. Ms. Rodriguez-Tasef: Thank you. 334 January 24, 2002 67. DIRECT MANAGER TO MAKE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS FOR FAREWELL PARTY AT SHIP "AMISTAD " TO HONOR WALTER J. FOEMAN WHO WILL RETIRE AS CITY CLERK ON FEBRUARY 1, 2002. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, while the members of the community are here, this is perhaps a good moment to reflect on one of our most outstanding employees of the City, who's about to be dearly departed. Chairman Regalado: What? Commissioner Sanchez: Walter Foeman, come on up. You're the next contestant on the Price is Right. Chairman Regalado: Dearly departed. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): That's what happens if you leave. Commissioner Sanchez: Come on up, Walter. Chairman Regalado: He's not dearly departed. He's just leaving to Broward. Commissioner Sanchez: You're the next contestant on the Price is Right. Well, where's the cake? Walter, we have a proclamation for you from the City of Miami, where it reads: Whereas the City of Miami values a committed, professional work force and seeks to pay tribute to those employees who persevere unselfishly and creatively for the public good; whereas Walter J. Foeman, a 22 -year career employee of the City of Miami, having received his bachelor and master's degrees from Howard University in Washington, DC, and the Certified Municipal Clerk status at the Municipal Clerk Institute of Syracuse University, has amassed a distinguished record as a public servant, with early experience at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Intern in the Office of the late Congressman Claude Pepper and as a Research Assistant in the Industry of Urban Affairs and Research in Washington, DC, and with a long-term tenure with our City, moving up from Senior Management Analyst to Public Relations Agent to Assistant City Clerk to City Clerk; and whereas Mr. Foeman, having acquired grants totaling over two hundred thousand, has made fine arts of records and time management and has created an outstanding, highly rated system for monitoring and archiving documents and official materials, keeping an accurate record of minutes and attendance at City boards and committees, supervising and certifying elections and, in general, establishing himself as invaluable to the City and acquitting himself always with exquisite poise behind a gentle, soft-spoken demeanor; and whereas it is fitting and appropriate that local authorities of the City of Miami, and on behalf of our citizens, pause in our deliberation to pay special tribute herewith to our City Clerk, Walter J. Foeman, an employee who has given himself, a 1999 New Times "Best Bureaucrat" who contributed to our City and have made a quantified difference in our government and whose value to our system is clearly immeasurable. Now, therefore, we, the Mayor and the sitting Commissioners of the City of Miami, Florida, do hereby proclaim Thursday, the 24th of January, of the year 2002, as Walter J. Foeman, City of Miami, 1980 to the year 2002. In observance therefore, we call upon all citizens of the City of Miami to join us in celebrating the outstanding career of Walter J. 335 January 24, 2002 • /0 Foeman. We urge everyone to join us in wishing a fond farewell to our colleague, Walter J. Foeman, a citizen who has shared freely, and with grace, his expertise and time. (APPLAUSE) Commissioner Sanchez: Hey, did I hear a boo over there? I better not here a boo over there. Hey, if you don't like it over in Broward, come on back. Listen, I think each Commissioner should have -- each Commissioner should say a few words, because we -- I know that I speak from the heart, Walter. The three years that I've been here, you are a true professional, a scholar and I'm sure going to miss you. Chairman Regalado: This is the only City Clerk that I've known since I was elected in 1996, and Walter has been a person that not only -- and I said it, he had imagination. He had tried to do things different, but also trying -- he tried also to be of service and I just hope that the next City Cleric of the City of Miami will follow in Walter's footsteps. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm the newest Commissioner here and I have to recognize that I owe a lot to Walter. When I presented my papers -- or filed my papers to run for City Commissioner, he asked me for so many different documents and proof of so many things that I -- he even got me upset and I said, gee, it's so hard to run for City Commissioner. Why does this man have to be so picky? And I complained. Let me tell you. Today, Walter -- and I already told you personally, two months ago -- public I have to say thank you for being so professional, for requesting so many documents because the time came when my opponent tried to disqualify me and thanks to you, that was so persisting and so picky and that request -- required me to bring and present all the documentation that you did, I was able to continue my career and to win the election. So, from the bottom of my heart, thank you very much. You are a real professional. God bless you. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Walter, you and I have already talked, so you know how I fecl. I think you've done one hell of a job in this City and, as Commissioner Teele said today, it should be illegal for you to leave because you don't even have any gray hair. You ought to be staying with us, but I guess I don't blame you. Commissioner Sanchez: Hey, ask him what color he's using. Vice Chairman Winton: But -- yeah. But it's been great. And come back and visit us. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission, the public, Walter Foeman certainly represents the best in a career civil servant and a professional, and I think our City is extremely fortunate to have had his service. I've only served with him for four years. But Walter is certainly as competent or more competent than anyone that I've had the pleasure of meeting and working with in the similar profession. I think it's really important that the public know that Walter has tried to bring City Hall closer to them, and we won't talk about the fact that he was almost arrested by the police for trying to sell passports to get money to maintain the City services, but, again, it underscores the fact that lie's tried to make America work and this City work for our citizens by going out there literally hawking passports outside of the swearing in 336 January 24, 2002 • ceremony each four or five months when the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) is swearing in citizens. One of the things that Walter has made a tremendous difference, and that's going to affect every citizen in this community is getting our Clerk's Office online and getting technology applied so that citizens can come in and get information. I was in a deposition yesterday and the question turned on "Where did you get the information?" And the attorney said, "Well, I received it from the Clerk's Office, and I've never gotten such a fast response and a professional response." Walter, that was someone who's suing the City and maybe you shouldn't be so fast to help. But, again, it underscores what the essence of a professional is. He has a job to do and without regard to who comes into his office and do it. The time is now 11:10 -- 11:09, and here we are again. We've cheated Walter out of his day. He's only had 50 minutes -- will only have 50 minutes of his day. So, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, what I would like to do is move that Walter be required to come back to the City once more and that the Manager and his staff coordinate and appropriate -- Commissioner Sanchez: Farewell. Commissioner Teele: -- farewelI party in connection with Black History Month and the ""AMISTAD"," and that the appropriate staff and expenditures be made to salute Walter, and any other persons that would be appropriate during that "AMISTAD" celebration that may have retired. Because we owe it to Walter to send him out with a salute. And, so, I would so move, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second. What you -- what you're saying is that we hold this get away party for Walter at the "AMISTAD"? Commissioner Teele: At the "AMISTAD". And let the Manager's staff coordinate it. Chairman Regalado: OK. It would be at the "AMISTAD" docked at Bicentennial Park. Commissioner Sanchez: Can we request a fly by? Chairman Regalado: We'll be there, Walter. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, can we request a fly by? Commissioner Teele: Call the question. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): You can request anything you want. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. (APPLAUSE) 337 January 24, 2002 u The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-130 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO MAKE NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS FOR A FAREWELL PARTY AT THE SHIP " AMISTAD " TO HONOR WALTER J. FOEMAN WHO WILL RETIRE AS CITY CLERK ON FEBRUARY 1, 2002. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None, 338 January 24, 2002 • 68. DIRECT MANAGER TO CONDUCT REVIEW AND PRESENT PLAN RELATING TO COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS (LE. RESTAURANTS, RETAIL BOOKSTORES, STUDIOS, MUSEUMS, ETC) LOCATED ALONG NORTHEAST 2N" AVENUE, BETWEEN NORTHEAST 61 S' STREET SOUTH TO NORTHEAST 59TIl TERRACE, TO MAKE EXISTING ESTABLISHMENTS ELIGIBLE FOR CONSIDERATION COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE, CONSISTENT WITH LITTLE HAITI PARK INITIATIVE AND APPLICABLE COMPONENTS OF F.E.C. STUDY FUNDING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN LITTLE HAITI PILOT JOB CREATION PROGRAM. Commissioner Teele: Pocket -- Commissioner Sanchez: You got pockets? Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele has some pocket items. I just have some comments for the Manager on the bond list -- I'll be brief. Commissioner Teele: The three pocket items that 1 have, none of them instruct -- all of them instruct the Manager to come back to the Commission with a report of some type. This is a resolution to the -- of the City Commission requesting the Manager to conduct a review and present a plan related to the commercial establishments, i.e., restaurants, retail bookstores, museums, et cetera, located along Northeast 2nd Avenue, between 61st Street south to Northeast 59th Terrace; to make existing establishments eligible for consideration for Code compliance, consistent — assistance, consistent with the Little Haiti Park initiative and the applicable components of the FEC (Florida East Coast) study from the program and funding previously approved in the Little Haiti Jobs Creation Project, and to report back to the Commission at the next meeting; further requesting the Manager and the City Cleric to provide public notice of this meeting. So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): "Aye." Chairman Regalado: No one opposed. 339 January 24, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO, 02-131 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT A STUDY RELATED TO COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS (I.E. RESTAURANTS, RETAIL BOOKSTORES, STUDIOS„ MUSEUMS, ETC.) LOCATED ALONG NORTHEAST 2N" AVENUE, BETWEEN NORTHEAST 59"" TERRACE AND NORTHEAST 61"' STREET, TO DETERMINE THE STEPS NECESSARY TO MAKE THE EXISTING ESTABLISHMENTS ELIGIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE, CONSISTENT WITH THE FUNDING AND DIRECTIVES PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR THE LITTLE HAITI PARK INITIATIVE, APPLICABLE COMPONENTS OF THE F.E.C. STUDY, AND THE LITTLE HAITI PILOT JOB CREATION PROGRAM; DIRECTING THE, CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT A PLAN IN RESPONSE TO THE STUDY FOR CITY COMMISSION REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION AT THE NEXT CITY COMMISSION MEETING; AND FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THIS MATTER. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzdlcz Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 340 January 24, 2002 • 69. DIRECT MANAGER TO INSTRUCT DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING TO DRAFT AMENDATORY ORDINANCE TO CITY CODE TO CHANGE NAME OF "OMNI AREA MEDIA DISTRICT" TO "FIRE STATION NUMBER TWO MOTION PICTURE DISTRICT," IN RECOGNITION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FIRE STATION NUMBER TWO'S HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE TO AREA. Commissioner Teele: This is a resolution of the City Commission requesting the Manager to instruct the Department of Planning and Zoning to draft an amendatory ordinance for the City code, to consider -- of the City Code for the Commission to consider a change in the name of the Omni Area Media District to Fire Station Number 2 Media and Motion Picture District in recognition and acknowledgement of Fire Station Number 2's historic significance to the area. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Commissioner Teele: So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Opposed? No. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-132 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING TO DRAFT AN AMENDATORY ORDINANCE TO THE CITY CODE FOR CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERATION TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE "OMNI AREA MEDIA DISTRICT" TO "FIRE STATION NO. 2 MEDIA AND MOTION PICTURE DISTRICT," IN RECOGNITION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF FIRE STATION NUMBER TWO'S HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE TO THE AREA. 341 January 24, 2002 11 (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 342 January 24, 2002 • 70. DIRECT MANAGER TO CONDUCT THOROUGH REVIEW OF ALL CITY PARKS FOR PURPOSE OF MAXIMIZING LAND AND PARK FACILITIES FOR SOCCER FIELDS. Commissioner Teele: And the last one is a resolution of the City Commission directing the City Manager to review all parks citywide for the purpose of maximizing land and parks facilities for potential soccer fields throughout the City. So moved. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. If all in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-133 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT A THOROUGH REVIEW OF ALL CITY OF MIAMI PARKS FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAXIMIZING THE LAND AND PARK FACILITIES FOR SOCCER FIELDS. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 343 January 24, 2002 71. (A) MANAGER TO MEET WITH COMMISSION ON BOND LIST FOR DISCUSSION AT FUTURE COMMISSION MEETING. (B) DIRECTOR OF SOLID WASTE TO MEET WITH COMMISSION REGARDING UPDATE ON PILOT PROGRAM. Chairman Regalado: And, Mr. Manager, on the bond list, next Commission meeting, maybe we can discuss that, but I hope that you would be able to meet with members of the Commission to discuss another draft. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, I'd like to see if we can get input from all the Commissioners on what they'd like to see. And I've put together some kind of a list with all the requests and bring it forward to the Commission. Chairman Regalado: I would just remind the members of the Commission that included in the language of the bond there was the Citizens Oversight Panel for the bond issue and we need to move that, because I've gotten several questions about this panel in my office W -1d on the radio and TV (television) program, and we -- I know that we did the ordinance, but we haven't moved on this committee. Commissioner Teele: Have we done the second reading? Chairman Regalado: No, we don't. Mr. Gimenez: The first one's already been done. I think we're ready for the second one. Mr. Chairman, during the meeting you requested that we give some kind of an update on the Solid Waste and the Pilot Program. We can do that now or I can have the Director meet with you individually and bring you up to speed, Chairman Regalado: Individually, Individually. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: We need a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Bye. 344 January 24, 2002 L] The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO, 02-134 A MOTION TO ADJOURN CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON THIS SAME DATE. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzdlez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None, ABSENT: None. 345 January 24, 2002 C THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 11:13 P.M. ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Sylvia Scheider ASSISTANT CITY CLERK MANUELA.DIAZ MAYOR 346 January 24, 2002