Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-03-07 Minutes• • CITY OF MIAMI CITY COMMISSION MEETING M IN UTE S OF MEETING HELD ON MARCH 7, 2002 PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Sylvia Scheider/Acting City Clerk CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 7th day of March 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 9:20 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 Gimenez, City Manager Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Now, are we going to start? We have several announcements, but before that, we're going to ask Reverend Willy Leonard to give us the invocation, Commissioner Sanchez will do the pledge of allegiance. And if you please all stand. Reverend. An invocation was delivered by Reverend Willy Leonard, followed by Commissioner Sanchez leading those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. 1. APPROVE CITY ATTORNEY'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION RELATED TO DELOITTE-TOUCHE, LLP & FRANK PAREDES VS. CITY OF MIAMI. Chairman Regalado: I have some announcements to make, and I need the City Commission to concur. The Mayor has asked that his items will be brought at 3 p.m., when we return for the afternoon session. At that time, he's going to present proclamations. And he was asking, if it's OK with you all, to be here around three for the Women's Month of Proclamations, and the Mayor's items. Commissioner Sanchez has requested that one of his items be heard on a public hearing, after 5:45. That would be done. Also, several residents from the Upper Eastside have requested that the billboard ordinance will be heard after 6 p.m. So, if it's OK with you, we'll do that. Also, residents of the Grove have requested that the PUD (Planned Unit Development) will be heard at -- after 6, so they have time to be here and participate. So, we have zoning items that we have to deal before 6. We have the Mayor's items and the ceremony at 3. So, we have plenty of things to do. Hopefully -- well, hopefully, I was planning to sort of ask the people -- some of the people that want to be here for the PUD item are really to support. So, that would not be that difficult. On the billboard issues, there are some people who would like to make their comments and they're welcomed to, as this is a public hearing. So, having said that, we have a few proclamations. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I would move that the executive session, previously scheduled for 9 a.m. be -- Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioners, I'm going to withdraw the request to have the executive session this morning -- Commissioner Teele: -- be withdrawn. So moved. Mr. Vilarello: From the agenda today. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. 2 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: -- to withdraw the executive session and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-208 A MOTION APPROVING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION RELATED TO DELOITTE-TOUCHE, LLP & FRANK PAREDES VS. CITY OF MIAMI PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED FOR 9:00 A.M. ON THIS SAME DATE. 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. 3 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Now, we have to decide something right away. The March 28th meeting, it falls on a Thursday -- is Holy Thursday, the second day of Passover. There are some people that have requested that because this impacts Christians and Jews, that we sort of change this meeting. So, for your information, the Mayor is doing his State of the City Address on March 27th. That would be a Wednesday. So, it's either you want to go on a Tuesday or you want the first week of April for the March 28th meeting. You all decide. Commissioner Teele: Can we can we take it up at 3 p.m. today? Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, respectfully. You've advised us. Could we have some time to consider it with our schedules, and decide it at 3 p.m. today? Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. So, at 3 we'll decide. But just make a note that it's going to be very difficult and sensitive to have that meeting on the Thursday. So, we need to -- and the Mayor has his speech that we're supposed to be there, of course, on the 27th, which is a Wednesday. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Are you sure we're supposed to be there on this, you and I? Chairman Regalado: This one, I'm sure that you will be there. I will be there. And very happy by the way. 4 March 7, 2002 3. PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER REGALADO TO MEMBERS OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD: ADA ROJAS, REV WILLIE LEONARD, LINDA ROMERO, TORRIS COOPER, ANTHONY ROBBINS, BEATRIZ MENENDEZ APONTE, REV. RICHARD BENNETT, MARIA ZORILLA CLARK; SALUTE TO MIRTA FUENTES FROM COMMISSIONER REGALADO IN RECOGNITION OF HER WORK FOR CHILDREN OF MIAMI WITH HER ANNUAL TOYS DRIVE, AMIGOS TOGETHER FOR KIDS. (See #22). Chairman Regalado: We have some proclamations. And I would ask the members of the Community Relations Board to come up here, please, to receive. 5 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. We have the consent agenda. We're going to try to move this quick. But I think that it's important that we address one item. And I'm going to jump the consent agenda. And this is the appointment of the City Clerk of the City of Miami. The City Commission has received the resumes of the candidates. I'm sure that members of the Commission have met with the applicants. We have a memo, a "Dear Colleague" letter from Commissioner Teele, from two days ago. And yesterday we have a memo from the Mayor, and it's about the position of the City Clerk. As directed by the Commission, all the applications were received by the City Clerk, forwarded to the members of the Commission. And as directed today, we have to appoint the new City Clerk of the City of Miami. So, Commissioner Teele, do you have a motion? Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the Commission, Mr. Manager, Mr. Attorney, in receiving the applications and reviewing the Charter, the important issue that I wish this Commission to take note of is that we have two officers that are officers of the City and the corporation who report directly to us. Those two officers are the City Attorney and the City Clerk. And I think it's important that, in our conduct of our duties, that we not dilute or diminish our responsibilities and authority in making those appointments. I would note that the Mayor has a responsibility, under our revised Charter, of appointing or nominating the Manager to us for our confirmation, based upon a majority or an extraordinary majority to reject that. However, consistent, I think, with the principles that have guided this Commission to date -- at least since I've been here, which is harmony -- I've taken the opportunity to advise both the City Attorney and the City Clerk -- the City Attorney and the City Manager of my intent to nominate the applicant -- one of the applicants. Both have had a harmonious working relationship in the past with the individual and I think -- I did not seek, nor am I requesting then or now their advice or recommendations, because I think that raises some other issues. The applicant that I have outlined in a four-page memorandum, the reasons why, I think has three skills that are essential today as we move forward. First and foremost, budget ex -- budgetary and management experience. As I noted in the memorandum, the individual served as the Budget Analyst for the Fire Department and worked directly for our Manager in that role and with our Manager in that role. And noting that the Fire Department is the second largest department in the City, we're not aware of any major irregularities during that period of time, at least not to date. Secondly, is technology. Under the previous Clerk, this office has embarked upon what is one of most ambitious technology upgrades, both from the context of the Legistar System, which will make information available, not only to departments, but to the public, by the Internet. The proceedings -- the full background and proceedings of our agenda and agenda packet will be available. And that process is being rolled out in conjunction with ITD (Information Technology Department). But I think it's important to note that the applicant has been an instructor -- has not only gone to school, but has been an instructor in technology and computers. And, thirdly, and most importantly, is the role -- the essential role of the Clerk. The applicant serves as the clerk of an independent board in a very similar role that our Clerk is required to perform. Indeed, runs elections, independent of the Clerk for elections, to board -- to the various Civil Service Board by the employees of our City, and has tremendous respect and competence. Finally, in this regard, I took the opportunity to meet with the previous Clerk and to seek his advice regarding if there are any reasons or any information that he may have regarding the applicant? To the 6 March 7, 2002 contrary, he indicated that the applicant would serve extremely well. Although, he indicated that he feels that the Department of the Clerk has outstanding personnel and outstanding people. In that regard, I would also indicate that the applicant has very high academic credentials and collegiate degrees, et cetera, and has worked extremely well with the Clerk's staff in the past. I should also indicate that the acting Clerk, who did not apply, has done an outstanding job, and I've been assured will continue to do an outstanding job, and will advise -- in some ways, looks forward to having more help in the office. And, so, without further ado, Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to nominate the person of Priscilla Thompson, who served as an applicant -- one of 12 applicants, and is fully qualified. The newspaper today indicated that I have indicated a preference for race. Nothing should be further from the truth, neither in my letters or my private conversations. I have said, repeatedly, that I think it's important that competent and qualified African-Americans be sought out and given an opportunity. But I will say here on the record, for all to know, that I will never support an African-American that is not qualified for any position in this City or in any public office that I'm privileged to serve in, not for any reason political or otherwise. And I would note that while Ms. Thompson is an African-American, she breaks a more important barrier, which is a gender barrier around this place, in being the only female of the five elected, plus the Mayor, six, plus the three appointed, in some ways breaks more importantly the "good old boy" network barrier down a little bit. And, so, I'm very pleased to nominate both an African-American and a woman, but not because of those factors, but because of her competence. So moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion to nominate Priscilla Thompson as City Clerk of the City of Miami. Do we have a second? Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second the motion. Chairman Regalado: It's been seconded by Vice Chair Johnny Winton. Madam Acting City Clerk, call the roll, please. Priscilla Thompson has been appointed City Clerk of the City of Miami. (APPLAUSE) Chairman Regalado: So, Madam Acting City Clerk, would you swear her in? Sylvia Scheider (Acting City Clerk): Certainly. Chairman Regalado: Would you come up to be sworn? Note for the Record: At this time Acting City Clerk, Sylvia Scheider, swore in Priscilla A. Thompson as the new City Clerk for the City of Miami. (APPLAUSE) 7 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-209 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ELECTING AND APPOINTING PRISCILLA A. THOMPSON AS CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO HOLD OFFICE AS PROVIDED FOR IN THE CITY CHARTER. (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. Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Honorable Mayor, members of the Commission, I thank this honorable Commission for your vote of confidence in supporting me as your City Clerk. I am deeply humbled and honored to serve this great City in such a capacity. It is my promise that our City Clerk team will continue to move forward with the innovative projects initiated by former City Clerk, Walter Foeman. Our goal to provide excellent customer service will be demonstrated in every aspect of our office and in our interaction with all City departments. I would also like to thank my family, friends, co-workers, Civil Service Board members for your patience, support, ever -flowing words of encouragement and ability to make life just a downright interesting learning process. Each of you are the wind beneath my wings. Also, thanks to the City Manager and his staff for the professional relationships I have enjoyed over the years. I look forward to continuing those positive friendships. Again, thank you, Commissioners, for entrusting me to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the office of City Clerk. It is indeed my pleasure to work with each of you toward improving the quality of life for all the residents of the City of Miami. Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Chairman Regalado: Madam City Clerk, welcome. Do you want to test your seat, or you rather wait and be here the next session? It's up to you. Commissioner Sanchez: She's working for free right now 8 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir Vice Chairman Winton: There were a number of resumes that came in, other people interested in this job, and I forget -- I think they came into the Clerk's Office. I hope that, as a matter of procedure, that we write a very nice letter back to each of those applicants and express our appreciation for their interest in the job and tell them that we did fill the job, so that they don't just leave -- don't get left hanging. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. The City Clerk is directed to do that. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, respectfully. Could we direct the City Attorney to write that letter? It would be interesting for the Clerk to write the letter, "Thank you for your kindness Chairman Regalado: But, Arthur -- Commissioner Teele: -- "but we -- but I (INAUDIBLE)." Mr. City Attorney, write the -- Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. There are no mayoral vetoes. 9 March 7, 2002 5. CONSENT AGENDA. Chairman Regalado: So, we proceed with the regular agenda. The consent agenda. Anybody wants to pull an item of the consent agenda? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, do we have to stay here all night? We're going to be here next week. Let's agree to get out of here around -- Vice Chairman Winton: Move the consent agenda, then. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: This is a public hearing. Anybody from the public on the consent agenda? No one has come forth. There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 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 THE CITY COMMISSION. Thereupon, on motion duly made by Vice Chairman Winton and seconded by Commissioner Teele, the consent agenda items were passed 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 Gonzalez 10 March 7, 2002 5.1 ACCEPT BID OF MCO CONSTRUCTION & SERVICES, INC., FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "WILLIAMS PARK BUILDINGS AND POOL RENOVATIONS PROJECT, 13- 6407', $198,900; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BONDS, TOTAL COST $232,785. RESOLUTION NO. 02-210 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF MCO CONSTRUCTION & SERVICES, INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS DATED JANUARY 8, 2002, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "WILLIAMS PARK BUILDINGS AND POOL RENOVATIONS PROJECT, B- 6407", IN THE AMOUNT OF $198,900; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BONDS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 331351, AS APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $198,900 FOR THE CONTRACT COSTS, AND $33,885 FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $232,785; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE. 1 l March 7, 2002 5.2 ACCEPT BID OF ROYAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC, FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PHASE XX, B-4647', $173,075; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT TOTAL COST $200,000. RESOLUTION NO. 02-211 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF ROYAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS, DATED DECEMBER 18, 2001, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PHASE XX, B-4647', IN THE AMOUNT OF $173,075; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 341183, AS APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $173,075 FOR THE CONTRACT COSTS, AND $26,925 FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL COST OF $200,000; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE. 5.3 ACCEPT BID OF PRIDE ENTERPRISES PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-01-290, FOR PROCUREMENT OF ONE DUI/BREATH ALCOHOL TESTING VEHICLE FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR USE BY DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $139,594.25; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT V. RESOLUTION NO. 02-212 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF PRIDE ENTERPRISES, THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00- 01-290, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF ONE DUI/BREATH ALCOHOL TESTING VEHICLE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR USE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $139,594.25; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT V, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 142023.290525.6.840. 12 March 7, 2002 5.4 ACCEPT BID OF ABOVE ALL GARAGE DOOR AND PARTS, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-01-199, FOR REPLACEMENT OF FOUR ROLLING GRILLS AND FIVE DOOR OPERATORS AT MIAMI RIVERSIDE CENTER PARKING GARAGE, FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, $10,184; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. RESOLUTION NO. 02-213 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF ABOVE ALL GARAGE DOOR AND PARTS, THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-01-199, DATED AUGUST 13, 2001, FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF FOUR ROLLING GRILLS AND FIVE DOOR OPERATORS AT THE MIAMI RIVERSIDE CENTER PARKING GARAGE, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,184; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 311042.429301.6.830. 5.5 ACCEPT BID OF TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC., PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-039 FOR PROCUREMENT OF ELEVEN SPECIAL CHAINSAWS FOR DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, $15,149; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. RESOLUTION NO. 02-214 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF TEN -8 FIRE EQUIPMENT, INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01- 02-039, DATED JANUARY 7, 2002, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF ELEVEN SPECIAL CHAINSAWS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, ON AN AS NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,149; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 313304, AS FUNDED BY THE FIRE ASSESSMENT FEE. 13 March 7, 2002 5.6 APPROVE PROCUREMENT OF FIVE CUSHMAN CLASSIC TURF TRUCKSTERS, MODEL 898543B, WITH OPTIONS, FOR USE BY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, FROM GOLF VENTURES, INC. FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, UNDER EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 070-840-01-1, $44,479; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. RESOLUTION NO. 02-215 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF FIVE CUSHMAN CLASSIC TURF TRUCKSTERS, MODEL 898543B, WITH OPTIONS, FOR USE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, FROM GOLF' VENTURES, INC. FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, UNDER EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 070-840-01-1, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MARCH 31, 2002, AND ANY EXTENSIONS, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $44,479; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NOS. 311702.429401.6.840 AND 331368.589301.6.840, AS APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED. 5.7 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF AMERICAS LLC, FOR USE OF 1,526 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE, LOCATED AT 50 NORTHEAST 9TH STREET FOR OPERATION OF DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT TEAM. RESOLUTION NO. 02-216 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LEASE AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE AMERICAS LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ("LESSOR"), FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 1,526 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE SPACE, LOCATED AT 50 NORTHEAST 9TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE OPERATION OF THE DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT TEAM, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: (1) A TERM OF FIVE YEARS WITH NO OPTION TO RENEW, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1.00; (2) LESSOR TO PAY ALL COMMON AREA OPERATING CHARGES; AND (3) LESSOR TO PROVIDE TWO PARKING SPACES, WITH ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT. 14 March 7, 2002 5.8 AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY FELICIA FUENTES, $50,000 IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST CITY AND ROBERT NONES IN CASE OF FELICIA FUENTES VS. CITY AND ROBERTO NONES; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND. RESOLUTION NO. 02-217 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY FELICIA FUENTES, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $50,000, IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ROBERT NONES IN THE CASE OF FELICIA FUENTES VS. C17Y OF' MIAMI AND ROBLRIO NONES, ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 98-2661 CA (10), UPON THE EXECUTION OF A GENERAL RELEASE RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF- INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND, INDEX CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.653. 5.9 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO APPLY FOR AND ACCEPT GRANT FUNDS FROM FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, $296,290 FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF FUEL DOCK AT DINNER KEY MARINA; AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF MATCHING FUNDS, $296,290 FROM STRATEGIC INITIATIVE FUNDS. RESOLUTION NO. 02-218 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDING TO THE FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT ("FIND") WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $296,290, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A FUEL DOCK AT DINNER KEY MARINA; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE GRANT WHEN AWARDED, AND TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $296,290, FROM STRATEGIC INITIATIVE FUNDS AS THE CITY'S REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS FOR AWARD OF THE GRANT. 15 March 7, 2002 6. APPROVE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED WITHIN CITY THOROUGHFARES BY CARE RESOURCES TO PROMOTE 14TH ANNUAL AIDS WALK TO BE HELD ON APRIL 21, 2002. Chairman Regalado: We now go to the blue pages. Mayor Diaz will be here at 3 p.m. and he will be presenting the City Commission with his item. Commissioner Gonzalez, do you have any items on your page? Commissioner Gonzalez: No, I don't. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: Got another banner request, AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) Walk-A-Thon. So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. Do it before the billboard ordinance. Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-219 A MOTION APPROVING THE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI THOROUGHFARES BY CARE RESOURCES TO PROMOTE THE 14TH ANNUAL AIDS WALK TO BE HELD ON APRIL 21, 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. 16 March 7, 2002 7. URGE LEGISLATURE OF STATE OF FLORIDA TO ENACT HOUSE/SENATE BILL HB67/SB156, WHICH WILL RELIEVE COASTAL COMMUNITIES OF EXCESSIVE WINDSTORM INSURANCE RATES. Vice Chairman Winton: Second one is a resolution -- Chairman Regalado: You have a 10 a.m. You requested a public hearing, I remember Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, that's right. Chairman Regalado: -- on these two -- do you want to defer this -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, please. Chairman Regalado: OK. You have a 6 p.m. public hearing on the naming of a park. So, we'll just wait until you're ready, Mr. Vice Chairman. Commissioner Joe Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just for the record, there is an item that I have requested to be time certain later on, around 5, 5:30, reference the awnings. And those are complaints of merchants and awning companies complaining about the fees and the permits in the City of Miami. So, I would ask that that item be heard later on. Moving on to my other item. We've all heard about the windstorm insurance, the excessive windstorm insurance rates. And being that the eastcoast along the I-95 -- east of I-95, the windstorm insurance continues to skyrocket, and it is formulated that every year, every two years it's going up just about almost 40 percent. It's going to get to a point where people are just not going to have the resource to pay such high windstorm insurance. While up in Tallahassee, I had the opportunity to speak to the Senator and also the Representative. They're pushing this bill to enact -- to minimize the windstorm insurance. And I have a resolution that I would like to read for the record, and so moved. Mr. Vilarello: It's on Supplemental Agenda Number 2. S-2 on the Supplemental agenda. Chairman Regalado: Yes, I see it. I see it. Commissioner Sanchez: It's a resolution of the City of Miami Commission urging the legislators of the State of Florida to enact House Bill 1361 and Senate Bill 1418, which, if adopted, will relieve coastal communities of excessive windstorm insurance rates; further directing the City Clerk to transmit a copy of this resolution to the herein designee officials in Tallahassee. So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second. Commissioner Gonzdlez: Second. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, just for the record, the House Bill and Senate Bill will have to be corrected in the resolution. 17 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Vilarello: The numbers. Commissioner Sanchez: They have to be amended. Those are the wrong House -- but for the record, it's House Bill 1361 and Senate Bill 1418. Vice Chairman Winton: And this resolution is simply in support of those bills, right? Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Commissioner Sanchez: And just to put on the record, I don't think there is a municipality in the state of Florida that's not supporting this. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion. We have a second? 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. 02-220 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION URGING THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO ENACT HOUSE/SENATE BILLS HB 1361/SB1418, WHICH, IF ADOPTED, WILL RELIEVE COASTAL COMMUNITIES OF EXCESSIVE WINDSTORM INSURANCE RATES; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICIALS. 18 March 7, 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. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on the item. I don't see Ms. Vangates. Or she was sitting here. I'm requesting of the Manager, when the Mayor comes in at 3 o'clock, could we get a fast update as to where we are in Tallahassee with the Manager and the Attorney? And can we sort of have a little bit of a discussion? Session's going to be over in about another two weeks now, and everything we're doing, we need to, you know, sort of know where we are. And if there's some resources we may have to make available, we ought to go and all do that. But I think we really ought to make sure these last two weeks, we're all in the same direction. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Be happy to have -- Commissioner Teele: So we could just get a fast -- and maybe contact Mr. Book, and whoever our lobbying team is, give us some kind of update so, at 3 o'clock, 3:30, we could have a five- minute discussion. Mr. Gimenez: We will. We'll give you a report of where we are. Vice Chairman Winton: He might be a little nervous about coming here. Commissioner Teele: Who? Oh, Mr. Book's in Tallahassee, I'm sure. Chairman Regalado: OK. So, Commissioner Sanchez, you're done? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, Mr. Chairman. That's it for now. 19 March 7, 2002 8. WITHDRAW REQUEST FOR EXTERNAL AUDITOR OF CITY, K.P.M.G, TO PROVIDE WRITTEN REPORT TO COMMISSION ON CURRENT AND FUTURE LIABILITIES AND OBLIGATION TO ALL PENSION FUNDS. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to withdraw Item A, with the understanding that I really would hope that in the mid -year appropriations process, that the Budget Office and the Manager are able to have -- with the External Auditor -- have an intelligent discussion with us. I don't know how we can have an audit each year that doesn't make some type of review of our responsibilities based upon the various pension funds. I mean, in effect, if we don't have some kind of oversight, we're letting those boards and their professional staff, their professional consultants, write checks on our accounts, and somebody's got to review it from our point of view. I understand they're doing their job from the various union pension fund trustees and their professional staff point of view, but just know that if there's a shortfall under our Collective Bargaining Agreement, we're writing a check for whatever that number is. And I just don't think, as a matter of form, that our audit is complete unless that audit contains some statement regarding each of those pension funds on an annual basis. And, so, what I'm suggesting, with the Finance Department that is responsible for the external audit, and the Budget Department that is responsible for reviewing where we're going, you know, as our five-year projections and each year of this, we need to establish and amend some process that there is outside of the collective bargaining process and outside of the various pension funds and their professional staff -- and I don't want to interfere with anything they're doing. They're doing their thing. But somebody's got to do our thing. And I just think that to the extent our external auditor doesn't review their findings and review that and make comments to us, we've got a little bit of a huge open door for somebody to write checks on us. And, so, I want to defer this, but I want to bring this back up again in the context of the budget amendment and in the context of the Finance Department's responsibilities in overseeing the contract with the external auditor. And I think that needs to be a very clear focus and mission, that our external auditor has, as a line to comment specifically in the notes or in the Manager's report, regarding each of those pension funds and where they are and where they're going, et cetera. And I yield to you, Commissioner Winton, or some of the others that may know a little bit more about this. But whatever they say, we've just got to write a check for the way this thing -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, there are some safeguards the administration has in terms of the findings of the Pension Board. There's an arbitration process. So, it's -- and we have our own actuaries, so we don't take their reports at face value. There are challenges to that report. And then, if there are differences between what the City's actuaries say and the Pension's actuaries say, there is an arbitration process. But at the next meeting, we can have a report for you detailing exactly what the checks and balances are. And I'll be happy to include any other additional checks on our side that will make sure that the playing field is level on both sides. Commissioner Teele: And I'll yield -- Mr. Manager, respectfully, respectfully, the administration may have checks and balances. The legislative body, which I'm a member of, has no checks and balances. And what I'm talking now about is not the administration's checks and balances. You 20 March 7, 2002 work with audit -- I'm sorry -- the Labor Relations reports to you. These internal checks and balances report to you. And, you know, somewhere along the line, the legislative body, this Commission, the external auditor works for us, you know. There's three entities that work for us over there, the external auditor, the financial advisor advises both the management and the board. And, so, what we need -- because, at the end of the day, we're the ones that have to write the check. At the end of the day, it's on us. And we need to hear some checks and balances other than from the Manager and other than from the Pension Board. We need to have some outside people saying to us, we have no interest in this. We have no vested interest. We're here to just simply say that it's fine or -- and write the check for twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) or twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000). But I don't think that's asking too much before we start writing checks. And we have that obligation. It's not a question that we don't have the obligation. Mr. Gimenez: It's no problem, sir. I think -- I understand where you're going to. And we will include that in the audit work that needs to be done on a yearly basis. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: As an extension of that point, you know, the Mayor has hired Linda Haskins, who's a superb financial analyst -- and I've asked him if he would take this a step further. Because what we really need to understand, we need to understand what the impact of employees retiring in the City of Miami and the financial obligation we have to meet with each of those retirements going on in the City of Miami, and we know that people can retire here roughly after 20 years and get a pretty sizable chunk of their last year's salary when they leave. When you start thinking about the financial impact on a City, what it could be in light of the fact that we're -- we were getting a demand for -- to write a check that's just huge in the City of Miami, I think we need to do an actuarial study, where we go back 10 or 15 years and we go forward 20 years and determine what the impact on our City would be if you leave all of the employees in place and every single employee that's eligible to retire, retires when they can retire, and do a financial projection to determine what the impact -- the cost impact will be on the entire pension system, which will fall back, potentially, on the City. Now, obviously, you have to put lots of assumptions into that, like the potential earning rate of the funds that are being managed by the pension fund, but that's just part of financial model. You have to make basic assumptions and run your model. And I would like to see what the long-term impact will be on this City, given the kind of pension program we have. And, so, I'm hoping that -- I think the Mayor's going to move forward with that. And I think it will be a very, very telling picture. And the telling picture will either tell us that we have the kind of revenue growth in this City that can deal with this and not put an unfair burden on our citizens or it will tell us that we don't. And, so, I think it's a picture that -- since it's such a big ticket item, it's a picture we all need to understand clearly. I'm not making any early judgments. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, in response -- you're way over my pay grade. I mean, everything you've said, I understand the English words. I'm not sure what the financial implications are. But I think every Commissioner that sits here has an absolute right to 21 March 7, 2002 information. And I think anybody who wants information should be afforded that information on an objective basis. The only point that I would make, as a member of this collegial board, is that we debate ad infinitum, uniform manufactures for three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) lead debate. Vice Chairman Winton: For 5,000. You know, tires on fire trucks, and -- I mean, you know -- and we go -- but, you know what, the big numbers, the workers' comp, the big huge numbers, you know, the three million dollars ($3,000,000) that relate candidly to employees of this City go past us and we never see any of it. I mean -- and, Commissioner Sanchez, I'm -- I mean, you know, I'm going to you and expressing our appreciation to you in terms of, you know, your dogged determination in terms of just asking the questions. All of those numbers in workers' comp relate to our employees. Commissioner Sanchez: And the more we dig, the more we find. Commissioner Teele: And the -- so, all that I'm saying is that rather than individual Commissioners having to dig, we need to have systems in place that somebody is coming to us with a totally disinterested view. Because let's face it, everybody in this system has a vested interest in the retirement system, you know. Everybody. Everybody that's a City of Miami employee has a vested interest in this. We need to hear from somebody who has no interest at all, whether it be the Clerk or the Attorney or the Manager or everybody underneath all of them. We need to hear and we need to get an outside that advises us, that is totally disinterested, and that's my only point. Vice Chairman Winton: There is no question that in doing this, we're going to have to hire outside consultants. A person in the City can't do this alone. It requires some other expertise, particularly actuarial work. So, I think -- I'm with you a hundred percent and feel exactly the same way. Chairman Regalado: OK, sir. Any -- Commissioner Teele: On the motion to withdraw, Mr. Chairman, I'll call the question. Chairman Regalado: OK. There's been a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 22 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-221 A MOTION TO WITHDRAW AGENDA ITEM D -5-A (REQUEST FOR THE EXTERNAL AUDITOR OF THE CITY, K.P.M.G, TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT TO THE COMMISSION ON THE CURRENT AND FUTURE LIABILITIES AND OBLIGATION TO ALL PENSION FUNDS). 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. 23 March 7, 2002 9. REQUEST MANAGER CONSIDER REQUEST OF CRA BOARD AS RELATES TO CRA RESOLUTION SEOPW/CRA R-02-04 WHICH REQUESTS THAT CITY ACQUIRE TWO PARCELS OF LAND FOR MUNICIPAL PURPOSES AND AUTHORIZE CRA TO PROVIDE IN-KIND GRANT TO CITY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITY ON SUBJECT PROPERTIES TO HOUSE OVERTOWN NET OFFICE POLICE SUB -STATION. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, the only other item relates to two parcels that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) have identified in conjunction with the potential NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office and the police office. I would so move. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Is there a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been second. It's a second reading ordinance. Read the ordinance. Commissioner Sanchez: It's a resolution. Chairman Regalado: No. It's an ordinance. Commissioner Teele: It's a resolution, my "B." Commissioner Sanchez: "B," it's a resolution. It's Commissioner's item. Chairman Regalado: It says second reading ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: Not what I'm reading. Commissioner's item. Chairman Regalado: My page, it says second reading -- oh, no, no. Forget it. I'm sorry. I'm wrong. It's a resolution. I'm very sorry. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 24 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-222 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT A REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO THE IMMEDIATE AND EXPEDITIOUS ACQUISITION OF TWO PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED AT 934 NORTHWEST 2°a COURT AND 930 NORTHWEST 2' COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OVERTOWN NET OFFICE/POLICE SUB- STATION FACILITY, SAID ACQUISITION TO BE CONTINGENT UPON THE RECEIPT BY THE CITY OF AN IN-KIND GRANT FROM THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("CRA") UNDER A 'CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK' CONTRACT. (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. 25 March 7, 2002 10. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SELECT AND HIRE OUTSIDE FIRM TO DO CITYWIDE SURVEY OF AT&T CABLE SERVICES, $50,000; SAID FUNDS TO BE TAKEN FROM FINES OWED TO CITY BY AT&T. Chairman Regalado: One of my items 1 would rather do it around 11:00, when Vice Chairman Winton finishes with his public hearings. The item "I" is a discussion concerning an update about the survey. As we discussed last session, a survey about services of AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph). I have discussed with the Manager. The Manager has written a very complete memo regarding the options that the City has for survey on services and I am ready to pass the gavel to the Vice Chair to move that we proceed with the Manager's plan for a survey. In fairness, we have to say that now AT&T is having more complaints than in the past because of the construction for the broadband systems that is being done throughout the City. However, there are quality issues. There are sound and other issues that we keep getting complaints in our office. I'm sure that your office, too, and I think it's important that we understand the different complaints that the residents of Miami have on the AT&T services. We will be doing this survey about services response time on the phone for complaints. It's important. There might be some breach of contracts on these issues that we are discussing. It's very important to understand what is going on because if you all read the press, AT&T is about to merge with a major cable services company, and the City Commission will have to approve this merge in the City of Miami. Without the information, there is nothing that we can discuss with the new company in case they do merge. So, I'm asking the members of the Commission to support this plan by the City Manager, to do a survey. The money that the survey cost, which is under fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), no more than that, will be taken from the fines that AT&T owes the City of Miami. As we speak, AT&T has an outstanding bill of close to four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) dollars with the City of Miami. Mr. Manager, could you tell us of your proposal for citywide survey on AT&T services? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. It's in the — there are a couple different options and we feel that the final option is really not a good option to have AT&T do it. So, we -- there's a survey been developed. I think it's a pretty comprehensive survey and the cost of fifty thousand was based on this one strategy research firm that was recommended by Mr. Leibowitz, but there are other firms that do this kind of survey and we could get a better deal but we'd like to get an authorization of the fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). Vice Chairman Winton: So, do we have a motion? Mr. Gimenez: We think we can do it for a lot less. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a -- you have a motion. Chairman Regalado: I have a motion. I have a motion to authorize the Manager to hire a company of his preference to do a Citywide survey -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. 26 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: -- of AT&T services in the City of Miami. Commissioner Sanchez: Second for the purpose of discussion. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Discussion. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: I am so glad to see that we're wising up on this issue. I mean, years ago, when we had people doing their own traffic studies, they were hiring consultants to come back and, you know, sing their song, and I'm glad to see that we're not going to let AT&T do that, to go out and do a survey and come back and tell us that everything is fine and dandy. So, I'm also glad to see that they're going to end up paying for it. So, it's a wash for us. So that's what -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I think this is the right thing. I would ask the attorney to take under advisement what's going on because I really think, given the ongoing posture and litigation, this is something that really should have been handled through the City Attorney's Office, without the necessity of a normal bid to come before us, because what it does is it also telegraphs where we're going and you know, this is the kind of thing that, under the State law, the Attorney may hire, without coming to the board for a litigation purposes, through the attorneys, this kind of service, and what you don't want to do is get AT&T now goosing themselves all up and around try to, you know, respond during a period of time. So, you know, I'm totally in support of it, but I would ask the City Attorney to take this under advisement. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner, this is a totally separate issue from the litigation. This doesn't have to do anything at all with the litigation that -- the litigation is about not complying with the broadband construction, but the service, the response time, the repairs, quality of programming. And what I mean, quality, video and audio, and quality of programming in other areas of diversity, et cetera. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I accept that and I certainly don't mean at all to make that an issue, but I would note, as you've noted, there's going to be a transfer before us in the next few months or years, depending on how this thing works, and as a part of or ongoing counsel responsibility, the lawyers -- and I would urge you to work, you know, with the attorney on this because there's not even a necessity to have a -- I mean, you know, there is a way that this can be done under the state law that will get you exactly where you want to go -- Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: -- on this. Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second. Further discussion? 27 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. Vice Chairman Winton: Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign oppose. Motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-223 A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SELECT AND HIRE AN OUTSIDE FIRM TO DO A CITYWIDE SURVEY OF AT&T CABLE SERVICES AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $50,000; SAID FUNDS TO BE TAKEN FROM FINES OWED TO THE CITY BY AT&T. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, 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 Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. 28 March 7, 2002 11. NAME RECREATION BUILDING AT ROBERTO CLEMENTE PARK, LOCATED AT 101 NORTHWEST 34TH STREET AS DOROTHY QUINTANA COMMUNITY CENTER. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton, are you ready for one of your public hearings? I see -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I am. Chairman Regalado: -- people from Wynwood here. If you want to do your Wynwood -- Vice Chairman Winton: Would love to. Would like to move a resolution of the City of Miami Commission naming the recreation building at the Roberto Clemente Park, located at 101 Northwest 3e Street, Miami, Florida, as the Dorothy Quintana Community Center, and directing the City Manager to take necessary steps to appropriately identify this center. And Dorothy Quintana has been an untiring advocate for many, many, many, many years in Wynwood. She's a great lady. She's always out front. She works very hard to make that community a better place to live. She succeeded at making that community a better place to live. And, frankly, I'm thrilled to death to introduce this resolution. I couldn't think of a better person anywhere in this City than to get that building named after her. So, so moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second your motion. Commissioner Teele: Second it, too. Third it. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion that has been second and third and fourth and fifth. And we have a public -- we have people here from the Wynwood community. This is a public hearing. And -- Vice Chairman Winton: And we'd love to hear from them. Chairman Regalado: And we want to hear from the person of the day. If we -- yes. Thank you. Name and address. Janitza Kaplan: Good morning. My name's Janitza Kaplan. I'm the Executive Director of Rafael Hernandez Housing and Economic Development of Wynwood. I'm here to applaud what you're doing with regard to the Center. We feel that Dorothy is not only the appropriate person, but the only person we can think of that deserves such a recognition. She really is the heart of our community. She's there when we need her. And when she sees that something isn't being done, she's going and I'm sure she knocks all of your doors, as she does with ours, and she makes sure that the job gets done, and that the services that our community needs reach us. So, we would like to thank you for recognizing her and thank her for all her hard work. Thank you, Dorothy. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Henry Mojica: Yes. My name is Henry Mojica and Janitza -- 29 March 7, 2002 Mr. Mojica: I work with Janitza on Rafael Hernandez, and I know Janitza -- I'm sorry. Got a little nervous here. I know Dorothy for many years, for eight or nine years. An excellent lady. She's a role model to all the children in the area. And we hope that a lot of those children, when they see the building named after her, they will follow in her footsteps. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Dorothy. Vice Chairman Winton: Dorothy. (APPLAUSE) Dorothy Quintana: Well, I don't know if I deserve that or not, but been working really -- not for only for Wynwood but every community. And our friend knows me, that I'm always after him for everything and he comply with what I say. And I've been in the Commissioners -- because Tomas Regalado, our Commissioner, he knows me for so many years and he can tell you the work that I try to do for everyone that I can. And thank you for our new Commissioner that we have in Wynwood. I think he's wonderful, and he's really been working with Wynwood, which we never had it before the way he's been doing it. I have Teele, and he knows also from the County and how hard I work and he knows me. Angel knows me as a community leader that I've been. So, I think everyone knows the work that I have done. It's nothing hidden. Everything is public. And I'm proud to have worked for everyone and to try to help everyone that I can. Thank you very much for the honor you're giving me. And thank you. (APPLAUSE) Chairman Regalado: There is a -- Ms. Quintana: But my friend up there, he's been my friend for years and years. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second, and we -- we're going to do this, Dorothy, in your honor as a roll call, so each member will have the opportunity to say to you what they want. 30 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-224 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION NAMING THE RECREATION BUILDING AT ROBERTO CLEMENTE PARK, LOCATED AT 101 NORTHWEST 34TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS THE DOROTHY QUINTANA COMMUNITY CENTER; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER O TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFY THIS CENTER. (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. Chairman Regalado: There you have it. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, Dorothy. Ms. Quintana: Thank you. (APPLAUSE) Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to bring up one more item real quickly, and that's our new trash pick-up system. Commissioner Teele: Before you do. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. 31 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton, I want to commend you. Because I think one of the things Ms. Quintana said is really -- bears truth. Wynwood is a very unique community. It's sort of -- everybody, I guess, assumes it -- Commissioner Gonzalez or Commissioner Gort before, would be the representative, but really, it falls largely in your district. I have a little slither of it along 7th Avenue, and I guess Angel's got a little piece on the very end. And one of the challenges that you said so many times in the community development process is that Wynwood really is an area that has sort of fallen through the cracks in a lot of ways. And you've been fighting very hard to get more recognition and more dollars. And I really do think that it represents the best of single -member districting and diversity in terms of we're all in this together. In that regard, Commissioner Winton, I would ask that the Manager be requested -- because Dorothy's a unique person. I would request that all of the previous mayors of this City, for the last 20 years, and Commissioners, be contacted when we do this building. Because Dorothy is a person who has worked across political lines, across racial lines, across philosophical lines. I know that Suarez was really a big Quintana fan. He stole her from Ferrer. After Ferrer was no longer in office, he was a big Quintana fan. Carollo was a big -- I mean, Dorothy is a person who really respects. And I think it gives us a way to invite all of the Commissioners, Commissioner Dawkins, Commissioner Plummer, Commissioner Gort, everybody, and have a really Miami salute when we do the building itself, under the leadership of our Mayor, Manny Diaz, and our district Commissioner, Commissioner Winton. So, thank you, Johnny. If you would consider that. You know, you could throw it away or whatever. Vice Chairman Winton: That's the reason this all works so well. Everybody's always thinking. And I wouldn't have thought of that. You did. It's a great idea and I appreciate the thought and I appreciate the compliment. So, Mr. Manager, if you can do that, that would be outstanding. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. 32 March 7, 2002 12. DIRECT MANAGER TO LOOK FOR MORE EFFECTIVE WAYS TO EDUCATE RESIDENTS ON NEW "ONE -ARM BANDIT" TRASH PICKUP SYSTEM, INCLUDING SCHEDULED TRASH PICK-UP DAYS. Chairman Regalado: You have another item? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. And that is, it's come to my attention -- you know, we're converting to the -- I think it's called the One -Arm Bandit in trash pick-up system. And I don't mean to catch anybody off guard and we don't have to answer it right now. So, I don't want to put anybody on the spot right now. You can just go back and think about it. But I get the sense from people that I'm talking to out in the community that our communication about this new system isn't what it ought to be. So, it seems to me that when we're going to a new system like this, that is designed to be a better system, save the taxpayers money, all of those kinds of things, that it ought to be unveiled in a very celebratory fashion, and really promote it extensively and promote it before it gets there. Because people are still going out and -- you know, if their old trashcan's about to die, they go out and buy a new one. People are going in -- you know, they're building little huts in their yards to this -- you know, as we speak, to put the new trashcans in. The new ones aren't going to fit in those things. So, we really need to do this in an exciting fashion with a lot of education, and get people pumped up about it, but educated so that when it comes and they just spent fifty bucks ($50) on a new trash can that is now obsolete, they're not calling and saying (UNINTELLIGIBLE). And a good friend of mine -- close friend of mine just did that over the weekend, as well. So, if we could -- if you could look into that, I'd appreciate it. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner. Commissioner Gonzalez: May I add on your comment, Commissioner Winton? I -- on recent visits to different talk shows, referring radio station -- as a matter of fact, I went to your show, Commissioner Regalado. I've been asked by the press that why don't we have a system that, you know, they're willing to do it free, as a public service announcement, of all of these changes that are coming about in the City of Miami? And especially this come up when I was addressing the issue of the amount of illegal dumping that we have in the City of Miami, and in reference to the amount of garbage that we have that -- the truck goes by today. They do the pick-up today and tomorrow, we -- again, we have -- and it is a matter of -- in most cases, it's a matter of education. We need to start educating people. You know, when is the day that they have to bring the garbage out? When is the day of the pick-up? And all of these media are willing to assist us and to work with us. So, maybe, Mr. Manager, we can come up with -- and I'll be more than happy to bring it to all of these talk shows and to all of these radio stations, and even cable channel and, you know, and greet them and make them public, and see if we can start educating the people on the process of solid waste, because most of the problem that we have out there is a matter of education. People doesn't know. And that -- I believe that would be something very positive and it would save us a lot of dollars. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. 33 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: You want to say something? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Just to elaborate on the subject of solid waste. Yes, I do believe that we need to focus on education, but you know what follows education. There's got to be strict Code enforcement. And let me tell you what's happening out there. People know that they could come in the City and dump their garbage, and the next day it's going to be picked up because we provide a good service. And that's what's happening now. If we went out there with Code Enforcement and you got somebody dumping illegal debris and you fine them a thousand dollars ($1,000) and you confiscate their car, I guarantee you, the next time, when the word gets out, they're going to stop doing it. And I think that's what we need to do. Yes, education is important, because a lot of people that are doing it right now, apparently, they may not know when the pick-up is, or who picks it up, and knowing that the City picks it up. But, also, they're getting away with it. So, they do it. Chairman Regalado: But this is a separate -- Commissioner Gonzalez: That's why, when we send the message of -- you know, when we giving the instruction on how the process work and how they should dispose of their garbage, we also should insist that if it isn't done properly, then they're going to be ticketed, and they're going to -- because you just mentioned something. Last week, 10:30 at night, I caught a truck doing illegal dumping in my district. I called the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office. I called the Police Department. The police responded. I believe they arrested the guy, impounded the truck, and the whole nine yards. But I caught the guy, I mean, 10:30 at night. You know, he was dumping and he was dumping in his patio. And then, when I started talking to the man, I said, where do you live? He lives about 20 miles away from my district and he's dumping in my district. I say, hey, you know, no more. So, you know. Chairman Regalado: But this is a separate issue. What Commissioner Winton was addressing was the fact that we have not been able to communicate to the residents. Like, for instance, in my home, we don't have the new service. We did get on the mail a brochure, but the brochure is a little complex, because it tells you that you need to place this huge tank five feet away from the bumper of your car, five feet away from an electric post, five feet away from the driveway. So, I was trying to measure that and I have to place it right on the middle of the street, in front of my house. So, it will be very difficult for the drivers that go by that street to -- and as a matter of fact, it probably help because it will mean that they have to decrease -- yeah, they're going to have to slow down. So -- see, the problem is that we -- you know, Johnny is right. We need to fanfare the truck. You need to bring the truck. And my understanding is that what we did, Johnny, was a pilot program -- to approve a pilot program. This cannot be done citywide until and unless we approve it; is that correct? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. This is a program, which is a pilot program, to test it out, see how it works. And then, if it does work the way we think it will work, then we come back to you and we'd like to institute it all throughout the City, but we don't have the data yet to know that it is working the way we intend it to work. Chairman Regalado: OK 34 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Further discussion on the item? 35 March 7, 2002 13. DEFER CONFIRMATION SALARY AND BENEFITS TO BE RECEIVED BY CITY CLERK PRISCILLA A. THOMPSON. Chairman Regalado: We have a resolution that we should have addressed, and this is the benefits -- salary and benefits of the City Clerk. So, what we're going to do, we're going to take this in the afternoon, after the City Clerk discuss this with the members of the Commission. 36 March 7, 2002 14. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVE ACQUISITION OF ANNUAL SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES FOR FASTER SYSTEM, FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (GSA) FROM CCG SYSTEMS, INC. $5,618; ALLOCATE AS FOLLOWS: $4,494 FROM GSA ACCOUNT AND $1,124 FROM DEPARTMENT OF FIRE - RESCUE. Chairman Regalado: We have a resolution, Item 3. Is there a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's a four-fifths vote. It's been moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: 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. 02-225 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4/5THS) 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 APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF ANNUAL SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE FASTER SYSTEM FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION ("GSA") FROM CCG SYSTEMS, INC., THE SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, EFFECTIVE THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2002, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR THREE ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,618 FOR THE INITIAL PERIOD, AND ANY INCREASE(S) WILL NOT EXCEED MORE THAN 15% OVER THE THREE- YEAR EXTENSION PERIOD, SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATIONS; ALLOCATING FUNDS AS FOLLOWS: $4,494 FROM GSA ACCOUNT CODE NO. 503001.420905.6.670 AND $1,124 FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.280601.6.340, SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS AND BUDGETARY APPROVAL. 37 March 7, 2002 (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. 38 March 7, 2002 15. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVE PROCUREMENT OF TWENTY-TWO PORTABLE MTS 2000 AND LTS 2000 SERIES MOTOROLA RADIOS WITH SMARTNETTM SOFTWARE SYSTEM, WITH ACCESSORIES, FOR DEPARTMENT OF SOLID WASTE FROM MOTOROLA COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS, INC., $57,307.70; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. Chairman Regalado: Item 4 is also a resolution. Needs a four-fifths vote. Commissioner Gonzalez: Moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Do we have a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: Item 5. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. On that item -- and I know we're in a hurry, but I just want to come back to this issue that I'm at all the time. In this I can't tell -- you know, how do we really know we need 22 radios? Why don't we need 15 radios? Or why don't we need 35 radios? How many radios do we currently have? I mean, there just isn't enough information in these kinds of requests. And this isn't a small amount of money. It's fifty-seven thousand dollars ($57,000). And I can't tell from reading this, whether or not there's any justification at all for these radios. And you all know that this is a point I keep coming back to over and over and over again. And this just isn't written in a fashion --what we really should do on this is vote "no," but we already voted "yes." So, I'm not going to bring it back. But the next one, I'm going to vote "no." So. whoever does this stuff -- Unidentified Speaker: I hear you. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. You're welcome. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 39 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-226 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR- FIFTHS (4l5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE PROCUREMENT OF TWENTY-TWO PORTABLE MTS 2000 AND LTS 2000 SERIES MOTOROLA RADIOS WITH THE SMARTNET SOFTWARE SYSTEM, WITH ACCESSORIES, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF SOLID WASTE FROM MOTOROLA COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS, INC., SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $57,307.70; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 353018.329401.6.840. (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. 40 March 7, 2002 16. TABLED: APPROVE REVISED CITY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN FOR JULY 1, 2001 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2004, FOR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION OF CITY IN FLORIDA STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM. (See #43) Chairman Regalado: Item 5 is a resolution directing the -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that items 5-A and "B" be deferred for about 30 minutes, and ask the City Attorney and the Public Works Department to provide us with some advice. If these items were competitively bid, they shouldn't be here this way and I want to understand exactly why it's being done this way. Chairman Regalado: You want to defer Item 5? Commissioner Teele: Just for 30 minutes, 5-A and "B." Chairman Regalado: "A" and "B". How about "C"? Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Item 6? Commissioner Teele: "C". Five -C. Yes, I'm fine with that. If we could just -- Chairman Regalado: You're fine with item "C". Well, let's proceed with Item 5-C. It's the Local Housing Assistance Plan. It's a resolution for the period of July 1 st, 2001 to June 30, 2004. It's for the City of Miami in the Florida State Housing Initiative Partnership, the SHIP (State Housing Initiatives Partnership) Program. This is a public hearing. Gwen. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Just for the Commissioners' information, we did talk to the Public Works Director and we do need to pull the two resolutions that ask for the four-fifths. That's what's inappropriate. Commissioner Teele: Before you pull them, I want them to look at -- I want the Attorney to tell me a little bit about what's going on. Ms. Warren: The -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, five is still on the agenda and 5-C is still before us. So, even though there's an "A" and a "B", there's also a five. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Which is all a public hearing, I guess, directing the Manager to revise the program guidelines for single-family rehabilitation and that -- so, we'll just defer 5-A -- five, 5-A and 5-B. And "C" is before us now; is that right? 41 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Yes, that is correct. Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: This is what we're doing. Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Gwen, only on "C." Commissioner Winton: Can we really vote on "C" before we vote on five? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Warren: What I would like to -- Commissioner Teele: These are just contracts. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Warren: What I would like to do, if it's at all possible, is just to give you a summary of the item, and attached to it is a series of resolutions, two of which have been -- Chairman Regalado: No. Just item "C." The City Attorney would have to consult with the members of the Commission. You have to address item "C," 5-C, not the other one. Commissioner Teele: I guess what she's saying -- unfortunately, because of the way the agenda's done, there is a five, there is a 5-A, and a 5-B. Chairman Regalado: I understand. Well, let's do this. Commissioner Teele: 5-A and -- 5-A and B were deferred for a few minutes. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's go on to six and then we'll do the whole five thing. 42 March 7, 2002 17. ADOPT PLANNING CALENDAR FOR TWENTY-EIGHTH (28TH) YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT. Chairman Regalado: Item 6 is a planning calendar for the 28th Year Community Development Block Grant. A planning calendar for the 28th Year Community Development Block Grant. Now, there are issues here that needs to be approved because of dates and deadlines with the federal government. However, I am troubled by some of the policy decisions and I would hope that the City Commission would approve some of the dates that needs to be approved, but defer the policy decision of this resolution until we have the five public hearings that, by law, we need to have in each district in the next 15 days. The reason is because there are several items that are very controversial and very important policy decisions that the City Commission has to make. If you all don't want to go ahead and discuss these policy changes, we can do that or we can just approve the dates and defer the policy decision. Policy decision, I mean by the decision of -- or the proposal of the administration to cancel all funding for administration costs of the agencies that do public housing in the City of Miami, and other issues that -- I have received a lot of feedback from those agencies and it would be, I think, unfair. Vice Chairman Winton: That's a surprise Chairman Regalado: Huh? Vice Chairman Winton: I said, that's a surprise. Chairman Regalado: It's not a surprise. Well, I guess that they were surprised, but I'm very uncomfortable. I'll do whatever all you want to do. If you want to go ahead and discuss it and vote on the whole thing, it's fine by me. I would not agree, however, but if you want, whatever you want to do -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir Commissioner Teele: Let me say this. I will always support any reasonable request to defer a decision for a member to get enough information. But I think, if we don't understand -- I don't understand what the issue is. Obviously, you've had some discussions. I think we owe it to the process to at least hear from the public. Chairman Regalado: Oh, yes. Commissioner Teele: And hear what the issues are. Hear from the administration. Maybe we defer making a decision today, pursuant to your suggestion, but this is the problem. We can't just go out and have these public hearings if we don't give a policy direction on what it is we're going to be doing for the next year. In other words, the real business here is to make the policy decision so that we can put out an RFP (Request for Proposal), pursuant to that policy. If we don't make some decision, then what we can do -- what we'll wind up doing, perhaps, is staff will make their own decision in light of a lack of a policy. They'll say they won't but they do it all the 43 March 7, 2002 time. And what will happen will be, the RFPs won't go out the way we would want it. See, if we just direct them to send out the RFPs, we're making a decision either now, whether we're going to deal with this housing issue or not by directing them to do it. If we direct them to send it out without any instruction, we're basically giving them cart blanche to do what they want to do. If we direct them with instructions, then we have to make that decision. So, either way we're sort of in the position where we have to make the decision and what it really means is, there's either going to be "X" dollars available for the rest of the people -- that is, not in the category -- or there is going to be "X" minus dollars or "X" plus dollars. So, either way, we've got to make some decision if we want to get the RFP process out and I would suppose that the public hearings really are about the RFP process. That is, the policy directions that we want to hear from the community on where it is we're going. Chairman Regalado: That's what I said, that we'll do whatever the board wishes to hear the issues. Commissioner Sanchez: I think it's the consensus of the Commission to hear both sides today. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman? Commissioner Teele: But maybe not -- maybe -- Commissioner Sanchez: Maybe not make any decision, but at least listen to both sides Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. OK. Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I also have serious concerns with what I read in reference to this issue, and I have to agree with you, Mr. Chairman, and Commissioner Teele, that we need to go through the process of these community meetings, but not only we need to go through the process of community meetings to know exactly what the community wants out there, who are definitely the people that elected us, but also it really upsets me a lot to see that none of the people that are going to be affected by our vote or by a resolution of the administration are consulted. Most of these agencies have been having a relationship with the City for years and years, doing Economic Development and doing housing, and they have been our partners for years. And all of a sudden, we decide or the administration decides: let's cut these funds, let's close them down, let's finish these projects, you know. And we don't even give them the courtesy to sit down with them and discuss the issues and give them the opportunity to give their input and even revise the stage of each of these housing projects that are going through the entire City of Miami. And that really upset me because -- and now that I don't have a conflict of interest, and "The Miami Herald" is sitting in the chamber, now that I don't have a conflict of interest, now that I don't work for the CDC (Community Development Corporation), I know what I had to suffer when I was the Director of Allapattah Business Development Authority, and because of financial -- of the administration -- of the previous administration, my "fondos" were -- my funds were cut. The project was delayed two years, and we're still trying to bring the project up, and at one point, the people here had the audacity of blaming the Executive Director and the board of directors of ABDA for not completing that project, and it had nothing to do with the administration of ABDA or with the Executive Director or the employees of the ABDA. It 44 March 7, 2002 had to do with the administration of the City of Miami that made serious allegations -- and Commissioner Teele, you took the leadership of making sure that the record stayed clear in this Commission meeting one day, when you said, well, did you find anything wrong there? No, I did not, and that was the words of the previous City Manager Donald Warshaw. And then you said, well, you should apologize to this agency for making those allegations. So, we've got to make sure that whenever we're going to take -- at least as -- you know, and Chairman Regalado says, I'm going to do whatever you decide to do. Well, let me tell you: I'm not going to do whatever you decide to do. I'm going to do what I believe is right, OK? I'm going to vote with my conscious. I'm going to vote on what I believe is right and is just, not because four people here are going to say, yes. I'm going to say yes. No, I'm not going to be a puppet here, OK. I have my principals. I know this business because I've been part of this business for 15 years and I know what you have to go through and what you have to suffer in order to make affordable housing for the poor people of the City of Miami. So, I believe that these people need to be treated with more respect, with more dignity because they are partners in housing, what we're doing in the City of Miami. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, what I meant when I will do whatever all you want to do is to discuss this now or to vote on the whole thing or defer. There is a consensus and the Commission to discuss it now; hear the people and the administration, and then make a decision or whatever. I didn't mean about voting one way or another. Just on the process of hearing what we need to hear. So, this -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I will support you on deferring this item and going through the process of -- as Commissioner Teele says and I'm sure the rest of my colleague agree, that we consult the community and also, I will appreciate if we instruct the City Manager to instruct this department to sit down with the people that are going to be affected, that are going to be closed down, the people that are going to be suffering the consequences of this action that is being proposed, which, by the way, it was a surprise. It was a surprise to me. I find out about it. Now, I'm not Angel Gonzalez, the Director of ABDA. Now, I'm a sit Commissioner, OK? And I got this in my hands three days before it came to vote. And I don't think that's -- I don't think that's fair. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I think the staffs going to regret the day that Mr. Gonzalez resigned because, as Malcolm X said, "These chickens are getting ready to come home to roost." I will be very to the point. We have a problem in Community Development, a serious problem, with the way we handle the relationships with the public and our people. I mean, we've gone through this. You know, what Commissioner Gonzalez is saying is a matter of record. If, in fact, no one has sat down with these organizations and informed them, then I'm getting ready to switch sides on this thing because I think it's not fair to us, if staff is not talking to the people that they are paid to work with -- in other words, to bring it to us and have us have the initial discussion. I don't know that Commissioner Gonzalez is correct because I don't -- you know, I don't know that he's incorrect. But I need to know from the Manager, have these affected agencies in housing 45 March 7, 2002 been met with individually, been met with as a group? Has there been a dynamic process that doesn't make us be the staff? Because that's, in effect, what we're getting ready to be if we have a public hearing if they've never been met with as a group or met with individually, one-on-one, prior to these recommendations coming to us. Because if they haven't, then we don't need to be the staff. A lot of this stuff needs to be decided and discussed so that the issues can be narrowed here, but we don't need to have a venting session, with all due respect from the public, we don't need to have everybody coming here and say, nobody talked to us, because that's just basic, I think. It's the courtesy of meeting with someone before we make the recommend -- before the staff makes a recommendation. So, Mr. Manager, I would just simply ask, have the staff met with each one of these organizations regarding these recommendations prior to, you know, them coming up here now and have they met with all of the organizations as a group? And I don't know the answer to the question before I ask it. Gwendolyn Warren: Commissioners, Gwendolyn Development. I wish the answer was simple, but to specifically about the housing recommendations, h performance, expenditure of funds, bringing the prod occasions. We have schedules of meetings -- Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren, my question -- Chairman Regalado: No. Commissioner Teele: That's not my question. Chairman Regalado: No, no, he didn't -- Warren, Director of Community answer your question, if you're talking ave we discussed the issues of non- ects on-line infinitum and on several Commissioner Teele: Have you met or your staff met with each one of these people regarding the recommendations that are before us today, that you all are making, individually, regarding the recommendations, and as a group regarding the recommendations? Now, I know there's compliance audits, and I know there's consultation and back and forth, but I don't think we should be put in -- Ms. Warren: To answer the question directly, the -- we'll go through the agencies. B.A.M.E. (Bethel African Methodist Episcopal) , East Little Havana, Jubilee, and Little Haiti Housing have been told on several occasions that if they -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. Gwen, Gwen, Gwen. Ms. Warren: -- that we were coming to the City Commission -- Chairman Regalado: Gwen, Gwen, Gwen, Gwen, Gwen, one second. Ms. Warren: -- that we would be coming to the City Commission. Chairman Regalado: Gwen. 46 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Let her finish. Let her finish. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's not what we're asking. Vice Chairman Winton: No, I think she's answering the question. Chairman Regalado: No. No, but -- Commissioner, I am running this meeting. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: A City Commissioner asked you a question. It's a very simple answer. Ms. Warren: Did they know we were coming here to make a policy recommendation? Yes. Commissioner Teele: That's not the question. Chairman Regalado: That's not the question. Commissioner Teele: Have you discussed -- there's B.A.M.E. Ms. Warren: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would ask to yield. You're the B.A.M.E. representative, sir; is that right? Have you been discussed -- what's your name and address for the record? Bill Mauzy: Bill Mauzy, Executive Director of BAMS Development Corporation. Commissioner Teele: Have you sat down or anyone from your agency sat down with Mr. Hepburn or Ms. Warren regarding these recommendations prior to today? Mr. Mauzy: No, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Ms. Rodriguez, Anita Rodriguez, has anybody sit down with you? Anita Rodriguez: We were not -- we have made -- not notified of this meeting today. We did not know the content of this meeting today. We did not know these recommendations were coming to you, and we learned about them about two, three days ago, when we started approaching some Commissioner, and I didn't even have time to talk to Commissioner Winton or you, Mr. Teele. We did get to talk to the others and the Mayor's office about our concerns, and I brought my concerns today. But have we been notified or had we seen this before? None at all, and nothing like it. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Name 47 March 7, 2002 Frank Gudorf: Frank Gudorf, Executive Director of Jubilee Community Development Corporation. We had not -- we had been informed about the two projects, which are on this list that we are engaged in and we've had some discussions with Ms. Rodriguez about that, the members of our staff. However, the policy issues which are on the one page -- it's not numbered. We only found out about this recently -- actually, from the folks at East Little Havana, and we have not been contacted about any of these policy changes. The first day we found out about it, about two, three days ago also. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I don't want to turn this into that issue. All I want to know is -- and all that I'm simply saying is that we should not be the people who have the initial meeting. All of these -- a lot of issues are going to get filtered out if the staff would meet with the people and deal with it. I don't have any problem hearing both sides. I want to hear Ms. Warren's side, because I'm going to say for the record, I think if you're not performing, we ought to figure out some way to protect the public dollars, but allow the people to finish whatever they've got and come to some compromise. But I think we -- you know, I'm not at all making a decision on the recommendation. I'm only saying that the process ought to be the thing that Mr. Gonzalez talked about from two years ago, where you sit down with people and communicate. There are lives affected. I mean, nobody would like it if the Manager simply made decisions without sitting down, and say, you don't have a job. And that's what we're talking about. We're talking about community-based organizations that have professional staffs, who have families, who have this, and they ought to at least have an opportunity to make their point. Commissioner Sanchez: Tomas? Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Sanchez. Vice Chairman Winton: In listening to this, I think there's a little bit of right and a little bit of wrong maybe in all of this right now because what we're asking of the staff -- I don't think we can ask the staff to take a proposed policy out to the community before the Commission has given staff some sort of direction because then they're just kind of flying around in the wind. So, I think it's appropriate that the policy question come before us before it goes back out to the public. But I think it's also appropriate that we not make a decision on the policy. We hear the presentation from staff regarding policy, and then we direct the staff to go back -- and we make no decision -- and we direct the staff to go back out into the community then with some direction, and the direction is we kind of -- you know, we think we might agree with this policy or we don't agree with it at all. But you've got to go out and meet with all of the affected agencies. Then we ought to have probably at least two public hearings so that we could then have the appropriate -- us giving them direction, then them going out and meeting with the affected agencies and then having real public hearings so that everybody could say their peace and then we can make a decision on the policy. And it seems to me that that's procedurally how this really ought to work. Chairman Regalado: And that is what I said 15 minutes ago. 48 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: That is what you said. So -- Chairman Regalado: That is what I said 15 minutes ago. Let's do this because I knew -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, we've come full circle to what you've said. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I think that everyone who's made a statement here has made a point that is valid in one way. I think that having the opportunity that I did meet with the City administration and also with a couple of developers, both of you made good points. I think that today, for us to make a decision on what would be the policy here, I think would be a mistake, but we do need to send out some guidance. Let me just say that development in the City of Miami gets harder and harder each day, because of not only the infrastructure, the acquisition of land, not to mention WASA (Water and Sewage Authority) connection and other things, and we do need housing in our community. But, again, listening to both sides and saying also that the administration has made some valid points on some of the things they want to bring out. I don't think anyone here will support taking away the administration fund, because you're basically killing the services that are provided. But, however, the administration has brought out a key point that I, myself, am a little concerned. You're talking about the City putting out there almost eight million dollars ($8,000,000) of funds that are tied up, are frozen. The City would like to maybe hold on to those funds because I'll tell you what eight million dollars ($8,000,000) could do at a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) a house. We could build eight hundred homes in our community that's so needed. However, we think that -- and these are just policy issues that will be -- if we discuss it today, we can come back after we've had the necessary channels of communication cleared -- are that, you know, you could come back when you have your plan site -- you have your site, and the administration could provide you the funds in an adequate time so we don't delay your process. I know that during the year many of your agencies have come to my office and complained about things that happened that you have no control over. There's the things that happen with the permits, and acquisition of land, and it's very time consuming. You know, it's not an easy thing to do or else we would have a hundred and fifty people out here developing in our community, OK? But the issue here is that we need to come to a consensus that we can all agree on and then, at the end of the day, you'll be satisfied with what you do; the City will be satisfied with the services you provide, and we could vote on the issue. But if we don't have that communication -- I mean, I'm certainly not going to be on the spot where I'm going to come up here and the administration will present a policy because, at the end of the day, if I think that the policy is a good policy and it's going to fine tune this process, I'm going to support it. But I'm not going to allow for the City to tie your hands up where you cannot go out there and do what your agency does. Chairman Regalado: Commissioners -- go ahead, sir. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I happen to be a member of ABDA, of the board, Allapattah Business Development -- (unintelligible) Vice Treasurer. But I am here, too, as a federal taxpayer, and as a member of the public citizen. You know, for me to get this paper, it was hard because first, when I went to the second floor there and I talked to the 49 March 7, 2002 receptionist -- I go there with my T-shirt and my dungarees (unintelligible) and say, I want the back-up material for this item, with the ad of the paper. Nobody said anything. So, I say, you better tell Ms. Warren to get me that. Otherwise, I'm going — I've go to go in front of the Commissioner to ask for it. Then, all of a sudden, I got 86 pages of whatever is -- about public -- about rehabilitation, about housing and all that. And that shouldn't be. Anybody that goes there should be served, regardless of who the person is, regardless of if it's a big shot developer or is Jorge Perez or Juan Perez. They should be taken care of properly the way it is -- because that's what it is there and that's one of the things I got. And everything he said about ABDA, whatever happened to that development on 17th Avenue is true, not only with the City and ABDA, but with the County, too. They stopped the whole thing and "The Herald" bring (unintelligible) without talking because people in the administration should go and take a tour of Allapattah. The other day somebody higher up had asked me, "Where do you live?" In Allapattah. "Where is that?" The higher up of the City don't even know what Allapattah is because they never bothered to go there. They come to work and they take to Pine Crest and Kendall or Pembroke Pines or whatever it is. It shouldn't be. Not only Commissioners, the people -- the higher up in the City should go to the neighborhoods and see the problems and see what we're doing. About affordable housing. Remember what happened now with CODEC (Community Development Corporation) Development. Eighty-six hundred people applied for it, not two hundred, three hundred. Eighty-six hundred people applied for an apartment there and they don't even have a hundred apartments. They had to have a lottery for the apartments. So, we need affordable housing in the City of Miami. Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I would respectfully request that the order of the day now be to hear from all of the organizations. I recommend, so that we can focus our time, that we hear from them in the order that they have been presented, and then from anyone else from the public, and I would respectfully request that the staff be given an opportunity to layout what their policy is at this time. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. But -- Commissioner Sanchez: Can we just follow the list that's here? Commissioner Teele: But we need to hear from staff first. Chairman Regalado: But one second. Let me just -- you know, we're going to be hard pressed for time, but this is so important. What I would ask you to do, Gwen -- and members of the public, is only to address the proposal of the changes in policy. Forget about performance, the past and what you have performed and what you haven't. But the policy changes that is being proposed by the administration. So, first, Gwen, go ahead and explain what you're proposing. Ms. Warren: Commissioners, this item is regarding the planning calendar for the 28th Year, and as you'll review it, it basically outlines the available grants based on the planning estimates from 50 March 7, 2002 the federal government, in total. And the Community Development is twelve million, eight hundred and fifty-six thousand; under HOME (Home Investment Partnership Program), there's five million four hundred and nine thousand; under HOPWA (Housing Opportunities for Persons Living with AIDS), twelve million four hundred and eighty-two thousand; under emergency shelter, four hundred and forty-seven thousand dollars ($447,000), for a total of thirty-one thousand, one hundred and ninety-two dollars ($31,192). Thirty-one million one hundred and ninety-two thousand. The memo goes on to outline the planning calendar, which would allow us to present our annual plan to US HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development), which is due there, working backwards, on August 16th because they take a twenty -- 45 -day review period in order for the funds to be made available to the City by October 1. That means that the City Commission would have to make their funding recommendations by July 12th for us to have a thirty -day comment period. It also outlines the time frame for the Commissioners to have their public hearings, which would be April 8th through 19th, in order for us to meet the planning schedule. Also, what we're recommending versus last year, is that we schedule in advance and we not hold duplicate public hearings because the City would like to, on our new cable network, they're going to be televising the hearings and we want to ensure that we have adequate coverage and no duplication. Also, last year some community agencies had some concerns, because they weren't able to attend all of the public hearings. So, again, we're asking you to adopt the planning calendar and to establish your dates for your district public hearings. Additionally, we're asking you to establish a policy, if you would, where each Commissioner would have what is — would be recognized as your primary public hearing so that we would have one major event, and then you could have a subsequent follow-up meetings, but we would like and recommend, given the time constraints, the cameras and also the requests by the Commission, that other City departments be in attendance, that we try to have one primary meeting and hopefully, some secondary meetings, if so desired. These policy issues -- and, again, that the staff are recommending are several. One regarding Housing Administration. We have provided you -- and, again, we've had an opportunity to talk with various Commissioners. We're recommending that you discuss the implementation of a policy regarding Housing Administration. The recommendation for the policy is based on our current expenditure rate in administrative dollars and our encumbrances of brick and mortar dollars, which is fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) in total, and the resulting houses that have been built, which is for home ownership, which is twelve. We're also recommending -- and, again, in the letter that if, in fact, you address a new policy regarding Housing Administration, we're asking that you do several things. One, all agencies that are currently funded be grandfathered in and exempted from any new policies that are implemented, so no one that you have currently funded would be -- I guess able or affected by any new policies that you would implement going forward. Secondly, our letter recommends that if, in fact, you adopt a policy, that we do have a series of public hearings to review that policy prior to any formal implementation and that after those policy discussions and public hearings that we come back to the City Commission. The City Commission directed staff, on numerous occasions, prior to the discussion of any policy, that we come to you first before we hold public hearings regarding the adoption of new policies. We are following your recommendations. So, on the administrative issue, we have some concerns about the current structure. Again, we ask that you allow us an opportunity to review that structure. We've made a recommendation regarding developer fees, as one possibility. We've also talked about restrictions of administrative dollars for those agencies that, through a variety of processes, or how they're funded, they won't be able to get other administrative dollars and we suggest that 51 March 7, 2002 you exempt them from any preclusion of receiving administrative dollars regardless of the policy. The other issue is the timely expenditure of housing funds. As we've indicated, we have a list here of agencies. But at the time of this letter, we had approximately eight million dollars ($8,000,000) -- seven million eight hundred thousand dollars ($7,800,000) that had been encumbered. As you will know, the City Commission, when you award dollars, you award them by ordinance, which means we have to set those monies aside, and they can no longer be used for distribution. As a result of that policy of appropriating by ordinance, and also as a result of the complexities of getting housing programs started, what has occurred is that we have eight -- approximately eight million dollars ($8,000,000) in reserve that we're not allowed to access for the purposes of funding projects that may, in fact, be ready to go. So, we're asking several things that you consider in your policy. One, that all of these agencies be grandfathered in and when they're ready to go, that monies be immediately made available to them. The definition of "ready to go" entails they would have the proper bonding, financing, site control, and that we receive 180 days notice, or if they're currently ready to go, obviously, they would be exempt from and they'd just receive the funds, but, again, that nobody be defunded or de -obligated, but that the funds be unappropriated, but those agencies that have been funded receive their monies at the point that they're ready to go to construction. The second issue, one modification to this letter. There are two agencies that are on the list of projects. Gate House and New Century Development, the Casals Group -- Carlyle Group. Both of those agencies were funded as rental projects. They were not tax credit projects. They did not receive the funding. So, they should be taken from this list -- excuse me. And those monies would be made available in an RFP (Request for Proposal) for rental properties, but their resolutions -- ordinances or resolutions that you appropriated, they did not receive monies in that year. So, those monies are now available for redistribution and they should not be on this list. Again, all other agencies on here would be guaranteed their funding, but, again, if they're not ready to go and if they cannot meet the requirements for implementation, those monies would be, again, reallocated at some time in the future. The last -- Vice Chairman Winton: Ms. Warren? Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: That's not an open-ended policy. Ms. Warren: No, we're suggesting for an additional year. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. That's an important statement. Ms. Warren: And that if, in fact, within the next year, they do not meet the requirements to commence construction, that they would have to start back over. They could come back and reapply -- Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Ms. Warren: -- but, again, as you will note, we have some agencies that have been funded for seven years and the projects have not occurred yet. We're merely asking -- and we do recognize 52 March 7, 2002 the complexity of funding. We're saying guarantee them their funding for a minimum of additional year, with no questions asked, that we not change any policies affecting them, but that going forward in the future, we need to address the issues that would have frozen and spent approximately fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) and resulted in twelve homes. And I think that, again, you've asked that we come to you before we implement policies or recommend them and prior to public hearings. The final recommendation on policy is regarding the public service cap. As you know, this is the last of your third years of your fifteen percent waiver, and your public service dollars for the last three years, have been approximately three million dollars ($3,000,000). This last year it was three million, two hundred thousand. Because we're at fifteen percent again, that would reduce your public service available funds to a million nine hundred thousand. We're making two policy recommendations. One, that as a result of a review of your previous funding recommendations, if you'll note on the bottom of that page, your elderly programs have received approximately a million six hundred thousand dollars ($100,600) and so forth. We're recommending that for the purposes of policy discussion, that your seniors programs and those programs that serve the disabled, be the priority for receipt of public service funds because of your reduction in dollars. If you may recall, last year you received almost fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) in requests for three million dollars ($3,000,000). Now, we only have a million -nine and we're suggesting that given the reduction, that we prioritize those most in need. We're further recommending that the administration be directed by you to work with the Law Enforcement Trust Fund, the Police Chief, to see if we can develop a program for joint sponsorship, or service to high risk or at -risk youth. Further, we're recommending that we have a set aside, by district, of approximately two hundred thousand in total or forty thousand dollars ($40,000) per district, for district Commissioners, based on any particular projects that may be on -- outside of the realm of either the elderly or the disabled that would allow you to fund, again, projects as a result of your public hearing process. We're asking -- yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren, on that, I think it needs to be very clear. If we do this, it has to be pursuant to the same competitive process that everybody can submit for, but you all will not make a recommendation, but would just submit those recommendations. But I don't want the responsibility of having forty thousand dollars ($40,000) assigned to me or my district for us to put out. I mean, for me to put out. I think it needs to be a competitive -- I strongly support what you're saying because the priorities in each district may be slightly different, and forty thousand dollars ($40,000) flexibility is a good thing. But what I hope we're saying is that forty thousand dollars ($40,000) will be pursuant to a competitive process that everyone within those districts -- limited to those districts will be able to apply for. It will go through your department for an evaluation and recommendation of eligibility or non -eligibility. Ms. Warren: But not recommendation for funding. Commissioner Teele: Exactly. OK. Ms. Warren: Yes. So we would provide staff support to the Commissioners in terms of reviewing the paper process for eligibility but not for funding recommendations and that would be done at the district level. Again, if, in fact, the Commission -- we're asking for direction 53 March 7, 2002 specifically at this point on the public service dollars because we have to get the RFP out. We're trying to, again, get some policy direction given the reduction -- Chairman Regalado: Gwen, excuse me. I think that the public service issue is not being debated now. I would ask you to conclude in a few seconds, so we can have time to listen to them, because it's getting late and within the policy -- I think that the policy decisions that the Commission is talking is regarding the housing area. Ms. Warren: Again, those were our policy -- our recommendations. Just to summarize, we recommend that there be a serious review of the process that is used and the policies that are used to fund housing, and we recommend that there be a review of a methodology to encourage private/public partnership. We recommend very strongly that we review two issues, the expenditure of administrative dollars, because of the potential disallowed costs associated with it, and that we also recommend that we come up with other ways to assist agencies with implementation dollars that are not tied into administrative dollars. Final statement, four million dollars ($4,000,000) of administration, twelve houses. It does not work. And I, again, am only asking that you review the policy, that we be allowed an opportunity to have public hearings, to talk to professionals in the field, and to bring that back to you. But I beg you to please consider your policies. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: The reality is that it's very hard to establish a partnership between the private enterprise and a CDC or CBO (Community Based Organization) to do affordable housing, home ownership because whenever you talk to a developer, a private developer, and you talk to them about doing affordable home ownership for low income moderate families or moderate families, they don't want to get into that because you know what the answer is? There is no money on home ownership. The money is in rentals and that's why they want to do nothing but rentals. In my district, in Allapattah, there has been -- for history, there has been strong opposition to rental units because Allapattah is a transient neighborhood. People come to Allapattah from different places. Once they establish themselves, they leave Allapattah and Allapattah continues to be a -- big portion of Allapattah continues to be a ghetto, even though we're working on it. We're trying hard to clean it up and we're trying hard to build it as a stable community, OK? The only way to do that is doing home ownership. That's how you're going to preserve people on the neighborhood. That is the only way that we can revive these poor neighborhoods, building affordable home ownership housing. And I don't have anything against rental, and I don't have anything against people wanting to make money. Hey, I applaud that. I hope I could build twelve hundred units and make a couple million dollars myself, but that is not what solves the poor neighborhoods' housing situation. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. What we're going to do now -- and I would -- Anita, I would ask you to wait. The Commission wanted to follow the list. So, we have people 54 March 7, 2002 here that represent different agencies that are involved in this debate. The Allapattah Business Development Association, do we have any representative here? If you want to speak to the issue -- I would like to ask, please, address only the policy changes. You know, performance, and we have done this, and we have done that, we can do that in a public hearing. But we have many things to deal with. So, we're going to start. The representative of the Allapattah Business Development Association, do you wish to speak or you already did? Mr. Gudorf: I think so. I can tell you one thing -- Mr. Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 26th Street. I am one of the founding members of ABDA and we have been working there for many years for the benefit of the community. As you can see, 20th Street the amount of facade work, the affordable housing that's coming like (inaudible), that's bricks and mortar. That's being done there and we like to keep on -- the funding that will keep us in business. For what? Because affordable housing with homeownership brings revenue to the City. Fern Isle, used to be the City's nursery, wasn't paying any tax at all. Look at how much money now that neighborhood is paying now in taxes to the City. (Inaudible) and getting service from the City, too, but is paying back to the City. That's something that we have to do. And the only thing we see any of these changes, whatever are going to be implemented, consult and talk to us first, too, and then to the Commission, and we'd like to call a meeting. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. B.A.M.E. Development Corporation and on the issue of the policy changes on housing. Sir, your name. Mr. Mauzy: Bill Mauzy, Executive Director of B.A.M.E. Development Corporation. Actually, I'm going to -- whatever minute and a half I have, I'm going to slide over to Anita because we're all on the same boat. And I don't want to repeat what's been going on to waste a whole lot of your time. But it's really important that we have an opportunity to sit down as individuals or as a group that are directly affected by this, so that we can literally bring everybody up-to-date as to where we are and what the problems we've had. Nobody here knows that as of February the 20th, I got all of my planning done -- permission to pull my first permits. Now, I'm literally ready to go into the ground in terms of the verticals. It has taken over four years to do that but that point is here. Nobody's asked that question and I'm ready to do it. So, I don't want to beat up or go through a whole lot of — I'd just like to get this thing done, and I want to yield the rest of my time to Anita. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, sir. CODEC (Community Development Corporation), who, by the way -- I have mentioned this on the need of the housing, they had a lottery and there were, I think, seven thousand applications. If you go by Southwest 8th Street and 22nd, the days before the lottery, you will see a long line that took three blocks to get a number for the lottery. Commissioner Teele: (Inaudible) home ownership? Jose Fabregas: No. This is Section 202 Elderly, Commissioner. My name is Jose Fabregas, Executive Director of CODEC. 55 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Mr. Fabregas: Yes. I just want to remind the Commission on the policy issues that it takes us, the Community Development Corporations, sometimes two to three years to bring a project to fruition. We do either the rental of the elderly or the home ownership that we're doing. It is a difficult task. We need your support and I thank you for the recommendations and that's all. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. East Little Havana CDC (Community Development Corporation). Anita Rodriguez-Tejera: Anita Rodriguez-Tejera. I'm the Executive Director for the East Little Havana CDC. I'd like to thank you for this opportunity. I'm a bit disappointed with the policy recommendations, in particular, because of the lack of notice and participation by the various entities affected. In particular, I highlighted for you those issues I wanted to discuss and under housing administration, you know, the issue of eliminating the award of HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) funds for Housing Administration. I think, in terms of the policy decision you have in front of you, is that most of the CDCs are operating in the most deteriorating neighborhoods of this City of Miami and will stay there for a reason. Not just to house people, but to revitalize and bring some new buildings or bring new structures into that community, to energize that community and, hopefully, private developers will follow and will help revitalize those areas. So, your policy decision is, are you going to support us in developing home ownership housing or do you want to push us into rental developments where there's a profit to be made? And the reason I say that is because in all of these neighborhoods, appraised values are very low. We can -- and that basically caps the sales price of our units. It cost to develop a unit there, the same as it would anywhere else. But we cannot recover a cost of construction. So, we rely on the City of Miami for two things: one, to help us bridge that gap and make the project break even. And we don't look for a development fee because then we need to ask you for more grant to do that. And then we rely on you to pay for staff out of the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds. If you cannot help us to pay for staff and you cut off the funding to administration, for all of the CDCs, you're basically closing the doors. And we're employers of various families -- I mean, various people that you will leave unemployed. But that's not the issue. The thing is that if home ownership is going to be a focus of the City administration, there needs to be an understanding that these developments don't happen as fast as the rental developments. The rental developments have the tax credit subsidy that helps build them faster. I can assure you that as a CDC with the capacity we have, we can build rental, low income housing tax development as fast as any private developer. And the question is to you, is that what you want to see in your neighborhoods, instead of the homeownership projects that take a little longer? So, you have to bear with us and understand. And Administration is frustrated but they need to understand that the home ownership is harder to develop, because of the lack of resources attached to that. And so, that's really the policy decision you guys have in front of you. And the other thing is, we're not -- the CDCs are not just housing low-income people because that we can do in well-to-do areas, and we can make a profit at it. We are developing and revitalizing neighborhoods in addition to housing people. So, we're basically forced to stay in those depressed areas where appraised values are so low. And if you keep that in mind, that's also the policy decision you have in front of you. Where are we going to develop? Because if you tell me you're going to cut our administrative dollars, I can assure, 56 March 7, 2002 next year we're going to be developing out west, and we're going to be making a profit, because we can do it. We're capable -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Anita, let me ask you a question. How many units have you built in the last five years? Ms. Tejera: We completed the Casa Grande Phase I, 80 units. We completed Riverside, Phase I, 10 units; Riverside, Phase II, 15 units; and Sunrise Gardens, 12 units. And we started construction three months ago with Latin Quarter Specialty Center, which is 45 units, plus 15,000 square feet of retail space with two levels of parking facilities. Commissioner Gonzalez: But what I mean, units that you already built, they're sold, occupied, paying taxes, paying taxes to the City of Miami and paying -- Ms. Tejera: And -- yes. Closed and they are full property tax paying families. Commissioner Gonzalez: Over a hundred? Over a hundred in five years, right? Ms. Tejera: Definitely. Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: But Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez, then explain to me how this list that I have before me says a hundred and twenty-five units planned and zero completed. Chairman Regalado: In the last two years, probably, they mean. Ms. Warren: That's three years, and at that nine hundred thousand or close to a million dollars ($1,000,000) they were to build those units, and plus there's another four point six million in brick and mortar. So, it is the million plus the four point six and the million dollars ($4,600,000) of land. So -- Commissioner Sanchez: How far behind are they on their -- Ms. Warren: The Latin Quarter, as far as I understand, we received the insurance and bonds on February 12"', and they're up and ready to go now. The other project that they have, it's a million dollars ($1,000,000), I think, as I understand, they're out of -- lack in funding, and some other issues and that project's not ready to go. So, we're asking to go forward with the one that's ready to go and to again grandfather in the other project until they're ready, but don't freeze the money, and that's what the policy issue is. 57 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I just want to understand one thing. This sheet of paper reflects the last three years? Ms. Warren: Three years only. Commissioner Teele: OK. Just answer one question, Ms Warren. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: In the last three years, is this statement is correct, that East Little Havana CDC has a hundred and twenty-five units planned and zero completed? Ms. Warren: Correct. Commissioner Teele: And would you just answer one other issue. Don't confuse bricks dollars with administrative dollars. How much money have we spent in housing administration dollars with them over the last three years? Ms. Warren: The amount that you've spent with East Little Havana last three years is nine hundred seventy-two thousand, three hundred and forty dollars ($972,340) of administration. Commissioner Teele: Nine hundred and seventy thousand? Ms. Warren: Nine hundred seventy-two thousand, three hundred and forty thousand dollars ($972,340) of administration. No houses. Ms. Tejera: I'd like to address -- Commissioner Teele, that's an incomplete statement. And I need to complete it. Commissioner Teele: And, ma'am, all I'm just trying to do is ask her a question. You can make any statement. But I don't want to get into a debate because we've got to hear from everybody and it's not fair and Commissioner Regalado really wants to get through this. So -- Ms. Tejera: I know. But you asked a question. They put information on the record that is incomplete and I think we should -- Chairman Regalado: If you want to respond to that question -- Ms. Tejera: Yes, yes, please. Chairman Regalado: Specifically? Ms. Tejera: Yes, please. Chairman Regalado: The money that you have gotten in the last three years. Go ahead, please. 58 March 7, 2002 Ms. Tejera: During -- Commissioner Teele: Administration. Chairman Regalado: Administration. Ms. Tejera: During the three-year period, we completed the 80 -unit Casa Grande Phase I, that we closed the last unit in August, last year. We completed phase II of Riverside, fifteen units, and those fill in those three -- in that three-year period. So, I don't want administration to come to you -- wait. Commissioner Sanchez: But why aren't they on this report? Ms. Tejera: Wait. Well, I don't know why -- I haven't seen that report. All I want to say to you, Mr. Teele -- Commissioner Teele, is that I don't want you to think that we've received administrative dollars, and East Little Havana sitting in its laurels and crossing hands and not doing anything. And also, I must add, Latin Quarter Specialty Center -- Commissioner Teele: Let's don't -- Ms. Tejera: -- staff needs to understand that the Commissioner Teele: Be fair to the other people. Everybody's got a problem. You've made your point. And we ought to let everybody have a chance before we have to break. Ms. Tejera: OK. Well, I'll address it in writing to each of you and I would appreciate it if you would read our correspondence because I will clarify the issue if I cannot do it publicly. Commissioner Teele: Johnny -- and I just want to say one thing. I've seen this administration -- I mean, you know, everybody has their own opinion. I've seen it in the billboard stuff. The problem with staff is they won't sit down with people and solve these administrative issues and it looks bad for everybody when it comes here. This is televised. I don't know if staff is right or wrong. I'm ready to ask the Internal Auditor or the lawyer to go out here and give us an independent report on that one issue. But the fact of the matter is, these are the kinds of things that create bad relationships and bad will with the public and with us and with the agency that's unnecessary. And just sitting down with everybody saying, here's my draft report. Tell me where we're right, tell me where we're wrong would solve all of this. And that's my only issue. Vice Chairman Winton: Could I ask you, again? Chairman Regalado: OK. Yes, sir. Ms. Tejera: I'd like -- I'm sorry. You have a question. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton. 59 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Tell me again. You finished which two projects during this three-year period? Ms. Tejera: Riverside, Phase II, 15 units. Vice Chairman Winton: You finished that when? Ms. Tejera: I don't have the exact date. It was -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, no, not the exact date, the -- Ms. Tejera: Two thousand -- we finished closing units in 2001 Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, last year. Ms. Tejera: And the 80 units in Casa Grande were finished in mid '99, and it took the City and the County two years and four months to close all 80 units with us, which created, actually, a cost for us. But, you know, the issue is, we're working and the project, Latin Quarter, has a predevelopment process that requires staffing and funding to do for us to begin construction, so to pretend or give the item implication that funds are being received and nothing is being done is not correct. And Casa Grande, Phase II, we have all the funding on that project, except we expressed to the City just last month on January 22nd, when we met with them, is that we need an additional support on Casa Grande, Phase II, either from the City or the County. We're going after this round of the RFP coming up. If we don't receive it, then by the end of this summer, we're going to say, here, City, have the money back or let us keep a little bit of it and we're going to go rental. Because the home ownership we cannot make it work. I don't want to sit on money from the City. And the City did not put an RFP out last year, so that kind of delayed us a little bit, because we could have used some money last year. And that project, architecturally -wise, is a duplication of Casa Grande Phase I. We just have to add the architectural for the parking facility. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me, Anita. Two Commissioners have asked you the same question and you have responded with dates and numbers of units. I just want to understand something here. In this document by the City of Miami, Department of Community Development, according to this document, this is the last three years. It says, East Little Havana CDC. Number of units completed: zero. Barbara Rodriguez: Commissioner Regalado, Barbara Rodriguez, Community Development. It is a correct statement from Anita that Casa Grande I had 80 units. What we're talking here is three years. The year that Casa Grande was counted for in administration was the 24th year. So, she did produce those 80 units in the 24th year. When we add 25th, 26th and 27th year, what we're saying is that she was going to be delivering to us the units of 125, which included Casa Grande II, and the Latin Quarters Specialty. As you know, Latin Quarters, we've been counting it for the last seven years. So, that is something that we need to take into consideration. When Commissioner Gonzalez states, "What did you do in five years?" that is a correct statement. The 80 units of Casa Grande I. Casa Grande I was considering the administration of 22nd, 23rd, 60 March 7, 2002 24th. So, what I'm saying is that Casa Grande did get administration in three years that are not being considered at this time. Commissioner Teele: Then, Barbara, you're right. If you would, then how much administrative money have they gotten in the last five years? See, they answered the question of the last three years, which is is nine hundred and seventy thousand dollars ($970,000). So, if you go back -- if you're right and she's right, then the question is -- you gave them credit in -- five years ago, right? Ms. Rodriguez: Commissioner Gonzalez asked her, "What did you do in five years?" Commissioner Gonzalez: In five years. Ms. Rodriguez: And the answer was correct from Anita. Commissioner Teele: No. But I'm talking about, you said you gave them credit in year 25. Ms. Rodriguez: We funded them in the year 22nd, 23rd, and 24th, which included the Casa Grande I and that Riverside complex. So, that is a correct statement. Vice Chairman Winton: But when you -- but funding them is different than completed. Ms. Rodriguez: Correct. Vice Chairman Winton: So, when did it get completed? Ms. Rodriguez: Well, again -- Vice Chairman Winton: It got completed in 1999 Ms. Rodriguez: The issue on one -- and, again, when we meet with agencies and when they submit with the RFP, they tell you what they want the administration for. When we negotiated the 25th, the 26th, and the 27th year funding, they claimed these are the projects we need money for, and that is what we're reporting here. If you want us to go back five years and tell you, instead of the nine hundred and seventy-two thousand dollars ($972,000) that we provided them in funding, then we will add that funding, and we will give them credit for the units that they delivered to us. But the amount of funding will go up representative. Commissioner Gonzalez: Commissioner Teele, would you yield? Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Sure. You yielded to me. Thank you. I apologize. Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you, sir. Thank you. I'm familiar with the process of Latin Quarter. Commissioner Winton, you were not a Commissioner back then. I don't know if, Joe, you were. You were not here either. I think Commissioner Regalado was. Nineteen ninety- seven -- 6l March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: That's been going on since -- 1992 it started. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- they -- Chairman Regalado: I'm the only one for everything. I mean, you know, but -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. They break ground in 1997 on Latin Quarters, OK? Chairman Regalado: But -- Angel? Ms. Rodriguez: In 1995. Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no. In 1997. Javier Suarez was the Mayor for 120 days or 115 days or 10 days or whatever the days he was. I was invited to that groundbreaking. Frank Castaneda was still working for the City back then, and then Suarez was removed from the Mayor's seat and then that got into kind of a hole. I don't know if it was the usual political vendetta that used to happen here back then, but that project went into the hole, OK? And I remember that Anita was here many, many times discussing the contracts and the problems with the contracts, and the problem with the awarding of the money to start the project. And that project -- right now, they just started the project. I was at the Southwest Calle Ocho two weeks ago at your Cultural Fridays, and I saw that they, thank God, finally, they started the project, because I thought that maybe that was going to be for the third Millennium. You know, so -- I mean, you know -- I know that these people have been working for years and years. Chairman Regalado: Let me -- we need to -- Anita, we need to hear from other people. You know -- Ms. Rodriguez: Can I just touch on the last policy issue? I don't want to talk about our projects anymore. I'm going to send you some information on the progress with backup of when we received allocation, and when the City finally gave us our contracts, and what happened after that, so that it's very clear in everybody's mind, with backup documents, so that it's not hearsay, OK? Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you Ms. Tejera: And I'll do that. And then the policy issues that I wanted to go to is in terms of -- under the item of timely expenditure of housing funds. The principal of doing the two-tier depends on how that's structured; it may work or may not work. When we receive a commitment from the City of Miami for a project that is being developed inside the City of Miami and it's only in principal, it is very difficult to obtain any firm commitments from any other funding source when the first funding source that should be at the table is only in principal, and I want to bring that to your attention. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. 62 March 7, 2002 Ms. Tejera: And the other thing is, the second tier related to that -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Anita, I really -- Commissioner Teele: I think you're being very unfair and rude to the rest of the industry by doing this. You've been up now for 40 minutes. We're going to -- Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Ms. Tejera: I've been asked -- Commissioner Teele: We're going to stop. I asked that everybody sit down. I want to hear from everyone's point of view. Chairman Regalado: Right. And we need to. Commissioner Teele: And I respect your point of view, but I think you should respect the other organizations that are just in the same situation. So -- Chairman Regalado: Anita -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Can I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Let me say this. Ms. Tejera: I've been asked a question, Commissioner Teele. I didn't do this purposely by taking more time than I should have. I always, as you know, limit my time to my two minutes. Commissioner Teele: Please. Can we hear from someone else, please? Chairman Regalado: Let me do this. Let me do this. We're going to have public hearings in each district. I'm sure that all of you will be there. We thank you, Anita, for that. We have -- anybody from the Edgewater Economic Development? Anybody from Habitat For Humanity? Anybody from Haven Economic Development? Commissioner Teele: Let me understand. On Habitat For Humanity, how much administrative dollars are they getting? Ms. Warren: They receive -- Commissioner Teele: Administrative dollars. Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to know -- 63 March 7, 2002 Ms. Warren: I think seventy-five thousand, but they're not on the list. Commissioner Teele: Well, they're on this list. Ms. Warren: That is a list of every agency that's been funded. They're not on the list of agencies in your letter recommended to be grandfathered in. The only agencies on your letter to be grand fathered in is B.A.M.E., East Little Havana, Jubilee, and we have deleted the two rental projects, and that's it. Commissioner Teele: What are the two rental projects? Ms. Warren: The rental projects -- you had provided money for -- Commissioner Teele: Is Jubilee on the list? Ms. Warren: Jubilee is on the list. Commissioner Teele: Both of them? Ms. Warren: Both Jubilees are on the list, and they would be grandfathered -- Commissioner Teele: What about Gate House? Ms. Warren: Gate House was a rental project Commissioner Teele: Is it on the list? Ms. Warren: It is on the list. It was on the list. We've asked that it be deleted. They did not receive funding. So, that money would go back into the pool for rental projects. Chairman Regalado: We have a representative of Jubilee. Go ahead, sir, on the policy changes. Mr. Gudorf Yes. Frank Gudorf, Executive Director of Jubilee. Just a few comments. There's much in both of the -- under the housing administration proposals and the timely expenditure of housing fund proposals, which I could support in some modified fashion. Certainly, in terms of - - with the housing administration dollars, waiting until the project is completed to get your housing administration funds, we'll all be out of business next week. That just simply doesn't work. If there's some way that we can peg it to certain specific, you know, points in time when you do such and such, you get so many dollars and what have you, on a per unit basis, I personally could support that. The timely expenditure of housing funds, in principal, I think that's fine, as long as -- I think y'all need to realize -- as long as those dollars are available when we need to close. There's a statement in here that says, it will be first come, first serve, but it might be into the next year. Well, if we have -- all of these home ownership projects have multiple sources of financing. If we're ready to close with the County, with the State, with our private banker and what have you, and we already had an allocation from the City and the City's, "oh, I'm sorry. We don't have any more money this year. It needs to wait until next year," we 64 March 7, 2002 lose our County money, our state money, our bank money, and we're back to zero and then people come in here and say, by the way, Jubilee failed. Jubilee failed. You didn't get your project done. Jubilee failed. So, I think that needs to be addressed. The other issue on failure is, I think this whole system is set up -- and this needs to be really -- there needs to be some real housing summit, I think, taking place here, because the way this thing -- this whole process is set up, it is set up for the non-profit developers to fail. Nobody wants to put all the money into these projects. The City wants to put a piece in. The County might put a piece in, although they're more reluctant now to put County dollars into projects in the City. You can go begging to the state. You've got to keep all these pieces in line sometimes because they all have different funding cycles. It takes three, four years to get those dollars into place. By the time you get the last dollar in, the first one -- the first dollar wants to pull out. So, then you've got to go back and beg and borrow and steal, whatever you can, to keep that last dollar in. At the end of that period of time, you've spent four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) in your administration funds. You haven't gotten the project built. Everybody points at everybody else saying, you know, we failed, you fail, and this has happened and that has happened. What needs to happen here is that the City and the County, at a minimum and preferably with the state, needs to sit down together with the nonprofits and see if there's some way to streamline this process. The other thing is that, I think once the City decides -- let's say Jubilee comes into to you all with a project. Here's what we want to do. So many units on such and such a site. It's going to take us three years to do that. Then I think there should be some commitment, to say, look, we're going to give you administrative dollars based upon timeframes or whatever, and it's going to -- you know, and we will commit to you multi-year for three years, at which point in time you need to close on the financing and get this thing out of the ground; otherwise, that project dies. I think, without that realization, this is never going to go anywhere. Next year we're going to be back here screaming at each other. And, you know, Commissioner Gonzalez, used the word a number of times, "suffer." I think those of us who are in this business, man we suffer every day. And the sad thing about this is, it doesn't need to be this way. There's some fault on our part -- I'll accept the fault. There's some fault on the part of the funding sources. We need to figure out where the bottlenecks are, how to make this system work, so we can stop pointing fingers at each other and get the buildings built and the units built. I can tell you -- just one other comment. What Anita said is right. Jubilee, in the last couple years -- we have a project coming out of the ground right now in Little Havana, in Commissioner Sanchez's district. It has taken us four years to put the financing together for that. County two -- Florida Housing Finance Corporation, the Florida Department of Community Affairs, Sun Trust Bank, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, Magoly (Phonetic) Institute out of Baltimore and LISC (Local Initiative Support Corporation). So, we've got seven funding sources in that one project. Thirty units. Taken us four years to put that together. You might have noticed, I didn't mention, because there's no City of Miami dollars in this project, by the way. In that same period of time, we've done a 98-unit rental project down in Florida City. Why? Because we got a tax credit. You know, we can do tax credits like the for-profit developers can, too. I made a lot of money on that tax credit deal. This condo project in East Little Havana, I ain't going to make nothing. So, if the choice is between me making -- me doing non-profit rental out in the suburbs and making a lot of money so I can keep my doors open or doing home ownership in the City of Miami, which is my understanding, is what you all want, is home ownership, then we need to find a way to make this process work. And all I'm saying is, it doesn't work. 65 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman? Commissioner Teele: You are the Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: You are the Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Commissioner Sanchez: You are the Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Vice Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: You have the gavel. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Vice Chairman, could I make a comment? Yes, you may. I think that -- what's your name again? Mr. Gudorf. Mr. Gudorf. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry? Mr. Gudorf. Frank. Vice Chairman Winton: Frank made a great point. We probably do need a housing summit. And it seems to me that one entity for sure, that ought to lead the charge on that would be LISC because LISC has a lot of different kind of resources available. It knows what all of these agencies go through. It's independent of the agencies. And, so, you know, LISC may want to bring somebody like the Collins Center in or -- I don't know who else. But it seems to me, Dennis, that you guys ought to lead the charge, bring the City to the table. But we should have a housing summit to talk about policies and procedures and funding sources and come out with a whole new plan to get at this issue because I think you are all -- I think everybody here is right. I think staff is frustrated because we can't get -- but -- and you guys are frustrated and I hear a lot of right on both sides of this picture right now. So, I think the system is probably a system that is simply designed to fail. Commissioner Sanchez: It's got flaws, without a doubt. Vice Chairman Winton: A lot of them. And I'm not sure, frankly, that we -- no, no, let me restate that. I am sure that we don't have the internal skill sets to figure out how to appropriately redesign this system in an independent entity that isn't the City, that isn't the agencies, would be a perfect vehicle for doing this in-depth analysis in an unbiased fashion and helping us create a new policy. I don't think we can get that done to fit with the time frame that we've got to deal with, with year 27, or whatever it is, funding. So, we might have to make some interim decisions about what we want to do, but I would like to -- maybe we need a resolution that directs the City Manager to work with LISC or just request LISC to come back to us, think about this suggestion and come back to us with a plan to initiate this housing summit. 66 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Mr, Vice Chair, I have to leave now and I wonder if you can follow the debate? If you all going to vote on something, I would ask you to defer any voting. I understand all what has been done here and but I just -- I want to vote on this issue, and I understand -- Vice Chairman Winton: I think you only wanted to vote on the schedule, isn't that right? Chairman Regalado: That's what I said. If you only vote on the schedule that we need to do that, my vote will be yes. If we are going to vote on any policy now -- Vice Chairman Winton: I would move to accept staffs recommendation on the schedule. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second. Vice Chairman Winton: As planned. Commissioner Teele: I would ask that there be one moderation. The schedule implies the 8th through the 19th for one hearing, the primary hearing, with supplemental hearings; is that correct? Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Of April. I would ask that it be amended to the 8th through the 20th, a Saturday. You know, we've got to get out of thinking Monday through Friday when we're out here in the community. So, I would just ask that Saturdays be included in terms of the schedule, and it go from the 8th through the 20th. Chairman Regalado: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: Accept the amendment. Chairman Regalado: It's -- and also, just think about this. When you make a decision this afternoon at three on the next City Commission meeting, think about these meetings that we're scheduling in terms of different districts, so you take that into account. The administration will have to work around the City Commission meeting. Commissioner Teele: On the motion, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Now, I think part of the problem here is us. Two things happened on the motion. Last year we said, at least one meeting, and unlimited number of other meetings. What that did is, it created havoc for the staff. So, what her recommendations, I heard it was, there will be one primary meeting, which staff is obliged to support, et cetera, and then if you want to have supplemental meetings for a neighborhood, that's up to you, which staff will support, to the best of their ability. But we had the problem where one person came in and said, "Well, why 67 March 7, 2002 was the Public Works Director at this meeting and they weren't at that meeting? And dah, dah, dah, dah. Commissioner Sanchez: The problem was duplication of meetings. Commissioner Teele: Yeah. Commissioner Sanchez: Several Commissioners had the same meeting at the same time. Commissioner Teele: But it would be on a first come, first -- Vice Chairman Winton: I agree with their point. Commissioner Teele: First come, first served basis, by written memo to the Clerk as a part of this, and first come, first served, and then work it out with the others. Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: So, I just wanted to clarify those two points. Each of us will be entitled to one primary meeting and as many supplemental meetings as required. And the final issue on that is the thing that made my meeting work much better than I think a lot was working with public -- with Community Development in putting out materials supporting the public hearing. And I would only ask that the resolution or the motion include instructions to staff to work with each Commissioner and to provide the cost, the administrative costs, of course, of mailings and preparation of publications that may be necessary to notice the meeting or be presented in the pleating. And I just wanted to make that public and on the record because we all have the same access and whether you utilize them is a different matter. Vice Chairman Winton: Accept that modification as well. Commissioner Teele: Thank you. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Well, there is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 68 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-227 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ADOPTING A PLANNING CALENDAR FOR THE TWENTY-EIGHTH (28TH) YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: It passes. Mr. Vice Chair, you want to come back at 2:30 or 3 o'clock. Remember that 3 o'clock, the Mayor has a ceremony that he wishes us to attend. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I don't think we're done with it. I still think we need to discuss public service. Chairman Regalado: No. I understand that. But I'm just asking at what time you want to come back? Commissioner Teele: I would prefer that we come back at 2:30. Vice Chairman Winton: That's fine with me. Commissioner Teele: And try to finish this item up and any other votes when you're here. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele: And then -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Two -thirty. Commissioner Gonzalez: I just want -- Mr. Chairman? 69 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Note for the Record: Chairman Regalado left the Commission chambers at 11:49 a.m. Commissioner Gonzalez: I would like to request from Ms. Warren a report that could show me how much money you have in your letter of credit by project, not only on housing but on all different areas. Ms. Warren: My letter of -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Your letter of credit with US HUD. Ms. Warren: Oh. My items of -- fund balances? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Warren: OK. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK? What else? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, could we finish the public hearing as it relates to -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Also, if you please could -- excuse me, Commissioner Teele. Also, if you please -- could you tell me how much money of the grant that we get from US HUD every year, how much money do you keep for administration of housing? How many millions of dollars or how many hundreds of thousands or whatever. Ms. Warren: It's on your -- excuse me. It's on the -- under funding uses for the 23rd year. The maximum allowed is 20 percent. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, yes, I know the maximum allowed is 20 percent, but I -- Ms. Warren: It's two million five hundred and seventeen thousand. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, I got it -- I can see it now. But you're taking -- I know the maximum allowed amount is 20 percent, but are you taking the 20 percent, the maximum or — Ms. Warren: Yes, we are. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- are you taking the maximum? Ms. Warren: Yes. We do it in both direct and indirect costs for City related costs, plus our staff. Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. 70 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Can you add one thing: that you're going to provide that information to all of us? Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: To all the Commissioners. Can you also add in there each agency, how much we're spending on administrative, because we talked about East Little Havana. Well, I want to know how much we're spending on each and every one of them. Ms. Warren: In your package, there is a list, with a chart, of all funding by category, by agency for the last three years. It's -- Commissioner Sanchez: I have it here. Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: Dennis, would you like to comment on my request? Dennis Russ: Sure. Just very briefly. My name is Dennis Russ. I'm the Program Director for Miami -- Greater Miami LISC, Local Initiative Support Corporation. We are a funder of Community Development initiatives in the City of Miami. We are your partners in these efforts to achieve affordable housing, neighborhood revitalization, to undertake Economic Development in the community, and business development. And certainly, we're interested in the kind of housing summit that you have spoken of and we're certainly interested in working together with the City of Miami and with Miami -Dade County and the state of Florida in smoothing out some of the dysfunctionality of the system. We have concerns. We've undertaken to take -- to access resources and we're putting them in the hands of community groups and Community Development organizations and we have concerns. We want to have capacity building activities. We want to have performance standards and measurements. But we also have to recognize the kind of dysfunctionality that Mr. Gudorf spoke of and the amount of time that the system is requiring anybody to take in order to do this work. And we have the opportunity in a series of conversations to address that dysfunctionality, and we'd be happy to do that. We had a series of meetings. During the course of one, Mr. Hepburn joined us in some of those. The County joined us. We have a product that speaks to how we might further address this so we would be certainly happy to be a part of that. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Dennis, would you bring, then, a plan back to this Commission and could you tell me when you might be able to bring a draft of a plan for this summit, the kind of resources you need and the kind of people you think you'd be inviting to this summit, and when you think you might have it? Could you bring that -- a draft of a plan back to us at some point soon? Mr. Russ: Sure. I think we could do a first cut of it within 30 days and a second cut of it within 60 days. I'd certainly like to speak to -- have an opportunity to speak to the department in the development of that. 71 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: I think you should. And you probably have to put together a little steering committee that's made up of the agencies and you at the head and City and County, to kind of craft the plan and then you can move forward with the entire summit. So, you'll bring that back to us within 30 days? Thank you. Mr. Russ: A first cut in 30 days and then -- Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Mr. Russ: And then, you know, taking a look -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you're moving this train real fast down the track. I'm in support of what you're doing. I would prefer if you would do a motion that would instruct the staff to have this summit within 90 days or something, and then direct that they work with LISC, among other organizations, to do that. And I'll tell you why. I think Greater Miami Neighborhood is who we've been paying a lot of money over the period of time, and I don't mean that disrespectfully, but we've been paying them to work as technical assistance providers through this whole period. I think we miss a lot if we take them out of the loop on this. I also think that what I'm interested in is private sector approaches to it. So, I'm just as interested in LISC and Greater Miami Neighborhood, but I'm also interested in what Lenar or what Century or somebody that's out there building scattered site housing in the community in Dade or Broward County now. And I think, to cut the private sector approach out of this is where we've made this sort of mistake for the last 20 years going all the way back to, you know, the Jack Gordon -- Senator Gordon's CDC bill that passed in Tallahassee, in the aftermath of the riots in the 70s, and we've just sort of cut them out. And, so, I would very much support what you're doing, but I would like to see a component of this on the -- not just as a consultant to come in, but in this advisory group. I also think that the Broward County Housing Finance Authority -- that's not Broward County Housing, but the Independent Financing Authority, according to most of the developers that are out here from Palm Beach to Monroe County, that are doing it, are saying that they are, by far, the most efficient agency, including Dade Housing Finance, including Palm Beach Housing Finance, in being able to provide the support to the not -for - profits and the private developers in being able to do it, and theirs is based primarily on a commitment from banks before they even start. So, I mean, I think what we're saying, we're all in agreement on. 1 just don't want for this to be -- Vice Chairman Winton: A not-for-profit deal only. Commissioner Teele: -- not-for-profit. Vice Chairman Winton: Agreed. Commissioner Teele: And then the for-profit sort of be an add-on. And I think one of the recommendations contained in the management recommendation was greater partnerships in the private sector approach. So, I think that's something that even they -- that the staff is recommending, and we ought to put that on a co -equal basis, if you will, with Greater Miami Neighborhood, LISC and any other entities that you designate or the Commission -- 72 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Well, my view is, when you talk about summit, you have every single party that you can think of that has to do with development of housing at the table. That includes the banks and the for-profit entities, and that's the reason I asked Dennis to bring us a cut of the plan so that we can -- you know, they'll do the early heavy lifting to kind of outline the plan and then we can add the component pieces that we think might be missing there and we don't have to craft it all right here in one day. That's point one. And the second is, I don't think this can be done in 90 days, and I think it's a mistake to rush it. Commissioner Sanchez: Neither do I, and I want to address that issue. Vice Chairman Winton: I think this is an effort that's probably going to take six months to really get it planned right, get the people there, get the resources you need, and -- Commissioner Teele: I'm willing to stipulate it takes how long you think it takes, but I think we ought to throw the ball to Dennis and let him put together an advisory group, based upon the discussion today. Vice Chairman Winton: Agreed. Commissioner Teele: Working through the City staff, and the City administration, and come back. And if it takes 90 days, fine. If it takes a year, fine. But I agree that putting maybe an unrealistic minimum time does a disservice, and I fully accept that. Vice Chairman Winton: And do you think -- do we need a motion to direct the staff to do anything specifically? Commissioner Teele: I think we should formulate this as a motion, that we vote on at 2:30 when Commissioner Regalado is back. Commissioner Sanchez: When Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Teele: And I would also go one step further on this. I think what is really needed -- and this is -- 1 don't mean to beat a dead horse, Madam Manager, but I want to say -- Madam Manager, I want to say this so that we're all on sync on this. What is needed -- and maybe where Dennis and Greater Miami Neighborhood could be very helpful -- what is needed is a round table discussion among all of the parties that are affected and the staff and maybe we ought to ask somebody to facilitate that. But, Johnny, Commissioners, we continue to argue about facts and that's what drives me crazy up here. We don't get to make policy. And I want to apologize to you, ma'am, but I get so frustrated because we argue about facts. We're not here to decide the facts. We're here to decide the policy. You all need to agree on the facts. And I just think, Johnny, it would really be in our best have if we got LISC and Greater Miami Neighborhood working with the staff, to hold a workshop or a -- something on the facts relating to these and to develop or to vet, if you will, a report. What's wrong with this report is, we're just taking an artificial snapshot. Three years does more disservice than the service. Every organization's got to have a different window. You can't just say three years. It gives us a distorted picture. 73 March 7, 2002 You've got to look at organization "X" and look at how long they've been doing this. Organization "Y" and look at what they're doing. You Just can't say three years or two years, and that's what all of this is leading up to. Vice Chairman Winton: I agree with you one hundred percent. And the fact of the matter is that, in this process -- in the summit process, that process should get all of this kind of stuff out on the table and it helps set the new standard for measuring performance. So, we'll get recommendations that everybody sitting at the table agreeing on, that, you know, we can't measure the performance, because the market reality out there in terms of where the money comes from says you can't measure in a three-year period. You have to measure in five, or that you can measure in two, whatever the answer is. And then everybody's speaking the same language and that's the point that you're making. We're not speaking the same language, and that's simply part of the problem. I'm sorry, Commissioner Sanchez. You've asked for the floor three times, and I've been a very, very unresponsive Vice Chairman. The floor is yours. Commissioner Sanchez: You're forgiven. On this issue, I think that every year, when this comes about, we end up arguing over the same facts. We end up arguing over the same thing. This year, the recommendation has come forth by the administration. You know, whether it's been received or not, I think that to address the issue, there is dysfunctionality in the structure, and we need to address it. I think that if one message has been sent clear, crystal clear, it is to have this summit to iron out what is it that we need to work on to make sure that it works. We can simplify the process. Yes, we can. We could work together on this. But I'll tell you, we have touched on an issue that I think is prudent on this and it's performance. Funding should be tied to productivity. In everything that we do, I think that in the process, if -- you know, this cannot be a one-sided recommendation. I mean, there needs to be recommendations on both sides from the developers and from the City administration that come to the 50 -yard line and agree on the issue. Perfect example that I came out and I stepped forth and looked at was that we have all this money out there that's on the other side. It's basically frozen. But, then, on the other hand, we realize the complexity and the procedures that have to take place to get the projects done, whether it's three, four years. But there has to be a consensus among the administration and the developers that if we say, hey, your project is going to be completed four, five, whatever the amount is -- and I'd like to see it somewhere within a four- or five-year project -- that it's completed. And if it's not completed, then, you know, you're going to have to give the funding back to allow somebody else to do it. And I think these are the things that, in the summit, these recommendations will come back to us and then we'll fine tune the policies of it and make it acceptable to both sides. And in the best interest, I think that this legislative body will focus on doing what's right for the City and work with you because you have educated us on the complexity of putting together these projects. I mean, it's not that simple. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Any further discussion? Do you we have a -- Commissioner Teele: But at the end of the day, you've still got two issues you've got to decide today or some time within the next 30 days, and that's this: Number one, what happens on the administrative dollars. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. 74 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: For the -- Vice Chairman Winton: This year. Commissioner Teele: I mean, it's all fine, dah, dah, dah. But at the end of the day, what's going to happen on the administrative dollars for the organizations that they're making the recommendation on? Does that go out in the bid document or does it not? Number one. And number two, what can we do to release those funds that have been -- I think you said -- this thing -- but there's no action. I think -- is it seven point eight million dollars ($7,800,000)? Ms. Warren: Minus the two projects. Vice Chairman Winton: Minus the two that came out. Commissioner Teele: What is the total amount? Yeah, but you can wait until the seminar on that. I mean, there's two things you can't -- Vice Chairman Winton: No. We're going to have to make a decision on this this afternoon. Commissioner Sanchez: But -- Commissioner Teele: We've got to make a decision. Commissioner Sanchez: Aren't they grandfathered in already? That was part of the -- they're grandfathered in. Commissioner Teele: So, -- Ms. Warren: Their monies are grandfathered in. Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Ms. Warren: The administrative issue is one for the Commission to give us direction on. Commissioner Teele: Board to make. Which we're not going to do until Commissioner Regalado comes back, if at all. Commissioner Sanchez: At 2:30. Commissioner Teele: The only point I'm going to say very clearly, Ms. Warren, as far as I'm concerned -- and I'll say it when Commissioner Regalado gets here -- it makes no sense, in my mind, to lock in the eight million dollars ($8,000,000) or seven point eight million dollars ($7,800,000). I heard very clearly one thing from one of the persons in the public, they've got to have more than an agreement in principal. They've got to have more than an agreement in principal. So, somewhere between something much greater than an agreement in principal and a 75 March 7, 2002 release of the money, is where we've got to ask Dennis and the staff and the public to think about. I'll throw this out. Why don't we release the money and make a 108? Do a 108 loan on behalf of all these projects, and then they can draw them down when they're ready to go. I mean, I'm just asking a question. Or some type of funding mechanism in which there's a commitment, a binding commitment to make the projects available, but not hold the cash available. Because what you're going to get when Commissioner Gonzalez gets his letter of credit or project by project and a fund balance per project is, it's going to be way distorted because the first seven point eight or whatever amount of this is CD dollars, is going to be there. And then it's going to look like, well, you're not doing a good job of managing the program. Why are you carrying all this money over? So, she's caught in the middle of a box between what we're saying and where we want to go. So, I want to come down fully in support of the staffs recommendation to release these dollars, cash, these commitments. I want to come down fully in support of the industry's recommendation, that they've got to have more than an agreement in principal. They've got to have something like a letter of credit or something that they can be able to pull down when they're ready go. And somewhere between all of these, you know, high-powered, high-grade people, we all ought to be able to figure that out in terms of what -- Vice Chairman Winton: And, Commissioner Teele, to that point, it seems to me that we ought to direct staff to work with some of the agencies during the lunch break unfortunately, because we need some direction. What's here today, particularly in light of this summit, we're not likely to pass this recommendation as it sets. So, what's the right thing to pass that buys us the time to get to the summit that's really going to fix this problem? And, so, y'all need to figure that out, some compromise here that works, where we don't have money tied up where it shouldn't be tied up, but where we can get you the funding that you need to get projects moving this year. So, if y'all are willing to do that, we would -- Ms. Warren: I think one of the things we requested is even if you were going to consider this, that we be allowed to have a public hearing with or without the Commission, to go over this, and additional meetings with each agency, and come back with something in terms of how to deal with these thing on an individual basis. The purpose here was not -- Vice Chairman Winton: Except you're asking -- Ms. Warren: -- to say, freeze the money, take the money. The purpose today is (inaudible) to consider the policy and give us direction. It is not to say, defund them or set the -- Vice Chairman Winton: But you're asking us to vote on a policy this afternoon Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Ms. Warren: No, I'm not. I'm asking you to discuss and consider a policy and let us come back in 30 days, based on input from you. That's the only thing we're asking. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK. All right. Fine. So, this might be an easier vote this afternoon. 76 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Exactly. Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Got it. I understand. Ms. Warren: We're just asking you to give us direction so we can go have a public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: So that direction's probably going to be what we just set for noon. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, you've had plenty of direction today. Ms. Warren: That's all we asked. We didn't ask you to do anything, you know. Vice Chairman Winton: I understand. OK. Any other discussion on this point? Before you run, this point's -- I think we're done with this point. 77 March 7, 2002 18. MR. ROBERT A. FLANDERS, FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI PARK'S ADVISORY BOARD, TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION CONCERNING A PROPOSED RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO THE CREATION OF A MASTER PLAN FOR MIAMI'S PUBLIC PARKS SYSTEM. Vice Chairman Winton: We have, on Item 7, there's two people here. They would like to -- it's a public appearance, and... Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, are we in agreement that we'll come back at 2:30 -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, we are. Commissioner Teele: -- and finish off the Community Development issue? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Teele: There was a whole series of issues -- Vice Chairman Winton: That's exactly right. Commissioner Teele: -- that (inaudible). Vice Chairman Winton: That's exactly right. At 2:30, we're going to -- this is the first issue that comes up. And we have a public appearance, and Mr. Bob Flanders and Greg Bush. Bob Flanders: Thank you, Vice Chairman Winton. Good morning. Well, afternoon. My name is Bob Flanders and I live at 720 Palm Bay Lane, in Miami's Upper Eastside. Thank you for allowing Greg Bush and myself to appear today as members and representatives of the Parks Advisory Board. We bring an encouraging message of hope and recommendation of unique opportunity for the City and its parks system. If the heart of the City is its business, then its soul's in its neighborhoods and its parks. Recognizing the need to address almost 20 years of neglect and lower financial support of Miami's park system and to reverse their shabby state of affairs, this Commission made a fundamental shift in priorities when it created the Parks Advisory Board in 1999. The Parks Board was charged with an obligation to review the Parks Department's budgets, programming, beautification, security, physical improvements, and to advise the Commission of its findings, and we have risen to the challenge. With board member Carlos Arboleya's guidance and the able assistance of department head Albert Ruder and his staff, we researched and created a property and program overview of the parks system completed last summer. Our report's very creation was a voyage of discovery and self -education for the Park's board members, and its completion has lead us to an irrefutable conclusion: that a master plan will greatly benefit Miami's park systems, and we strongly encourage you to endorse one because we believe it is the best way to leverage the one hundred and twenty-seven million dollars ($127,000,000) in home land defense neighborhood bond dedicated to the park's system. With the leadership and input of Planning and Zoning Department head, Ana Gelabert-Sanchez, City Planner Maria Nardi has prepared a proposal for the master plan, a blueprint for the revival of Miami's parks. Recognizing the prime importance of each neighborhood's participation, the 78 March 7, 2002 master plan process includes a public park charette, held in each of the 13 NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) areas to which the community will be invited. A master plan, gentlemen, is a paint by numbers. You fill it in as you go along, and ultimately arrive at a beautifully, logical picture. The Parks Board has requested that it be written so that it will also serve as the basis for the many public and private grants that are available to the City. It is a significant fact that the bond money can serve as matching funds for many of the grants. In other words, gentlemen, we may be able to almost double our money available for parks projects. The tragic circumstances of what happened in the United States on 9/11 has allowed us all to refocus upon what is truly important: community, family, and relationships. Some former members of this Commission believed wrongfully, that parks are a frill. They are not. They provide recreation in a crime -free environment for school children and their families. There are green areas that enhance the City's quality of life by cleaning the air, breaking the heat and breathing life into neighborhoods. Safe and improved parks can also improve the surrounding real estate values and which, in turn, improve the City's tax base. The Parks Advisory Board would like to gratefully acknowledge that valuable contributions of all the City departments that have conspired with the Park Advisory Board as a team to give the parks the attention they deserve. We would also like to thank the City Manager and his staff for their welcome assistance with this project. Given that almost 50 percent of the bond funds are devoted to parks and recreation, the Parks Advisory Board would also encourage the Commission and the Mayor to consider appointing members of that board on the Bond Oversight committee. Commissioners, on behalf of Chairman Greg Bush and the other members of the committee, we thank you for your indulgence and your wise consideration of our recommendations. Vice Chairman Winton: Bob, I'll have to admit, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking us. I mean, is there a -- there's a request in this somewhere. Mr. Flanders: We are requesting that we isolate a small portion of the one hundred and twenty- seven million in the funds that are dedicated to parks through the process of devising a master plan for the parks system. The park system hasn't had a master plan, I believe -- Al, has it been 20 years, 25 years, 30 years? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it's probably 20 or 30 because we haven't had a master plan for anything else for 20 or 30, so, it fits. Mr. Flanders: Right. We think it's the best way so that the money is not spent piecemeal, willy- nilly and without any plan or forethought. If you don't know where you're going, you can't get there. Vice Chairman Winton: But are you also saying that the master plan needs to be completed before we spend any of the bond money on park -related things? Mr. Flanders: Well, sir, we think it can be done in a fast track project. We have, I gather, an approved vendor and all the Commission has to do is to approve moving forward with it. Like I said, we already have -- Vice Chairman Winton: And what do you -- how do you define fast track? Mr. Manager, are 79 March 7, 2002 you familiar with this at all, or Al? Albert Ruder (Director, Parks): I'll probably need Ana Gelabert's help because it's more like a -- but I would say we have a selected list of consultants that you guys have approved before from Public Works so we could use landscape architects, so probably it would take about six months, I would -- Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Planning and Zoning): What we have suggested is have landscape architects and the town planners and urban designers that you approved on the pre - approved list of professionals that the Public Works Department has, and what we were suggesting is that we could possibly ask -- get the scope of services out, have the landscape architects and town planners become a team, give a presentation. From that we'll be able to choose -- they've already been pre -selected, so they have gone through the required process. We can select a firm and the firm can start with the master planning. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir Commissioner Teele: See, nobody's answering the question yet. How much money we're talking about? It's real -- you've got to have a budget. Are we talking about twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) or two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) or two million dollars ($2,000,000)? And I'm really serious. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Can we just, you know, work on that and bring it back to you when we have more specific plans? Commissioner Teele: See -- and I'll tell you what the problem is of what's come up-to-date. The dollar limit on that -- on the Public Works list is very low. I mean, it's very low. I mean, by Miami's standards, it may be high, but it's really a very, very, very low threshold. What was the cost of the -- you know, I've only seen one Comprehensive Master Plan done in this whole City. That was the one that was done for Coconut Grove. How much was that master plan? Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Two hundred to -- two hundred and fifty-seven. Commissioner Teele: For Coconut Grove? Okay. So, we're talking on the magnitude of two or three or four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) or something like that, and we'll let you come back. Let me tell you what I recommend. Is Nachlinger here? Mr. Nachlinger here? Because this issue keeps coming up, Mr. Manager. I am strongly in support of the recommendation, in principal. I would very much like to ask staff to prepare an item that can be voted upon today to approve this in principal, but further to withdraw "X" percentage of the park designated projects within the bond for the purpose of planning. In other words, we're talking one percent, one half of one percent. We're talking two percent, two-tenths of two percent. I mean, whatever it comes out, based upon what the Manager recommends -- that we withdraw that amount for all of the 80 March 7, 2002 projects for the purpose of a master plan, for which all of them will benefit equally, and we designate that amount of money as a part of this pool that we keep talking about, and we could move forward immediately. In other words, if it's two hundred thousand, it doesn't bother me. If it's two million dollars ($2,000,000), it doesn't bother me. Because the worst thing we could do is do half a master plan. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: That's the worst thing we could do, is try to save money. So, I mean, I don't think we ought to try to agree on what the amount is or what -- I think we ought to agree on the principal. And, by the way, for DOT (Department of Transportation) purposes, they require that you spend at least five percent of every project for planning and engineering before you spend one dollar. You can't spend a DOT -- if you get a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000), you can't spend one dollar ($1) of that until you at least spend five million planning it and evaluating it and going through it before you can spend anything. That's just a federal safeguard, a governmental policy safeguard, because it's much better to spend five million dollars ($5,000,000) and decide you don't want to do it than to spend ninety-five million dollars ($95,000,000), like we did on the Old Arena, and do it wrong, and that was forty million dollars ($40,000,000), not ninety-five. So, the principal, I think, is very thoughtful and I think it really is an intelligent approach that we ought to all be able to support, and it's not going to cost anymore money. It's -- the voters have already voted on it, and we just withdraw the amount of prorata and it's probably going to be something like point five percent, just to pick a number. I mean, what's one percent -- one percent of a hundred and thirty million? Mr. Ruder: It's a hundred and twenty-seven million. One percent would be one point two seven million... Commissioner Teele: So, that's the order of magnitude. If we took one percent of every park and applied that to a master plan, it would be one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000). The problem is, I don't know what the order of magnitude is. And talking about the miscellaneous bid contracts is just going to get you in a lot of trouble because the threshold for all those is going to be two hundred thousand, three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000). Vice Chairman Winton: So, do we have a motion? Commissioner Teele: I don't think we should vote on something like this without Commissioner Regalado. Vice Chairman Winton: I agree. Commissioner Gonzalez: I have a question. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: Are we talking about doing a master plan? Are we talking about all of these issues? Are we talking about hiring outside consultants and outside planners and outside -- 81 March 7, 2002 you know. And let me tell you. This is something that really bothers me and it bothers me forever, OK. We have a huge administration in this City of Miami who spend millions and millions and millions of dollars, OK, on administration, from taxpayers' money and whenever there is a chunk of money coming in from somewhere, we find planners and we find lawyers and we find people that are -- want to take a bite of that money, and I don't know what is the purpose of having a Planning Department and Loan Department and all of these departments. Let's contract it out, everything. I mean, let's contract out. Because we're going to have a staff and we're going to be paying the amount of dollars that we pay in salaries, OK, and on top of that, we need to go outside -- every time we're going to do something in the City, we have to go outside and hire people from the outside to do the job that we should be doing in-house. I mean, either we have an administration problem or we don't have the most competent people in the world working for this City or we have some kind of a problem. But it really pisses me off and it really concerns me. That's the word. It concerns me. The money that maybe we should use to put a playground or to do a pool or to do is going to go now to consultants, consultants and attorneys and architects and, you know. Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner -- Commissioner Gonzalez: The underprivileged people of the neighborhoods are not going to have a pool. Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gonzalez, how do you truly feel about this? How do you truly feel about this? Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, if I could reply to that? Commissioner Gonzalez: Please. Mr. Gimenez: If I can answer that question. We have a certain amount of capacity -- Commissioner, we have a certain amount of capacity within the administration, but there comes a time when we have -- we know that we're going to have a certain amount of planning that has to occur in order for this bond program to occur. It's two hundred and fifty million dollars ($250,000,000). That, frankly, exceeds our capacity internally. Commissioner Gonzalez: And let me tell you, Ms. Gelabert. Excuse me. This is the second time that I'm talking and I see a funny smile on your face, OK. I don't know if there is any -- if you find anything funny in what I'm saying, hey, just tell me about it and maybe I'll make you a joke so you can laugh. All right. Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I apologize if you thought, but I have not made any face. Commissioner Gonzalez: I like to be respected because I respect everybody to deserve the same respect, OK. So, let's keep it on line. Thank you. Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, we try to respect all Commissioners and, you know, I'm going to apologize if you felt that somebody was disrespectful to you -- disrespecting you from this 82 March 7, 2002 administration. But what I'm trying to say is that we have a certain amount of capacity and we - - if you want to get all these projects done and completed, we have to go outside because we don't have the capacity internally to do some of the things that we need to do as a City to make it run correctly. So, that's -- when we exceed that capacity, that's when we come to you with recommendations to go outside to, "A," get it quicker, OK, and also there may be expertise that we don't have in-house. If we ended up hiring all this, it would end up being a lot more expensive because, then, we just basically hired the people that we need for the time that we need and then they're gone. It's a lot less expensive to do it that way than to hire all the expertise that you may need with all the benefits, et cetera, et cetera. Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I just wanted to make that point clear. And I know, whatever you're going to do, you're going to have to bring it up to us to make the decision to vote on the amount of money -- Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that it's going to spend. But it really concerns me, once again, and I wanted to be public on the record, that the money that is supposed to go to the parks for the kids of the neighborhoods to have playgrounds and to have amenities and things to enjoy, that goes to -- that go to developers and to go to planners and to go to, you know, outside the City. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, on this issue, and I'll limit my questioning on it. Was it -- would this only apply to City parks or City property that could be converted into green space, which we so desperately need in the City? Mr. Ruder, maybe you could answer my question, sir. Mr. Ruder: It's parks, it's open spaces, it's also an evaluation of other -- I believe there's -- we have a draft here also will cover other properties that maybe could be converted into parks. Vice Chairman Winton: Sir, you've answered my question. Just to bring something up that I have brought in the previous Commission meeting. We have a golden opportunity to take an area right now that is a green space, which is in horrible condition, an eyesore, and probably, on the I I of April, the meeting, I will have "X" amount of residents that live in that area come here to express their concerns, and that is 13u' Avenue, the Cuban Memorial Drive Corridor from Coral Way to 27t". I will be asking the City to come back with recommendations on funding, and I have worked already with Public Works to start the process. This is a perfect opportunity to implement that and create a perfect promenade, connecting two businesses corridors: Calle Ocho and Coral Way, where people can walk through property that's ours. So, we don't have to go out. So, I could -- no one could come here and say the excuse, "Oh, the property 's too expensive." It's already ours. And it's -- it could be some easily converted to add -- it's not a big chunk of land, but at least it gives us and gives the residents of Miami additional green space in our community. To connect Coral Way with 8a' Street as a corridor, people could walk and neighbors could go out and maybe sit under a tree and read the newspaper in the morning or walk their dogs, but there's a long-term planning and if you do that, maybe just one suggestion that I would throw out. That area, right now, I would say about 20 percent or 30 percent is about 83 March 7, 2002 monuments. I think that would be a key place in our community to have monuments to recognize maybe the Twin Towers or maybe the Vietnam vets and all kinds of nice monuments that people could walk down there and connect one corridor to the other and while they're walking, they could see all these memorials. So, it's just a suggestion since you're involved in the parks. And, Greg, I spoke to you about this. So, I've given you a heads up and I'm looking for your guidance, leadership to take that area, which is an eyesore now, and convert it into something we could all be proud of. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Commissioner Teele: On the issue that Commissioner Sanchez just raised. I think, again, a master plan would get that -- and I think there's probably a lot of space -- it really should be not just parks, because I think one of the big issues we've got is, we need to -- and I'll say this respectfully to you, Dr. Bush, you all need to look at a better definition and approach to what's a park from what's an open space from what's a -- The County has got this elaborate system of regional parks. We really need to develop something that's intelligent. But what Commissioner Sanchez is saying is what I am one hundred percent in agreement with. You've heard me talk about this so-called 9'h Street Mall Promenade, where we ought to have monuments, et cetera. We have a unique community and I think we're missing a lot of that community, and I strongly support what he's talking about in the Little Havana area because that is a national tourist attraction and we're not putting our best foot forward. So, I want to support that. I want to take a totally separate view from my dear colleague, who I really want to work with. This City, for the last 20 years, has been in a crisis management mode. For twenty years it has been -- for five years, it's been in a one -of -a -kind, first in the history deficit mode. You know what happens when you're in a -- when you don't have enough money to operate? The first thing that goes is capital projects. In other words, all maintenance gets deferred. Everybody's going, you know -- the next thing that happens is the planning process is truncated, thrown out the window, et cetera, and basically, for the last eight or ten years -- and I don't want to overstate this, but this City has gone through a very difficult time. Before I got here. When I got here, it was in an emergency. Before you got here, before all of us got here. The one thing that we have to be mindful of with this tremendous opportunity that we have, the County, Raul Martinez, my dear friend in Hialeah, every time we go to MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) meetings, he's shooting me the bird, making sly remarks about Miami, saying what a great thing we've got because we've got this bond issue, and he's also saying -- Raul Martinez is also saying, if we don't do this right, Bob Nachlinger and Mr. Manager, we're going to blow it for the rest of the cities and Dade County because people want to see projects and, you know, the devil's into details the public does not understand or even give a darn about this 10 -year phase and that we're going to do this right. The public expects us to get it done. And Raul Martinez is the guy who's always saying, if the City of Miami doesn't get moving on those park projects, the County can kiss goodbye their so- called billion dollar ($1,000,000,000) general obligation bond they want to roll out in November. Now, what does that have to do with where we are? We don't have -- this City does not have, particularly in Public Works, in Parks, and Planning, we don't have the capacity -- because we've given that up for the last three or four years. If you look at these budgets, we've gone down, down, down, down, down in terms of the percentage of funding for the City as it relates to parks, 84 March 7, 2002 for example. The Park's budget has gotten numerically bigger because the budget gets bigger, but in terms of percentage of the budget, the Park's budget gets smaller and smaller and smaller. Planning really didn't exist as a body. Now, look to do a real master plan, you're going to have some kind of master -- what do they call those guys that write books and, you know, call themselves professors? Is it master real -- land planner, land architect? What do they call those things -- those people? Mr. Ruder: Land use planner. Commissioner Teele: No, but there's a master. There's a category. You've got to get -- you don't want to have one of those people on your staff everyday. You know why? Because those people are highly paid. There are certain kinds of services that, if you want to get the quality, we've got to go out and buy it. And I'll tell you what we've got to do in Public Works, with all due respect to Public Works, is going to be 10 -times more than what we're going to have to do in contracting out in Planning. So, we may as well get ready for it. We don't have -- our Public Works Department is set up for a capital plan of about twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) a year? What's a good number? Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) a year. If we start talking about bringing in a bond issue, we're going to have all kinds of contracts going out for consultants and engineers in the Public Works area because we don't have the staff to run a two hundred million dollar ($200,000,000) or a hundred and fifty million dollar ($150,000,000) capital program on a year-to-year basis. And, so, the Planning Department is caught in the same vice. They don't have the in-house staff -- it's not competence. It's not even about competence. We have a very competent staff. It's really about capacity. Now, if we want to double our staff - - and this is the mistake the School Board made when they did their bond issue. They decided to do everything -- remember about eight or ten years ago, to do everything in-house. You know what's going to happen once you finish those programs? You've got all those people there that expect to be able to work there for 30 years and retire. Philosophically, I think we're going to be much better off keeping this administrative -- our City staff in Planning and in Public Works as lean as possible and to contract out over these surges. And I just -- you know, I want to -- I mean, I feel very badly for the Planning Director, if she did smile or whatever. She may like you. I mean, you know, I don't know what's going on. But the fact of the matter is, everybody's under a lot of stress and a lot of pressure and I think we've got to really try to understand also the dilemma they're in because they're in a dilemma that you and I and none of us set up here -- we inherited, they inherited, and I just would respectfully appeal to you to work with the Planning Department on this kind of request because they've got a tough job and they don't have the in- house staff to do it. But it's not about competence. And it kind of hurts some of the professionals that hear us making these statements because it's really not about competence. It's about capacity and not just having enough people with enough disciplines to do it, respectfully. Vice Chairman Winton: And, Angel, I might add: I'm involved currently in two master planning efforts and finished one, you know, six months ago on Bicentennial Park, and it's -- in addition to capacity, it's really strategic capacity, as Commissioner Teele said. We have -- when you're doing these master plans; they have a relatively short shelf life. So, we go out and hire the best experts we can find that may cost more than if you just had staff doing it, but the best experts we can find to help that master planning process -- and that's a one-year or two-year engagement. We're done with a master plan, they're gone. They go home. We don't pay them anymore and 85 March 7, 2002 it's not built into overhead. And you have a greater level of expertise and specialized skill sets that really helps us craft an appropriate master plan that we commend. As public policymakers, we can direct the dollars that we want in those directions against a real Comprehensive Plan so that we know that every time we spend a dime, we spend a dime today, we spent a dime tomorrow, we spend a dime next year and we spend a dime the year after next. It all builds on the building blocks that a master plan would create for you, and if you don't have that master plan, there's no building blocks. So, we all sit here and say, "Well, we've got a million dollars ($1,000,000) we've got to spent. Well, it's going to go over there." And, then, tomorrow, it's over here and we wake up in five years and we've got something that you say, "Well, what did we really create?" And it wasn't what we envisioned. With a real plan, you can strategically place all those dollars -- Commissioner Sanchez: Vice Chairman Winton, and then -- when you do that master plan, if you don't implement that master plan -- Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, you're in big -- Commissioner Sanchez: -- then you could stick it in the shelf with 50 other master plans because I could bring out five or six master plans from Calle Ocho that every time they -- I mean, they -- everybody wants to come in and do another master plan. So, the process to do the master plan -- Vice Chairman Winton: And then implement. Commissioner Sanchez: -- follow through and get it implemented because if you don't, you've wasted your money. Now, I do agree with one thing. Outsourcing some of this stuff is very important because you bring in the experts on this thing. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Anything else? We're not going to vote on this until Commissioner Regalado gets back, so we appreciate your presentation and we'll take a vote on the request when Commissioner Regalado is here at 2:30. Mr. Flanders: If you would like, Commissioner, I'll be happy to return. Vice Chairman Winton: Sure. Mr. Flanders: In any case, in answer to Commissioner Teele's question, I have to tell you, sir, the plan -- the master plan process is designed in such a way to connect the people who live in the City to their parks, and it's doing the right thing for the -- Vice Chairman Winton: And neighborhood to neighborhood. Mr. Flanders: -- for the City. Yes. Greg Bush: Can I make a brief comment? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Quickly. 86 March 7, 2002 Mr. Bush: Very brief. Vice Chairman Winton: Very brief. We -- Mr. Bush: This is a process in which I think it's important to understand, we're trying to build constituency for the parks, so it's going to be neighborhood by neighborhood. We're interested in connecting neighborhoods to the parks. I think that's real important because, in the long run, these plans aren't going to mean a damn unless you have a public that's really involved in the process. Vice Chairman Winton: Agreed. Mr. Bush: It seems to me. So -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. 87 March 7, 2002 19. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 2-892 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED "ADMIMSTRATION, BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS," TO: (1) RENAME DIVISION 10, ENTITLED "CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD" TO CITY OF MIAMI CULTURAL, FINE ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT COUNCIL ("COUNCIL"); (2) REPEAL SECTIONS 2-1140 THROUGH 2-1143; (3) SUBSTITUTE NEW SECTIONS 2- 1140 THROUGH 2-1143; (4) PROVIDE FOR "SUNSET" REVIEW OF THE COUNCIL. Chairman Regalado: We have two things that are pending. One thing is the parks issue. The other one is the second reading of an ordinance that I had in my blue page that I wish if we can get it out of the way, because I was waiting for some information. So, let me -- Mr. Vice Chair, could 1 chair so 1 can move a second reading ordinance on the Cultural and Entertainment Council? It's the second reading for this ordinance, approved by the Commission on February 14. Vice Chairman Winton: What item is that? Chairman Regalado: It's on my blue page. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. I got it. Chairman Regalado: And it's the last of my items. Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion. Chairman Regalado: And a second. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Any discussion? It's an ordinance. Chairman Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: Before voting, I have to give you a brief explanation about what we're doing here. What we're doing is, we're expanding this board to include entertainment. And what we're doing is that we are -- we'll be using the City of Miami 501 not-for-profit account to get funds. One of the things that this board should do -- in fact, one of the people that have driven this new board has asked permission, as a potential future member, to go and meet with the Orange Bowl Committee. So, the City of Miami will participate in salvaging the Orange Bowl Parade through this Entertainment and Cultural Board. You know, we can reinvent the parade. And if there is an economic need, the people that are willing to work in this Council believe that the private industry, through a not-for-profit account of the City, will be able to support maintaining the Orange Bowl Parade. As a matter of fact, we have here the general manager of the radio station that organizes the Three Kings Parade. And I'm telling you, if there is no Orange Bowl Parade, the Three Kings Parade will suffer tremendously, because they use the same floats. And so everybody wants to have the Orange Bowl Parade go on. And, you know, the organizers are saying that there's not going to be any more parade next year. So, I 88 March 7, 2002 really think that with this Council, we can have the City of Miami Orange Bowl Parade. And so that's the explanation. Vice Chairman Winton: Great. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll, please? An ordinance entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE IX OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION, BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS," TO: (1) RENAME DIVISION 10, ENTITLED "CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD" TO THE CITY OF MIAMI ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT COUNCIL ("COUNCIL ); (2) REPEAL SECTIONS 2-1140 THROUGH 2-1143 IN THEIR ENTIRETY; AND (3) SUBSTITUTE IN LIEU THEREOF NEW SECTIONS 2-1140 THROUGH 2- 1143, TO CREATE, ESTABLISH AND SET FORTH THE COUNCIL'S PURPOSE, POWERS AND DUTIES, PROVIDE FOR MEMBERSHIP AND APPOINTMENTS, QUALIFICATIONS, OFFICERS, TERMS OF OFFICE, VACANCIES, MEETINGS, QUORUM AND VOTING, ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS, PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY, RULES OF PROCEDURES, MINUTES, ASSIGNMENT OF STAFF, LEGAL COUNSEL, NOTICES AND FILING OF RECORDS; AND (4) PROVIDE FOR "SUNSET" REVIEW OF THE COUNCIL BY AMENDING SECTION 2-892 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of February 14, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Chairman Regalado, 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 Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado NAYS: None ABSENT: Commission Joe Sanchez Commission Angel Gonzalez THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12192. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. 89 March 7, 2002 20. INSTRUCT MANAGER TO COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATION TO FACILITATE MASTER PLAN PROCESS FOR USE OF PERCENTAGE OF FUNDS FROM ALL PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PARKS ORIENTED PROJECTS AND OPEN SPACES THROUGHOUT CITY; MANAGER TO ENSURE THAT THOSE FUNDS WILL BE ALLOCATED AS A PART OF FIRST DOLLARS FROM HOMELAND DEFENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS (See #18). Chairman Regalado: Now, we have a few minutes before we go outside. You all wanted to finish the Parks item and -- I think Bob, you wanted to finish here or is it -- Vice Chairman Winton: I think their presentations are completed. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And we just didn't take an action because you weren't here. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: So, we wanted to wait until you got here. Chairman Regalado: I think I understand what we're doing, is to take part of the budget for a master plan. This is what they do in the federal government and the state government. They take money to do a master plan, and I think it's a pretty good idea. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir Commissioner Teele: While the Park's Director is here -- I apologize, I didn't have a chance to talk to you during the break, Mr. Director -- but do you recall the amount of money that the Safe Neighborhood Bond Program allows from their grants for planning? On all of their grants that come to us, there is a percentage amount. Would you -- Albert Ruder (Director, Parks & Recreation): They allow 17 percent for administration planning. It's all grouped within that 17 percent figure. Commissioner Teele: Yeah. So, 1 just wanted to put that on the record, as well. Is that when we get a grant from Safe Neighborhood Bonds for our parks, they allow us 17 percent for planning and administrative costs associated with that. And, so, I guess, if Commissioner Winton would accept, the motion would be a motion to instruct the staff to come back with a plan to facilitate a master planning process; to use a percentage portion of funds from all of the parks -oriented projects that have been previously approved, and to ensure that those funds will be made as a part of the first crunch of dollars. And further to instruct the Manager to advance funds, if necessary, to facilitate the process. I would so move. I would so move. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. 90 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make an amendment. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: That it also include open green space throughout the City of Miami, just not only parks. Commissioner Teele: And I would accept that, with the understanding, again, that when we talk about parks, we really need a better definition. But I -- my definition includes your definition, open green -- Vice Chairman Winton: As does mine. Commissioner Teele: -- open green space, plazas -- Commissioner Sanchez: Which could be turned into promenades. Commissioner Teele: Plazas and promenades, as well as -- one of the things that needs to be incorporated in this, Mr. Manager, is the -- what are those things that the Planning Department's been working on? These entrances, what do we call them? Commissioner Sanchez: Gateways. Commissioner Teele: As well as gateways. All of this should be looked at as one comprehensive program, the gateways. Because those gateways need to be beautiful green space. They need to be beautiful open space, where appropriate. So, I accept that as a friendly amendment, yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second, as amended. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 91 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-228 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO FACILITATE A MASTER PLAN PROCESS FOR THE USE OF A PERCENTAGE OF FUNDS FROM ALL PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PARKS ORIENTED PROJECTS AND OPEN SPACES THROUGHOUT THE CITY, (INCLUDING PLAZAS, GATEWAYS, PROMENADES, ETC.); FURTHER DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO ENSURE THAT THOSE FUNDS WILL BE ALLOCATED AS A PART OF THE FIRST DOLLARS FROM THE HOMELAND DEFENSE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS AND TO ADVANCE FUNDS, IF NECESSARY, TO FACILITATE SAID PROCESS. 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. 92 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: We need to go outside. The Mayor is inviting us to go outside. But before we do -- OK. No, you can stay. Commissioner Sanchez: It's OK. Chairman Regalado: But before we do, let me tell you. You all know that FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) has been working on Flagler Street and is now working on Coral Way and Southwest I" Street. The Flagler Street project has been finished yesterday, but the good news is that they did it three months in advance. FDOT offers bonus to the contractors if they finish early. They did that in Southwest 8th Street and they did that in Flagler. They're doing that also in Coral Way. So, I think it -- that Jose Abreu and FDOT needs to be commended officially by the City Commission, because Flagler is one of the major -- the most traditional historic street in the City of Miami, and they did an extraordinary work. And if you go by Flagler from 27th to 71 Avenue, it's beautiful. And so, I hope that somebody -- maybe we don't need it, but maybe the City Clerk -- Madam City Clerk, can write a letter, signed by all the members of the Commission and the Mayor, congratulating Mr. Jose Abreu, the Director of FDOT, for the good job in Flagler. And, by the way, when you leave today here, try to avoid Coral Way. There is one lane closure in Coral Way, because of the project. But we hope that it will be done before the 300 days that it was scheduled to be. So, the Mayor is going to do some presentations outside in the lobby, and he's inviting us to go and be with him for this event. Commissioner Teele: Move to recess. 1 mean -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: Yes, we will be back after a few minutes. THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 3:07 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 3:11 P.M), WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT. 93 March 7, 2002 22. CERTIFICATES FOR MERIT FROM MAYOR DIAZ IN RECOGNITION OF WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH: M. ATHALIE RANGE, LUCIA DOUGHERTY AND ROSARIO KENNEDY; PROCLAMATION BY MAYOR DIAZ IN RECOGNITION OF COMMISSION ON STATUS OF WOMEN; PROCLAMATION BY MAYOR DIAZ TO GARY STONE AND CLAUDIA PUIG IN RECOGNITION OF THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THREE KINGS PARADE DECLARING SUNDAY JANUARY 6, 2002 AS "GARY STONE AND CLAUDIA PUIG DAY." (See #3) Chairman Regalado: (INAUDIBLE) is convened, after a brief recess. I understand that Mayor has two proclamations. And after that, he is going to present some of the items on his blue page, and then we'll go on with the regular agenda. Mr. Mayor. Mayor Diaz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have a couple of very important people that we're going to recognize today, and we have two proclamations for them. I'd like to read them. "Whereas the City of Miami salutes the work of community advocates who initiate projects to elevate the quality of life of our citizens, devotedly and selflessly promoting understanding of the culture and history of the people comprising our City's diversity; and whereas Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation, an organization dedicated to using the airways for the benefit of the people who listen, has embraced various community initiatives designed to facilitate improved health care and effective social programs for the general Miami populace, enriching our City through critical acts of civic responsibility and philanthropy; and whereas the Three Kings Parade and Festival, one of the five largest Hispanic events in the United States, has benefited from the generosity and foresight of Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation, an international company, which, in 1999, added a festival component to this annual religious winter celebration, increasing both its visibility and its significance as one of Miami's major commemoratives; and whereas it is just and appropriate that officials of the City of Miami, on behalf of our citizens, pause herewith to pay tribute to Gary Stone, Chief Operating Officer of Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation, Claudia Puig, General Manager and Vice President of Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation Miami,WAMR-AMOR 107.5 FM, WAQI-RADIO MAMBI 710 AM, WRTO- SALSA 98.3 FM, and WQBA 1140 AM, who, together, create and promote the Three Kings Parade and Festival, an event that brings joy and cultural reaffirmation to countless families across South Florida. Now, therefore, I, Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor of the City of Miami, do hereby proclaim Sunday, the 6th of January, in the year 2002, as Gary Stone Day and Claudia Puig Day. (APPLAUSE) Claudia Puig: Well, 1 want to thank all of you, Ralph. I just want to thank everyone, the Mayor, all the Commissioners. It couldn't be possible without all your support. This is a 32 -year tradition, this parade. It has been on for 32 years. It unites our Hispanic community and it's dedicated to bringing together our whole community and all the children that we have in our community. So, thank you again to all of you for making it possible. We couldn't do it without all of you. And, Commissioner Joe Sanchez, a special thanks to you. (APPLAUSE) 94 March 7, 2002 Gary Stone: Let me say how proud I am of Claudia Puig and her staff and the things that they do for this community with Three Kings Parade and the other things that they're involved in year- round. And we at Hispanic Broadcasting are very proud of them and really pleased that we're able to make a contribution to the community. Mayor and City Council members, I really appreciate the recognition and we're just starting here and really get going. So, we'll do more and more. So, thank you so much. (APPLAUSE) 95 March 7, 2002 23. BRIEF ON REQUEST OF WAIVER FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ON 15% LIMIT ASSOCIATED WITH CDBG FUNDED ACTIVITIES UNDER CATEGORY OF PUBLIC SERVICE. Chairman Regalado: OK. We go back to the regular agenda. We still have the blue page of Mayor. He had some items that wanted to bring before the City Commission. So -- Commissioner Sanchez: Where are we at? Mayor Manny Diaz: And I heard some brief discussion, before your last break, regarding the Orange Bowl Parade, and I think it's only fitting that we presented these proclamations, because I think -- I do think that we need to do everything we can to make sure that we maintain this tradition and continue to work with Hispanic Broadcasting Corporation to do so. I wanted to mention a couple of items that are on the blue page. One is an item that some of you have discussed with me, and I just wanted to bring you up to speed on it, particularly in light of your conversation earlier this morning on the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) issue. Many of you have talked to me about the possibility of getting another federal waiver to increase -- to continue the increase that we had last year from 15 percent to 25 percent of our social programs. And I just wanted to alert you to the fact that I have spoken with our Congresswoman Meek, who has been the champion on this issue in years past, about trying to get a waiver this year, as well. And she has indicated to me that the prospects of successfully getting that waiver this year appear to be very, very slim. There seems to be no appetite for it with the President and the leadership in Congress. So, I wanted to bring you up to speed on that. 96 March 7, 2002 24. SUPPORT CITY'S IN-KIND COMMITMENT AS PART OF COMMUNITY PROPOSAL TO ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON FOUNDATION'S COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP FOR OLDER ADULTS INITIATIVE, WHEREIN CITY AGREED TO PROVIDE STAFF SUPPORT, $22,059 PER YEAR, AND NOT TO EXCEED $33,088 OVER COURSE OF 18 - MONTH PLANNING PERIOD. Mayor Manuel Diaz: The other thing that I wanted to mention to you is that my office has submitted a letter of support for the grant application. I believe you have a resolution in your agenda package. The letter of support is for a grant application, which would be a partnership between the County, the City, United Way, service providers at Fl U's (Florida International University) Center on Aging to conduct an 18 -month planning study that would address future service needs and the mobility issues of seniors, as well as look at addressing efficiencies in our local service delivery structure. The Alliance on Aging, Inc. is serving as the local coordinating entity. I would recommend that you support this resolution to have the City provide the in-kind support of a transportation and housing planner at 2 percent of their time during the 18 -month planning process, in the event that the local partnership receives the requested funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. I have personally agreed to serve on the Alliance for Human Services, Community Service and Subcommittee, a group that will meet quarterly to set policy, including goals, project missions, scope of work, and plans for financing strategies. And the City Manager has appointed Kelly DaSilva to serve as the City's representative on the Steering Committee, which will meet monthly and review planning and operations. In the coming years, we, as a City, are going to be experiencing a rapid aging in our population. And it is incumbent upon us today to involve ourselves in proper planning in a way to ensure that we can meet the future needs of our citizens. And I would urge your support of this resolution and this initiative. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: We have a motion by Vice Chair Winton, second by Commissioner Teele. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 97 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-229 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE PROVISION OF IN-KIND SERVICES BY THE DEPARTMENTS OF PLANNING AND ZONING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON FOUNDATION'S COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP FOR OLDER ADULTS INITIATIVE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,059 PER YEAR, AND NOT TO EXCEED $33,088 OVER THE COURSE OF THE 18 -MONTH PLANNING PERIOD; ALLOCATING FUNDS EQUALLY FROM EACH OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF PLANNING AND ZONING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. (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. Chairman Regalado: Mr. Mayor. Mayor Diaz: That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. 98 March 7, 2002 25. INSTRUCT MANAGER TO WORK WITH MAYOR'S STAFF AND DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER'S STAFF TO DEVELOP PILOT OUTREACH PROGRAM TO HELP SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS OR SOLE PROPRIETORS THAT ARE EX -OFFENDERS AND PERSONS WITH HIV/AIDS, TO ASSIST THEM TO SET UP THEIR BUSINESS IN CITY, MORE PARTICULARLY IN MODEL CITY AREA. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, while the Mayor is here, there are two matters that I'd like to get the Mayor's acknowledgment of or consent regarding. Also, I think it would be very helpful if there is going to be a discussion on the legislation in Tallahassee, that the Mayor's Office at least be contacted when that discussion is going on so he's aware. Because at the very end of the day, I think our legislators would very much like to know that our Mayor is supporting, weighing in on any matter that is important. And I do understand there may be one or two late -breaking matters that will have direct impact on the City of Miami. The two matters that I'd like to discuss first is a discussion that the Mayor had during -- on the occasion of meeting with several African-American ministers who in the occasion of Black History Month, in which the Mayor and I both pledged to request of the Manager that we initiate a program primarily to help small business owners or sole proprietors that were ex -offenders, in the context of trying to assist them in setting up their business and doing business with the City. And I think, you know, again, it's something that we need to recognize that the City of Miami has a very unique problem, with the number of ex -offenders we have, that ex -offenders, in fact, have a difficult time getting jobs. And I would, Mr. Mayor, like to move, with your permission, a request that the Manager develop a program, consistent with your statements, to do a significant outreach, including a revolving loan program that would involve primarily ex -offenders and persons that are HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) positive and other high-risk areas, as a pilot program in the Model Cities areas. I would so move that issue. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: -- and a second. Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Mayor, I would invite you, please, to clarify or, you know, to put on the record -- Mayor Diaz: Commissioner Teele, thanks for bringing that up. I support the motion. One of the problems was extremely strong in the minds of particularly the church leaders who were there is the fact that they are doing a tremendous amount of work and a tremendous amount of good work to bring back, to rehabilitate a lot of ex -offenders. And you get people up to a certain point and then when they have to go get a job, and the fact that they are an ex -offender, it prohibits them from getting that job. So, any initiative that we, as a City, can do to work with the churches to give these people who have reformed, who have rehabilitated and want to become contributing members of society, I think is absolutely warranted. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion? 99 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Are we talking about providing employment or providing loans to small businesses? Commissioner Teele: Well, what we had asked was, is that the Manager work with us in developing a program -- but a number of the persons that have been involved, that have talked to me since the meeting, have indicated that they would rather be self-employed or sole businesses, et cetera. I don't think there's much we can do, candidly, other than jawbone in the private sector with employment. But I don't want to take either one off the table at this point. But I do think that we, through our community development process and our neighborhood development process, have the mandating responsibility to help people with their business development. I'd hate to become a job agency, candidly. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, if I may. I don't certainly have a problem with anybody who has AIDS, that we could assist them. I do continue to have a problem with assisting convicted felons, when we have so many small businesses in our community and there isn't enough money through the CDBG process to assist them. I mean, we just got off a good two-hour discussion on CDBG, people that are looking for funds all the time, to have to take in the little resource that we do have to start, you know, providing convicted felons with loans. I have a problem with that. I've had a problem with that since day one. I had a problem with convicted felons on the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel) and I continue to have problems with convicted felons. I don't have a problem with helping them restore their rights to vote, but until they get their rights restored to vote, I don't feel that this Commission or any other government can provide assistance to people that have been convicted of felons. Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Chairman, I deeply respect Commissioner Sanchez position, and would note that you've been always consistent on that position. This is not something that's come up now. But I do wish to make a very real clarification between someone who's a convicted felon and someone that has their rights restored. Even if they have their rights restored, they're still a convicted felon. And the problem that we're having in our society is the fact that convicted felons are people, and they've got families and they've got obligations. And I believe that while the priority -- the good thing about where we are in our community development process is, while their priorities in each district may be minute of their certain consensus, I will submit to you that in the district that I'm pleased -- privileged to represent, jobs and job creation is going to be the number one, the number two and the number three area in the district that I represent. In some other areas, elderly feeding, maybe. In some other areas, neighborhood improvements maybe. But the point that I'm making is, please, as the Commissioner of the district that I represent, give me the flexibility, within the context of the funds that are targeted to my district, to at least be able to work to prioritize those things as a matter. Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, as long as they're targeted to your area and you don't end up taking from another area, I don't have a problem with it. Commissioner Teele: And I deeply respect that, Commissioner. 100 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: So, there is a motion and a second. Commissioner. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I happen to agree with Commissioner Sanchez, in the fact that if Commissioner Teele is talking about monies that are going to be targeted to his area, I mean, he should be the -- have the flexibility to use those monies in his community the best way that he see fit to improve and to take care of the needs of his community. So, I'll vote yes on it. Commissioner Teele: I'm only -- I think the motion -- first of all, doesn't move any money. Doesn't do anything. It just ask that the Manager sit down with the Mayor's Office and my office to develop a pilot program in the Model Cities area, where we have -- and, again, I would just note for the record that black unemployment in this City is three times that -- and I would ask the Director -- the Manager to provide us with statistics of unemployment by ethnicity. But let's be very candid, folks. Black unemployment in this City is at least three times that of the unemployment elsewhere. Unemployment in Overtown, for example, is six times that of the other areas. So, this is clearly a community where one size doesn't fit all. We've got to fashion our remedies to the problems that each community has. And I, again, have tremendous respect for the consistency of the position that you've taken, Commissioner Sanchez, which is consistent with your background and your experience in law enforcement. And I certainly don't want anybody to read that there's a dispute or a disagreement about it. You've had this position on any number of areas that are interfaced with this. Commissioner Sanchez: But just for point of clarification. It's not my background. I just don't think that when you have two people -- one that has been a hardworking citizen that's struggling out there too to survive, especially with the economy the way it is, and you're going to have one person who has clearly violated the law, has gone to jail for something that he did and convicted by a court, to come out. And then, when you have funds that we fight for and people are constantly fighting to scratch up money to provide this type of assistance, then we're basically going to be providing it to someone who has not been a good citizen. Commissioner Gonzalez: We also have -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Mayor, I'm so glad you're here to hear the debate. Mayor Diaz: It's great. Commissioner Gonzalez: We also have a high percentage of unemployment in the Hispanic community. What happened is that it doesn't reflect that much because, remember, that we have a lot of people coming from different countries in Central America and South America that, due to immigration problems, they don't report themselves. But they're with a lack of employment. And that is also serious problem that we have in the Hispanic community and something that -- unfortunately, we are not the federal government and have the assets of the federal government to take care of these matters, because my point of view is that if the federal government allows this situation to happen, they should be liable or responsible for taking care of these social problems that we're having in our City now. But, unfortunately, that's not the way it is. We're 101 March 7, 2002 seeing cuts and more cuts coming down and it's sad. I don't know how we're going to be able to solve the problems in our community. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, call the question. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." Commissioner Teele: The second areas that I would -- Commissioner Sanchez: Hold it. One "no." Chairman Regalado: Note one "no." The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-230 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO WORK WITH THE MAYOR'S STAFF AND THE DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER'S STAFF TO DEVELOP A PILOT OUTREACH PROGRAM IN ORDER TO HELP SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS OR SOLE PROPRIETORS THAT ARE EX - OFFENDERS AND PERSONS WITH HIV/AIDS, TO ASSIST THEM TO SET UP THEIR BUSINESS IN THE CITY, MORE PARTICULARLY IN THE MODEL CITY AREA. 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: -- bring up to the Mayor, while the Mayor is present. Congresswoman Meek, who is obviously a dear friend of our Mayor, called me en route to Haiti recently and indicated that she's very interested, Mr. Mayor, in meeting with you and the Manager regarding the request, which this Commissioner approved and instructed the Manager to present at this Commission meeting, regarding Movers. I note that there are a number of people -- could I just - - could the Mayor just see the hands of the people that are here from Movers? I know they're here this morning. I'm advised by the Manager that this matter will not be taken up. But, Mr. Mayor, the Congresswoman indicated that she had discussed with you the request of Movers, which is an organization associated -- a not-for-profit 501(C)3, associated with trying to 102 March 7, 2002 positively impact AIDS and HIV in the community. And she's requesting a meeting with you and the Manager in my office and others, to try to expedite a decision on that. And Ms. Warren has indicated to me that she's willing to work with your office on that. So, I just wanted to put that on the record, because she asked me to, to you, Mr. Mayor. Mayor Diaz: I'll be at that meeting. 103 March 7, 2002 26. BRIEF COMMENTS BY MANAGER ON CITY'S BOND RATING UPGRADE FROM "B -AA -2" TO "B -AA -L" Chairman Regalado: OK Mayor Diaz: Actually, Mr. Chairman, before I leave the dais. Mr. Manager, do you have a -- would you like to make an announcement, some news we just heard? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Well, actually, sir, I'd be honored if you'd make the announcement. I think it was a large part of your doing in going to New York. But if you want me to do it, I'll do it. I'm happy to announce that Moody Investors has upgraded the City's bond rating from a B -AA -2 to a B -AA -1. I think it's largely as a result of our meeting with them in New York the last couple of weeks, and I think they were sufficiently impressed with the Mayor and our -- had confidence in his abilities. And I think that had a large part to do with the upgrade in the bond rating. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Manager. 104 March 7, 2002 27. DIRECT MANAGER TO INSTRUCT DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO CONDUCT AUDIT OF ALL COMPUTER HARDWARE CURRENTLY LISTED WITHIN CITY'S INVENTORY (INCLUDING MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY, DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST). Chairman Regalado: The Mayor has also requested that we make a motion to direct the Manager and the Information and Technology Department to conduct an audit of all computer hardware currently within the City's inventory. I -- the Mayor, his memo says, I would respectfully recommend that the Commission request that a complete audit report be provided to the Mayor, Commissioners and the City Manager by Friday, March 22nd, the year 2002." The audit report should also be presented to the City Commission as is March 28, but that date will be changed. So, do we have a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Mr. Manager, you took note of that? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: OK. Before we go on, we need to -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, in that audit, would you also include MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority), the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and Bayfront Trust, so that we get a comprehensive in terms of -- you know, this interface problem, because it's -- Commissioner Sanchez: Maker of the motion accepts the amendment. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: To include the CRA also. Chairman Regalado: OK. 105 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-231 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO CONDUCT AN AUDIT OF ALL COMPUTER HARDWARE CURRENTLY LISTED WITHIN THE CITY'S INVENTORY (INCLUDING MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY, DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST); FURTHER REQUESTING THAT A COMPLETE AUDIT REPORT BE PROVIDED TO THE MAYOR AND COMMISSION BY FRIDAY, MARCH 22, 2002, SAID REPORT TO BE PRESENTED AT THE MARCH 28, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING. 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. 106 March 7, 2002 28. RESCHEDULE SECOND REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH, ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 28, 2002, TO TAKE PLACE ON APRIL 11, 2002. (See #2) SCHEDULE SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27, 2002, BEGINNING 2 P.M., FOR ACTION RELATED TO PENDING LABOR UNION CONTRACTS (See #50). Chairman Regalado: OK. Before we go on, we need to decide on the next date available for members of the City Commission to do the regular meeting, scheduled for March 28. I think that we all agree that this is very special day, Holy Thursday, and the second day of Passover. So, what do you want to do? We have the state of the City address by the Mayor on a Wednesday, the Wednesday on the 27th. Do you want the City Commission meeting on the Tuesday, the 26th, or the next week, the first week of April? Anybody had a -- Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to combine it with the one on the 11th. Chairman Regalado: You would like what? Vice Chairman Winton: That's what I'd really like to do. Chairman Regalado: You would? Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So that we don't have one more day that we're -- Chairman Regalado: Well, then, don't complain about I 1 o'clock. Vice Chairman Winton: I never do. I'm used to it. Chairman Regalado: I know you never do. Vice Chairman Winton: We stay until 11 even if we have five items. So, what difference does it make? Chairman Regalado: So, anybody oppose to that idea? When is the first meeting in April? Vice Chairman Winton: The 11th. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): April 11th. Chairman Regalado: April 11th. OK. Is that OK with everybody, Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Sanchez? Commissioner Gonzalez: It's fine with me. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele? 107 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: So, is there a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second to combine the two meetings of the Miami City Commission, March 28th with April 11th. Maria Chiaro: (Assistant City Attorney): There will be two separate meetings on one day. Chairman Regalado: Two separate meetings on one day, absolutely. So, all in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-232 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RESCHEDULING THE SECOND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH, ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 28, 2002, TO TAKE PLACE ON APRIL 11, 2002. (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. Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 108 March 7, 2002 Mr. Gimenez: There may be a need of -- we're getting very close to settling negotiations with the four labor unions. And because of some time constraints, there may be a need for a special meeting to deal with those contracts prior to April 1, but that hasn't been finished yet. When it does, I will notify you. So, there may be a need for that kind of a special meeting. Commissioner Sanchez: And, Mr. Chairman, if I may. I think that we may need a special meeting just to deal with those issues because I'm sure there's going to be a lot of questions. Chairman Regalado: Oh, yeah. Because -- but before -- you know, before you need a special meeting, make sure that you speak to every member of the Commission before so we don't have so many questions and controversial issues -- Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: -- to discuss. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: If you are obliged, if you are absolutely obliged to call a special meeting, I would recommend that you do it on Monday, the 25th, around 3 o'clock. And that would facilitate the -- Chairman Regalado: Do we have CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency)? Commissioner Teele: -- CRA Board meeting at 5. So we could just sort of combine that -- Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but where is -- Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair? Commissioner Teele: It doesn't matter. We could set it wherever, but it will be up to you to call it, and we would change -- Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, the -- we know that AFSCME (American Federal, State, County, and Municipal Employees) will be ratifying their contract on the 25th, so it's going to have to be some time frame between the 25'}', in the morning or the -- before the afternoon of the 27th, because apparently, the Passover holiday starts at sundown of the 27th. Chairman Regalado: Well -- but, you know, we won't be able to do any meetings at all on the 28"' or the 29`h. So, if we don't do it -- as a matter of fact, I think that most, if not all, of the members of the City Commission will be present at the Mayor's speech on Wednesday, the 27th. So, we could have a meeting of the City Commission prior to the speech. I think it's going to be 109 March 7, 2002 like around 5, 5:30 in the afternoon. It would not be here. But wherever it be, we'll have the setting already. So, if that is the case, are you guys OK with just setting -- Madam City Attorney, can we set a special meeting of the City Commission for March 20 -- I think it's 20 -- Mr. Gimenez: Seventh. Chairman Regalado: -- 7th. Twenty-seventh. However, the question is, you want to do it after the speech or before the speech? Commissioner Sanchez: After the speech would be better. Chairman Regalado: I think so, too. Because -- Mr. Gimenez: If it's a 5 o'clock speech, I think we're -- talking about sundown of the 27a', which is the beginning of the holy day. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Manager, first of all, I don't even know where the speech is going to be and I don't even know what time it's going to be, so -- Chairman Regalado: It's around 5 o'clock. And, probably -- Commissioner Sanchez: I think we should do it before then. Chairman Regalado: And probably will be either at the Artime or the Miami High Senior High School. Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe we should do it before the speech then. Chairman Regalado: So, it's going to be 3 o'clock. Commissioner Gonzalez: Because -- Chairman Regalado: It's not going to be enough time. We need a motion for a special meeting of the City Commission, if -- Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved on the 27th, but at 2 o'clock instead of 3 o'clock. Commissioner Gonzalez: Two o'clock. Chairman Regalado: Fine. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: But if there is no need for that meeting, then we'll cancel it and we'll -- 110 March 7, 2002 Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Chiaro: And your special meeting is for the expressed purpose of ratifying the contract. Chairman Regalado: Of listening -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Of the contracts. Chairman Regalado: -- listening to the Manager report on the union contract. Union contracts. There is a motion -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: -- and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 111 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-233 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION SCHEDULING A SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27, 2002, BEGINNING 2 P.M., FOR ACTION RELATED TO PENDING LABOR UNION CONTRACTS. (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. 112 March 7, 2002 29. DIRECT MANAGER TO REVISE PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION AND HOMEBUYERS FINANCING PROGRAMS; MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT AND ADMINISTER HOUSING PROGRAMS. AUTHORIZE $15,000 TO PROVIDE LOWER INCOME HOMEOWNERS WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO PERMIT EMERGENCY REPAIRS WHEN IMMEDIATE HEALTH AND/OR SAFETY HAZARD EXISTS TO INHABITANTS OF HOUSE AND OWNER/RESIDENT OF PROPERTY HAS NO MEANS OF UNDERTAKING SUCH REPAIRS. DIRECT MANAGER TO PROVIDE GRANTS TO HOMEOWNERS PARTICIPATING IN SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM TO COMPLETE RIGHT OF WAY IMPROVEMENTS AND CORRECT DEFICIENCIES ON HOMES REHABILITATED THROUGH SAID PROGRAM, AS IDENTIFIED THROUGH ASSESSMENT PERFORMED BY ENGINEERING FIRM OF H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM ACQUISITION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES FROM H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TO ASSESS STATUS, WORKMANSHIP QUALITY AND WORK NEEDED TO COMPLETE REHABILITATION OF HOMES PARTICIPATING IN SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM ACQUISITION OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FROM INDIGO SERVICE CORPORATION TO MANAGE COMPLETION OF REHABILITATION WORK ON HOMES PARTICIPATING IN SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM, AS IDENTIFIED THROUGH ASSESSMENT BY H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele, do you want to hear now Item 5? Commissioner Teele: Yes. Chairman Regalado: Let's go back to Item 5, and -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move Item 5A. Chairman Regalado: Five. We've got 5. First of all, we've got 5 and then 5A, and then 5B and then 5C. Commissioner Winton: Second 5A. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion. Chairman Regalado: No. First, we have to move 5. Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele moved -- 113 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: I moved 5. Commissioner Sanchez: -- Item 5. Chairman Regalado: He moved 5A. Commissioner Sanchez: If someone -- Chairman Regalado: So, we need to move 5. Commissioner Sanchez: Is there a second? Chairman Regalado: If there is -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I second for discussion, Number 5. Chairman Regalado: 5Aor 5? Commissioner Sanchez: Five. Just 5. Commissioner Gonzalez: Five. Chairman Regalado: Five. OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion. Chairman Regalado: Discussion. Go ahead, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Have we done everything we can to correct the problems that we had with the Single Family Rehabilitation Program that we had? Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Yes, we have, sir. We -- Commissioner Sanchez: Which steps have we taken to assure that we don't get in the same bind we were in with the Single Family Rehabilitation Program? Ms. Warren: The quality controls that are being recommended would be that, one, we use an outside engineering firm that would review any cost estimates, and also sign off on any work done on any rehabs. And, additionally, that we recruit or advertise for a list of vendors that would be approved through the Public Works or Procurement Department, that would be not only diversified in terms of ethnicity, but also specialize in various areas of work. And, additionally, we've recommended the reduction in the amount of the award, to be consistent with the funds that are available, from 40 to 25,000, and that the repairs be specific to life and health safety issues that had been certified by either the Building Department or the Health Department. We've also, based on some recommendations of Commissioners, we're recommending that the Emergency Program, that goes along with the Rehab Program, allow for us to select licensed 114 March 7, 2002 vendors, without bids, so that we can deal immediately with the emergency. Currently, we have an Emergency Program, but it requires three bids, competitive, and, again, it flies in the face of it being an emergency, if it takes three weeks to select somebody to do it. Commissioner Sanchez: Are we giving preference to the elderly and the disabled? Ms. Warren: Our recommendation is that the elderly and the disabled be prioritized as the recipients of the funds, as a result of the reduction, and that of any other low income -- very low income individuals needed to participate in the program, that it would be done in a form of a loan that would be adjusted, based on their income, from zero to three percent. And we're anticipating those as being rare cases, but the priority is seniors and the disabled. And those will be grants. Commissioner Sanchez: And the reason why I bring that up is because we are faced with a situation that we have a lot of people that are retired on a fixed income, that are very proud to own their property, and when they have repairs that they can't pay for, they find themselves either having to go out and get a second loan, or they find themselves selling their homes and moving on out, and I do not want to get -- or, at least, I don't think this legislative body wants to have that reputation, as being the City that wants to move their elderly out. And I know that we've taken legal -- well, legislative action to protect our seniors by the safe seniors that allows them for the Homestead Exemption to have 50,000. But I think that it's prudent that we focus on providing as much assistance as we can to those elderly people that find themselves in those situations on a fixed income. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. And I'd also like for the Chairperson -- Mr. Chair? Chairman Regalado: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Warren: In order to implement the emergency provisions, we would like to introduce an additional resolution that would allow us to modify the Emergency Program, so that we could select licensed vendors versus getting bids. And, also, it would allow us to include -- I'm sorry -- that information into the guidelines. And, additionally, for your information, for the individuals whose houses are currently being repaired, we're also recommending that any repairs above the original grant amount, that has been identified as a result of this review, including any costs associated with the ROW (Right -Of -Way), which is the -- what is it called? The Right -of -Way improvements, that those be considered grants to the individuals, and that it not be charged against their mortgage. But these will be grants to the homeowner, and not a part of their mortgage. Chairman Regalado: Gwen. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: I have two questions. First of all, I guess that you know very well that the other program was a nightmare, especially for people that suffer the consequences of damaged 115 March 7, 2002 materials, and second-class materials and work. Who's going to inspect that? Is the City or your department? Ms. Warren: No, sir. The Commission directed that -- and we have selected an engineering firm from Public Works -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Warren: -- who has gone through every house, every bid, all invoiced, and has reviewed all work, identified all outstanding issues, and have itemized the quality of the work, the work that needs -- that's remaining. So, it has been done by an outside firm, independent of the City. Chairman Regalado: OK. The other question is: The people that apply, you have a list? Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: Are these people going to be in line for this new program, or do they need to reapply? Ms. Warren: Their applications, we still have. They would be the first persons contacted. They -- we only had an application. We never went through the full process, but they will be the first persons contacted. Chairman Regalado: But they did apply? Ms. Warren: Yes, they did. Chairman Regalado: Because there are people that had applied. Ms. Warren: Yes, they did, sir. Chairman Regalado: And when are we talking about that we think that we can start the program? Ms. Warren: Immediately upon your adoption, we would be able to go forth. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I have an unreadiness. The hour's getting late. We've got a lot of people queued up now. I have an unreadiness, but I'm going to waive my unreadiness, but let me put it on the record, because I'm going to ask for a report. Gwen, you know, candidly, when this whole program got going, for two years you and I did the Miami Two -Step: I kept asking for information. You said, "We'll get back to you." We finally wound up with the U.S. Attorney or somebody beginning investigations. Then I started asking questions, where are we? 116 March 7, 2002 Because I've been getting calls, you know that. You said, "Well, it's under investigation. We'll get a report to you." The report that we're getting now, though, does not, at all, address, by broad categories -- without talking about vendors, contractors -- what the problems were. Ms. Warren: I have them here Commissioner Teele: If I may. I need to know, specifically, have the recommendations of this new program been coordinated with the consultants that you all have hired, in terms of the structural problems, and the operational problems that were in the field? In other words, is there a grid anywhere -- because going again from forty thousand dollars ($40,000) to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) is a recommendation, but I'm very uncomfortable with that recommendation, because I don't know what the experience was with the projects that we've reviewed, and nobody's come forward with that. You know and -- you know that I, through coordination with your office, did a survey of the homeowners in my district, and I turned all that over to you and to the federal officials -- the government officials looking at this. This program was horrible, the way we ran it, but I still don't know what lessons have we learned as it relates to costs. And, so, my issue focused, primarily, right now is, are we suggesting that most of the repairs that these homes had had a threshold of less than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) or more than twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000)? And that's a very important question. Because now all of a sudden, we're getting ready to vote to reduce the threshold from 40,000 to 25,000, but we don't want to make this program a non -existing program out there. Ms. Warren: In the letter, what you'll have -- what you'll find is that the recommendations for reduction include no general home repairs. Again, the forty thousand dollars ($40,000) was predicated on a ten million dollar ($10,000,000) windfall, if you would. The new program is predicated on a two million dollar ($2,000,000) annual grant allocation. So, under the original program, there were -- it included health and safety issues, but there also was the ability to do general home improvements. The recommendation here, given the reduction in funds, is that we remain with health and safety issues, and that we not do general home improvements -- Commissioner Teele: Let me ask you quick -- Ms. Warren: -- because of the significant reduction. Commissioner Teele: Well, you know, I'm nervous about it, and I'll tell you how I -- if the maker of the motion will entertain it. Let me tell you how I can feel a lot more comfortable. If we approve the program, but provide the option of the Manager to come to this Commission and request, on a case-by-case basis, an increase of back to forty thousand dollars ($40,000), based on need, I would be comfortable. Because, you know, the worst thing that we can do is not go in and not do the job. Get enough to fail. You know, it's that old thing, "If it takes an hour to dig a hole, how long does it take to dig half a hole?" Well, I don't want to dig any half holes with these houses. I want to ensure that whatever we're doing, we have sufficient money to make them whole. And I don't know if 40,000 was the right number at first, but I still haven't heard enough in the answer to my question, which is, were the houses that we've looked at, were they over 25,000 in repairs to be done or less than twenty-five? I never got that answered. 117 March 7, 2002 Ms. Warren: The answer -- Commissioner Teele: And, so, all that I'm asking is, is there an objection to giving the Manager the authority to come to us, if we get into a situation where you need more than 25,000? Let's say, you need another three thousand dollars ($3,000). I'd like for the Manager to at least be able to come to us and say, "We need to finish off this project." So, if the maker of the motion -- I don't know -- Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Who made the motion? Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. In most cases, I know that some of these houses -- some of these -- we have some homes in Allapattah that were rehabbed -- were redone. I don't have any problem with your amendment to the motion, but I -- believe me, that with forty thousand dollars ($40,000), there is a lot that you can do to a home, because -- Commissioner Sanchez: You can build one. Commissioner Gonzalez: If you -- you can build a home, OK. If you -- Chairman Regalado: But, Angel, we're not doing 40,000. We're going down to 20,000. Commissioner Gonzalez: But we were doing 40,000 before. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's the point that I'm -- Chairman Regalado: Yes, but we are going down to 40,000. And what Commissioner Teele is doing is, he's right, because -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I under -- Chairman Regalado: Every house that I visited, they went over the budget. When they started looking -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, because probably -- excuse me. Probably -- I know exactly what Commissioner Teele is saying, and I read the proposal before I sat down here, and I read the ordinance. So, I know exactly what we're voting here, and I know exactly what Commissioner Teele is saying. But what happened was that we had a bunch of people ripping off the City, OK, and ripping off the Program. I can tell you that with four thousand dollars ($4,000), you can do a rewiring of a three-bedroom house, with new panel and everything. You can do a roof with seven thousand dollars ($7,000). You can do a four -turn air conditioning for a house for about five thousand dollars ($5,000). So, believe me, forty thousand dollars ($40,000), you can do a lot of things. I don't have a problem with your amendment, Commissioner Teele. 118 March 7, 2002 What -- also, on the monies that we're going to be giving to buy homes, now is going to be a loan. It was a grant before, right. Am I correct? Ms. Warren: It was a forgivable loan, grant, over a 10 -year time period. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. But now we're going to be charging interest, small interest on the money? Ms. Warren: Zero to three percent, depending on the income. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. It's not going to be forgivable anymore? Ms. Warren: No. Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Another issue that I had was that we have some cases where we have real, real emergencies, and I believe that we need to set aside small amount of money to cover these real emergencies right away. Because if you have a house that the ceiling is coming down -- the roof is coming down and the people are getting wet, we need to do the roof right away, and we can't wait for the process of six months, and paperwork and then another six months, the rating, who the contractor is going to be. So, you know, I don't know if you agree with me, but I would like to have an amendment, where we can have fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) allocation just to cover emergency cases that had to do with electrical or roofing, real emergency cases. Commissioner Sanchez: Who made the motion? Ms. Warren: The resolution that we just passed out does do that. It's for -- Chairman Regalado: This is a different item. We're -- Commissioner Gonzalez: No, it is not. Chairman Regalado: We need to do them separate. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, that's a different item. We'll vote on that -- that's a resolution that we've got to pass on the emergency, and you can amend it with your amendment. Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. All right. Ms. Warren: And it would include -- and it would increase the guidelines. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have -- Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 119 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Winton: I have a little different spin on this, because when you look at this -- we're talking about a maximum of two million dollars ($2,000,000) a year. There's three categories here. There's elderly and disabled rehab money, and that's treated as a grant only. Then you have the second category is very low, low, and moderate loans for rehab at the zero to three percent interest, and the third category is very low, low, and moderate first-time home buyers, zero to three percent interest. At this twenty-five thousand dollar ($25,000) threshold, and two million dollars ($2,000,000) a year, you're going to do 80 homes. You're going to do 80 homes. So, talking about -- there is no money here, at least in terms of the way this is set up. And if it's stacked in order of priority, which is the grant part first, which is elderly and disabled outright grant, then we're going to do 80 of those a year. We're going to make zero difference in our City. We have in our City something in the neighborhood of a 135,000 total households, and Gwen tells me that something in the neighborhood of 50 percent of those are in the very poor -- in the -- Ms. Warren: Low-income neighborhoods. Vice Chairman Winton: Low-income category. So, if we're going to make a difference, we've got to do something radically different. Now, we don't seem to have the ability, yet, to find any new money from Washington, which would be the best answer of all, if we could figure out how to get a Pilot program going down here, and get a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) for first-time homebuyers, and really change neighborhoods, but that's not in the cards. Certainly not today, and it may not be in the cards ever. But if we modified this program so that we gave no grants at all, but they were treated at zero interest loans, and those zero interest loans would be paid back either at the time at which title transferred, which means they've sold their home, because they wanted to move somewhere else, or they passed away and transferred the title to their heirs, or if they refinanced their house to take money out, we would get our money back. And if you got that money back over the course of 10 years, you'd have a twenty million dollar ($20,000,000) pool of money to deal with, and over 20 years, you'd have a forty million dollar ($40,000,000) pool of dollars to deal with, just chipping away two million dollars ($2,000,000) a year. So, while we wouldn't solve any of the grand problems in our time, we could certainly set the foundation today that could have real money available for doing these kinds of things for homeowner programs 10 years out, 15 years out, and 20 years out. So, I really feel that we should not have a grant program in this, at all; that it should be simply a zero percent interest loan for those families in each of these categories. And they're set up in order of priority. Commissioner Teele: On the point, would you yield? Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Would you allow for a grant program for the emergency -- Commissioner Winton: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: The ten thousand dollar ($10,000) emergency, which is not a part of this motion. It's the next resolution. 120 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Winton: Absolutely. Because treating emergencies is very different than what we're talking about here. So, I would like to modify the motion to change this program here so that we don't have any grant part of this; that it's a zero -- you know, I don't care. And y'all can decide this -- zero to three. I don't care if it's zero. But zero to three is consistent with the other two categories, but certainly in the zero to three percent. And if you want to make it zero, I'm fine with that. But make it all a loan as opposed to a grant. Commissioner Sanchez: And just for clarification, once you sell the house, does the money come back? Commissioner Winton: If you change -- if there's a change in title, meaning you change ownership, we get our money back. Commissioner Teele: Or refinance it. Commissioner Sanchez: Or refinancing. Commissioner Winton: Or refinance. Because if you don't have the refinance clause in there, the family can put a bunch of financing on there, and put so much debt on it that you're wiped out anyhow. So, we want to prevent us from getting wiped out. Commissioner Sanchez: Just for point of clarification. The priority list will not be modified. It will stay exactly how it is? Commissioner Winton: Yeah, I'm fine with the priority. Commissioner Teele: I don't know, Johnny. But the bankers are all smiling out there. Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the maker of the motion accepts the amendment? I accept the amendment. Chairman Regalado: It's been accepted. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 121 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-234 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REVISE THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION AND HOMEBUYERS FINANCING PROGRAMS BY DECREASING THE LEVEL OF REHABILITATION FINANCING ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE IN THE FORM OF GRANTS OR LOW-INTEREST LOANS FROM $40,000 TO $25,000 FOR ELIGIBLE HOMEOWNER(S) THAT OCCUPY THEIR HOME(S) AS THEIR PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE(S); FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO IMPLEMENT AND ADMINISTER THE PROGRAMS PURSUANT TO PROGRAM GUIDELINES, ENTITLED "SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM," ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE CITY COMMISSION WITH SPECIFIC PROJECTS, AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE, FOR REHABILITATION FUNDING IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM DESIGNATED IN THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: We have another item, the Emergency Repair Program. So, do we have a motion for that? Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." Commissioner Sanchez: Amend it to 15,000, instead of 10. 122 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: Amend it to fifteen, instead of 10. Chairman Regalado: OK. Is that -- Commissioner Teele: Now, that program will either be a grant or a zero loan, depending upon the Manager's decision. So, what we would be doing -- because it doesn't say, but consistent with what Commissioner Winton is saying, and what the program -- that would either be a zero loan or a grant, depending upon the Manager's determination. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Maker of the motion accepts the amendment, if there's any. Commissioner Gonzalez: It could be in the form of a loan, with very small interest. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Warren: Correct. Chairman Regalado: Do we have -- Ms. Warren: This is just the resolution that allows you to incorporate the grant, instead of the loan, to people whose houses have been restored. Chairman Regalado: This -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, can we have the City Attorney read the resolution into the record? Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Ms. Warren: They reviewed it, yes. Ilene Temchin (Assistant City Attorney): A resolution of the Miami City Commission authorizing and directing the City Manager to provide grants to homeowners participating in the Single Family Rehabilitation Program; to complete right-of-way improvements, and correct deficiencies on homes rehabilitated, or to be rehabilitated through said program, as identified through the assessment performed by the engineering firm of H.J. Ross and Associates, Inc. The amount of the grant to be the difference between the approved loan grant amount, and the funds needed to satisfactorily complete the repairs in accordance with the cost estimates established by H.J. Ross and Associates, Inc.; further providing an option for the homeowner either to utilize the services of the City's construction management contractor to complete the rehabilitation or to execute a waiver in a form acceptable to the City Attorney; entitling the homeowner to receive full payment for completion of the rehabilitation work according to the cost estimate provided by H.J. Ross and Associates, Inc., and also accepting full responsibility for completion of the rehabilitation. 123 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Winton: Now, this is the Emergency Rehab Ordinance? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Ms. Warren: This is the -- again, this is -- Chairman Regalado: That's the second item that they added to it. Commissioner Sanchez: But wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Commissioner Teele: That's not what she just read. Ms. Warren: No. The first handout you had was about the Emergency Rehab. This one is the amendment that allows that any additional work that is done to correct any errors is a grant and not a loan to the homeowner, and that fix the City's public right-of-way not be considered a lien on these people's houses either. Commissioner Teele: But now you've got two things. You've got a motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: I don't get it. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no. Ms. Warren: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought this was the second page. Commissioner Teele: You've have a motion by Commissioner Sanchez on this two -pager -- Ms. Warren: Oh, I thought you had voted. Commissioner Teele: -- entitled Emergency Repair Program. Commissioner Sanchez: With the only amendment that it was fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). Let's vote on that. Call the question. Commissioner Teele: It was two amendments: The 15,000, and that it was either a grant -- Vice Chairman Winton: Or a loan. Commissioner Teele: -- or a loan. Commissioner Gonzalez: Or a loan. Commissioner Teele: Depending upon the Manager's determination. Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. 124 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Winton: Is that the resolution the City Attorney just read? Commissioner Teele: No. Commissioner Sanchez: No. Commissioner Teele: That's separate. Ms. Warren: No. That's the one -- I thought you had already voted. I'm sorry. Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK. So, she -- Ms. Warren: It was the previous one. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Good. Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. Chairman Regalado: OK. You're sure what you're voting on, right? Commissioner Teele: Yes. We're voting on this. Vice Chairman Winton: I am now. Ms. Warren: It's an emergency. Commissioner Teele: We're voting on this. Commissioner Gonzalez: So, we're going to vote on the Emergency Repair Program. Chairman Regalado: We're voting on this resolution. Commissioner Teele: The Emergency Repair Program. Chairman Regalado: That's exactly. Commissioner Gonzalez: With an amendment of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), instead of 10. Chairman Regalado: But -- OK. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 125 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-235 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000 TO PROVIDE LOWER INCOME HOMEOWNERS WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO PERMIT EMERGENCY REPAIRS WHEN CITY INSPECTORS DETERMINE THAT AN IMMEDIATE HEALTH AND/OR SAFETY HAZARD EXISTS TO THE INHABITANTS OF THE HOUSE AND THE OWNER/RESIDENT OF THE PROPERTY HAS NO MEANS OF UNDERTAKING SUCH REPAIRS; SAID FUNDS TO BE PROVIDED AS EITHER A GRANT OR A LOAN, DEPENDING ON THE CITY MANAGER'S DETERMINATION. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: Now, we go back to 5 -- Commissioner Teele: The resolution she just -- the Attorney just read -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Wait. May I make a correction? Sorry, Mr. Teele. When we discussed this, we said that it was going to be up to. Commissioner Teele: Up to. Commissioner Gonzalez: Up to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) maximum, because most of these repairs are not going to cost fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). They may cost five thousand, seven thousand dollars ($7,000). So, people out there don't believe that, "Hey, you know, I've got fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) to do "X" amount of things." OK. It's going to be specifically for emergency repairs, like roofing, electrical, plumbing, but up to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). Chairman Regalado: OK. That's the motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. 126 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: We have a second, right. Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-236 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000 FROM AN ACCOUNT TO BE IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE LOWER INCOME HOMEOWNERS WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR REQUIRED EMERGENCY REPAIRS IDENTIFIED BY CITY OF MIAMI CODE ENFORCEMENT INSPECTORS THAT ARE DETERMINED TO BE OF IMMEDIATE HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARDS FOR THE INHABITANTS AND FOR WHICH THE OWNER OR RESIDENT OF THE PROPERTY HAS NO FINANCIAL MEANS OF MAKING SUCH REPAIRS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE FUNDS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE OWNER(S) OR RESIDENT(S) AS A GRANT OR A LOAN; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENT(S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: It passes. Chairman Regalado: "C." 127 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: We haven't voted on this resolution. Vice Chairman Winton: What is this resolution? Commissioner Sanchez: We still have to vote on the resolution that was read by the City Attorney, which I moved. Commissioner Winton: Well, what is that resolution? Chairman Regalado: We just voted on it. We just voted on it. Commissioner Sanchez: No, we didn't. Ms. Warren: This is a separate one. Commissioner Sanchez: it's a separate motion. Chairman Regalado: OK. Well, do we have a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: I move the resolution read by the City Attorney. There's a second. Chairman Regalado: And we need a second. Commissioner Winton: I'll second it, but I don't -- only for purpose of discussion at the moment. She read this resolution. I was thinking about the other things we were discussing. Chairman Regalado: Right, right. Vice Chairman Winton: So, I don't even know what this resolution really says. Chairman Regalado: Right, right. Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, so -- what's the point of this resolution? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): If I may? The item that I believe that you all just voted on is Item 5, as amended, by the comments of Ms. Warren, and if that's not the case, then I think you need to correct the record. Commissioner Sanchez: That is the case. Ms. Warren: That is the case. Commissioner Gonzalez: That is the case. 128 March 7, 2002 Mr. Vilarello: OK. Then five -- Item 5, as amended, was the item that was already voted on. You presently have a motion before you based on the resolution that Ms. Temchin read. Ms. Warren: So, everything's fine. Commissioner Teele: No. We voted on Item 5 -- Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: -- as amended. Chairman Regalado: Look -- Mr. Vilarello: As amended. Commissioner Teele: We then voted on the Emergency Repairs, which was something passed out, that's not on the agenda. Commissioner Gonzalez: Correct. Ms. Warren: Correct. Commissioner Teele: And we just voted on that. Vice Chairman Winton: Correct. Commissioner Gonzalez: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: That was the second vote. Commissioner Sanchez: This is what's on the floor now. Commissioner Teele: The third vote is what Ms. Temchin just read, which is Item 5B. It modifies Item 5, and it's 5A and B. Isn't that the H.J. Ross -- Ms. Warren: It's totally new. It's 5D. Commissioner Teele: Oh, 5D, Delta. Ms. Warren: Delta. And, again -- Commissioner Winton: So, why are we going out of order? Ms. Warren: The purpose of this resolution, just for clarification, is that you've adopted all the policies, but we have a couple of issues concerning the completion of the rehabs. We don't want any cost that is associated with us having to redo the work to be charged against the family's 129 March 7, 2002 mortgage. Additionally, in order for the families to get their occupational -- the CO (Certificate of Occupancy), they have to repair the City's streets. The streets have to be repaired in front of their homes. We're asking that these two costs be considered a grant, and not a lien against their mortgage. So, they have a mortgage for the repairs, but anything that is a result of the problems with the program, or the ROW, be considered a grant and not a mortgage. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Warren: That's what this does. Commissioner Gonzalez: That makes sense. Chairman Regalado: OK. Are you all clear on this? Commissioner Sanchez: The item, Mr. Chairman, is under discussion. There's a motion and a second right now. Chairman Regalado: OK. So -- Commissioner Teele: Five -D. Chairman Regalado: Five -D we're voting on. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 130 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-237 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE GRANTS TO HOMEOWNERS PARTICIPATING IN THE SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM TO COMPLETE RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS AND CORRECT DEFICIENCIES ON HOMES REHABILITATED OR TO BE REHABILITATED THROUGH SAID PROGRAM, AS IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT PERFORMED BY THE ENGINEERING FIRM OF H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ("ROSS"); PROVIDING THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE GRANT TO THE HOMEOWNER BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE APPROVED GRANT AMOUNT AND THE FUNDS REQUIRED TO SATISFACTORILY COMPLETE THE REPAIRS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COST ESTIMATES ESTABLISHED BY ROSS, WITH THE COSTS OF THE ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT TO BE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT,- FURTHER RANT;FURTHER PROVIDING THE HOMEOWNERS WITH THE OPTION TO EITHER (1) UTILIZE THE SERVICES OF THE CITY'S CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE THE REHABILITATION, OR (2) EXECUTE A WAIVER, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, I ENTITLING THE HOMEOWNER TO ACCEPT FULL PAYMENT TO COMPLETE THE REHABILITATION WORK, ACCORDING TO THE COST ESTIMATE PROVIDED BY ROSS, AND REQUIRING THE HOMEOWNER TO ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR COMPLETION OF THE REHABILITATION. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: I move Item 5A. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. 131 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Five -A. It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-238 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR/FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE ACQUISITION OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, UNDER EXISTING CITY OF MIAMI PURCHASE ORDER NO. 221570, DATED JANUARY 7, 2002, FROM H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC., AN ENGINEERING FIRM INCLUDED ON THE APPROVED LIST OF CONTRACTORS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, TO ASSESS THE STATUS, WORKMANSHIP, QUALITY AND LABOR NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE REHABILITATION OF HOMES PARTICIPATING IN THE SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: Requires a four/fifths vote. I move Item 5B. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: Five -B, it's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 132 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-239 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, BY A FOUR/FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE ACQUISITION OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES, UNDER EXISTING CITY OF MIAMI PURCHASE ORDER NO. 221569, DATED JANUARY 7, 2002, FROM INDIGO SERVICE CORPORATION, A FIRM INCLUDED ON THE APPROVED LIST OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONTRACTORS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, TO MANAGE THE COMPLETION OF REHABILITATION WORK ON HOMES PARTICIPATING IN THE SINGLE FAMILY REHABILITATION PROGRAM, AS IDENTIFIED THROUGH ASSESSMENT BY H.J. ROSS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. (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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: OK. 133 March 7, 2002 30. APPROVE MODIFICATION TO DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR UNITED WAY OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, INC.; 3150 & 3250 SW 3RD AVENUE (Applicant(s): United Way of Miami -Dade County, Inc.). Chairman Regalado: OK. Now, let's pause the regular agenda and let's go to the PZ item. We have many visitors here that I believe are for PZ Number 1, is that correct, Mr. Lawrence? Unidentified Speaker: Yeah, it is. Chairman Regalado: So, in deference to the people that we have here, residents and proponents, we will leave the regular agenda, we'll come back in a few minutes, if we can do this in a few minutes. Vice Chairman Winton: And, Mr. Chairman, in deference to those business persons who used to have their business in the City of Miami and move them to Coral Gables as well, that same deference? Chairman Regalado: Which ones? Vice Chairman Winton: Adolfo. Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, with names and everything. With friends like that, who needs enemies? Chairman Regalado: Anyway, I wasn't talking about him. I was talking about David, in deference to. Item PZ -1. Go ahead, Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): Thank you. For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Department of Planning and Zoning. PZ -1 is a Request for Modification of a covenant that runs with the properties locate at 3150 and 3250 Southwest 3`d Avenue. The modifications to the covenant is in order to modify a condition in the covenant that tied them to a site plan that showed surface parking at the intersection of 12d' Avenue and 32nd Road, and along Coral Way. This is the remaining properties that are owned by United Way on Coral Way. The department is recommending approval, with conditions. The modification they're requesting is in order to build a parking garage in the Center of Excellence for United Way. Our recommendation of approval is based on findings that this will consolidate the United Way complex. It will provide a parking garage to take care of a parking situation, which is currently spilling out into the neighborhood. The conditions the department is requesting on this modification is, number one, that the new proposed Center of Excellence include, which includes a preschool center, requires a special exception. So the condition is that the applicant apply for and comply with any conditions that may be imposed on final design of the Center of Excellence, and similarly for the garage, it requires a Class II Special Permit and the applicant would be required to obtain the separate Class II Special Permit and comply with any of the conditions regarding the final design of the parking garage. The parking garage, in particular, is going to be facing residential area, so this is something the department wants to continue to work with them on for buffering and screening of the garage that faces the residential area. 134 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: So, you're saying that you want some more time to work with them? Ms. Slazyk: We can do that through the special permits. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Ms. Slazyk: The third condition here is that this approval is only for the footprints and the height on their new site plan, but not for the design. The design details we're still working with them on to try and come up with a final design that's appropriate for Coral Way, that provides the right buffering and screening to the residential area, yet, consolidates plans for United Way that makes sense for the neighborhood. So, this approval would be fine with footprints and heights only, with the final design to go through the Class II and special exception process, which they have to do anyway. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado : This is a public hearing. Adrienne. Adrienne Pardo: Hello, my name is Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at Greenberg Traurig, 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf of the United Way, which is located at 3150 and 3250 Southwest 3rd Avenue. As I'm sure most of you are familiar, it's the corner of Coral Way and Southwest 12th Avenue. With me here today is Adolfo Henriques, Chairman of United Way Board, Mr. Harve Mogul, president and CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the United Way, Dave Lawrence, President of Early Childhood Initiative Foundation. I'm going to speak briefly. They're then going to speak and explain the project to you and then I will speak again. This property is located in an area, which is designated office within the City of Miami and as Ms. Slazyk had stated to you, the only request that we have before you today is to modify a site plan, which was attached to a covenant, which was given to the City in the early 70s. The United Way's corporate headquarters are located at the Ansin Building, which is here, which I'm pointing to, and then they have another parcel, which is located directly across the street, which is also on Coral Way. The site plan, which we are requesting approval of for the modification to the covenant, is right here. It shows the Ansin Building, which currently exist; it shows a new parking structure, and it showed the Center of Excellence. And as Ms. Slazyk had also stated, there are still several City approvals that we need to go through in order to finalize all the approvals that are necessary for this facility. At this point in time, I'd like to turn the floor over to Mr. Henriques. Adolfo Henriques: I wasn't trying to rush you, Adrienne, but I'm Adolfo Henriques, with offices at 2800 Ponce de Leon, and with many other offices in the City of Miami itself. Thank you very much for this opportunity to appear before you and ask you for your support in one of the most important projects that I think our community has undertaken, and that's the Center of Excellence. Also joining us this afternoon, who was not -- some individuals who were not mentioned, are several members of our board and our partners and other community leaders, who simply are interested in taking care of our children. If I could just ask them to stand for a minute, so that -- because -- and many of us will be available to answer your questions if you have them. 135 March 7, 2002 Thank you. You know, we teach our children that they can be or they can do anything that they dream of, that they're unique one of a kind individuals who can become great scientists, leaders, educators, healers, or even politicians like yourselves, and every child is born with that wondrous potential and very important dreams, but the problem is how are they going to get there without the guidance and the nurturing that they actually need? This Center of Excellence is going to help us achieve that goal for this community. It's going to house a state-of-the-art early care and education facility for young children of all races, income levels, cultural and ethnic backgrounds, and it's only -- it's not only going to be a model for this community. It's going to be a model for this nation. It's going to be a work -- world-class training center for childcare professionals, for them to improve their skills of taking care of kids. It's a meeting place for organizations and project partners involved in early childhood education, where they can actually integrate all of the things that they do together. They're planning and all of the activities that they do for taking care of children. It's going to be a resource center for employers who are interested, actually, in developing their own on-site childcare facilities and it's going to also be a research center, where early care and education curriculums are going to be modeled and they're going to be tested. It's a great need in this community to improve the quality of early care. I don't know if you know this, but only five percent of all of the childcare centers that we have in this community are actually gold seal accredited and even fewer of them are accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. Out of fourteen hundred, less than five percent. You know, the type of accreditation that we're taking about is the one that ensures that these children receive really the utmost care and education from highly trained staff and where the ratio of staff to children is actually appropriate. Research has shown that a child who receives quality care in an environment that actually helps to stimulate imaginative play, socialization and learning right from the beginning, they have a much greater chance of succeeding, of achieving well in school, and of becoming real good corporate citizens and contributors to our society. At the same time, it is actually proven that those who do not are at a huge disadvantage and, quite frankly, end up performing quite low and because it has actual adverse affect on the children. Our children here in Miami -Dade County are particularly challenged. We know that children who are born in poverty or near poverty are less likely to attend preschool programs. The ones that help them to actually develop that nurturing. Now, with this type of center and what the facilities that it's going to provide, we can offer all children the same chance; the same chance to be exposed to our environment that is going to give them the high quality of care and education that they need. But the only way we're going to be able to do that is with your help. You're actually going to be able to help make this place a reality. It's going to serve as an icon for this community and, hopefully, really it's going to distinguish Miami as a community that actually cares, cares about its children, cares about setting the example for our nation as a whole. It's going to be a huge, very powerful vehicle for change and improving the childhood -- the children's lives here in our community. That's really the challenge. And now what we need to do is act. I'm going to ask Harve to just bring you up-to-date on exactly what our plans are and then we can answer any questions you might have. Harve Mogul: Adolfo, thank you, and, Commissioners, thank you for your time to give us an opportunity to talk about this, we believe, very important community opportunity. When Adolfo shared with you the vision of the Center of Excellence, what I'd like to do is help you understand the thinking of particularly our own board that's gone into its development. This August of this year will mark three years since United Way moved out of downtown and into a Miami 136 March 7, 2002 neighborhood, a move our board felt was critical to our mission of building community because it would put us closer to the people our organization serves. In every decision we have made about our building and about this new project has been done with an eye towards preserving its strength in the community. While we acquired the building at 3250 Southwest 3rd Avenue and the adjacent lot of land, one of the board's priorities was to determine what we, as an organization, could give back to our neighborhood and community. Many shared their ideas with us about what we should do with the adjacent land. Given the land's commercial zoning, many envision the possibility of a multi -story, multi -use commercial venture. Others a high rise rental building for low income residents, but those ideas do not support our United Way's vision. Instead, given our commitment to children through our success by (inaudible) initiative, a venture our board commenced in 1992, coupled with the enormous need to improve the availability of quality early childhood learning programs, we made a commitment to create a world-class teaching and learning center for our children, their parents, teachers, childcare providers; a facility that would provide a tremendous service and become a great source of pride for our community. Some people might ask why this location. The fact is, childcare centers, like schools, are housed in neighborhoods where children and families live. This location is ideal. It sits on two major thoroughfares, and it backs up to a residential area within the Coral Way NET, where there are three thousand children under the age of five, and many more nearby, all of which will be our first preference for the center. Among the children enrolled in the area's public schools 82 percent participate in free or reduced lunch programs. These children and those that will follow need our leadership. Clearly, there is a great need for this kind of facility. Currently, virtually all key private early childhood planning entities are housed in this location. The Early Childhood Initiative Healthy Start, the Readiness Coalition, the Alliance (inaudible) Service and others enabling us to bring advocates, researchers, teachers and children together in one spot into this unique center of learning. As I've gone through multiple architectural concepts, we've been mindful of issues that are important to neighborhoods. We have invested in five different design approaches so that we could arrive at the very best plan, which now, we believe, we have. We note traffic is always a high top priority. This change in covenant will significantly increase our parking for staff, volunteers and others to use our facility, and will alleviate side -street parking. As a best practice center, one of the standards of operation will be that parents will not be allowed to drop their children off in the street. Instead, they must park their cars in our parking lot and escort their children into the classroom and, at the end of the day, they have to do that procedure in reverse. Also, of course, there's no set arrival or departure time, unlike a public school. That would ease potential congestion as well. The first floor of the parking area will be reserved exclusively for parents. We're also following the input of the Miami Roads Neighborhood Association, the recommendations of City staff. Instead of constructing another high rise on Coral Way, like the 12 -story building on the west side of our lot, our plan has the parking structure self-contained in the rear of our current six -story office building, the Center of Excellence will be only three stories. Our architects are incorporating landscaping and other techniques into design to ensure more residential feel. We've reached out to our neighborhoods for their insight. In doing so, we learned some of the ways that they have been inconvenienced by the 12 -story apartment complex on Coral Way, between 30th and 31 st. We want to help remedy some of those situations. We're very excited about the opportunity to do something unique and special in a great value to our children in the neighborhood, in our community. The Center of Excellence will become a national model that cities will emulate and will showcase Miami as a community that really values its children and is doing its part to give 137 March 7, 2002 them the very, very special start in life. Since moving into the neighborhood, we have partnered with Miami Roads Association on various activities. We look forward to continuing that relationship as well, as offering our opening -- our open free meeting space to more and more community groups. Anyone who drives past our building now can see the great care we take, the landscaping, the up keep; we have on-site, 24-hour, seven day a week security, right. Approving our request for a change in the covenant, we would be taking an important step towards doing something good for the neighbors, the neighborhood, the City, and most importantly our children our future. And Dave Lawrence, who's president of the Overage Childhood Initiative would like to add a few more words about the children. Thank you. Dave Lawrence: Commissioners, thank you for this opportunity. I want to do this mostly in headline form. Here's a picture that I would give you of our overall community. Thirty-one thousand children born every year, many of them in the biggest City in our community, Miami; thirty percent of whom start school in desperately woeful shape, and most frequently never catch up; a community where more than half of the children, significantly more, are in some sort of childcare arrangement; a community where more than half of the children born in this community this year will grow up in poverty or near poverty; a community whose best chance for the future focuses on a more educated community, and the time to start frankly is not the 4th grade or the 7th grade or the 1 lth grade or in college. The time to start is prenatal to age five. There is a significant, I think, nationally important early childhood initiative working here in behalf of all children, all children's health, all children's education, all children's nurturing. The effort encompasses not only the intellectual growth of children, but the social, emotional and physical growth of children. There are several significant elements in that toward a successful childhood and ultimately a successful adulthood. One of those is clearly parent skill building. Another is clearly health insurance. And a third is very clearly childcare. Adolfo Henriques mentioned accredited childcare. Accreditation is the only way, you know, that the childcare you have for your child is a stimulating atmosphere. I'd love for you to remember this number: there are one thousand four hundred and forty-six state licensed childcare centers in this community. One thousand four hundred and forty-six. And of this morning, 89 of those were accredited. I want you to be hurt by the number; I want you to be pained by the number, and I think we need to do something about it. This proposed Center of Excellence would speak to the highest quality, would be a place of training for early childhood professionals, caregivers. It would be a place that would be literally a model of best practices, and it is fundamentally important, I think, to the future of this community and I hope you will support it. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. You're done? Ms. Pardo: No. I just need to give you a few more facts. First, I'd like to say that I was very remissed in not mentioning that Caesar Alvarez is also here, not here as CEO of Greenberg Traurig but here as the Chairman of the United Way campaign, and he wanted to show his support of it and show the importance of it to this -- Chairman Regalado: You want to -- Caesar? Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I think he should put it on the record 138 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, make a commitment. Go ahead, sir. Caesar Alvarez: Really -- thank you. I just want to -- do I have to say my address, at 1221 Brickell Avenue. No. I would like to thank you for giving us the time and needless to say, this is so critical to our community and I know you have taken this very seriously. Would like to have your support. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Ms. Pardo: I'd like to add a few more points. To let you know that we have been working with the Planning staff for many months, since June of this past year, we have also met with Tony Wagner, the NET Administrator, and we showed him the proposed plans for the parking structure. And the reason it all came about is because the United Way, although they have parking, they need more parking and there's been a parking issue and some of the neighbors in the area have complained that there isn't sufficient parking. And, so, the purpose of building the parking structure is to alleviate that parking problem. It would take the cars -- any of the cars that overflow, it would take them directly into the parking structure, which is extremely important. We met with Tony Wagner and we showed him the proposed plans with regards to the parking structure and we also discussed with him the Center of Excellence that would be located on Coral Way. Mr. Wagner suggested that we also meet with the Roads Neighborhood Association, which we did in October of this year. We met with the Roads Association. We showed them our proposed plans. We went through the parking structure and the proposed Center of Excellence. At the time, our designs weren't completed for the Center of Excellence, and we said we would later come back to them, which we still need to do, but they were very pleased with the fact for that building, it's only a three-story building on Coral Way versus currently a long Coral Way, which is designated office. I'm going to point that out on my other map here. As you can see, I've highlighted the site in yellow. Let me get my bearings. It's upside down. I've highlighted the site in yellow and you can see the corridor all along 3rd Avenue is designated office, which I'm pointing to here on the aerial, and you see that this office designation allows high rise buildings. It allows high-density residential buildings. Actually, the zoning ordinance allows for unlimited height. This building here is approximately 13 stories and a building, if you were to put one here, a high rise residential, it could also go to approximately 12, 13 stories. And instead of doing that, what we're proposing is to have a three-story building along here because we thought that it made for a nice transition when you come down Coral Way and not to have a high rise residential, and we explained that to the Roads Association and they very much liked that idea. And, in fact, I just spoke with Linda Cummingsbird (phonetic) just a few minutes ago, who's the President of the Roads Association, and she still said they were in support of this and they had no objection to our proposed -- Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me for interrupting you. Are they prepared to pass a resolution supporting it? Ms. Pardo: Yes. I asked her on the telephone -- actually, she said she's going to be here tonight, but I had to hang up because you were starting with PZ -1. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I can assure you, if they were against it, they would be here but 139 March 7, 2002 they're not here. Ms. Pardo: They've been running in, but we -- I mean, we went to the Roads -- we wanted to work with the community -- I mean, it's been very upfront. We've been out there reaching out to the community. We had originally filed for a Class II, which required that we submit notice to our adjacent owners, as well as every single neighborhood association in all of the Coral Way NET area, which we did. And even after that, we sent a letter to all the property owners on these two blocks and we sent a letter and we explained that our proposal with regard to the Center of Excellence and the parking structure and we said please call us if you have any questions. We did not receive one telephone call. Last week, however, we decided we wanted to make sure we did outreach to the community and we had sent out a letter and last week, we held a meeting and we invited people in this particular area. We invited them to a meeting at the United Way. That was on February 28th, and there were actually only -- there were three individuals that showed up and two of them live in the same home. So, there were basically only two houses from along 31st that came to the meeting and were there to hear about what our proposal is all about. So, we're requesting that you approve the modification to the covenant. This site is extremely important for this particular facility and I've put in the booklets that you have before you, under tab five, you'll see that all educational facilities, particularly for little ones, they're located -- most of them are located in the heart of a residential -- a single-family district because it makes sense. That's where you're going to have those schools. You want children to walk to school that's within the community. Here we've done better. We've put it along a minor arterial road, which is a major roadway. It's just one step below a highway, as far as highway standards go, but it's on a minor arterial road, but it backs up to a single-family residential and it's on a corner here, a commercial corner. So, in addition to being able to serve the residential community, which is clearly what they want to do, it can also serve some other people that perhaps work downtown, and are on their way and driving down Coral Way and that's why this particular site is so important. You've got the United Way headquarters already here. There are so many agencies within the United Way headquarters that are combined and there's a synergy between them and it's not the type of facility that you can just say, "You know what? We don't want it in our neighborhood. Put it somewhere else." Because any other neighborhood you would put this in, it's going to be a single-family or it's going to back up to a single-family because that's the type of facility it is and this really is -- it's an ideal location. And with regards to the office regulations, it is way below the density and the height and the floor area and, therefore, we would request your support in modifying it and we still need to come back -- just so you understand, we still need to have a public hearing. There will be another public hearing on the child -- the early education facility because any facility that has 10 or more children requires a public hearing, and with public notice obviously to everybody within five hundred feet, submittal of a site plan, full elevations, et cetera. So, we're happy to answer any questions that you have. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, Adrienne. We have residents from the area. If anybody wants to be heard -- go ahead, sir. Your name and address. Luis Herrera: My name is Luis Herrera. I live in 1181 Southwest 22nd Terrace. I'm here to present to these people that they talk only to the Miami Road Homeowner's Association and they say they like to work with the neighborhood, but that's not true. I'm representing the Vizcaya Homeowner's Association and I bring a letter to you people that read it first that I continue to 140 March 7, 2002 talking. I'm going to present it to each one of you. And the signatures of the people that are against in the neighborhood the parking lot and the construction over there. Take a few minutes to read the letter, please. Chairman Regalado: Luis, you wish to continue or you just want the letter to be read into the record? Thank you. OK. Go ahead. Mr. Herrera: I want that letter in the record because I'm representing the Vizcaya Homeowner's Association. Whenever they get in touch with us to what it he's doing in there, and they supposed to be meeting -- Chairman Regalado: But, excuse me, Luis. They should have been advised by Tony Wagner, the NET Administrator, that they should contact your group. Apparently, what she said is that the NET Office told them to contact the Roads Association, which apparently they did. Otherwise they would be here, but they didn't speak to you, that you're across from the bakery, across the street. That's the residential neighborhood that they have -- so, he lives across Coral Way and 12' -- Mr. Herrera: OK. Let me get to the -- Chairman Regalado: But go ahead. Go ahead. Vice Chairman Winton: (Inaudible) where he lives? Chairman Regalado: I'm just saying that probably they didn't know that you were there, that the NET Office should have told them that you should have been contacted. I don't know if they told you. Vice Chairman Winton: Show me where your neighborhood is relative to -- Mr. Herrera: It's across -- Chairman Regalado: He lives across the bakery on 12a' and Coral Way. That's near -- next to the ad agency. All of that, that's the Vizcaya Homeowner's Association. From there to 17`}' Avenue, on the east side -- I mean on the south side of Coral Way. Mr. Herrera: I'm inside -- this is the laundry, American Laundry on the corner here. This is (inaudible) right here, OK. There's congestion five (inaudible) over here somewhere. There's congestion of the traffic over here. There's a lot of traffic for this construction right here. The parking lot is behind -- let me see. Right here. The parking lot is over here. That we want to put -- how many -- how many -- Vice Chairman Winton: Stories. Mr. Herrera: -- stories you want to put in the parking lot? 141 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Three. Mr. Herrera: Five story. Ms. Pardo: Five -story -- three-story building. Mr. Herrera: Five -story building in front of a residential area. The old lady got a lot of problems with the parking right here. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. Herrera: And nothing against the United Way and the kids. That particular United Way is not in a bad place to do that kind of school -- this president mentioned about it. Supposed to be another place bigger area they can handle all kind of kids in there and not this -- a small area. This is too small for that kind of building. We working so hard to buy these houses to keep it like a residential and these gentlemen come here to the neighborhood and do whatever he want because they supposed to have a meeting with the planning or send a car to the neighborhood, pull it up, who against or opposed or whatever. They never did. And we still now in front of the Commissioners, almost everything done. Except when somebody come to me and they told me what's going on and I started get some signatures talking to the neighborhood, and I can show you right here how many neighborhoods is right here, right now against this project. Resident. At this time, they have meeting when everybody working at three o'clock, instead of being seven o'clock when we come in -- look, I come from my work -- look at my presentation look at the presentation of the president. Look at the suitcase. There's about two hundred dollars ($200) a suitcase or three or five. Chairman Regalado: Luis, Luis? Mr. Herrera: Mine is five dollars ($5) Chairman Regalado: But if you -- Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Luis, if you had requested that we would have heard this later on, 1 would have done it because we have done it for everybody who feels -- but you didn't know, I guess, and -- Mr. Herrera: They don't get in touch with us. They don't get in touch. They don't get in touch with nobody. Miami Roads Association all the time, when it come -- any time they building in there, they love to see a building. I don't know why they permitting this kind of building in there before, when it's supposed to be Coral Way is a historic road and we want to keep it like, you know, low-density, and that's a new project that they have on Coral Way to 27d' Avenue, that they mention they want it low density and they still giving some permits to everybody and (inaudible) high rise. That's -- I can't understand nothing like that before, and you have some people here that they want to talk too, the residents. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Do we have more residents that wish to speak? Go ahead, sir 142 March 7, 2002 Francisco Bermudez: My name is Francisco Bermudez. I'm a civil engineer and I'm right across the street from the building. Chairman Regalado: Your address. Mr. Bermudez: Two Ten Southwest 32nd Road. One of the things that comes to mind is that if you -- how many children are there going to be in this area? Because there is a lot of traffic going up and down Coral Way. I don't think it's a safe area to have that many children. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Are you asking -- you have to ask through the Chair. Mr. Bermudez: I would like to -- Chairman Regalado: No. You have to ask from me, so -- OK. Mr. Bermudez: Could she confirm the density of children that would be in the building, the parking again? Ms. Pardo: Yes. It would be 140. Chairman Regalado: A hundred -- Ms. Pardo: Up to 140. That's what our request will be when we file for the special exception. Mr. Bermudez: Is it going to be a school of 140 children? Is that what you're talking about? Ms. Pardo: Well, it's an early educational facility. Mr. Bermudez: So, there would be no children running out or -- Ms. Pardo: No. The children will absolutely-- these are children that are ages zero to six years old. So these children will never be unescorted. They're much too young to be walking there by themselves. They will only -- Mr. Bermudez: Right. There's a lot of traffic in that area. Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Your concern are the children -- the children's safety, is that your issue? Mr. Bermudez: Yeah, as a citizen of the area, I would hate to see an accident. Chairman Regalado: I understand, but that's your issue? Commissioner Sanchez. One second. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, did we have -- did you anticipate or did you prepare to have meetings with the Vizcaya Homeowner's Association pertaining to this? Have you 143 March 7, 2002 participated in this in any way? Mr. Bermudez: No. Commissioner Sanchez: You have not? Mr. Bermudez: I don't have no invitation. Commissioner Sanchez: But the other homeowner's has -- Mr. Bermudez: Yeah. Commissioner Sanchez: -- the Roads Homeowner's Association has? Chairman Regalado: were -- Ms. Pardo: Yes. Mr. Bermudez: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Were you advised by the NET Office to meet with them, with Vizcaya? Ms. Pardo: Not with the Vizcaya, no. I did -- when we filed for the Class II originally on the parking structure, I was given a list by the NET Office and it lists many neighborhood associations and the Vizcaya Roads was one of the associations that I did send a letter to, advising them that we had filed plans on the parking structure. Actually, the letter went directly to Mr. Herrera. I have a copy here that was in my file. That just made reference to the parking structure but since then, like I said, the meeting we had last week, we were focusing on the people over here and perhaps it was my fault and I take full responsibility, but it was my understanding the Roads Association covered all these neighbors here. I always thought the Vizcaya Association was really dealing with the neighbors on this side, and I didn't see this -- the individuals who were living over here as being affected because you have Coral Way separating the two. So, that's why we got involved with Roads and we thought it included them, and we did have a meeting that night where we had invited -- Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Mr. Herrera, would you feel comfortable if you sat down with them and they go through the planning and explain to you what they're doing? Because I'll tell you one thing: I looked at it and there's a big difference from having a 12 -unit exactly where the lot is right now -- this is -- we'll talk about this because this is just -- this is different. It's a modification to a declaration of a restricted covenant. What we will be basically doing here today is just approving, with conditions -- and we're just approving the footprints and the density of the project itself. That's the only thing we're doing. Everything else would have to come back to us and we're talking about the final design, buffers, screen, all that stuff will come back. And I think that you will be a part of the process to see what we're about. If you would like, what 144 March 7, 2002 we could do is allow them the opportunity to maybe table this and you could meet with them outside or maybe if you want another day to meet with them and talk to -- maybe they could show you exactly what they're going to do because I think there's some confusion here. The story -- the school that they're doing is only three feet -- I mean, two stories high. If you look at the design that I'm looking out there, that would be afterwards. It will have to come back to this Commission. I see there's a lot of buffer and design itself gives it back at least -- because I'll tell you, I'm very sensitive to any development, whether it's two stories or three stories. That's right next to your property. I think design there -- and that will come back later on for our approval, will be to consider -- and I think you will be involved in the process -- is the buffer itself. But you will have plenty of room from the building to your property. Would you like an opportunity, out of, you know, respect to your homeowner's association, to meet with them? Mr. Bermudez: OK. I'm trying to get in touch with it. I mean, if you want to get -- being part of Commissioner Sanchez: Well, she just said that she has met with the other homeowners association. Mr. Bermudez: Right. Commissioner Sanchez: Apparently, she was not aware that she had (inaudible) your homeowner's association. Mr. Bermudez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez and Luis, can I make a suggestion? What the Commissioner is saying is that the whole process has to come here. You've been here many times on many public hearings. Mr. Bermudez: Right. Chairman Regalado: What he's asking you, if you don't mind that if we vote on this, then they'll meet with you and if you do not agree, then we -- you will have ample time to bring all the members of the association to the different public hearings that we're going to have. Is -- that is why -- that is what -- Commissioner Sanchez: That's what I'm trying to accomplish here. I do have other concerns that I want to discuss pertaining to the school itself, and I think I'm going to need some legal -- I'll turn over the floor to you, Madam -- Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): No. I just wanted to make a clarification, Commissioner, that under normal circumstances, this project would not come back to the City Commission so that if you would like it to come back for a public hearing, as you've just described, you would have to make that one of the conditions in the approval -- Chairman Regalado: But she just said a few minutes ago that because it's more than 10 children, 145 March 7, 2002 it has to come to the City Commission, Ms. Pardo: It has to go to the Zoning Board -- Commissioner Sanchez: That's a special exception Ms. Pardo: -- for a public hearing. If it was appealed from the Zoning Board, then it would definitely come back to you. Commissioner Sanchez: But that could be a condition that they could accept. I don't have a problem with that. What I do have, Mr. Chairman is that although the United Way is a great institution. We are the poorest City in our nation. I don't think anyone will dispute the fact that we have a need, in my district, which just happens to be -- and we do have a lot of needy families, a lot of children that could benefit from this. What I don't want to see is people from outside the City and I can't put those restrictions and I want to make it very clear and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. City Attorney on this. It's that we don't want to see people from other areas, such as Pembroke Pines and Weston that work in Brickell and commute to work, where they will come and drop their children off, where, you know, you're not going to serve an area -- not that I want to be self-serving. I think that -- I'm not going to say only District 3. 1 think the City of Miami should be -- and it's just a condition that I would put. It can't force you to do it, but I would ask that you take that into consideration. Ms. Pardo: We already have. Because we think it's important to give a preference for the neighborhood children and also a preference to City of Miami children for this facility because it is located in the City of Miami. And we've thought about this and we put it in here and we wanted it to go before you. Commissioner Sanchez: If you agree with the condition that come back, I'm prepared today to move to accept or approve with conditions that come back and, of course, you would have to meet with Vizcaya Homeowner's Association and just basically come to an agreement on what they consider to be the buffer conditions. I see the plan and I see a big difference in having a wall right behind your home or approaching your home and having that setback that really allows you the opportunity to blend in. On the parking issue across the street, let me just say that we do have one major problem in this City. We lack parking. We lack parking in Calle Ocho; we lack parking in downtown; we lack parking in Overtown, and we lack it through all our communities. There's one thing that we need is more parking. The only condition that I would ask is that if there's an event that happens along that area -- and I could see that area coming forth because I see great plans now with Coral Way that's under construction and five points will be a meeting point in the future of Miami, considered five points when you say, where do you want — (unintelligible) the bakery, where is it at? Five points. I'm sure the United Way, five points. So, there's a lot of good things that are coming to there. I'm prepared to do that and allow you to be in the process. You know, you're a reasonable person. I'm looking out for the interest of the homeowners. I will not allow them to build a wall approaching your home. I just can't see it. Someone looking out their balcony and looking into your back yard. However, this is a three- story, not a 12 -story. It's a three-story building and the design itself, which we're not approving under these conditions, it will come back and we will have to approve based on the 146 March 7, 2002 recommendation of this City. Yes, sir. Mr. Herrera: Let me clear something. You're talking about three-story building facing Coral Way. OK? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Mr. Herrera: It's facing Coral Way. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Mr. Herrera: OK. The neighborhood, you're talking about the parking lot, they're going to make it in a residential area. (Inaudible) against top part of the building on that side, in there, going to be in front of this family. Chairman Regalado: OK. Here we have two -- Luis, if I may. We have two situations because you live across Coral Way, but we have a lady that lives next to -- Commissioner Sanchez: He is here representing -- Mr. Herrera: No, if I live across Coral Way. Commissioner Sanchez: The Vizcaya Homeowner's Association. Chairman Regalado: No, I understand, but I think he's talking about the lady that lives next to the building. If she wants to say something -- Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Chairman Regalado: -- you're welcomed. Go ahead. Mr. Herrera: She needs an interpreter. Chairman Regalado: (Comments in Spanish). I'm going to translate. Mr. Herrera: Before she talks -- Chairman Regalado: You want to -- OK. Erme Serrano (THROUGH INTERPRETER): My address is 32 Road -- 321 Road Southwest. We know that United Way wants to construct its building precisely next to my home. They also want to build a parking right in front of -- across from our houses. What is permitted for them, by law, and if the Commission permits, especially on Coral Way, I feel that that might be OK because they have their right to do whatever it is they want there. But I do feel that it will be uncomfortable for us that they construct a building next and then one across. They're not leaving me any room for breathing there. There's a lot of neighbors here. That we are 147 March 7, 2002 uncomfortable. Since they've arrived there, actually, it's taken away some of the peace in the community and in our home. This is our home. This is our peace. This is our tranquility there. Commissioner Sanchez: Can you translate to her back, telling her that the only thing that we are approving here is the density and the footprint of the projects. They will have to come back, if they accept the conditions, that she will be involved in the process and the City, too, who is out to protect her interest, to make sure that she is protected and her property is protected on the design, the buffer, and other conditions. Ms. Serrano (via Interpreter): OK. That's fine again. We are not in any way against the United Way. Not in any way. Absolutely not. Chairman Regalado: Close -- just be close to the mike. Ms. Serrano (via Interpreter): All that we -- all that they have a right to do there will affect it, but whatever's going to hurt us, that will not be accepted. We're going to oppose that and there is a lot of (inaudible) we are going to give a good fight that's for sure. This is our homes. Chairman Regalado: Ma'am, explain to them that what the Commissioner says is that we're not approving any building here. Ms. Serrano (through interpreter): No, I understand. That's fine. Correct. I understood that perfectly. Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir Vice Chairman Winton: Obviously, this is the kind of thing that I've weighed in on a lot since I've been here. Adrienne, you know that I've been very vocal on these kinds of things, and I can tell you all from sitting here, the structure you're building on Coral Way is logical as it can be. We could have a much higher density building built on Coral Way by right, so that can be done virtually without any Commission approval. So, the Coral Way building, from my viewpoint, is -- that y'all are planning is much better than anything else that could end up there. And it's (inaudible) given the economy and the movement to build more housing in the City of Miami. However, the parking garage is, in my mind, seriously problematic. You say that's a seven -story parking garage? Five? Ms. Pardo: No. It's only five. Five levels. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, five -- but it's a five -- Ms. Pardo: It's lower than this building. 148 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: I know. But it's right up against -- across the street from single-family homes, and that's an issue. You know, that's an issue that y'all have to look at very, very carefully. Ms. Pardo: No. We are. We are. And we're doing major work as far as the landscaping of that to make sure it's very softened and also the fenestration of the building and the design of the building so that when they look at it -- Vice Chairman Winton: It doesn't look like a parking garage. Ms. Pardo: it would look like a parking garage. And we understand that naturally, because of the shape of this lot, it's not as if it goes all the way to the end there. These would be a nice green area at the end, like there currently is, and we still have to get approvals of that. And I would be happy to meet with them again. We have a wonderful facility at the United Way, which is obviously in their neighborhood and, you know, we'll have another nighttime meeting because we did -- last week we had an evening meeting so we could reach out to the community. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 think that, when you have the meetings, you better be prepared to take some renderings that show what the street level look is going to be of that garage as opposed to bird's eye view looking down because nobody has -- nobody can tell what -- when I look out my window, what am I really going to be looking at. Mr. Pardo: We do that with the architects Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman? Ms. Pardo: We can do that with the architects. Miguel Blanco: I can tell you. First of all, how can -- my name is Miguel Blanco. I live at 341 Southwest 32nd Road, which is directly in front -- it's the one with the white roof of the parking lot. Vice Chairman Winton: (Inaudible) where at? Commissioner Sanchez: It's the one with the white roof. Mr. Blanco: The one with the white roof. Right there. It's directly in front of the parking lot. How can you tell me that a five -story parking garage is not going to look like a five -story parking garage? It's going to be right in front of the house. It's going to tower -- how tall is this? I don't know how five stories is. It's going to tower over my house. So, what am I going to have as a view? I'm going to have ramps and maybe a palm tree, and that's going to increase -- Commissioner Sanchez: Are you willing to look at some designs? Ms. Pardo: No. There will be no ramps. 149 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Then you just don't want any parking lot there? Mr. Blanco: Actually, I really don't want a parking garage in front of my house because I don't think that that's going to really alleviate the parking situation. Right now, I come home at many different times and I'll see the parking garages completely emptied and the people that -- I don't know whether they rent offices or what it is they do -- are parked right in front of my house. That's public parking. You can park wherever you want, but why is the parking garage -- not garage, parking lot. Excuse me for being nervous -- is completely empty and so is the one on Coral Way, completely empty. Yet, there's parking everywhere, you know, filled up by people who walk into the United Way Building. That's a problem. It's a problem, but I don't think it's -- Ms. Pardo: That's what we want to alleviate. Mr. Blanco: But I don't believe that a five -story parking garage is going to do the thing. Do it on Coral Way. If you're going to do a building already on Coral Way, you have one that's -- I don't know how many stories that Monserrate (phonetic) Building. Do it on Coral Way. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but then that lady there is not going to be very happy. When you put the building three stories and then you put five stories on top, OK. Mr. Blanco: But, meanwhile, you're surrounding us into like a corner like this, with buildings here and buildings here. We're completely cornered in. Ms. Pardo: All of this land that their property is on is within the office designation. Commissioner Sanchez: See, that's the problem. Because they -- they're in -- Mr. Blanco: Well, just so you know, we very strongly oppose that. Commissioner Sanchez: And I'll take that into consideration. Ms. Pardo: We're going to work with you and meet with you. Mr. Blanco: We understand the one on Coral Way. Ms. Pardo: We do. Mr. Blanco: Well, really, you will blend just fine. For whatever projects you want to do in there, rent it -- the building or the offices to whoever you want to rent it to, that's fine, including the children's programs and whatever. But what's going to stop people from parking in front of our houses anyway? Ms. Pardo: Well -- I mean, we can discuss it as far as putting up signs, making sure that we take necessary steps so that people couldn't park there because that's one of the purposes of the parking lot. 150 March 7, 2002 Mr. Blanco: Except residential parking. Ms. Pardo: Well, right, except maybe you get a little permit and something like that, so that way those that live there can park there and it wouldn't be a problem. Mr. Blanco: I still -- Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think she can answer all those questions right now and I don't think this is the forum to do that. I think that Commissioner Sanchez has already suggested that y'all get together and you can go back and forth on all kinds of ideas and feel free to think of all the ideas you can, and let somebody respond here. Maybe, at the end of the day, there's a compromise that really works here. Chairman Regalado: But, also, you understand that this is not any approval, any buildings or any garage or anything and like Commissioner Sanchez had requested, that if we vote on this and if this change of covenant is approved, everything has to come back to a public hearing. At the City Commission, regardless of what happened on the Zoning Board, the Planning Board, everything has to come back to this City Commission. Is that OK with you? Mr. Blanco: Sure. I mean, that's -- I understand that clearly. Just when I hear the word "footprint," I'm thinking, OK, well, this -- and they're only talking about the three-story beautiful building, but they're not talking about the five -story monster in front of my house. Vice Chairman Winton: No. We're telling him both. So, you're going to talk about both Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Mr. Blanco: So -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Blanco: That makes me nervous. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Mr. Blanco: I understand. Chairman Regalado: If we don't have anybody else, we're going to close the public hearing. Do you want to just go ahead, sir? Mr. Tejera: My name is (inaudible) Tejera. I live at 322 Southwest 33`a Road. I was in a meeting with that lady the other day. I explain to her about I'm against the project they want to make. (Inaudible) for the project. The problem, how many children you're going to have? How many people will be coming and pick it up? We have a lot of traffic in this block. I explain her about 33` Road. When the people coming from the east to the west in the afternoon, everyone 151 March 7, 2002 make a right turn on 33rd Road. That's a two ways. But on the other side of Coral Way, 31', it's the only way for the Metro buses, they coming from the south to the north. That's some other thing we needed change. Thirty-third Road for the one-way. This horrific. So many times you run across the street, you have to be very careful. Tell me about when they bring 140 children so far; like in the beginning they say 140 so far. I don't know. We going to stay in that traffic in the afternoon when the people come and pick it up, drop it in the morning? Commissioner Sanchez: OK Mr. Tejera: With a narrow street? Why didn't United Way have a lot of people supporting United Way? They don't plan another place with more spaces. They have no space. I told that lady there should be more living in there like a bird in a cage. It's a real small place. Commissioner Sanchez: And you will be back here fighting development on that property for a 12 -story apartment building. Mr. Tejera: I live at (inaudible) I live at (inaudible). Commissioner Sanchez: It's a reality. Mr. Tejera: I live there for 20 years in that place. After the United Way moved in there, terrible. We not moving from that place. I will be dying in my place. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Chairman Regalado: Anybody else. Anybody else? Go ahead, sir. OK. You want a -- no, no, no. Let's translate. We've got a translator here. Don't worry. Feel comfortable. Mr. Herrera: I live at 355 Southwest, 33rd Road, for 21 years. (COMMENTS OFF THE RECORD) Mr. Herrera: Twenty-one years. I have three daughters. All three of my daughters have been raised and they have attended Shenandoah. I know the area. I pick up my daughters everyday. (Inaudible) no room. The police (inaudible) the traffic. I know that. Chairman Regalado: OK. Luis. Mr. Herrera: There's only one thing I wanted to mention that I forget about it. We have 20 -- I think it is 25th or 26th Road. We have a church with a school in there. We have Coral Way Elementary School close in there. Commissioner Sanchez: (Inaudible). Mr. Herrera: And we have St. Peters (inaudible) we've got plenty schools in our neighborhood.. What I think, they can look for bigger place -- 152 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: This is -- Mr. Herrera: (Inaudible). Commissioner Sanchez: This is a -- Mr. Herrera: Not against the United Way for what you're doing. It's only the construction that's all. Commissioner Sanchez: It's a childcare center. It's not a school. It's a childcare center. Mr. Herrera: That's all. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: OK. Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I would move to approve with conditions. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: The conditions have to come back to the Commission. Chairman Regalado: We're closing the public hearing. There is a motion by Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: And if I just may say before -- well, let's vote on and then I'll -- Chairman Regalado: Do you approve with conditions -- yes, sir. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, I think there was one voluntary proffer that needed to be on the record before you vote. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. That one needs to be on the record. Ms. Pardo: Yes. We voluntary proffer to give preference to the neighborhood children and the City of Miami children. Absolutely. Chairman Regalado: And you understand that the Commissioner has requested that everything comes back to the Miami City Commission? Ms. Pardo: Yes. 153 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: We need a second. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second. Chairman Regalado: It's been seconded. 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. 02-240 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT (S), APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ("ZONING COVENANT") DATED APRIL 17, 1970, AND RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 6867, PAGE 438-447, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI- DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3150 AND 3250 SOUTHWEST 3'm AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A", IN ORDER TO AMEND PARAGRAPH THREE OF THE ZONING COVENANT TO MODIFY THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN; SUBJECT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER RECORDING THE MODIFICATION IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNY, FLORIDA. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzdlez, the resolution 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 Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may? 154 March 7, 2002 Ms. Pardo: Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Just let me just take this time to tell the Roads residents. The Roads -- I live in the Roads and I'm proud to live in the Roads. That will be the Manhattan of the City of Miami. With all the urban infill that's happening in our community, people are moving back and you're starting to see that people are buying two hundred and fifty, sixty, seventy and eighty thousand dollars homes and tearing them down and making seven hundred and fifty thousand dollar homes. You know why? Because they don't want to commute anymore. They don't want to spend thirteen to fifteen hours a week in their car away from their family, away from working their loved ones. We're going to have to do things that we may not like. The responsibility that I have, as your Commissioner, is to make sure that if it has to be done, it's less painful than what it's going to be. You, sir, made a statement that, yes, let us put the building on the other side. Well, that alleviates your problem, but then it adds problems to this lady because she's not going to be happy when she has three stories plus five stories parking. Unidentified Speaker: She said she could live with one if they're on one side, but not on the other side too because it's closing us in. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think she said that, but we're not debating this right now. Commissioner Sanchez: Listen, I don't think -- listen, I'm going to make decisions -- Vice Chairman Winton: You guys talk about that later. Commissioner Sanchez: -- and sometimes you may not agree with them and that's the responsibilities that I have here. I consider myself an umpire. I might say you're it -- you're safe or you're out and you may disagree with me and you can throw dust at me, like Martin used to do, but that's how it goes. But let me just say that you've invested wisely by buying a house in the Roads. The Roads are picking up. Brickell is picking up and exploding. Apartments on Brickell are what -- were going for what, two forty, two sixty and two eighty, and they continue to go up? So, get used to development that's going to come here. It's got to be controlled development because right now with the density, three stories -- yeah, if we don't do this there, I guarantee you three months you're going to have a developer here and you're going to be back out here with all your homeowner's association complaining, well, they -- in that area they could put 10, 12 stories. Vice Chairman Winton: We're not debating here. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm going to debate with you. I just want to make sure you leave here not thinking I'm the bad guy. Chairman Regalado: OK. Next? Yes, sir? This item is finished. Commissioner, I'd like to propose something. 155 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, did the gentleman put on the record the name of his -- and address of his two hundred dollar ($200) tailor? Chairman Regalado: That's Armani. If you get that for two hundred dollars ($200), I mean, you know, we can sort of -- 156 March 7, 2002 31. OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF ALLEY AND AREAWAY NORTH OF NW 5TH STREET, SOUTH OF NW 6TH STREET, WEST OF 6TH AVENUE AND EAST OF NW 7TH AVENUE (Applicant(s): Trinity Resources International, LLC.) Chairman Regalado: Well, we're going to do -- we have a time certain item that Commission Sanchez requested regarding the awnings and permits at 5:45. But I would ask, because we're going to have a lot of items with public hearing after 6 o'clock. Can we do -- let's do some PZ (Planning & Zoning) items that are non -controversial and just get it out of the way. Let's do PZ - 2. Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -2 is a -- we recommend approval. It's an official vacation closure of an alley. Public Works is here, too. Vice Chairman Winton: I didn't hear what you said, Lourdes. Commissioner Teele: What's the address on that? Ms. Slazyk: The address -- Chairman Regalado: Northwest 6"' Street, west of 6t' Avenue and east of Northwest 7a' Avenue. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Ms. Pardo. Chairman Regalado: Adrienne Pardo. Mr. Maxwell: Ms. Pardo. Chairman Regalado: You have an item -- Commissioner Teele: Why are we doing this? Chairman Regalado: -- on PZ. Commissioner Teele: Pardon? Huh? Vice Chairman Winton: Are we on PZ -2? Chairman Regalado: We're on PZ -2. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. I didn't -- Lourdes said something about this. I didn't hear a thing she said. Ms. Slazyk: I was just saying this was a vacation of an alley, and that Planning recommended approval. And Public Works has the Plat and Street recommendation. Vice Chairman Winton: Planning recommended approval? What am I reading? PZ -2? 157 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: It says, "Planning denial." Vice Chairman Winton: Mine says, "Planning denied." Chairman Regalado: No. PZ -2 says, Planning and Zoning Department approval. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. On the agenda it says approval. The fact sheet has an error. It's approval. Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, all right. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Chairman Regalado: OK Commissioner Teele: Let me just understand this. Why are we doing this? I don't mind -- I just want to know, why are we doing this? John Jackson: John Jackson, Director of Public Works. This is an alleyway that was for the benefit of the lot owners in Adriance Square, and it's an alleyway and an areaway that -- and the applicant owns the property all the way around it. It just serves -- it only serves that parcel, but it is a right-of-way and they requested closure. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I -- Commissioner Teele: You haven't answered my question, though. Let me tell you, we've got to stop doing this just because the owners are coming forward and asking for it. If there is no development being proposed, if there is no -- Ms. Pardo: Right. Commissioner Teele: If there is no public purpose that's being clearly stated -- and I really don't think that Public Works or the Planning Department should come forth and recommend something -- 1 mean, should come forth and move something if it's really being moved by a property owner, for whatever legitimate reasons they want to do this for his or her own convenience. I would be much more persuaded to want to do this if this was a part of a development -- Mr. Jackson: Commissioner, I think -- Commissioner Teele: -- that's before us. Vice Chairman Winton: Because we have leverage. Mr. Jackson: Commissioner, I think it is part of a development 158 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: So, where is the development? This is nothing but an alleyway Mr. Jackson: The closure process is part of the -- is part of the platting process. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, maybe we need to change the rules so that closures don't come to us unless it's a part of the development some way or another, instead of, you know, way in advance. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. That's kind of chicken and egg because before they actually go put a development together, they have to know if they're going to get the closure. So, the closure is the first step in the development. In this particular case, it really only serves this property. If it were an alley that we're cutting down an entire street and served the whole block -- Vice Chairman Winton: But you're missing the whole point. Commissioner Teele: You're missing the point. Ms. Slazyk: I know. I understand. Vice Chairman Winton: Our point is, you know, when it comes to -- Ms. Slazyk: You want to see them both -- Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, Commissioner Teele's made it. I've made it. The point is, that's public land and that gives us special rights and that gives us much more leverage in terms of what we would like to see that development do that may better serve the public purpose and the private purpose because we're giving up public land. Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Ms. Pardo: Commissioner Winton, if I could describe it, I could answer a lot of the questions that the Commission is addressing at this point in time. Commissioner Teele: Adrienne, 1 want to hear from you, but we're talking now about a policy question, as to whether or not this Commission, as a matter of policy, should just go -- because a property owner happens to own both sides of the land -- both sides, as required -- and he or she is requesting that we close the land at the right-of-way with no development -- Ms. Pardo: There is development, though. That's what I wanted to explain to you. In this particular case, there is, if you want to hear it now, or I can wait until after your policy discussion. Commissioner Teele: No. I really would like to hear -- Ms. Pardo: OK. 159 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: -- what's the development that's being proposed. Ms. Pardo: My name is Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here on behalf of Trinity Resources, Inc. The development that is proposed -- this particular developer had obtained a Class II Special Permit from the City of Miami over a year ago, and actually, this is a small site plan, because I just had it in my file. And it is for a NAP (Network Access Point) facility. And it was issued over a year ago in the City of Miami. They then started to proceed to get their permits and an issue came up with regards to this particular alley and areaway. And I think also what's so important in this particular case is that the plat that dedicates the alley -- actually, nobody even knows what an areaway is because there's no definition within the City's Code for an areaway. But the alley on the plat is a private alley and plat. So, this particular property owner owns it. This isn't public land that we're talking about. And as you can see from the aerial that I gave you, that it's not even a paved road or alley. It's all within here. It's a vacant piece of land at the current time. Vice Chairman Winton: What did you say? You said this is pri -- that it's privately owned? Ms. Pardo: Yes, it's a private alley. And it's solely -- the plat says the alley and areaways as shown on the set attached plat, which I've highlighted in yellow, are hereby dedicated to the perpetual use of the lot owners on the subdivision only. It's not a public -- it's not your normal public alley. It's only for the use of this plat, and my client owns all the property on this plat. But because it's stated on a plat, the City makes us go through this whole process in order to remove it. And they did have a plan. And, actually, they worked with the River Commission, which I just found out today, because the gentleman from the River Commission is here on some other projects and he says, "Oh, I'm here on yours, too." And I said, we're not on the River. They're kind of cattycorner. And he said, "They were nice enough to dedicate this entire green area on their particular plan," and it works in with the whole greenbelt that they're doing on the River. And he was really filled with that aspect of it. But they do have a Class II for development. These are private alleys, not public alleys, like you normally have. And, therefore, we're requesting approval of this private alley and areaway closure. Vice Chairman Winton: And what's this development again? What is the development? Ms. Pardo: A NAP facility. Commissioner Sanchez: What is it? Ms. Pardo: Well, they started it many years ago. Commissioner Teele: Well, I tell you what -- Mr. Attorney, can we give this approval conditioned on the development of the facility that's proposed? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Or you help me figure out how to get what we're saying. 160 March 7, 2002 Mr. Maxwell: This is going to have to -- this is a -- is this tentative? This is a tentative plat. This is not the final plat, is it? Ms. Pardo: No, it's not the final plat. If this is approved, we then file all of our documentation required for the final plat and have to come back before the City Commission again. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but then you're into ministerial -- Mr. Maxwell: Well, no, sir. Plats -- I know that you were recently told about plats being ministerial, but very recently the Supreme Court has acted on that particular issue, and they've determined that plats are quasi-judicial in nature. And implicit in quasi-judicial action is that you do have some lever -- some leeway to move one way or the other. So, you can't take input and make decisions based on that. Vice Chairman Winton: What did you just say? You can what? Mr. Maxwell: You're not -- before they were ministerial. That means, you really didn't have any say in it. Once the technical committees acted, you were bound by their decisions. That's no longer the case. If you have evidence -- relevant evidence -- competent evidence on the record, subsequent to the committee's action, you can rule based on that, so you aren't bound. Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele, I guess -- and you can help me here. Maybe you see this a little differently than I do. I guess I do -- I see this different -- this particular example different than I have the others. Commissioner Teele: Well, it's late. Let's debate the policy a little bit later. Let's move this. But if you see it differently -- although, I don't know if it's a private -- Ms. Pardo: It's a private. Commissioner Teele: If it's a private owner, then why are we here, at all, on this? Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney. Vice Chairman Winton: We'd like to confirm: This is privately owned land. This isn't public land. Mr. Maxwell: Well -- Ms. Pardo: It's dedicated -- Mr. Maxwell: -- I would have to defer to the Public Works Department and their survey people. It sounds, from what Ms. Pardo said -- 161 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Maxwell: -- that what they have is -- what we have is -- what they granted the City was in the nature of an easement. That sounds like what she said, but I'd have to defer to Public Works on it. Mr. Jackson: Commissioners, it is dedicated for the sole perpetual use of the lot owners. At the time this was developed, this was a way to provide rear access to these lots. But now the new development no longer needs these lots for that purpose and that would -- but it is a private alleyway and an areaway. But because it's on the plat and in order to replat, we need to remove that right-of-way. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Commissioner Teele, I guess, unless you would object, that seems to me that from -- you and I need to stay focused on the policy, because it seems to me to be outside that realm. Commissioner Teele: I would move the approval, Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-241 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THE POTION OF AN ALLEY AND AREAWAY NORTH OF NORTHWEST 5TH STREET, SOUTH OF NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, WEST OF NORTHWEST 6TH AVENUE, AND EAST OF NORTHWEST 7TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A." 162 March 7, 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. Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Pardo: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, can we hear PZ -3? Chairman Regalado: PZ -3. PZ -3 is an alley south of South Miami Avenue. Go ahead, Lourdes. Ms. Slazyk: Excuse me. The previous item, I just wanted to put in the record -- clarify, the Class 11 for that project there did not go before the Miami River Commission. It got a Class II Special Permit, and through the Class 11, there was a dedication of the green space, but it didn't officially go before the Miami River Commission. 163 March 7, 2002 32. OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF ALLEY PARALLEL TO AND SOUTH OF SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, NORTH OF BRICKELL AVENUE, EAST OF SE 15TH ROAD AND WEST OF SE 14TH STREET (Applicant(s): Park Place at Brickell, LLC.) Ben Fernandez: Good evening, members of the Board. I'd like to request a deferral on this item. My name is Ben Fernandez. I'm an attorney with law offices at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. Chairman Regalado: OK. You want a deferral? Mr. Fernandez: For the law office of Bercow and Radell. Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: What date? Adrienne Pardo: Wait. Can we respond? Mr. Fernandez: It's not my item, but since you didn't ask -- Ms. Pardo: It's my item. Mr. Fernandez: -- you didn't ask for deferrals earlier -- Chairman Regalado: Oh. I thought that -- oh, it's not your item. Mr. Fernandez: No. Chairman Regalado: It's her item. Mr. Fernandez: That's right. Ms. Pardo: But he didn't -- Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought that you were representing -- Mr. Fernandez: But because you didn't entertain deferrals earlier, I'm just saving the Commission time. Commissioner Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait. Wait a minute. You're asking for a deferral on this item? Mr. Fernandez: Yes. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: On this item that's being heard here? Mr. Fernandez: That's correct. 164 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: He just got to the mic first. That's all. Mr. Fernandez: Right. Chairman Regalado: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Commissioner Sanchez: Why are you asking for a deferral? Chairman Regalado: Why -- Mr. Fernandez: I represent the property owner that directly abuts this property, Mr. Martin Taplan and 1428 Brickell Corporation. And we were a part of the alley closure initially, over a year ago, when it was proposed. We were opposed to the alley going onto Brickell and we wanted it to go to South Miami Avenue. We reached an agreement to agree with the property owners, with Park Place, the purchasers, and they went ahead and amended their Major Use Special Permit and now they're back for their road closure. However, we have not had an opportunity to review either the traffic consultant's information, the -- this plan for the road closure. The first notice that we got of this plan was just a week ago, when I was contacted by Mr. Taplan, who asked me to ask you to give us some time to meet with them. In addition, I have a letter from City National Bank that I'd like to distribute to you. They are also on this block. Commissioner Sanchez: It's tough to develop in this town. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele: I think this project, Mr. Attorney, is getting ready to make the point that Commissioner Winton and I are wrestling with. See, we closed something before, right? An alleyway here, right? Adrienne Pardo: On this one? No. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): That's correct. Mr. Fernandez: No, there's nothing enclosed yet on this -- Mr. Maxwell: No. He meant the previous item, I think. Mr. Fernandez: You approved a modification to a Major Use Special Permit for the project. However, that project contemplates a street closure. All we're saying -- we're not opposed to the project, necessarily. However, we were never provided with a copy -- we abut the property. We're the property owner right next door. We're most affected by this alley closure. We were not provided with plans for this project. We were never written to, or my client was never asked to meet -- 165 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Commissioner Sanchez: This project's been going on for two and a half years. Vice Chairman Winton: This -- yeah. Commissioner Sanchez: Almost three years. Vice Chairman Winton: There was a -- Mr. Fernandez: With the homeowners. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. Excuse me. There was a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit) -- this thing's had more debates than anything I've ever seen. Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: So, you guys are claiming -- and Marty Taplan's a developer. He knows what's going on in this world. He knows everything that's going on in this world. And to suggest now, after we've been through -- we've had -- I'll bet we've had four public hearings on this issue. And to suggest now that you guys knew nothing about any of this stuff is a little much for me. Mr. Fernandez: Can I explain? Vice Chairman Winton: Sure Mr. Fernandez: Let me show you this letter, which was signed by Park Place. When they originally contemplated the alley going to Brickell, we objected to that. We came -- when this was scheduled to come to the Commission, we objected to it. Mr. Ojeda agreed to work with us to send the alley to South Miami Avenue, rather than to Brickell. When they went forward with their MUSP, we -- Mr. Taplan assumed that the alley was going to South Miami Avenue throughout all this time. He did not know that it was going to Brickell. At this point, what we're saying is, we'd like to revisit the plan, ask for a deferral to give our expert, Mr. Richard (INAUDIBLE), a transportation analyst professional, the courtesy of reviewing the impacts that this closure's going to have on this abutting property. We have not -- we've been excluded from this property. I represent developers all the time. Whenever I have an application, I notify the abutting property owner, and I work with them. I provide them with all the revised plans. I think that's a minimum. And I'd just like to pass around this document. Chairman Regalado: OK. Adrienne. Ms. Pardo: Hello. My name is Adrienne Pardo, with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue I'm here today on behalf of the owner of Park Place and LLC. We've been here so many times and 166 March 7, 2002 we've been through so many scenarios. And what Mr. Fernandez is referring to is about a year and a half ago, two years ago. We originally had plans for our original plan when we had three towers. We had one tower here, one tower here, and the third tower here. And we originally had the alley going out to Brickell Avenue. Mr. Taplan objected at that time. We then scrapped it and we revised our entire alley closure application and we included his property, and we had an application with the alley going out to South Miami Avenue. We got all the way to the City Commission hearing and at that hearing, he told us, through Ben -- Ben said to us, "You don't have our authority to go forward with the application." So, Mr. Ojeda was very upset because he had revised -- we had spent so much time going to Zoning Board with the plan going out here. Then we revised it. We went out there. Then we came for the hearing here and he said, "You don't have authorization to go forward." Commissioner Sanchez: How many times have you revised this? Ms. Pardo: Oh, my gosh. So, then we worked within the neighbors. We had the whole issue with the neighbors. And we agreed to this whole plaza area. And I don't know if, Alan, you want to get into it. But when we did the plaza and we looked at the plan and how we were going to do it, we could no longer go back out to South Miami. And we've offered -- Mr. Ojeda -- Mr. Fernandez said that Mr. Taplan has a problem with it going out to Brickell Avenue, and we had offered that we would give him an easement, so there's 15 feet -- I'm going to -- Mr. Fernandez: That offer came today, for the first time, for the easement. Well, after knowing our concerns, we can't agree on the same day of the hearing. That's why we're asking for a deferral. Vice Chairman Winton: I don't -- hold on. They've got the floor. You don't. Mr. Fernandez: I understand. Alan Ojeda: My name is Alan Ojeda, 848 Brickell Avenue. First of all, I would like to thank you, the opportunity to be hear and present this in front of you. I would like to address all these issues and make a little bit of history. The reason -- and afterward, I will enter into the time of all of this. The reason why we are asking to close this portion of the alley, only this portion that's not adjacent to Mr. Taplan's property, is because we believe that a wonderful building with the main hope to create a big plaza with fountains used by the public. Obviously, this big concept of the plaza with the alley in the middle doesn't work. So, we presented this idea to all the neighbors. We have the support of all the neighbors. And speaking about public hearings. We came in front of the City Commission November of 2000 to get approved. October 2001, we went in front of PAB (Planning Advisory Board) and we got approved. November 2001, the City Commission approved this concept, five to zero. January 2002, this year, Zoning Board approved this seven to zero. This is what was approved in year 2000. Obviously, all these public hearings were publicized in the proper way. I even remember one day we even extended - - not we. Me. Obviously, the City extended the radius of information. Mr. Taplan is not an absentee owner. He is a real estate developer. Each time that the neighbors came to us, I think we listened to everybody -- two and a half years, we listened to everybody that came forward the first time, the first time that we heard of Mr. Taplan, since the approval by the City 167 March 7, 2002 Commissioner of November 2000 -- I'm saying 2000. I'm not saying 2001. I'm saying 2000, is less than 72 hours ago. And despite all the public notice that were given. This is not in front of his property. His exit usual is through 14. Here, he's roughly five feet below the alley. City National, that's a tenant in his building, is much easier for them to get out on 14th. So, we're not closing -- he still have the same number of egresses. That's two. And I don't see the reason -- me, personally, as a personal opinion -- after two and a half years, five or six public hearings, being in not only the public hearings, talking to, I think, 14 or 15 meetings with neighbors. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, move to deny the deferral Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: What did you just move? Commissioner Sanchez: We're basically -- he's asking for a deferral. And based on the arguments that I have heard here today, I am making a motion to deny the deferral. Vice Chairman Winton: Are we required to even make a motion? We just have to say "no." Chairman Regalado: We don't -- Mr. Maxwell: No. You don't have to do anything. Chairman Regalado: No. Mr. Maxwell: Just don't entertain it. Chairman Regalado: No. Because -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, we're going to -- you know, we don't want to defer it. Chairman Regalado: No, just keep -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, do the presentation. Chairman Regalado: We just keep the public hearing open. Anybody else? Any rebuttal? Anybody else? We will close the public hearing. Ms. Pardo: If I could just put in the record -- Mr. Fernandez: On the deferral or on the merits of the case? Chairman Regalado: No, no. You don't have any standing on the deferral. So, we're not voting on the deferral. Mr. Fernandez: Right. You're not entertaining the deferral. 168 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: I'm talking about voting on the project. Mr. Fernandez: On the park? Sure, I have additional comments on the merits of the road closing. Chairman Regalado: Well, go ahead. Mr. Fernandez: OK. Thank you. The road closing requires that you consider four things essentially. This isn't a public interest. Is the general public no longer using the right-of-way in question? Would there be any adverse affect on the ability to provide Police, Fire and emergency services to properties affected? Would the vacation enclosure of the right-of-way or easements have a beneficial affect on pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the area? How can this not have a negative effect on pedestrian traffic along Brickell? Your own SD -5 zoning district says that you are to encourage pedestrian traffic along Brickell. That's the whole purpose of the zoning district. If you go down Michigan Avenue, Park Avenue, you never see trucks exiting onto these streets. You know, wherever there is a side street available, you are to utilize that for service entries and exits. You just passed the Coral Way overlay district that requires that you utilize side streets for access, for commercial vehicles whenever possible. The only instance that I can think of, where you have an access like this or service vehicles on a beautiful roadway is the Intercontinental Hotel. The only reason they have it is because they don't have a side street that they can utilize. They have water all around them. And you know how ugly that garage is when you drive past it. So, clearly, they don't meet number four. As to whether or not this application is in the public's interest, I would submit to you that it's only in the developer's interest, clearly not the public's interest, because you haven't heard from the public. You haven't heard from the most affected property owner, which is my client, the neighboring property owner, whose service comes through this alley, whose garbage is picked up through this alley, and who will be most affected. So, I submit to you, that having failed to meet, at a minimum, two of the four elements of this test, that you should grant us a continuance, if not a deferral, on this and allow our expert to review the information. And we're not against this project. We're just saying, we've been out of the loop on this project because we were never provided with a courtesy copy of the plan by the developer, and we'd like an opportunity to at least comment on the road closing. These are two applications. You can't say that because you approved the MUSP, that means de facto that you've approved the road closing. Just combine them in the Code, if you're going to do that. These are two separate applications. You're to consider each on its merits. The fact that you approved a MUSP before you approve this road closing, that's like putting the cart before the horse. How can you do that? Did you just think that you were going to satisfy these criteria when you approved the MUSP? I don't think it should work that way. And I think that, you know, notice to property owners is important. And when you have a plat, your Code requires that all the property owners abutting the easement that is to be closed, that they join in the plat. Well, Mr. Taplan abuts this property. He is not joining in on the plat. So, if that's a condition to the final plat, then it's not going to be recorded and there's never going to be a development permit pulled. I realize that there was a recent amendment to your Code that allows you to -- developer to post a bond and to get around -- circumvent that issue, but I haven't seen a bond posted in this case. I don't think it's appropriate. I think that it's important for you to hear from the abutting property owner. This is the most affected property owner. City National Bank has a letter that describes their issues. They have tellers that let out onto this 169 March 7, 2002 easement. This isn't just a service easement. This is an easement that's utilized by all of the patrons of the bank, that exit through the easement. And this is going to be changed as a result of that. I don't think that the developer has really considered that in his application. Or, if he has, we'd just like the opportunity to be convinced that it's a good idea. The fact that there's a letter that Mr. Ojeda signed in the record demonstrates that Taplan and Ojeda were working together at the beginning of this project. They weren't -- there wasn't animosity initially. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: OK. Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: I just need to put on the record, to clarify a comment just made. It is no longer the law in the City of Miami that all the adjacent abutting property owners join in the plat. There are alternative provisions in the Code now. And I believe the applicant is availing themselves of those provisions. So, I just wanted to make the record clear on that. It's not necessarily that everyone join. Mr. Fernandez: I don't believe a bond has been posted. The provision provides that a bond be posted. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead, sir. You want to respond. Mr. Ojeda: Yes. I would like to address those issues. First of all, pedestrians usually don't walk through alleys. We have provided a huge pedestrian place with a pedestrian access from Brickell, from everywhere, and a big place for pedestrians to use. Again, pedestrians don't use alleys. Mr. Taplan, obviously (UNINTELLIGIBLE) position. All his trucks, his service trucks, everything comes through here, through the northern part of the property because here there's a five-foot difference in level. So, I'm not disturbing the use of any trucks that might go to his property, because, first of all, all these alleys stay open. Second, trucks go out to Brickell or we have provided a full turn -in radius to go back to the alley. So, there's not one single -- that I can think of -- one single service, one single truck of any type that would be influenced by this. He has his full access. His access is only through here. But, still, would be through this whole property. And, again, saying that -- speaking about, for example -- that doesn't serve the purpose -- here's a letter of the South Miami Homeowners' Association, dated January 28, 2002. Let me read part of it. "The closure enabled the development of a much better project than originally proposed." So, when you say that people have not been informed, City National is a tenant and my neighbor is a real estate developer and not an absentee owner. And we've been -- I think it has been properly aware. All of these plans are part of the public records. He's -- I don't know if he have never, ever showed up. Mr. Fernandez: All that we're asking for is an opportunity to meet with the developer, City National, Mr. Taplan, and the developer. The three owners of property on this city block. In order to discuss the easement 170 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. You're done? We are going to close the public hearing, and members of the Commission will discuss and decide what to do. Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Ben, Mr. Fernandez, you are a fine attorney. Mr. Fernandez: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: I'll tell you. You're a fine attorney. But let me tell you something. This project, you heard all the days that it has been here, OK? Let me just tell you something. If I were a developer -- better yet, if I was that developer, I would have hung myself from a tree already, OK. And I didn't support this project when it came with the twin towers at first. I had concerns. They have modified that plan, God knows how many times. They have gone through homeowners' association. They have met with everybody and their mother. They have -- probably know the City staff by first names and children's names and everything. Making it very frustrating for the developer. If you look at this plan the way it is now, the only reason why it's in front of us is because they agreed with the surrounding homeowners, all homeowners, that they couldn't do the two towers. So, they had to break it -- I mean, he -- and he's a gentleman. Mr. Alan Ojeda is a gentleman. He's come out here with patience, patience that I would never have, OK? He has come here and modified his project so many times. And the only reason that he's here today is because the only way that he could get this done to satisfy everybody is to have this alleyway closed. You know, it gets to a point that it's fiustrating for us when we have to sit here and basically hear everybody's concerns and try to work with everybody, OK, to try to find a reasonable solution to this project. Is it needed? Yes, it's needed. Because we're all counting on that revenue coming into the City. But, you know, Ben, it's frustrating. Because you show up here today after two -- almost two and a half years this project's going on -- in two years and you're basically asking for a continuance. Basically, what it sounds that you're putting stuff on the record to tie up the development. And it's very frustrating for the developer, for the attorney, for our attorney, and at least for me -- I don't want to see this project up here again, not only this project. There are so many that are having to come back and back and back. And what -- you know, it gets to a point where I don't know how much -- the developer's going to go, "Hey, you know, I'm just -- forget it. I'm out of here." And you know what's frustrating? I put together a Development Summit to try to attract people to come into the City to develop. And they don't even want to talk to me out on the street. They don't even want to talk to me. I talk to them saying I'm going to put another one in a couple of years. You know what they're telling me? "Don't count on me." It's frustrating. It's very frustrating. I respect you, because I've always liked you, Ben. You know that. Mr. Fernandez: We're not opposed to this project. Let me make that clear. There are two separate applications. We don't oppose the project. We just want to have information on the street closure. Chairman Regalado: Look -- Commissioner Sanchez: You know how hard it is to please everybody on a (INAUDIBLE). Vice Chairman Winton: Hold on. Hold on. 171 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Look, look, look, look. The public hearing is closed. Vice Chairman Winton: Is closed, so -- Chairman Regalado: So -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: I would move to accept the staffs recommendations on PZ -3. Commissioner Gonzalez: I second. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes five to zero. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-242 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF AN ALLEY PARALLEL TO AND SOUTH OF SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, EAST OF SOUTHEAST 15t` ROAD, NORTH OF BRICKELL AVENUE AND WEST OF SOUTHEAST 14TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A. " 172 March 7, 2002 (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. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a time certain. Mr. Ojeda: Thank you very much. 173 March 7, 2002 33. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL'; 2725, 2731 & 2733 NW 6TH STREET (Applicant(s): Fortune of the Chi, Inc.). Chairman Regalado: Mr. Vice Chair, I need to move a second reading of my district. So, can you chair? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir. What item is that? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -4, second reading for zoning change, with a companion, PZ -5. It's a -- PZ -4 is the land use change. PZ -5 is the companion zoning change. And PZ -6 is a companion alley closure. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, before we go there, then, Mr. Chairman, let me ask you: Is this going to take some time? Because we had a 6 o'clock time certain. Chairman Regalado: No. We don't have any -- Ms. Slazyk: It's second reading. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, no, no. Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner (INAUDIBLE) time certain. Chairman Regalado: No. But what I'm saying to you is that we don't have any residents or neighbors on this item. It's all second reading ordinance, and we don't -- it is a public hearing, but we don't have people here representing both parts. Vice Chairman Winton: Got it. Chairman Regalado: So, I move -- Vice Chairman Winton: Move forward. Commissioner Gonzdlez: And I second. Vice Chairman Winton: Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Chairman Regalado: I move PZ -4. Commissioner Gonzalez: I second PZ -4. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. 174 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. It's a public hearing. The public that would like to be heard. And I think people need to get sworn in, too, don't they? Have we sworn everybody in? Chairman Regalado: Not yet, but we will -- because we have two different things here. One is not zoning. And we have -- Vice Chairman Winton: Why don't we -- but -- I understand. We ought to swear in everybody, like we usually do. Everybody that's here to testify ought to stand up and be sworn in at once, so we don't have to do this at every turn. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): On any item. Vice Chairman Winton: Madam Clerk, would you swear in everybody? Sylvia Scheider (Acting City Clerk): Everyone that's going to speak on the zoning issues, please stand and raise your right hand. Vice Chairman Winton: Everyone who's going to speak on a zoning issue. Everyone that's going to speak on any zoning issue here, you need to stand at this time and be sworn. AT THIS POINT, THE CITY CLERK ADMINISTERED OATH, REQUIRED UNDER CITY CODE SECTION 62-1 TO THOSE PERSONS GIVING TESTIMONY ON ZONING ISSUES. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Move and second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Public hearing? Any public wants to speak to this issue, PZ -4? Are you here for PZ -4? Bob de la Fuente: Yes. On behalf of the applicant. My name is Bob de la Fuente. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Do we have any opposition to PZ -4 here? Being none, we'd like to close the public hearing. We have a motion and a second on the second reading of PZ -4. Mr. Maxwell: I'll read the ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Call the roll, please. 175 March 7, 2002 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 AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of January 24, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Chairman Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12193 The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 176 March 7, 2002 34. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING 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, 2725, 2731 & 2733 NW 6TH STREET (Applicant(s): Fortune of the Chi, Inc.) Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -5 is a companion. Chairman Regalado: It's a -- I move PZ -5, second reading. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Gonzalez: We have a motion and a second. We'll open the public hearing on PZ - 5. Is there any opposition to PZ -5? Being none, we'll close the public hearing. We have a motion and a second. It's an ordinance, so read the ordinance. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, if I may ask the applicant -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Mr. Maxwell: Wasn't there -- was there a covenant? Bob de la Fuente: Yes. I'll be -- Mr. Maxwell: You'd like the record to reflect that? Mr. De la Fuente: I would like the record to reflect that we proffered a covenant, which we've given to the City Attorney. They've approved it as to form and sufficiency. It's been executed. And we will take the original back and be responsible for its recording. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Call the roll, please. 177 March 7, 2002 An Ordinance Entitled -- AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 33 OF THE ZONING ATLAS 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 -I '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 passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of January 24, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Chairman Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12194. The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 178 March 7, 2002 35. OFFICIAL VACATION AND CLOSURE OF ALLEY PARALLEL TO AND WEST OF NW 27TH AVENUE, EAST OF NW 28 AVENUE, NORTH OF NW 6 STREET AND SOUTH OF NW 7TH STREET (Applicant(s) Fortune of the Chi, Inc.). Chairman Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I move PZ -6. It's the last companion. And it's precisely an alley for the development. Commissioner Gonzalez: I second. Chairman Regalado: PZ -6. Vice Chairman Winton: PZ -6, we have a motion and a second. Open the public hearing. Is there any opposition to PZ -6? Being none, we'll close the public hearing. Mr. City Attorney, do you have -- it's the same ordinance? Chairman Regalado: It's a resolution. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's a resolution. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, it's a resolution. OK. So, we have a motion and a second on the resolution. All in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The motion carries. The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-243 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF AN ALLEY PARALLEL TO AND WEST OF NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, EAST OF NORTHWEST 28TH AVENUE, NORTH OF NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, AND SOUTH OF NORTHWEST 7'H STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A." 179 March 7, 2002 (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. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. De la Fuente: Thank you. 180 March 7, 2002 36. RENAME BISCAYNE HEIGHTS MINI PARK, LOCATED AT 8400 EAST DIXIE HIGHWAY AS SHORECREST MINI PARK; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFY THE PARK. Chairman Regalado: Let me say this. Commissioner Sanchez had requested a time certain item for an issue that doesn't have to do anything with zoning. Well, actually, it does, but it has -- Commissioner Sanchez: It's permits. Chairman Regalado: It's about permits. We need the City Manager here. And so, we have -- Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner -- Mr. Chairman, I apologize for the interruption, but I believe my colleague, Commissioner Winton, had one at 6 o'clock. So, I would like to yield to him. And then I'll go ahead and do my -- Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And mine's real fast. Chairman Regalado: Right. You have the naming of the park. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Chairman Regalado: In the Upper Eastside, is that correct? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Regalado: For 6 o'clock. Vice Chairman Winton: And I think Michael Muschett is going to -- Michael -- Chairman Regalado: This is a public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: Is he still here? Chairman Regalado: Vice Chairman Winton on the naming of a park. A public hearing on a time certain. And we have -- apologize to the persons on this matter. Vice Chairman Winton: This might be the closest we've ever been to hitting the time certain. Usually, we're off by two hours. Michael, closure. Michael Muschett: My name is Michael Muschett, 760 Northeast 82nd Terrace. I'm president of Shorecrest Homeowners' Association. The name change that we are proposing is to change the park's name from Biscayne Heights to Shorecrest Mini Park. We're in the middle of park improvements, and we would like to make the name change part of the improvements and the 181 March 7, 2002 changes. And we have taken this to our membership and there have been no objections, that I know of. Chairman Regalado: Anybody who would oppose naming this park -- nobody. Commissioner Winton? Anybody else? If not, we close the public hearing and proceed with the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm going to move resolution of renaming the -- got to get my glasses on here -- renaming Biscayne Heights Mini Park, located 8400 East Dixie Highway, Miami, Florida, as the Shorecrest Mini Park; and further directing the City Manager to take the necessary steps to appropriately identify the park. So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-244 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RENAMING BISCAYNE HEIGHTS MINI PARK, LOCATED AT 8400 EAST DIXIE HIGHWAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS SHORE CREST MINI PARK; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE THE NECESSARY STEPS TO APPROPRIATELY IDENTIFY THE PARK. (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 NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. 182 March 7, 2002 37. DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO REEVALUATE FEE CURRENTLY CHARGED FOR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS REMOVAL AND REVIEW COUNTY PROCESSES AS RELATES TO SAME AND COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATION. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, dear colleagues, it's been brought to my attention that we have a severe problem when it comes to obtaining permits for awnings and also for signs. I was approached by several merchants of our community that we have been working very hard with to improve our area. And it's -- let me just get down to the point. Comparing to the County, let me just say that a awning fee to put an awning up of a thousand dollars ($1,000). The building fee -- and you're talking about permits and everything -- is three hundred and forty- three dollars and sixty cents ($343.60). Now, there were other -- it was given to me, a permit cost of the City of Miami. Let me just say that, in some cases, Miami's fee is three hundred and thirty-four dollars ($334). The engineer's fee is two hundred. The run permit -- of course, they have to go back and forth to take the permits. And then we'll talk about that, because that is -- it's ludicrous. It comes out to a total of six hundred and eighty-four dollars ($684) to put together -- to put up an awning in the City of Miami. In the City of Miami, if you put an awning up in your business, you're required six inspections. Just an awning. These inspections are Building, Public Works, Fire, Plumbing, and Zoning. I don't know -- have you heard if someone's ever put up an awning, where you're going to put a toilet up there or a faucet? But these are the things that are brought to our attention. And it really eats you up to know that a person that's going to go out there and be a good citizen -- I'm going to put up an awning in my business or I'm going to put an awning in my house -- and I have a gentleman that will testify, they come and they present to me a bill and they state that the awning will cost you a thousand dollars ($1,000). However, you're going to need six hundred and eighty-four dollars ($684) in permits fee. Well, I would say that just about 50 percent will say, "Well, I'm not getting a permit." And that's what's happening out there. We are putting barriers to people that want to improve our corridors and our residential -- residents. So, this -- now that I've put this on the table, I would like to turn it over to some of the individuals that brought it to my attention on the ludicrous fees that are paid compared to the County. The County's fee is eighty-seven dollars ($87) to put an awning and only two inspectors. Hector Lima (Director, Building): Actually, one. Commissioner Sanchez: One or two. But, I mean, there's a big difference. And I would like them to testify on what -- pertaining to this. And then 1 have a recommendation through a resolution to the City Manager. Commissioner Gonzalez: Commissioner, would you yield to me for a second? Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely. Commissioner Gonzalez: Before -- I am very, very familiar with this process, and with other fees that has to do with signage and awnings. Because when I was the Executive Director of Allapattah Business Development, throughout the Facade Program, we had to do a lot of awning 183 March 7, 2002 installations and signage installations. I could tell you that, probably -- I wouldn't say all of the awnings. The only awnings and signs that are installed in Allapattah with permits are the ones that had been done through the CD (Community Development) programs, through the Facade Program. But, in fact, we are -- when we are talking about the Facade Program, we're defeating the purpose. The reason is that we're giving the merchants some assistance in order to improve their businesses or to improve the facade of the commercial corridors. And most of the money that we using from federal funds, from federal grants to improve the facade of the commercial businesses -- buildings, we're taking back in the City through our permits and inspections and so on and so on. So, actually, we're defeating the purpose because we're not giving the recipients, the final recipients, which are supposed to be the merchants and the business owners are not receiving the entirety of the benefits that they're supposed to get from these grants. On top of that, the amount of inspections and the hard times that these small business people have to go through in order to get their permits approved, in order to get their plans approved, in order to get their inspections, and practically run them out of business. And specifically, the contractors that work for the Facade Program, they have to be a medium size contractors. Why? Because big contractors don't care about doing these small businesses and taking sometimes four months to get their money, to get paid. So, who are the ones that really go out there and hassle to get these businesses? The small or the medium size contractors. And actually, they're driving them crazy with the fees. In most cases, you pay as much in fees and permits as the actual cost of the awning. So, to the business owner -- it's incredible, what is happening. We're defeating the purpose of having a Facade Program. So, actually, we need to come up with some kind of a solution -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the process -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- to what we're doing here Commissioner Sanchez: The process here is to simplify the process. And some of the recommendations that I will make will be to be similar with the County to do it. Because what's happening here is that awnings, signs and tool sheds -- somebody who buys a tool shed at Sears for three hundred dollars ($300) has to get a permit to put it -- has to go -- and then he's got to go through all kinds of inspectors. I mean, I could see it -- you know, we've heard some people want to live in tool sheds and run for public office. We've all heard that. But I mean, the common person that buys a tool shed is just to put their lawn mower, the kid's bike or some stuff lying around the house, extra. Does he really need to go see a plumber and an electrician and zoning to put a shed? We just have to simplify the process. When it was brought to me, I think it's a very valid -- it's ludicrous to see the fines that we're paying. But the problem here is the construction debris charge that we charge. Somebody came up with a clever idea to generate money for the City of Miami when the City was in trouble. And, of course, all the illegal dumping, somebody has to pay for that -- for us to dispose that. So, someone came up with the construction debris, and that's what we're going to address at the end. But, at this time, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to hear from the people -- the gentlemen that are here today to speak on behalf of this. This is why -- time certain. Luis Sabines, Jr.: Luis Sabines, Jr. from the Small Business Opportunity Center. I have Juan Carlos Hurtado, our Director, Humberto Hernandez, and my dad from CAMACOL (Latin 184 March 7, 2002 Chamber of Commerce). I was the one who brought this up to Joe's attention, because I have a lot of complaints from the business people. When I'm going to put up an awning that cost six hundred dollars ($600) and they're going to charge him nine hundred for a permit. Because you've got permits there for three hundred dollars ($300), but we have some for five, six hundred dollars ($600). I really don't understand why we need a plumbing inspector to go look at an awning. We're putting an awning, not a toilet up there. I mean, why does an electrical inspector has to go there? The County uses one inspector, charges seventy-five dollars ($75), and that's it. Plus, these inspectors don't go the same day. You have to call them, these guys -- I want to introduce -- this is Alexis Duran, owner of El Sol Canvas Awning Company. Conrad Paris, owner of Biscayne Awning Company, and Juan Carlos Chaviano, and Manny his partner, the owners of Paradise Awning. They can go into detail on this. I also want Alex to explain a limp (phonetic) permit from the County, when you're going to do an awning in a house, not commercial. It's twelve dollars and fifty cents ($12.50). The City is seven hundred dollars ($700). Now, you ask why people build and why people do things without permits. It's nobody's fault -- I don't say it's Mr. Lima or Mr. Gonzalez's fault. It's the system that you guys have that really doesn't work. We need to do it like the County. Coral Gables is eighty-six dollars ($86) for a permit. We're paying seven hundred bucks ($700) for a permit. I mean, there's something wrong here. Now, let them go into detail. Then you guys make your decision. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not sure we need much more detail. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Right Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, what other detail is there? Mr. Sabines: But, Johnny, what I've got here is, this gentleman's going to pass you some files with permits pulled from the County and the City and you're going to see the difference -- I mean, you're a developer. Vice Chairman Winton: And, frankly, I think that's all we need (INAUDIBLE). You know, he's going to hand out the data and the data's going to be clear. Mr. Sabines: Right. I mean, if somebody knows about this, it's Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez has struggled with this. Chairman Regalado: Let me tell you -- let me tell you, Johnny. I guess that I'm the only one that was here when the prices, if we can call it like that -- I remember that some of our managers at that time brought some ideas, like the Solid Waste surcharge, and it was a way to raise funds. And -- Vice Chairman Winton: And they've never gone away. Chairman Regalado: And it's never gone away. And the thing is that I have here -- well, all of them, I know. But I have very dear friend of my family here that, I think about two years ago, three years ago, you told me, "I won't work in the City of Miami. No way." I wouldn't -- so, he doesn't do anything in the City of Miami. And at that time, I found out -- and, yes, we needed all 185 March 7, 2002 these strings in order to raise money. But I think that if our purpose is quality of life, is beautify our commercial corridors, we need to do something. And, Commissioner Sanchez, we commend you for bringing this because we need to legislate. We cannot just wait anymore tonight, today. We need to legislate something immediately. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm prepared to make a motion. Vice Chairman Winton: So, make it. Mr. Sabines: Excuse me. Before you do -- Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Sabines: Joe, not only the problem is the price. It's the difficulty of getting it. I mean, if the permit has to go from one floor to another. They have to go there -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, not if they -- Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and get the permit -- Vice Chairman Winton: Not if all of these inspectors get wiped out, you know. So it doesn't have to go to Fire and it doesn't have to go to -- Mr. Sabines: Well, let me explain this to you. This is the situation. When we had the meeting in Joe's office, they told me that the City doesn't have any runners. In other words, if a permit has to go from the 3rd to the 4th floor, they've got to go pick it up and take it to -- you mean to tell me that a City employee can't get in the elevator and drop a permit in the 3rd floor and tell the guy, "When you finish, bring it up?" In the County, there's a drop-off box. You drop it, they inspect the permit, they call you when it's done, and you pick it up and that's it. Commissioner Sanchez: Hold on. Mr. Lima. Mr. Lima: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Sir, you stated there's only two inspectors? Mr. Lima: No. Hector Lima, Building Department. There are only two floors that they have to go to. The 3rd floor for the Class II special permits and everybody else is seen on the 4th floor. Fire, Zoning, Plumbing. Commissioner Sanchez: Just to make sure that I'm saying things correctly here, I have a permit inspection record here from El Sol Canvas Awning Corporation and whoever -- and it has Building signed off, Public Works, Fire signed off, Plumbing signed off, and Zoning. That's -- and listen to this, November the 30`h -- November the 300'? -- 30"' they got three inspections. September the 8th they got Fire. December the 1 st, they got Plumbing. December the 1 st they got Zoning. You know, all that I'm saying is, look, we identified a big problem, OK? We just 186 March 7, 2002 need to address it. And I'm going to make a motion. We're just going to get rid of it because time is -- you know, we've got a lot of items. Let me just make a motion. Motion directing the administration to re-evaluate the construction debris removal fee. That's the problem. That's a problem. And I know it's a generator and it generates fund, but it was created when the City was financially in a jam. The City's no longer in a jam and we can't continue to stick it to our residents, OK? Make it applicable. Also, review the County's process and come back with a recommended solution so this legislative body can act on it. And I would suggest that you try to come back -- I'm going to be very flexible. How much time do you think that you could come back with an acceptable recommendation that we could take action on? Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): When's the first meeting in April, sir? Chairman Regalado: Eleventh. Commissioner Sanchez: First meeting is on the 11th. Ms. Bianchino: The only -- I just want to make you aware that we're in total agreement. There's no issue here, at all. Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think you could argue the fact. Ms. Bianchino: But there are Code changes that are going to be required. All this is -- Commissioner Sanchez: Well, then, we need to get them done. Ms. Bianchino: -- in the City Code, so we're -- Vice Chairman Winton: Bring it all back to us. Ms. Bianchino: -- going to bring back to you -- and I wanted to just raise one more point. l passed out to you the revenues that we've generated and I think it's important -- I mean, everybody feels -- Vice Chairman Winton: We have to understand that. Ms. Bianchino: We all agree about the Solid Waste fee. We all agree. But if you'll note, last year it generated two point three million dollars ($2,300,000) for the City. So, I'm just telling you. Commissioner Sanchez: Dena, from hard working people -- Ms. Bianchino: I agree. Commissioner Sanchez: -- that are out there working and when they're going to put up an awning or a sign or a shed, they've got to pay. I don't mind -- hey, listen, stick it to the big 187 March 7, 2002 developers, you know. I don't have a problem with that, but not the little people that are going to put up a shed, you know. And I'm -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, I think we can come back with a -- some kind of recommendation makes it a lot more equitable. Commissioner Sanchez: I support development, you know. Vice Chairman Winton: Joe, you know, we also have a policy -- I have -- you know, we have an office building downtown. I have my staff on two sides of the hall. I have to take out two occupational licenses because they're on separate sides -- same company, same damn sign on the door, but I have to take out two occupational licenses. Commissioner Sanchez: Hey, the City needed to generate funds. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. And I had them argue that it's in the Code. And I read the Code. I had one of my attorneys read the Code. But I was also running for office, so -- and now I'm in office, so I really can't say anything about it. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's the motion. Is there a second? Chairman Regalado: Commissioner -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I second the motion. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, just a question. I'm curious. I agree with you with the Solid Waste surcharge. The Solid Waste surcharge is something that Jose Garcia Pedrosa invented in Miami Beach, and he brought it here. And this was something that was adopted by the City Commission at that time. But I don't know. Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, we have a motion and a second. But just a question. Why don't we just tell, on your motion, to mirror the County's process? Commissioner Sanchez: Because we're not only going to focus on awning. We want to focus on signs and we want to focus on sheds and we want to focus on other miscellaneous. One recommendation is for these minor little permits, why do we have the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Offices? People could go to the NET offices and get those little permits. These are some of the recommendations, and you could come back on the 11th and then we'll take legislative action on them. Ms. Bianchino: Great. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. 188 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Going to -- talking about the Solid Waste surcharge. This is a charge on all -- on every construction, right? Just a little? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Vice Chairman Winton: It's a construction debris removal fee, right? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Gonzalez: The Solid Waste surcharge. This is something that we charge if -- whenever we do -- there is a construction, right? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir Ms. Bianchino: Yes. That is the same thing that Commissioner Regalado was describing. I called it by a different name. It's a -- Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. What is happening -- and that's another complaint that we have from some construction people, is that we're charging them the Solid Waste surcharge and, at the same time, we are requiring that they hire outside companies to pick up their debris. So, they're paying Solid Waste twice. They're paying to the City and they're paying to the private company. Vice Chairman Winton: And they have to get a permit. Commissioner Gonzalez: And they have to get a permit, also. And let me tell you. And that is construction. You know, that's just the construction. But talking about awnings. How much trash can an awning company produce in installing a sign? All they do is they come up, they come with the frame, they drill the holes, they put the screws and they tie the nylon or whatever they call those. Vice Chairman Winton: I think we all agree. Commissioner Gonzalez: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) we can charge them, you know -- I mean -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, but they pay to haul the trash off -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, they pat the company -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- because they're required to have the private hauler from the building take it away. Well, the small companies are a little different sometimes. Well -- you guys better pick up your trash. 189 March 7, 2002 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 motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-245 A MOTION DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO REEVALUATE THE FEE CURRENTLY CHARGED FOR CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS REMOVAL AND REVIEW THE COUNTY PROCESSES AS RELATES TO SAME AND COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION. 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 NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: On April the 11th you have to come back, Mr. Manager. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. 190 March 7, 2002 38. GRANT APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION, WHICH DENIED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW MIXED-USE STRUCTURE INCLUDING SELF -STORAGE FACILITY; 2322, 2332, 2336-44 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND 2323, 2329, 2339 & 2347 NE 2ND COURT. (Applicant(s): BMS Management.) Vice Chairman Winton: It was brought to my attention that at -- I think the last meeting we had -- I don't remember what PZ (Planning & Zoning) item it is in here. I think maybe -- I don't know. Unidentified Speaker: Item 23. Vice Chairman Winton: What is it? Unidentified Speaker: Twenty-three. Vice Chairman Winton: Twenty-three. And we said we would do it at 6 o'clock. And I think all the parties on both sides of this issue are all here. So if you don't mind, I'd like to -- Chairman Regalado: No. Absolutely. We're going to go ahead and do this. I just wanted to remind you that we have also promise a time certain -- well, after six and after seven on the billboard issue and on the PUD (Planned Unit Development) ordinance. So, let's do 23. Some of the people that were here were sworn in, but since then more guests have arrived, and I think that, Madam City Clerk, we need to swear in some of the people that are here and have not yet done so. 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 -23. Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. PZ -23 is a Special Exception in order to allow a mixed-use structure, including a self -storage facility at the properties at 2322, 2332, 2336 through 44 Biscayne Boulevard, and 2323, 2329, 2339, and 2347 Northeast 2nd Court. This is a project that requires Special Exception. It was denied by the Zoning Board and appealed here to the City Commission. The Planning and Zoning Department is recommending approval of the Special Exception, based on findings that in accordance with Article 13, Section 1305 of the ordinance and 946.3, which governs the public storage facilities, the project was reviewed for compliance with all of the applicable criteria, including the specifications, and it has been found to be adequate. The application met and, in most cases, exceeded the requirements of these sections. In particular, this case -- the particular concerns that the Planning and Zoning Department have with this particular project was its location on Biscayne Boulevard. As a mixed-use facility that contained a mini storage, the Department looked very carefully and had meetings over months with the applicant and the design team in 191 March 7, 2002 order to ensure that the project was designed to mitigate all of the potentially adverse impacts on Biscayne Boulevard. The most particular concern to us was the design of the building, the elevations and the ground floor. The project was redesigned, I think, a total of about six times through the Planning and Zoning Department giving comments on the uses and on the elevations so that it does not look like a mini storage, including no access on Biscayne Boulevard, retail on the ground floor and fenestration openings on the elevation so that -- as far as the -- what the project looks like, it doesn't look like there's no blank walls. And, again, in accordance with the criteria, 946.3, the specific criteria, you know, calls for the facility to meet certain minimum standards, and in most cases, they exceeded it. And by way of example, I'll go to the security issues. This project specifically has an on-site, live-in, 24-hour manager that's got security monitors. It isn't just security during their hours of operation. It's somebody there all the time. One of the issues that did come up at the Zoning Board on this particular case was a question about the use in C-1 versus C-2 and the comp. plan designation of this property. This property has a comp. plan designation of restricted commercial. The uses that are typically allowed in restricted commercial categories are uses that are needed to meet the daily retail and service needs of a residential area. A mini storage facility, a self -storage facility is intended to serve people, residents. They're small spaces. They're intended just to be extra closets and extra storage space for residents. In C-2, if you go to the intent statement of C-2 in the liberal commercial in the comp. plan, those are businesses whose primary function is to serve other businesses, to be more of regional type businesses. And this property, with the restricted commercial designation, this use is completely consistent with the intent of C-1, with the comp. plan of restricted commercial, with the designation, and what the permissible uses are and the intention of the district. With that, the Planning and Zoning Department recommends approval, finding that all the criteria has been met. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Good evening. For the record, Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with offices at 2500 First Union Financial Center. I am here tonight on behalf of BMS Management, who are the contract purchasers of this project, subject matter of this application, and are bringing to you this proposed project. I'm joined tonight by my partner and co -counsel, Howard Nelson, as well as co -counsel (UNINTELLIGIBLE). And this property is on Biscayne Boulevard and Northeast 24th Street. It is zoned C-1, with an SD -20 overlay, and it is consistent with the master plan, as your staff has stated. It is a mixed-use project. It has commercial -- residential and it is proposing to have in the upper floors a public storage facility. All of these uses are of right. The public storage facility is a permitted use, subject to a Special Exception. The commercial use on this site allows the -- is an absolute right of the retail on the ground floor. And as you will see on the rendering, the applicant has taken great length to provide residential commercial use along the ground floor fronting Biscayne Boulevard. This project also has at the rear one residential unit, which is used by the manager of the facility, who lives on site, and is there 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And in his unit, he has a monitor that flashes, for his convenience, the images of all of the closed circuit TV (television) cameras that are part of the security of the building. The reason we're here today is because of the public storage facility on the upper levels of this structure. Your Code is very specific as to what are the requirements of the mini storage facility. When you read under C-1 the fact that this is a permitted use, it specifically says, "As per the requirements of 946 of the Zoning Code." Under 946.2, your Code outlines a number of requirements, and they are as follows: Storage -- no storage of hazardous material, customer 192 March 7, 2002 safety, no negative visual impact, attention to loading and unloading of the storage items, hours of operation, potential use of the parking spaces and storage spaces, off-street circulation patterns, the maximum size of individual spaces, controlled access, security surveillance system, and security personnel, access to all storage spaces from interior structure; it must be designed to agree with the character and scale of surrounding areas, serious consideration must be given to blank walls on ground floor, loading shall comply with not being visible from public streets, and -- so as not to obstruct traffic on the public streets. All of these requirements are the analysis that your staff goes through in a Special Exception situation. And they must first determine that we, as applicants, have met each and every one of those requirements. That's what you just heard Ms. Slazyk testify; that in this particular case, this project has met all of the requirements of your Code. Why is that important? Because under Section 13 of your Code, for special permits to be issued or denied in accordance with procedures, standards and requirements of this ordinance, it states very clearly that where applications for special permits demonstrate that general and special standards -- and the special standards are the ones I just read to you -- and special standards and requirements for such special permits are met, the agent, agency or body of the City herein made responsible for the grant of such a special permit shall issue." So, basically, once your professional staff give competent evidence on the record, through their analysis and through their testimony, that the requirements have been met or, as Ms. Slazyk said in this case, in some cases the applicant has gone beyond those requirements, the requirements in the Code, then the City shall grant a Special Exception. What I'd like to do at this point in time is -- we have a number of consultants that would like to present to you some expert testimony for substantial competent evidence, on the record, as well as my co -counsels would like to address you. There's also in the audience a number of individuals from the neighborhood that would like to address you. So, at this point, I would like to turn it over to Mr. Luft. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Yes, sir. Name, address. Jack Luft: My name is Jack Luft. My address is 1900 Tiger Tail, Miami, Florida. You've heard your staff refer to this as a mini warehouse, and they also characterize it as a self -storage facility. I wanted to amplify particularly on this issue of the consistency with the comp. plan. Because since 1960, when these facilities were first developed in many cities around the country, responding to a space shortage and a demand from growing households, many cities were confronted with the use and really were, frankly, quite confused and uncertain as to what to call it. The term "mini warehouse" became the term of choice in many cities because they conventionally viewed these initially as a form of storage and, hence, a warehouse. Over time, however, that particular picture has changed. The term "mini warehouse" has remained and Miami, as well as many communities, continue to use it. But as Ms. Slazyk has pointed out, the cities now understand there is a fundamental difference between a pure warehouse and this type of facility. A warehouse, which is defined in the Standard Land Use Classification System of the federal government, Department of Commerce, which underlies most Zoning Codes of this country, which use the Standard Land Use Classification System, consider warehouses to be a transportation related use. They are, in effect, a terminal facility in the distribution of goods from producers to vendors. They are part of a trans -shipping network that goes from long haul to short haul distribution. They serve the industry. They serve the suppliers. They serve the vendors. They do not serve the public. Warehouses are not publicly related commercial services that have any relationship whatsoever to neighborhoods or residents. They are a business related 193 March 7, 2002 service. Hence, they are classified as part of a transportation network. Clearly, that is not the focus of what this facility does. As your staff has pointed out, this is geared to local neighborhood services. The self -storage facility is rented for the exclusive purpose of storing personal property. The care, the custody and the control of the property placed in the self - storage is maintained by the renter. It is not -- self -storage is not warehousing and presumes no possession of customers' goods, which is typical in the warehousing industry. The fundamental aspect of self -storage is that it is self-service operation, consumers and tenants retain the care, custody and control of their personal property. Because of the uncertainty about this issue, the state of Florida has, in fact, addressed it in State Statutes. Florida state -- Florida Statute, Chapter 83.801, 83.809, Self -Storage Facility Act states, "Any real property" -- this is the definition. "Any real property designed for the use and purpose of renting or leasing individual storage space to tenants, or to have access to such space for the purpose of storing and removing personal property." I've underlined the statement, "A self -storage service facility is not a warehouse." That is from the State Statute regulating these particular activities. The future land use element further clarifies this. It says in the introduction of your interpretation of Future Land Use Plans that "all activities and uses within each designation are compatible with each other by virtue of their scale, intensity and character, or by additional conditions required by the Land Development regulations," which is the function of the Special Exception conditions that you have required to make certain that this is compatible with the use. Commercial activities (UNINTELLIGIBLE) land use impacts are similar to those around them. Your zoning ordinance defines a warehouse as a terminal facility for handling a freight or storage. It says a mini warehouse is a storage facility, controlled access (UNINTELLIGIBLE), designated -- designed to contain space for individual compartments with a size limitation available to the general public. This is the distinction. I've been advised that I should have preceded this by stating that I am a member of the American Institute of Planners. I have 32 years experience in the field of Planning. And I have considered these issues. And I'm testifying here as an expert witness with special expertise and competence in zoning and the drafting of ordinances and comprehensive plans. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Mr. Luft: My resume is on record from the zoning hearing. I have served 28 years with the City of Miami in the capacity of the City Planner. This change, this recognition that self -storage facilities perform a fundamentally different role than warehouses has now been growing acceptance around the country. In fact, so much so that several cities won't -- Mobile, Alabama, Oklahoma City, Pueblo, Colorado, others now include self -storage facilities in residential districts. Important part, however, is that this particular facility on this site, in this community, has been subject to the standards and limitations of Section 946.3 in your Code, and conditions which enumerate those standards which must be met. And if they're met, as our counsel has advised you, then the permit shall be issued. The maximum size shall not exceed 400 feet. This facility complies. Controlled access shall be provided to the complex. Adequate security and surveillance shall be installed. You've heard that your staff has said surveillance and security exceeds the standards that you require. Access to all storage spaces shall be from the interior of the structure and each storage shall have independent and exclusive access. This is the case with this facility. Public storage facilities shall be designed to agree with the character and scale public scale of the area. Would point out that most people would, in a fair assessment of this 194 March 7, 2002 structure, conclude that it may well be an office building and certainly fits the character of the boulevard. I would point out that recently permitted on the boulevard have been fast-food franchises and not too long ago a log cabin grocery store, which, if that was found compatible, I would say that this certainly meets or exceeds that standard. Loading -- and as Ms. Slazyk pointed out -- your Design Review Committee has passed on this, and even the architect with the Zoning Board in his hearing commended the applicant for an exceptionally, successful design in keeping with the compatibility, scale and character of the area. Loading and unloading areas shall be evaluated on an individual basis for compliance with criteria, limiting locations not visible from the public rights-of-way. Area set asides shall be arranged not to obstruct the smooth flow of traffic around the site, and the number of loading and unloading spaces shall be commensurate to the size of the storage facility. All of these standards have been reviewed. Your staff has concluded that they meet it. I have reviewed it and I concur. Parking is provided at the rate of one space per 2,000 square feet. This project meets all applicable zoning, parking and loading requirements. Recreational, seasonal vehicles, including boat, trailers, et cetera, shall not exceed 25 (UNINTELLIGIBLE) length. That will be a standard of this. The hours of operation shall not exceed 15 continuous hours or extend beyond 10 p.m. That will be the case on this facility. And in addition to these, the evaluation of the staff has taken into account the surrounding properties. Those are the standards that it must meet and it has met them. It has met them completely and, as such, this facility requires that it shall be approved as a Special Exception. Those would be my comments at this point. I reserve right for rebuttal at later point. Gil Pastoriza: If I could, please? Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Chairman, Gill Pastoriza, 2665 -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I'm sorry. We're not -- Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We haven't completed our case. Chairman Regalado: They haven't -- are you -- Mr. Pastoriza: Yes. 266 -- Gill Pastoriza, 2665 South Bayshore Drive. I have a right -- he's an expert. I have the right to cross-examine him. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Commissioner -- Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: You do -- he does have that right, but you have the right to determine when that cross-examination should occur. 195 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Yeah. We're going to do that later. Let Vicky Garcia -Toledo finish and then we're going to have anybody from the public, both sides, and any cross examination that we need it to be. Go ahead, sir. Howard Nelson: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Howard Nelson with the law firm of Bilzin, Sumberg, Dunn, Baena, Price and Axelrod, offices at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. Hopefully, you'll remember, Ms. Leiva introduced me as her co -counsel. I have the pleasure of also being her partner. I'm sure you're wondering why I'm here in addition to her because, obviously, she doesn't need more than one attorney. And outside of my dubious qualifications as a land use attorney for the last 10 years, Ms. Leiva asked me to come up and make part of the presentation tonight because of my qualifications as an Urban Planner. Like Mr. Luft, I'm also an AICP (American Institute of Certified Planners) Certified Planner, master's degree in Planning from the University of Florida, having served for both the Treasure Coast, South Florida and North/Central Florida Regional Planning Councils as a Regional Planner. And having served as a Senior Planner for a statewide engineering firm. Among the duties therein, being the evaluation of consistency with comp. plans. And I am, in addition to that, the principal co-author of the 1985 Study Guidelines and Standards for the Evaluation of Local Government Comprehensive Plans, which was a DCA (Department of Community Affairs) -sponsored study. Very briefly, Ms. Leiva asked me to come up and address one simple question: The issue of consistency of this use with the City's Comprehensive Plan. And outside of Ms. Slazyk's excellent and absolutely accurate testimony, finding it consistent, which is in your staffs recommendation, I want to further that testimony. Pursuant to State Statute, Florida Administrative Code, as well, the method for determining consistency of a comp. plan with a use, is that of the application of a legislative policy document. You look at the document, as a whole and you look at the associated documents with it. In this case, to judge whether or not self-service warehouses or mini warehouses, as they're called in your Code, are compatible in restricted commercial districts, you generally look in two places. You look at the definition of use, either in the comp. plan or in your Zoning Code, and you look at the list of uses allowed in that comprehensive plan category. Now, obviously, there are several comprehensive plan categories, with which self-service warehouses are compatible. They're compatible in the industrial district, as many have stated before, quite honestly, and the general commercial and the CDB, but they are also compatible with the restricted commercial. Your Zoning Code provides two different warehouse definitions. A definition for warehouses, per se, as Mr. Luft alluded to before. Those are terminal facilities for the handling of freighter storage of goods and materials, i.e. part of the transportation, the carriage of goods. But in addition to that industrial use, there's a separate definition for mini warehouses or what many people call self -storage warehouses. And that definition is one where a group or singular buildings of controlled access or walled areas are provided to contain space in individual compartments available to the general public for rent or lease for the storage of their goods and supplies. What is this? This is your garage. This is your extra closet that you don't have at home. To determine whether or not that is a consistent use with restricted commercial, you need merely apply common sense and the wording of restricted commercial. Your restricted commercial use allows, among other things -- and I take this out of the definition of restricted commercial -- those activities -- those commercial activities that generally serve the daily retailing and service needs of the public, typically requiring easy access by personal auto and often -- and give some location criteria. These are the uses, which you find your general population needs on a regular basis so that you 196 March 7, 2002 don't send them into industrial districts. And by the simple language, compatibility is an easy question. With that, I'd like to turn it over to our third co -counsel. Luis Rojas: Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Luis Rojas. I'm an attorney with offices at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. And I'll be brief. And I will not be repetitive. I think that you're going to hear from lawyers and consultants and people in the audience on both sides on this issue, and I think that it's going to -- it's really going to come down to a couple of factors. One is what your expert professional staff, who has spent a lot more time on this issue than you're going to spend here tonight, is recommending to you, and I would suggest to you that they have given you their proper recommendation, because they have looked at this. They have asked the applicant, on more than one occasion, six, in fact, to change the design. And if you look at this, really, this is a modern facility. It almost looks like an office building. Five thousand feet of retail on the bottom. And if we were just to do 5,000 feet of retail on the bottom, we would be OK. The fact -- we can't have more retail there, because we don't have enough parking. This is a self-contained facility. And let me tell you, I've driven by the sight. And what you have there is, you really have some rundown homes, older homes that are boarded up, bringing probably no or little revenue to the City. You're going to enhance your tax base. And what I did was, I went to one of these facilities that was open. Let me tell you where some of these facilities are. Miami Lakes has a facility like this. You have one at Lighthouse Point. You have one up in Weston. You have one on 115th and Biscayne Boulevard. These are facilities that look like office buildings that really go to a residential use. And the one I went to in Miami Lakes, I walked in there. I didn't identify myself. I just said, I want to rent a facility. And all -- the first thing I saw was cameras everywhere. There were cameras that were just observing every single part of this facility. And I asked the lady, I go, do you ever have a break in? You know what she told me? "We've never had a break in." And I asked my client, have you had any break-ins in any one of your facilities? And they have not. And what I also found out is they have somebody that lives there 24 hours a day. So, even though the facility is not open 24 hours a day, there's times that it closes, there's someone there monitoring all those cameras with alarms that go off, to make sure that there is no crime. So, I would suggest to you, you're going to hear both sides. You're going to hear residents from both sides -- that when you look at this, when you look at the impact that it's going to have for the revenue for the City, because it's going to enhance your tax base, when you look at what your staff is telling you, that you vote for this. And I request a little bit of time for rebuttal. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, I know that there are several members of the neighborhood and property owners that would like to speak on this. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And, after they're done, I'm sure you're going to hear from the other side. And I would like some time for rebuttal. Chairman Regalado: Of course. Of course. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. 197 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Let's hear. What we really want is not to be repetitive, you know. Name and address, sir. William E. Beckham: Yes, sir. William E. Beckham, also known as Bill Beckham, 1207 Northeast 90th Street. I'm one of the major property owners of the area and own this particular piece of property. And more of what I think I'd like to talk to you about is give you what the practicality of it is. I don't want to get into the technicality. I think that's going to be debated here all night long, and who knows how long. But the practicality of it is that we are bringing in -- first of all, we bought these properties -- my father bought them over 35 to 40 years ago, then we started dissembling. We squared it off, you might say, the block in 1979. They have been on the market since 1979, not necessarily aggressively, but on and off the market the whole time. We'd love to have an office building come up and say they'd like to take over this facility. But the reality is, there's been no bona fide taker that's been -- has had interest to do that. But yet, we do have a certified developer who is here putting up a beautiful plan. Has put them across the County and other counties. Has done a great job. And is going to provide infrastructure for the City and a nice job. And I would submit to you that this is what you should be thinking about, instead of those run-down buildings that are on that property. So, I thank you for your time in that effort. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Joel Wieselberg:: Good evening. My name is Joel Wieselberg. I'm President of Concord Properties, Inc., with offices at 9655 South Dixie Highway, Suite 200, Pinecrest, Florida. I've been a Dade County resident for 40 years and been involved in the ownership and management of numerous rental properties in the Edgewater market on Biscayne Boulevard, between Omni and Northeast 36th Street, since 1972. I currently own one property at 426 Northeast 34th Street. It was our belief in the early 70's, when we began our acquisitions, that the Edgewater Biscayne Boulevard area would become a major urban infill area with significant gentrification. We were, however, a little early. That reality is now upon us. With the Performing Arts Center, the Fingers Project, and the Bowman Project, there will be major redevelopment. I've known the Brown family, the developers, for more than 30 years. They have an unblemished record for quality development. I have sold sites to them and other self -storage developers, and can report to you that, in part, due to the success and high quality of the development, my sales of adjoining properties were always at higher prices because of the nature of the dense residential development that is to come. And based on my experience in operating apartment projects in this market, it will be a great demand and need for high quality storage space from the existing and new residential tenants in close proximity to living quarters. At the ZAB (Zoning Advisory Board) Hearing, I heard the representative from Florida Eastcoast Properties and also the gentleman from Bacardi comment on the fact that the reason they were not in favor of this was because it looked like a warehouse. I find that a little disingenuous. For the developer of the Omni, which is reported as an architectural disaster -- and while Bacardi operates a magnificent architectural building as their main headquarters -- they have a concrete bunker across the street that they also operate. I would suggest they relook at their own house. Go to any 24-hour major city in America today and look at the cutting edge infill redevelopment South of Market in San Francisco, SoHo and Tribecker in New York. Great urban areas where all types of office, industrial, mixed developments sit adjacent to vibrant retail and residential. You're going to hear 198 March 7, 2002 from the advocates, the opponents, their attorneys and all their interested parties. I would respectfully submit that you listen to it and act on the advice of the only people in this room who have no other agenda than to serve you and the public. Do what your professional planners have recommended, and support this project. Thank you for your time and patience. Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Go ahead, sir. Todd S. Silverman: Todd S. Silverman, 8940 Southwest 198th Terrace, Certified Public Accountant. I've had interest in property approximately a block from this property since about 1983. I've seen the property be worth a lot less than I paid for it. And, recently, it is becoming quite valuable. I've viewed the building and I think it looks good and I think it would be beneficial to the neighborhood. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. William Karo: My name is William Karo, 8500 Southwest 80th Place, Miami, Florida. I am a co-owner of real estate at 331 and 323 Northeast 22nd Street, approximately a block and a half from this proposed project. I was here at the previous session before the Commission, which went into great detail on the nature of the project. I have studied a rendering of the project and I'm thoroughly familiar with the neighborhood. And I am convinced that this would be advantageous to the City, to the residents in the area to have this project approved by the Commission. Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Next. Bill Quesenberry: My name is Bill Quesenberry. I live at 1315 Campo Sano Avenue in Coral Gables. My father moved to Miami when he was three years old in 1925, and our business was here from that day -- his father started it -- until it moved to Texas in 1994. We were at Northwest 27h Avenue -- 22nd Avenue and 7th Street for over 40 years. More than 25 years ago, my father was one of the people that assembled this property, expecting that neighborhood to improve, as it's already been said. He has now passed away. Many of the investors had passed away. The realtor that put this together just turned 90 recently. My mother's support comes from my father's investment, some of which would be this property; although, about 15 years ago, we thought it would become money. There is another contingent -- there's another interest to consider here, and that is the investors who have paid the taxes, maintained the property, not profitably. Those properties have cost us money for 25 years. And for the opponents, such as Bacardi Company, or whoever the others are, to oppose this because it's not as pretty as the Bacardi building, and they would like to hold out for something better, is the right of ownership. And if they don't like this property, then they need to come buy it from us for at least as much money as these developers are trying to. And absent an offer to buy it away, then they really have no grounds for opposition, just because something prettier might come along later. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Next. Anybody else? Go ahead. 199 March 7, 2002 Jacque Hattoe: My name is Jacque Hattoe. My address is 1500 San Remo, and I'm a commercial real estate broker. Have been for about -- over 20 years. And I represent the owners of a property within about a half a block of this property. It's at 76 Northeast 23rd Street. Commissioner Teele: I didn't hear the address. Ms. Hattoe: Seventy-six Northeast 23rd Street. They are very supportive of this building going in. They feel that this project is excellent for the area and for their property. They've owned it for many, many years in their family. They would like to develop it or sell it, whichever comes first. And they also feel that it would definitely enhance the entire area, not just their property, which is a small piece, but the entire area that they've seen for a long time. And just feel that it would definitely help if this building is built as soon as possible. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. James McQueen: Yes. James McQueen, 25 West Flagler. I'm also an owner of property, Overtown. And just like to express my support of this facility that they're attempting to put here, and believe that it will be -- will add tremendously to the community. Thank you very much. Chairman Regalado: Anybody else from -- in support of -- Monroe Zafken: Hi. I'm Monroe Zafken. I live in Coconut Grove. And my business is at 3050 Biscayne Boulevard. I drive by that site -- well, five days a week anyway. And I think it's a good idea to have something more attractive there. As a businessman there, I think it will improve the neighborhood. And, also, I use the storage facility that these people have in Coconut Grove. And there's none finer anywhere. Commissioner Teele: What is at 3050 Biscayne Boulevard? Mr. Zafken: It's in a building, the Executive Tower. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. So -- Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Mr. Chairman, that concludes our presentation. I'd like to take this opportunity also to submit into the record -- we canvassed the neighborhood to find out if there was any support for this use or any need in the minds of this residents, and we have a petition signed by over 300 individuals who live in the neighborhood in support. If -- Mr. Pastoriza: I object to the petition. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- opposing counsel would like, I have a copy -- Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- I have a copy of these petitions for him to examine. 200 March 7, 2002 Mr. Pastoriza: I object to the introduction of those petitions. Those persons are not here. We don't know whether, in fact, those were neighbors. So, for the record, I'm objecting to those petitions coming into the record. Chairman Regalado: OK. Now -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: They're addressed -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, are the addresses -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: The addresses, phone number, signature and name printed are on each signature. Chairman Regalado: OK. Now we proceed to the cross-examination. Where is -- Oh, OK. I thought you -- Mr. Pastoriza: Haven't gone away yet. Chairman Regalado: -- disappeared. Mr. Pastoriza: Not yet. Maybe later. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. Humberto Pastoriza, offices at 2665 South Bayshore Drive. I think before I even start in the cross examination, I must tell you that I'm very confused, extremely confused by this presentation today. Mr. Rojas states that they have 5,000 square feet of retail. I looked at the drawings that have been filed, that are on record, with the City of Miami Hearing Boards, they reflect 3,300. I also looked at the beautiful rendering that they have here. And then I looked at what was submitted for the Hearing Board. And the records for the Hearing Boards -- and that's -- this is not that. So, if that's what they're proposing, I would submit to this Board that this Board needs to then remand this back or take this back all through the review process again. I want to submit for the record the flat -- the facades of the buildings that are on record. Chairman Regalado: Where is the hand-held mic? Mr. Pastoriza: And you should all have a copy of those drawings in your package. They show -- on the north side, they show windows. Well, the Hearing Board -- the Hearing drawings don't show any windows. So, is this all a smoke screen or -- if this, in fact, is what they're going to build, then this matter is not proper here. We're here on an appeal of those drawings, and we're not here on an appeal of this. So, I would like to, you know, either they do -- they throw this away and let's pretend that they did not try to do something to this Commission, and they stick to that. Or if they want to keep this, then they've got to go back to square one. Chairman Regalado: Do you wish to cross examine Mr. Jack Luft? Because you can do that, but only with him -- Mr. Pastoriza: I would like the applicant to tell me what plans are they going under? 201 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: No, no. Mr. Luft is the only one that you can cross-examine because he's - - on the record, he is the expert. Mr. Maxwell: No, Commissioner. Mr. Chairman, he can cross-examine anyone that testified. Chairman Regalado: OK. Well, then, let's do it. Mr. Pastoriza: Well, nobody's going to answer that question? Mr. Rojas: I'll answer one, because my name was said, Mr. Chairman. And I checked with my client and he is right. There is 3300 feet of retail. However, we're going to be using about 1500, 1600, 1700 feet of our offices, which I counted as part of the retail. So, when you use the offices that we're going to be using, plus the retail that we're going to be renting out, it is about 5000 feet. Mr. Pastoriza: Well, I think you should call a spade a spade. So, either you have retail and you have offices, but you just can't simply combine the two uses. Chairman Regalado: OK. You want to bring your -- Mr. Pastoriza: Well, I have -- still, there's another question that I posed that hasn't been answered. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, can I -- I mean, I think -- why don't we have a -- we got, what, two reporters here? Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: I think, you know, Mr. Attorney, you need to really help us keep the record straight because, obviously, this isn't the last of this either way. With two people keeping notes, this is -- so, we need to make sure that our record is straight going up. But I think he explained -- Mr. Rojas just said is 3300 square feet of retail. If you include their office space, which probably can be, from my mind, be considered either office space or retail, depending upon how you want to characterize it, it would be 5000. But assuming -- I mean, the common sense is, if somebody's going to be selling, that is, renting space, there is an office component to that that also has a retail component. So, I mean, I think that answer is satisfactory. I think you should help me understand, has the footprint changed and the height changed or any of the particular dimensions? Because -- I just need to understand, for the record, in your mind, based upon both sets that you're talking about, has the footprint changed? Mr. Pastoriza: Well, I haven't really checked the footprints of whatever's been proposed here. All that I submit for this City Commission is that they have come forward with a rendering that does not adequately reflect what was denied by the Zoning Board. And we are here on an appeal 202 March 7, 2002 of the Zoning Board's decision of the denial of a set of plans, which they are not -- which they're coming forward with a totally different set of plans. And that's all I'm saying. Commissioner Teele: If I may, I just would like to just be very clear. Madam Attorney -- Madam Counsel, has the footprint changed? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No, sir. Commissioner Teele: Has the height of the building changed? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No, sir. Commissioner Teele: What has changed? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: What has changed is the same thing that I put into the record a month ago when you continued this item. And I have put up a board for you showing the architectural details that have been added on to the same building, the same footprint and the same dimensions, as a result of the analysis and comments we received from your professional staff. As you will remember, I mentioned that part of the Special Exception is that your staff has to evaluate and see if we've met all the requirements. One of which is compatibility with the buildings in the area. In that process -- Commissioner Teele: Counsel? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes. Commissioner Teele: It would help me if you would answer my question. And if you want to make -- what has changed? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Nothing -- Unidentified Speaker: Hold it. Hold it. Hold it. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- other than more architectural fenestration on the facade of the building. Vice Chairman Winton: So, is the rendering that you're showing us, is that the project or is that the project? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: The rendering you're seeing is the final, approved rendering of the way the building has to look, pursuant to your staff. The other -- Vice Chairman Winton: So, that rendering was approved by staff? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, reviewed and approved. 203 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: So, staffs checking this out. Commissioner Teele: Now -- Chairman Regalado: Wait, wait, wait. Vice Chairman Winton: So, staffs checking to determine whether that's accurate? Commissioner Teele: And my question -- now, you've given -- I gave you -- I'm just asking a few questions to clarify the record now. Now, I'm getting ready to ask the City Attorney. Mr. Attorney, if the Board below did not review the rendering relating to the facade -- there's been a statement by counsel that the footprint is the same, the height is the same, all of the essential elements of the building are the same, with the exception of the facade. But if that rendering was not viewed by the Board below, should it or must it be remanded for their review? And I'd like for you to confer with the staff before you -- Mr. Maxwell: Well, 1-- my response will be a general one, because then you will need to pose a question to staff Commissioner Teele: Oh, you're real good. Could I just hear the general response? Mr. Maxwell: It would depend on whether or not the change was a substantial change or not. When items come up before you from lower boards on appeal, this Commission can either affirm what the lower board did, it could reverse what it did, or it could modify. So, you can change here as well. So, the question then becomes whether or not the changes that are now before you are substantial to the extent that they would have to be remanded to the lower board? Commissioner Teele: And, so, who can answer that question? Mr. Maxwell: Staff will answer that question. Commissioner Teele: All right. So, Madam Manager or Madam -- Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): I'm going to ask Lourdes to respond, but I think you should understand there is an issue here that what you have in your package is not what was ultimately approved by the Planning Department. So, the question is whether it's a substantial difference? And I'm going to ask Lourdes to speak to that. Mr. Pastoriza: Or the Zoning Board. Ms. Slazyk: The set that's in your package is the set that was received in the Department in October. They're dated October. And there was a write-up for it. Substantially, they didn't change as far as the footprint and the height and the amount of square footage. What happened was the project continued to go through Design Review before it actually went to the Zoning Board. And through the Design Review process, they did submit the correct ones, and they are 204 March 7, 2002 in the file dated November. And they have been reviewed. These are the ones that all they do is take the original project and added the windows and the awnings and the -- this was all part of the ongoing Design Review process in order to mitigate what we saw as potentially adverse affects because it was located on the boulevard. And these were all the things that needed to be addressed to get the project architecturally correct. So, the City Commission can approve these tonight because they have been reviewed by staff, they have been signed and they're in the file. If you want to continue it so you can get these in your packages and review them, that's, you know -- that's in order, or you can review them and ask questions. Commissioner Teele: Well -- but, Lourdes, do you remember my rules, when I'm asking the question? One real rule. Chairman Regalado: Yes or no. Commissioner Teele: Answer the question, please. Chairman Regalado: Yes or no. Commissioner Teele: I mean, that's all. I'm really trying to be very clear. Ms. Slazyk: I was just trying to explain the difference. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but you never got to answer my question. Forget my question about the footprint, the way I framed it, because the Attorney changed the issue. He said -- did you hear what he said? Ms. Slazyk: Is it substantial. Commissioner Teele: Is this substantial enough for this Board to act upon it, as it's presented today, or should it be remanded back or is it -- is it substantial change or is it not substantial, but we can hear it today? Ms. Slazyk: Right. I don't believe this is substantial. I believe you can hear it today, because the differences don't go to the size -- Commissioner Teele: I just -- and I'm telling you, if you say it's substantial, I'm going to move to remand it. If you say it's not substantial -- we -- you know, I'm -- I don't have an issue either way, but I just think the record ought to be clear, and what we're doing and what we're hearing tonight should be clear, because everybody's putting what they want to on the record. And we need to make sure that there is a clean record as to what it is we're doing here tonight. Ms. Slazyk: I don't believe this is substantial. I believe you can accept the changes. But if you feel you want more time to look at them, that's completely within the purview of the Commission. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Attorney, does that create a problem? 205 March 7, 2002 Mr. Maxwell: Well, whether or not you can hear it or not -- Commissioner Sanchez: Does it create a problem? Mr. Maxwell: Create a problem? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Mr. Maxwell: I couldn't speculate on whether it would or not, but I -- one thing I'd like to get into the record, if I may, Commissioner? I would like to have Ms. Slazyk indicate on the record as to whether or not the recommendations that they made earlier were made based on these plans, the plans in the application before you now or on the changes that were made subsequent to -- Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Director. Mr. Maxwell: -- the Zoning Board's action. Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Director, would you state that on the record? Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I must object. There were no changes -- Mr. Maxwell: What was your recommendation based on? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- made after the Zoning Board. There were absolutely no changes made after the Zoning Board. Commissioner Sanchez: Then she can make that statement. Ms. Slazyk: I was going to just say that -- Commissioner Sanchez: Let her make that statement. Ms. Slazyk: What was before the Zoning Board and what our analysis and our recommendation was based on was the November set, which is the set with the windows and the awnings, that is the set that's before you. Remember, those were dated November. That went to the Zoning Board in December. So, our recommendation was based on the November set, with the additional design comments. We were not prepared to recommend approval without conditions on design on the October set. And that's why they came back in November and again, delayed themselves another month to respond to all the design changes. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. 206 March 7, 2002 Mr. Pastoriza: Listen, not to beat a dead horse, but I just want to make this for the record. The plans that were before the Zoning Board -- the plans that the Zoning Board denied, from where this appeal comes from, were the plans that showed -- that did not show what is before you today. And that's what I'm -- that's what I want the record to be very clear on. I'll move on. Again, my name is Gil Pastoriza, 2665 South Bayshore Drive. I'm going to get into my presentation quickly, and then, at some point in time, I may ask some questions from the applicant. I'm here tonight representing Norman Braman and the Braman Leibowitz Associates Partnership. They are property owners in the area. With me tonight is my partner, Steve Helfman, Mr. Norman Braman, and Mr. Stanley Krieger, who's the general counsel for Norman Braman Enterprises. I'm going to give you what the other side did not give you. I'm going to give you the rest of the story. First of all, let me tell you what the law is in the state of Florida with regards to Special Exceptions. The law in the state of Florida says that in order for a Special Exception to be granted, the applicant must come forward and do three things: It must show the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; two, that the Special Exception is permitted under the Code, and three, that the request meets the applicable -- in this case, the applicable Zoning Code standards, including the SD -20 District, which this property is a part of. If the applicant meets that burden, they do not automatically get the Special Exception, as you've been lead to believe. If the applicant meets that criteria, then -- which we claim they haven't -- then the burden shifts to people like us, who are in opposition to this application, to show one, that it doesn't meet the Comprehensive Plan; two, that it doesn't meet the criteria outlined in your Code, including the SD -20 District, and that, in fact, it's adverse to the public's interest. If we carry that burden, we win and you must deny the appeal. We're not going to come up with five experts, lawyers that are Land Use Planners, planners, lawyers. No. We're going to come to you with one expert, who wrote the Comprehensive Plan, who wrote the City of Miami Comprehensive Plan. Who better than him can tell you what the Comprehensive Plan means? So, without any further ado, I will bring forward Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo. And we will show, from Mr. Olmedillo's testimony, one, that this use is not consistent with your Comprehensive Plan; two, we will show that the use is incompatible. We will also show that the structure is also incompatible. And then, through his testimony and the testimony of many others here, we're going to show you that the approval of this fortress in this location is against the public interest. Mr. Olmedillo, please. Guillermo Olmedillo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. For the record, Guillermo Olmedillo, 6840 Southwest 130`h Terrace, Miami, Florida. And I will submit my -- Mr. Pastoriza: Wait. Before you start, could you please tell the Board a little bit about your background? Mr. Olmedillo: For the last eight and a half -- actually between `80 -- `92 and the year 2000, I was the Planning and Zoning Director for Miami -Dade County. Before that, I was the Deputy Director for Planning and Zoning for the City of Miami for a number of years. I was also the Chief of the Neighborhood Division and the Zoning Division of the Planning Department at that time. Mr. Pastoriza: I've handed out some of Mr. Olmedillo's resumes. If I don't have any objections from the applicant or this Commission, I would like to qualify Mr. Olmedillo as an expert. 207 March 7, 2002 Hearing none, I guess, Mr. Olmedillo, you are an expert. OK. Mr. Olmedillo, are you familiar with the Special Exception application being appealed today? Mr. Olmedilla: Yes, I am. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, are you familiar with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan? Mr. Olmedilla: Yes, I am. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, what role did you play in the drafting of the Comprehensive Plan? Mr. Olmedilla: The Comprehensive Plan was written in -- it was written through a collaborative effort of many planners, and many planners who are here participated on it. Staff will tell you that, at the time, there was two phases to the preparation of the Plan. First phase was the research that had to be done as a background. And we joked about the fact that Ms. Slazyk had the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) as the chapter that she had to work on. And then we had the second section, which was prepared with the collaboration of a professor from FIU (Florida International University) that was hired as an outside consultant, David Whittington, who became the Coordinator. And then different areas were assigned to different planners. By that time, I was the Deputy Director. The area land use was assigned to me to prepare it for the Comprehensive Plan, for the language of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. Mr. Olmedillo, based on your knowledge of the Comprehensive Plan, is this application consistent with the plan? Mr. Olmedilla: I don't believe so. Mr. Pastoriza: Why, sir? Mr. Olmedilla: The Comprehensive Plan, very clearly, have two commercial districts, a Liberal Commercial District and a Restricted Commercial District. Through the history of growth management, through the courts and your learned counsel will explain to you that the test has shifted and the land use -- that the comprehensive plan, particularly the land use element, has become the constitution for land use. The Comprehensive Plan has to have language to allow you to do things in the different land use designations. He will also tell you that strict scrutiny is the test. You have to show that the language reflects the use that you want in a particular land use designation. I believe that including a storage facility, a mini warehouse, which is a warehouse, is listed under the Liberal Commercial District only. It's not listed in the Restricted Commercial District or Land Use Designation. Therefore, when the courts would look at something like this, they will take it through the strict scrutiny test and they will look at the language and, clearly, you have that warehousing, regardless of the size. It is not qualified in the Master Plan. It says, warehousing -- it belongs in the Liberal Commercial Designation. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, the property in question, does it lie in the Restricted Commercial Designation or the General Commercial Designation? 208 March 7, 2002 Mr. Olmedilla: The General Commercial Designation, which is the more Liberal Commercial Designation in the plan. Mr. Pastoriza: This property? Mr. Olmedilla: Yes, this property. This property is in the Restricted Commercial Designation. Mr. Pastoriza: So, your testimony here today, sir, is that a warehouse use is contrary to the specific language in your Land Use Plan under the Restricted Commercial Designation? Mr. Olmedilla: Yes. It does not appear in the language in the restricted commercial. However, when you go down to the general commercial, specifically, you have warehousing as a land use permitted in that designation. And this comes from your interpretation of Future Land Use Map contained in the Master Plan. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. Mr. Olmedillo -- Mr. Nelson: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Pastoriza goes on -- Mr. Maxwell: He's got to wait until the end. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. Mr. Nelson: -- I would like to reserve the right to cross-examine. Mr. Maxwell: Same rule applies. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, you will. Yes, you will. You will. We'll play by the same rules. When the last person that opposes the project testifies, then you will be able to cross-examine and we're here. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Pastoriza -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: -- I'm a little confused with the statement that he made. Is it permissible or not permissible? Is it consistent or not consistent? Mr. Olmedilla: It's -- I believe it's inconsistent with the Master Plan because the only place where you have warehousing is in the liberal -- in the General Commercial District, which shows warehousing as one of the activities there. In the Restricted Commercial Land Use Designation, you have no warehousing permitted. And please talk to your counsel, Land Use counsel. And he's vastly experienced in the Land Use matter, that the test is strictly test. You have to have the language to allow you to do certain activities or all the activities. 209 March 7, 2002 Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. Mr. Olmedillo, let's move forward. Commissioner Teele: Before you move, Mr. Olmedillo, when is a warehouse a mini storage and when is a mini storage a warehouse? Mr. Olmedilla: A warehouse is a warehouse. And what I'm suggesting to you is that the language in the Comprehensive Development Master Plan or the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan is very clear. It says, warehouses -- there are no qualifications to the type of warehousing that it must have. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, are you also familiar with the City's Zoning Ordinance 11000, specifically the C-1 and SD -20 Zoning District, and Section 1305, dealing with the standards for Special Exceptions? Mr. Olmedilla: I hate to go into history again, but your staff will remember that I had a sign for about three months in my office, when I was the Deputy Director, that said, "It better be important," which meant, don't open the door unless it's very important because i was working on the Ordinance 11000. I was the main author of Ordinance 11000, with two other people and staff. And that was the product of many months of work, with the community and with many of the attorneys, Land Use attorneys who are presently in the room today. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, based on your knowledge of the City's ordinance and your knowledge also of the proposed facility and the proposed use, would you say that the proposed warehouse use meet these standards? Mr. Olmedilla: I don't believe so. Mr. Pastoriza: Why, sir? Mr. Olmedilla: When the Commission gave us the charge of rewriting 9500, which was the old Zoning Ordinance, they gave us three instructions. They told us, no outside staff. You don't hire experts. You don't hire consultants to do it. You do it in-house. The next thing that they told us, they said, you simplify the ordinance. It's very complex. That was 9500. The third thing they said, which is by law, you have to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. You have to make it so that it's consistent with the Master Plan. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. Mr. Olmedillo, also -- Mr. Olmedilla: Let me expand. Mr. Pastoriza: OK. I'm sorry. Mr. Olmedilla: And that's why the commercial districts -- the commercial districts in the Zoning Ordinance reflect specifically what happens in the Comprehensive Plan. The same language -- the similar language that is used in the Master Plan and those land uses that are permitted in the 210 March 7, 2002 Master Plan, they're not the ones who were translated into the Zoning Ordinance when we prepared the land development regulations to comply with Chapter 163. Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. Mr. Olmedillo, again, based on your knowledge of the City's Zoning Ordinance and the standards of Special Exception, does the proposed fortress meet these standards? Mr. Olmedilla: I don't believe it meets the standards. Again, I have to go to the foundation. The foundation is your constitution for land use, which goes to the heart of the issue. Warehouse is contained in a separate district and that's where it should be. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, there was some -- I don't know whether it was testimony or what that basically lead us to believe that the fact that this use was included in the Zoning Ordinance, under the C-1 District, that that automatically meant that it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Olmedillo, do you agree with that or you don't, and why? Mr. Olmedilla: The fact that a use is added to a list of uses in a zoning district does not make it automatically consistent with a Master Plan. You will only find out when there's an appeal to that language. Otherwise, you don't find out. Because typically, what you do, under state law, is that you package your land development regulations, your subdivision codes, your Zoning Codes, and you send them up to Tallahassee. They file those things at DCA (District Court of Appeals). Whenever -- if and when there's a challenge, then they review that to see the consistency with the Master Plan. But the fact that you may include it in a zoning category does not mean automatically that you make it consistent with a Master Plan. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Olmedillo, is it your experience as a Planning and Land Use expert that when you have a use that is compatible with a zoning district, that you would see a number of those uses within the zoning district within a given area? Mr. Olmedilla: The most compatible uses is one, that it's alike. And, of course, you can have different things that are compatible because they have the same type of activity. Remember, the language in the Master Plan, the language in the Zoning Code of the intent of the district is to have retail, to have daily activities, to have something that is very active. One of the things -- one of the concerns or something like a warehouse or mini warehouse is that you go in, you drop your things. That which doesn't fit in your house or that that you want to get rid of but you don't get rid of at that time, and then you leave it there. It's not something that you use on a daily basis. It's something that you use occasionally. It's not the same type -- a restaurant you use daily. A supermarket you use daily. An office you use daily. That's the difference of -- the difference in the nature of uses in the two categories. Mr. Pastoriza: So, you would say that if the warehouse use was compatible, you would see maybe some storages along Biscayne Boulevard, meaning more storages along Biscayne Boulevard. Would you say that if it were compatible? Mr. Olmedilla: If it were compatible, yes, you would have those type of uses, where you have the same type of traffic and the same type of activity you have in a warehouse. 211 March 7, 2002 Mr. Pastoriza: I would like to call Mr. Jack Luft, please. Chairman Regalado: Are you -- Mr. Pastoriza: No. I'm not done. I'm still in my presentation. When they spent that hour and a half -- Chairman Regalado: Well, because we're supposed to have everyone opposing go before the Board and then -- Mr. Pastoriza: I will try to be as brief as I can. Chairman Regalado: Please. Mr. Pastoriza: OK. Chairman Regalado: Please. Mr. Pastoriza: Mr. Luft, I guess you're very familiar with Biscayne Boulevard, correct? Mr. Luft: Yes, sir. Mr. Pastoriza: Are you familiar with Biscayne Boulevard in the area between the American Airlines Arena and the northern boundary of the City of Miami? Mr. Luft: Yes, sir. Mr. Pastoriza: How many mini warehouses or self -storage warehouses are there abutting Biscayne Boulevard in that area? Mr. Luft: None that I know of. Mr. Pastoriza: Zero, right? Thank you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Luft: It's obviously a service that's needed. Mr. Pastoriza: That's it. I don't have any further questions from you. Chairman Regalado: OK. Anybody else? Mr. Pastoriza: OK. No. Let me continue, please. Chairman Regalado: OK. 212 March 7, 2002 Mr. Pastoriza: Thank you, Mr. Olmedillo. I don't have any more questions of Mr. Olmedillo. Well, I think that Mr. Olmedillo's testimony is sufficient to show that we've met our burden. We -- it's not that we think that we met our burden. I think that your Zoning Board, back maybe like a couple of months ago, by an overwhelming 7 to 2 vote, voted to deny this Special Exception. And when that Zoning Board voted to deny that Special Exception, it made a factual finding that Section 1305 of your Code were not met. I would like for the record -- introduce into the record the transcript of that Zoning Board hearing. Now, let me tell you some facts that the applicant failed to bring to your attention. The first is, this project is labeled as a mixed-use project. Let me tell you why. It's a mixed-use project because out of 137,773 square feet of space, it has one small very minute -- you may not even see it on the plans -- caretaker apartment. And it's got 3,300 square feet of retail. And, Mr. Teele, they have 4,000 square feet of office. So, they do have, combined, more than 5,000. But this -- it is a significant amount of the use that is mixed. Listen, let's not kid ourselves. This is a warehouse. And the retail space that they have on the ground floor is to serve the tenants of the warehouse. The office space that they have on the ground floor is for their offices for their warehouse. This is not a mixed-use project. This is a warehouse. One of the things that you're -- that the Code requires, but I didn't hear was, your Code requires that the facility be used for storing seasonal or recreational vehicles, small boats, et cetera. The Code also requires that they be stored within completely enclosed and adequately ventilated structures. The plans on file did not show specific locations for these trailers -- for these boats. I don't know. Maybe they're going to store them on the fifth floor. The structure itself. The structure is massive. It takes up one entire block. Floors 2 through 5 form a concrete box with little -- with -- actually, I've got some figures for you. The property has a mid area of 42,731 square feet. Floors 2 through 5 are a hundred by a hundred and eight -- 180 by 180. That is 34,400 square feet. Seventy-six percent of this lot is going to be covered by a block. Now, why is that all important? Well, it's very important because you have to take a look at what the intent of the SD-20 District is. The intent of the SD-20 District says -- it is also the intent to present -- to preserve (UNINTELLIGIBLE) through setbacks and lot coverage restructure. I mean, this is 76 percent. Your Code -- you know, this is incredible. Parking. Yes, this application meets parking. But let me tell you a little bit -- a story about parking which relates to this particular application. Your Code requires that each warehouse be limited to 400 square feet. That equates to approximately -- using a 70 percent utilization per floor, it equates to approximately 60 warehouse spaces per floor. There are four floors. That's 240 warehouses. There are only 28 parking spaces. We believe that the placement of this building on Biscayne Boulevard is a step in the wrong direction for the City of Miami. The City and those property owners in this area have tried and are trying very hard to upgrade the image of Biscayne Boulevard. We need development that respects and enhances the role of this boulevard as the gateway for the City. We don't believe that this application meets that intent, the intent of the SD-20 District. My clients have been in this area for many years and are spending millions, millions of dollars in upgrading their facilities. They have been very respectful of the role of Biscayne Boulevard in the development of their properties. They have placed those uses and those buildings that are not appropriate for Biscayne Boulevard at the rear of their properties, west of 2nd Avenue. You have heard the expression a "NIMBY" -- and if you give me one second -- which stands for Not In My Back Yard. Well, these neighbors are not NIMBIES. We don't mind this use. But we mind -- we want it in the correct place. This is a unique case. This is what I deemed it to be: NIMFY, Not In My Front Yard. Biscayne Boulevard is our front yard 213 March 7, 2002 and I show you here, where this use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In red is our property. In yellow is all the locations within walking distance, where this facility could go and not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. And I would like to put this map into the record, please. I'm done, finally. I know that everybody's anxious for me to finish. I'm going to leave you with a quote and it's a quote from a member of your Zoning Board, Mr. Allan Shuman. Mr. Allan Shuman, who voted against this development said, "I think warehouses being built on a major artery tend to symbolize decline." Biscayne Boulevard is going through a revival. Even the Omni, contrary to what Mr. Wieselberg, one of the neighbors says, is going through a revival. And they're saying, wait a minute. And this, according to "The Miami Herald," is what the owners are going to do. So, I ask you that for -- you know, based on the testimony and the evidence, that we presented to you today, that you go ahead and please deny this appeal. I thank you. I think Mr. Norman Braman would like to say a few words. Mr. Braman. I think that the gentleman from Bacardi will -- Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. What's the answer to the question you asked the other side? How many mini storages -- Mr. Pastoriza: Zero, sir. Abutting Biscayne Boulevard, zero. From the Omni or from the American Airlines Arena to the boundary of your City. I rode Biscayne Boulevard myself twice, up and down two times. Mr. Braman. Norman Braman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, fellow Commissioners. My name is Norman Braman and my offices are at 2061 Biscayne Boulevard. Thank you for giving me the time to address you this evening. I'm somewhat pained to be here because I've known the developer's family for many, many, many years. His grandfather was a close friend, his late grandfather. And I've known his father for many years, as well. And I'm also pained that, in listening to two or three -- two of the witnesses who testified for this Special Exception, that my good neighbor and friends, the Bacardis were disparaged. Nobody on Biscayne Boulevard, I submit to you, and no one in the City of Miami has done more for our City than the Bacardi Company. And Mr. Rodriguez is here this evening from the Bacardi company and he is going to speak after me. I've been on Biscayne Boulevard since 1975. I've seen some good days there and I've seen, frankly, a lot of very, very bad days. And during this period, our manufacturers that we represent placed enormous pressure on me to leave Biscayne Boulevard and to relocate outside the City of Miami. We chose not to follow that advice, even though they came to us with experts, marketing experts, telling us that we could do a heck of a lot more business if we were outside the City of Miami. We didn't accept that advice and we decided to stay there. Not only have we stayed on Biscayne Boulevard, but over the last five years, we have invested almost twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in our businesses on Biscayne Boulevard. We employ over 260 people at our locations. And we are so gratified to see what's been happening on Biscayne Boulevard. We have the Performing Arts Center coming, a real catalyst of development, an opportunity to make Biscayne Boulevard something very, very special, as far as this City is concerned. Something special that will also provide a very large tax base for the City of Miami and benefit all of its taxpayers. I feel, and I feel very strongly, that placing a warehouse -- and I won't get into the legality of it. I won't even get into the beauty or the lack of beauty of the project on Biscayne Boulevard -- is a mistake. It doesn't belong on Biscayne Boulevard. It will be -- it will provide the exact opposite to the benefit of a Performing Arts Center and everything that we've done with 214 March 7, 2002 our businesses and what Bacardi has done with their businesses. Therefore, I'm here this evening to urge you to reject the Special Exception. Thank you very much. And if 1 can introduce Mr. Jorge Rodriguez, President of one of the Bacardi companies, who's here this evening. Thank you. Lori Weems: I'm not Mr. Rodriguez. Good evening. Lori Weems with law offices at 701 Brickell Avenue and a resident at 1717 North Bayshore Drive. Here tonight with our client, Jorge Rodriguez -Marquez of the Bacardi companies. And I just wanted to briefly say a few words before I introduced him. As you all are aware, as The Herald recently said on February 7, 2002, this area is the "Center of Attention" in Miami right now, in Miami -Dade County. Not being equated to things like Lincoln Road. It's being equated to the development of South Beach itself, to Ocean Drive. I think as instructive as the points that Mr. Rojas made so well, as to where we do see storage facilities is where we don't see them, and that's in the gateway areas of these banner locations. We don't see them on Miracle Mile in Coral Gables. We don't see them on Lincoln Road, on Ocean Drive or on Las Olas. And we shouldn't see them on an area that's -- it's not a far-fetched imagination. It's going to be the next Ocean Drive of Miami. We're not saying don't build it. We're saying don't build it here. Commissioner Teele, you mentioned you asked my colleague, Gil, whether there were any other storage facilities on Biscayne -- fronting Biscayne Boulevard. Actually, there are. And I happen to know that because I use it. And that's at the area of the Howard Johnson Hotel, just one block south of the Omni District. And I did want to make that point just briefly, because I know there is a need issue. There's also a lot of areas to the west of Biscayne Boulevard, the gateway into the City, that are available and certainly would lend themselves to development in this means. And we would welcome development in this means. With that being said, at the time I'd like to introduce our client, Jorge Rodriguez -Marquez, the President of Bacardi -Martini, Inc. And urge your denial of this application this evening. Thank you, Commissioners. Jorge Rodriguez -Marquez: Yes. For the record, my name is Jorge Rodriguez -Marquez, from the Bacardi company. And I live in the little island in Miami Beach. Let me just, number one, address you and make one comment. I apologize to -- I've heard comments that probably someone thought that Bacardi made comments about the design of the structure. We're not against the design. We're against deviating from the original plan of the City. That's what we're against. Again, they could build it somewhere else, but Biscayne will be a deviation from the original plan. And I want to bring you back to 1963, when Bacardi came to Miami and where Bacardi established its headquarters. We've been there -- I think we probably built one of the prettiest buildings at that time, perhaps still today, and we're very proud of it. We have been taxpayers. We have been citizens and we've been investors of the area. We, alongside with Mr. Braman, have been carrying the flag in that neighborhood, making sure that we stay there, even though, in the `70s, some of you might remember, we were very close from moving out and we were asked by the City, "Please reconsider. Do not move out." And not only we did not move out, but we built more properties. What we are after is to make sure that the original plan is kept, that the image of Biscayne of the neighborhood is improved. And we want to see the City send us a signal, a clear signal whether the City wants and really means to improve the area or not. We've been waiting for 40 years to see the original plan kept. We've been waiting many, many, many years for the City to improve the area. And I'm sure you know, like we know, how an area can be improved. So, I'm waiting for the Commissioners, not for them -- I respect the rights, but 215 March 7, 2002 I'm waiting for the City to send us a signal of what is it the City's going to do with that area. Is Biscayne going to be improved or are we going to be -- keep maintaining the site as it is and not improving it? So, we're waiting for the message from you. That's what we're looking after. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: You're welcome, sir. Go ahead, Phil. Phillip Yaffa: Good evening. Phillip Yaffa -- Vice Chairman Winton: I thought you were going sailing. Mr. Yaffa: Forty-five days. Phillip Yaffa, resident at 1756 North Bayshore Drive, Miami. For the record, although I know you Commissioners are familiar with my background, I would like the record to reflect that while I am not testifying today as an expert witness, I do feel I'm an expert of the neighborhood. I base that on, I have lived in the neighborhood for more than 20 years. For more than 14 years, I have chaired the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce's Omni Venetian Subcommittee. I served on the board of the Downtown Development Authority for more than 12 years in that capacity. I've chaired all committees dealing with the Omni of Venetian area. That being said, I would like to point out that this is a special -- request for a Special Exception. The reason for a Special Exception is to get your insight and your expertise in deciding whether they meet the criteria. Now, clearly, we don't need you gentlemen and your expertise to decide whether this is of a proper size, whether individual storage units are under 400 square feet, whether there's adequate access onto the property, whether there's adequate access into each of the storage units. That's not why we have a Special Exception being heard before you today. We have a Special Exception being heard before you today because we need your expertise and your vision and your interpretation of the one criteria that lends itself to interpretation, and that is, do they meet the specific standard of being compatible with the character and style of this neighborhood? And I submit to you that they do not. Biscayne Boulevard clearly is one of our principal gateways into the City, historically and today. This particular spot on Biscayne Boulevard is almost at the epicenter between our Design District to the north, and the Performing Arts Center to the south. This is going to be, as it is becoming now, a principal urban district that will define the character of this city. And we need your expertise in determining how that character is going to be defined. Is it going to be defined with shops and restaurants and retail and office and residential uses? Or is it going to be defined as a warehouse, whether it's a mini storage unit or a warehouse? However we define that. I noted with interest that our Planning Department -- and I think everyone here knows that I have the utmost respect for our Planning Department. It is a joy to work with them in their expertise. However, Ms. Slazyk had noted in her opening comments that the Planning Department's most important aspect in reviewing this project -- and I quote her words -- "The most important aspect was the visual impact of the building on the boulevard." First, that says how important the boulevard is. Because the Planning Department was so concerned, they understand that Biscayne Boulevard is a principal roadway. It is now the entranceway into our two hundred and fifty-five million dollar ($255,000,000) Performing Arts Center. So, they understood the importance of the boulevard and they understood, from their perspective, that the facet that they should look at was visual. Well, I submit to you that that's not how we define character. They've designed a pretty building. They've designed a building that looks good. It's the use of that 216 March 7, 2002 building that is incompatible. Biscayne Boulevard, unfortunately, already has a number of locations where people come in, drive in, and drive out. We look to the Pollo Tropicals, to the McDonald's, to the Taco Bells, to the Wendy's, to the Denny's. Those are areas where people come in and go out. This mini warehouse facility is a location where people are going to drive in and drive out. It is not the look of the building that's objectionable. It's the use of this building, because the use does not add anything to this quality of life in this neighborhood. And that's how we should look at character. Recently, the Performing Arts Center Foundation produced an Economic Impact Study. Now, we've all read Economic Impact Studies for years. I'm sure that, in our libraries, our shelves are lined with them. But never ever have I read an Economic Impact Study that made a blanket statement, as clear as the one I'm about to quote. In speaking of the Performing Arts Center, the authors, internationally renowned planners, state that quote "The project would bring about a complete transformation of the Omni District of downtown Miami." There's no words minced here. The Performing Arts Center will bring about a complete transformation and, indeed, it already has. For the record, I would like to introduce into the record a copy of the Economic Impact Study of the Performing Arts Center of Greater Miami. On the southern end of this district, between 395 and 36th Street, we already clearly understand that we have one of the largest economic catalysts this community has ever committed to in the Performing Arts Center. The Economic Impact Study that I just introduced details the billions of dollars economic impact -- the Performing Arts Center will create. On the northern end of this stretch of the boulevard, this Commission just recently approved a gateway project into the Design District. If we look at this stretch of Biscayne Boulevard, with this -- I believe what's called the Tuttle Project on the north and the Performing Arts Center on the south, we have created an incredible catalyst for total urban renewal, a place where Biscayne Boulevard will take its place among the great boulevards of the world. When we think of the Champs Elysees, we don't think of mini warehouses. When we think of the Plaza of the Americas, we don't think of mini warehouses fronting on that area. As counsel earlier mentioned -- just so there's no confusion here, they describe this as mixed use. And I want the Commission to understand that they define mixed use as one caretaker apartment, that's satisfying the residential component, 3,000 or plus square feet of retail, which I understand the substantial portion will be occupied by one of those typical cardboard container stores, where you can go in and buy your tape, and your cardboard boxes and your pads to pack things up with. And, so, that's not exactly the kind of retail store that I think we envision when we speak of this stretch of the boulevard. They speak of it being fenestrated with more windows. Well, at the Zoning Board, they testified that the windows are not transparent, so they are, in essence, the appearance of a window. No light is going to shine through those windows at night. The retail, as I mentioned, is a cardboard box or -- when I drove to their facility, out of interest, of 115th and Biscayne Boulevard, I noticed that those windows were transparent and at night, when I went by, I was able to clearly look through the transparent glass and see all the doors of the various small storage units -- and that's not exactly the kind of look that I think I'd want to be proud of, if a visitor was driving into Miami and coming down to the Performing Arts Center and passing and looking in and seeing the doors of the storage units through the transparent glass -- because I mentioned to you, this glass is not transparent. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. 217 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: With all due respect to my good friend Phillip Yaffa, he stated right at the beginning he's not an expert witness. So, he is simply an individual from the public who has a right to make a point, but historically we've allowed those points to allow for two minutes, not for 22 minutes. Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Well -- Vice Chairman Winton: And so, if Phil were standing up here as an expert witness, you know, we would -- you would obviously allow that, but he isn't. And we have lots to do and, so -- and we know all this stuff. Chairman Regalado: And, Johnny, I -- the reason I have not tried to limit the time is because this item has been back and forth, back and forth and we have so many persons here that we would like to accommodate. But you're right. I just ask you, Phil, to finish. And both counsel should understand that, you know, we need to make a decision and move on with the long agenda that we have. Mr. Yaffa: I respect both Commissioners' observations and I will close with this. As I started, your expertise is deciding the vision of this City. The issue of standard -- the standard that I would like you to zero in on is whether this facility meets the character of the area. Biscayne Boulevard needs to be treated as a prize to be cherished. The City's signature streets, as such, it can bring residents to the City to shop, to dine, to go to the theater, to work, and to recreate. This use is not compatible. This use does not add to the vision of this, as a great City and a great boulevard. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Sean Schwinghammer: Try to keep this brief. Good evening. My name is Sean Schwinghammer. I'm Vice President for Development with the Pinnacle Housing Group. Our address is 9400 South Dadeland Boulevard. Pinnacle Housing Group, you may be familiar with us. We just completed construction of 186 residential units directly adjacent to this property named Pinnacle View. Our tower has, as I said, 186 units, 186 families, over 500 residences. We also have a parking garage next door. Our residents, or at least the first seven floors -- our residents will be looking directly at this structure of this blank wallet structure. And although that won't make our residents happy, we understand that's the breaks. People can build next to you. Our greatest concern has to do with the quality in the neighborhood -- the quality neighborhood and neighborhood atmosphere. The City of Miami helped to fund Pinnacle View with HOME (Home Investment Partnership Program) monies. Part of the conditions of your HOME monies was to make sure we maintained residential character that exists on the property right now and throughout the neighborhood. Presently, the property where the applicant is proposing their development has single-family homes and also some apartments. It was this residential character and the historic nature of this residential character that had the City require us to preserve a property owned site. Actually, the City helped fund the saving of a 4,000 square foot apartment building on our site that we picked up and we moved on-site, again, to maintain that residential characteristic to correspond with the single-family homes across the street. And 218 March 7, 2002 now the applicant has a proposal that will actually tear down the houses that were the reason for saving the houses that the City helped fund. That doesn't make a lot of sense. It kind of goes contrary to policy. I think the issue is, the City hasn't had a policy. Historic Preservation has talked about this area for some time as being designated as a future designated area for review and preservation. In fact, Pinnacle Housing Group funded a study that looked at the area as a potential National Register of Historic Places Designation, from 36th Street to the Omni, from 2nd Avenue to the Bay. We funded that study and it came up -- and it was reviewed by the State Office of Historic Preservation. And they agree that this area is prime -- is a historic revitalization area. Yet, this development will contemplate the destruction of at least five to six historically significant properties, and not just in my opinion, but also the survey. Commissioner Teele: Say that again. Mr. Schwinghammer: This development will necessitate the destruction of at least five to six historically significant properties, single-family homes and small Chicago -style apartments that our company surveyed for the City to see if there was a potential for historic preservation, and there is. In fact, we, in our eighteen million dollar ($18,000,000) project had to add a number -- hundreds of thousands of dollars more to make our development much more compatible with the area, bringing the residential scale more to the street, again, trying to coordinate it and create a neighborhood atmosphere. So, everyone's been talking a lot. I want to be brief. Our main point is, we'd like this, too, in the neighborhood. We are the adjacent neighbors. We do feel we're a bit aggrieved by this, not because it's going to have a building there, but the nature of the use. And we think it's incompatible with the residential nature that you all have helped to fund and preserve. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, sir. David Sakol: My name is David Sakol. I live at 9340 Southwest 103rd Street, Miami. I first came to Miami when I was 29 years old in 1957. I'm 74. I settled in an efficiency at 470 Northeast 25th Street, in Edgewater, and I came down to sell real estate. Everyday I would go to work and stop at the stop sign at 25th and Biscayne and I admired this large building at the northeast corner of Biscayne and 25th, and had a dream. I said, some day I'd love to own that building. Well, in 1968, I had the opportunity to purchase 2500 to 2512 Biscayne Boulevard, and I've owned it since 1968. Thirty-four years. Three thousand square feet of stores, retail and 15 apartments. So, comparing apples to apples, I have 3,000 square feet of retail. And that gentleman that proposes to develop this 137,000 square foot building also owns 3,000 square feet of warehouse. But I worry about the values because he has his built-in tenant but I was hoping, after waiting all these years of seeing progress go not from our area in Edgewater, but Brickell Avenue, up Coral Way, into Coral Gables and I've waited 34 years and 20 -- in particular, for people like Woody Wiesenger, who isn't here, but people like Norman Braman and the Bacardi families, who -- you know, with little guy like me, I have spent hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) a year improving my property to keep it up, waiting for the Performing Arts Center. They have spent tons of millions of dollars holding our area. I also had the opportunity to purchase -- and I own 470 Northeast 23rd Street, the apartment house that I lived in in 1957. I've owned that since 1974. So, I feel pretty lucky coming here selling real estate. And I'm not an 219 March 7, 2002 expert witness, but I am a CCIM. I'm coming here as a property owner. I've sold millions of dollars worth of property. And like Norman Braman, it pays me because I've represented, even recently, the Brown family. I took the lemon of the old Miami Herald building and brought FedEx to them, and helped improve downtown Miami and all of us. So, I had the pleasure of working with David and his father Steven. And I knew his late grandfather. We've waited for this catalyst to happen, the Performing Arts Center. And now it has happened, a two hundred fifty-five million dollar ($255,000,000) project. I have also sold property right near that area, because it is hot. I have signs on Northeast 14th Street and 1 st Avenue and Miami Place. And as this article, February 17'h in The Herald said, this is the hot area. This is the center of attention. Fourteenth Street will boom also, going from east to west, past the hospital, all the way to Northwest 17th Avenue, as well as Biscayne Boulevard, north and south. This is what we've waited for. But it's the wrong product. A beautiful building. They try to make it as beautiful as they could, but it doesn't bring people in. What we need is people on the boulevard. This is what I envisioned. I don't have a new building. I own an older building. That's why I poured all my life savings into this building, because this was my dream. And, yes, we do have people coming in. We have people coming in at Northeast 19th Street to 20th Street, the Finger Company out of Houston. They're bringing in 437 luxury rental units. Another friend of mine, who owned the property at 18th -- Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Mr. Sakol: -- and Biscayne Boulevard has sold his corner to Argentineans, which are going to build 136 condos. OK. I know you want to make it brief. So, thank you. Chairman Regalado: No. I don't -- Mr. Sakol: That's it. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: I don't have any problem. Mr. Sakol: No, it's OK. It's OK. Chairman Regalado: I don't have any problem. Mr. Sakol: I'm happy. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. How many -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: How many more witnesses -- Unidentified Speaker: We're done, sir. Chairman Regalado: You're done. 220 March 7, 2002 Unidentified Speaker: We're done Chairman Regalado: You're done. You're done. So, it is your turn to cross-examine Mr. Olmedillo, in case -- that was your purpose, was it? Or who do you want to cross-examine? You requested -- Mr. Nelson: Mr. Chairman, as much as I'd love to cross-examine everyone who spoke, in the interest of time, it would probably be more efficacious to just bring up our one rebuttal witness rather than cross-examine anybody. We'll waive cross-examination. Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Nelson: And I'd just like to direct a couple of rebuttal questions. Chairman Regalado: And then we'll close the public hearing. And then we'll hopefully make a decision. Mr. Nelson: Mr. Chairman, if I can bring up Mr. Luft as a rebuttal witness. And while he is getting up here, I just wanted to correct one thing from Mr. Pastoriza's -- Chairman Regalado: On the mic. Speak on the mic. Mr. Nelson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, Howard Nelson. And while I'm bringing Mr. Luft up, I just wanted to correct one thing that Mr. Pastoriza put on the record is, he categorized himself as a NIMFY and then responded that that meant Not In My Front Yard. The actual designation is "Not In My Front Yard Either," meaning, we don't want it anywhere. Commissioner Teele: Look -- Mr. Nelson: Let me bring up Mr. Luft. Commissioner Teele: Look, hold it. Mr. Nelson: Sir. Commissioner Teele: It's a little late to get catty. Now, answer the question about this retail being a box -cutting operation. I think Mr. Yaffa said that. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I can answer. Commissioner Teele: What is the retail component? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: The retail component has two parts: One is several bays that will be made available to merchants wanting to lease space on the boulevard ground floor for your typical service establishment, retail establishments for the neighborhood. 221 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Approximately, how many square feet? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: That portion of the square footage is -- it's 3300. Right next to it there is a 1400 square foot retail, which is the retail for the budget -- mini storage facility warehous. Commissioner Teele: Did you hear -- excuse me. Did you hear Mr. Yaffa's testimony? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Yaffa said that the only retail that you all are presenting to us is a box - cutting -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: It is not. It is not. Commissioner Teele: OK. Is there going to be really 3300 -- can I expect to see -- Ms. Garcia -Toledo: There is no more. Commissioner Teele: Can I expect to see a yogurt shop, for example, there? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Can I expect to see a Starbuck there? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Can I expect to see a strip club there? Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No. Chairman Regalado: No. Unidentified Speaker: And our store has 200 different items. Our store has 200 different items. Vice Chairman Winton: Then that settles it. Chairman Regalado: OK. You should have said yes. Mr. Nelson: Mr. Chairman, again, for the record -- Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Mr. Nelson: -- Howard Nelson. Let me bring back up Mr. Luft for just a couple of rebuttal questions. Mr. Luft, you were sitting in the audience and you heard Mr. Olmedillo's testimony, is that correct? 222 March 7, 2002 Mr. Luft: That's correct. Mr. Nelson: And it was Mr. Olmedillo's testimony that he worked with the City until 1992, is that direct? Mr. Luft: Yes. Mr. Nelson: During that time, he was instrumental in the creation of the Comprehensive Plan, is that correct? Mr. Luft: Yes. Mr. Nelson: Do you recall, from your job history with the City of Miami or your employment, as to whether, in 1992, when Mr. Olmedillo left, whether there was a zoning definition and zoning use for self -storage or mini warehouse? Mr. Luft: No, I don't believe there was. Mr. Nelson: As a matter of fact, is it your testimony that the only type of warehouse in the Code, in the Zoning Code, in the Comp Plan, in the days that Mr. Olmedillo was here, when he drafted those sections, was the main type of large warehouse? Mr. Luft: Yes. The commercial and industrial warehouse. Mr. Nelson: In your expert opinion as an AICP -- that's American Institute of Certified Planners -- is there a difference between mini warehouse, i.e., self -storage warehouse, and general traditional industrial warehousing? Mr. Luft: Yes. My testimony spoke directly to that point. The difference is whether you're serving industries or whether you're serving residents. Mr. Nelson: Can you please describe the type of user for self -storage or mini warehouse? Mr. Luft: The typical user is either residents in nearby neighborhoods. In this case, this is really an ideal location because the Edgewater area has undergone significant renovation and restoration of older 1920s and 30s bungalows and apartment buildings. Several owners of those buildings testified before the Zoning Board. And it's my personal experience and knowledge that many of those buildings that are renovated lack storage space, lack parking space, and would benefit greatly from this. In fact, that's one of the concerns of the owners. And then the small multiple tenant occupants of the office buildings along the Boulevard that are coming in with 2 and 3, 400 square foot offices are also prime users of this. Mr. Nelson: And you're even jumping ahead of some of my questions, because I wanted to ask you not only about Edgewater, but the multi -family uses also along Bayshore and the local small office. Are you familiar with those types of uses in the general neighborhood? 223 March 7, 2002 Mr. Luft: Yes. I visited several of the buildings that are undergoing some changes in there and they're definite -- they're marketing their office space to a lot of small, multiple professional tenants, import, export businesses who are taking one, two office spaces. And these are the types of uses that want nearby convenient storage for their files and records, and do access these things on a daily basis. Mr. Nelson: That is it. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Mr. Chairman, we will close with a statement from your staff on the issue of compatibility. This is part of your staffs analysis for the Special Exception. And I quote "The reason why this use works is because the applicant has specifically addressed the special district concerns of rehabilitation and enhancement of Biscayne Boulevard as a major gateway into the City of Miami by incorporating pedestrian friendly uses of the ground floor, and also articulating the facades in a proportional system which emphasizes the base, middle and top, which makes the building not look like a typical mini warehouse structure." I present to you that your staff has advised you and has recommended for the approval, and we would ask that you follow your staff s analysis. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Now we close the public hearing. Members of the Commission, we are ready to make a decision. And hopefully, discuss among the members of the Commission any issues. So, Commissioner Winton -- Vice Chair Winton, it's your district. Do you want to make a motion? Vice Chairman Winton: I'll start with my explanation. You all remember that this issue didn't come before us, but the issue over closing the alley came before us some time ago, and there was a -- I think a four to one vote. I was the lone dissenting vote to close the alley, because I knew this is what we would ultimately have to deal with. And on the side of the folks that are building this, you know, Bill Beckham, is a long-term friend of mine. I've known him almost since I moved to Miami, so -- and one of the property owners. And as we know, Mr. and Mrs. Brown were very generous in helping come to the rescue of the lady in the West Grove, that the unscrupulous lenders had stolen her home from her and they were good enough to help come to the rescue there. So, from an emotional standpoint, there's kind of an emotional attachment to -- it does look pretty. But if you -- if we go back and remember my argument, I said from the beginning that self-service storage or any other kind of warehouse use doesn't belong on Biscayne Boulevard. Now, we're in an interesting position here because we've had all these lawyers bouncing the ball back and forth. And, so, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what the law is going to say. And somebody probably is ultimately going to determine it. But I do feel very strongly. I felt strongly from the very beginning. I feel as strongly about that tonight as I did before, that self-service storage really doesn't belong on Biscayne Boulevard. Put it back on 2nd Avenue. There's all kinds of places where you can put it. It doesn't belong on Biscayne Boulevard, for all the reasons that we heard. So -- and I've heard our staffs discussion about why they thought it was appropriate, but I've also heard the other lawyers argue about why it isn't appropriate. And as far as I'm concerned, the argument about why it isn't appropriate opens up -- creates the opportunity for me to push a motion forward that is consistent with my position from day one. And that motion, which I will make, is to deny the Planning Department's 224 March 7, 2002 approval of this Special Exception with conditions. And that is my motion. I think that's just simply an inappropriate use on Biscayne Boulevard. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I will second the motion for purpose of a discussion. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead sir. Motion has been seconded. What the motion should do is deny the appeal, right? Commissioner Teele: No. That's his motion. Commissioner Sanchez: That's his motion. Chairman Regalado: No, no. What -- Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir. This is an appeal of the Zoning Board's decision. If the intent -- Chairman Regalado: So, he's not denying the recommendation of the staff, but he's denying the appeal? Mr. Maxwell: No. In order to carry through the intent of Commissioner Winton, it would be a motion affirming the decision of the Zoning Board, denying a Special Exception. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved, then. Commissioner Teele: I'm seconding the motion for purposes of discussion Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. You want to discuss -- Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's 8:43. Commissioner Sanchez: It's been a long day. Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Chairman, I would hope that after we deal with the billboard issue, and whatever is essential, I really wish we could defer the balance of the agenda. We're going to be back here in a week, and I don't see any reason to just continue to burn ourselves out, if we're coming -- you know, two weeks is something is a different matter. But let's burn ourselves out one night and not burn ourselves out two nights. So, on this item, I'm seconding the motion primarily to send a very strong message to the lawyers and lobbyists, that I take deep offense, as a Commissioner, to besmirching anyone's name and good reputation. I find it totally offensive for people to get up here and besmirch and mischaracterize Bacardi or anyone else who is an outstanding and upstanding citizen in our community. And unless I hear some different kind of language coming from this side over here, I'm going to vigorously continue my position 225 March 7, 2002 for the sake of the principal that we've got to stop being rude and discourteous to each other in the City, as long as I'm privileged to serve up here. I found particular offense to the catty kinds of ways about Bacardi's building is one of the most architecturally significant buildings in the entire City. The people have put their money where their mouth is. They've got a right to an opinion. And just because they have that opinion, there is no reason to besmirch their otherwise outstanding good name and reputation in this City. Now, before anyone says anything from this side, I want to say two other points. Number two, we need to look at -- the district Commissioner, in particular, needs to look at an overlay from the American Airline Arena to the district -- the City limits along Biscayne Boulevard. What we're trying to do now is ex post facto, make land use decisions that I'm very uncomfortable with. And I think, in the end, we're going to wind up, if we're not careful -- if we don't comply with our own rules and procedures, we're going to wind up being reviewed and reversed by court time after time after time. To the other outstanding corporate citizen, I found it absolutely curious and strange. If he were here three months ago, four months ago, he would have heard 50 people testifying that we don't want a car dealership on Biscayne Boulevard. That matter is in court right now. Biscayne Boulevard has -- is not the appropriate place for a car dealership and cars. It is -- I mean -- and, Commissioner Winton, this is a matter that is literally four or five months old. And, you know, we cannot make decisions based upon our own subjective opinions. We've got to make decisions on land use based upon our Zoning Code and our land use policies, and the various overlays. I happen to think, as I said then, that the finest car dealership, as far as I'm concerned, in America, is on Biscayne Boulevard. And that's why I voted for it. I don't know -- what was -- I guess the vote was three to two or -- but, you know, everybody's got their own view of what ought to be there. And if we've got that view, then zoning is not the place to do that. An overlay to establish a policy is the way. Mr. Olmedillo, to you, there are at least too many warehouse storages on Biscayne Boulevard. The City limit is where? What is the northern city limit? Vice Chairman Winton: Eighty-seventh and -- Chairman Regalado: Eighty-seven. Commissioner Teele: At the corner of 871h and Biscayne Boulevard is something called an Antique Facility. The Antique Facility is nothing but what this developer is proposing. It's a camouflage to a huge mini storehouse facility, but nobody knows that because everyone thinks it's a retail facility. Right on the corner of Biscayne and 87th, using your own counsel's argument. And the reason that I asked the question -- and I hope to goodness there will not be any type of adult anything on Biscayne Boulevard. We don't need this place to look like Fayetteville or Fort Bragg or somewhere I -- you know, I don't know if any of you have ever been up there, but it's not a pretty picture. But I would hope, you know, that if we're going to have something like this, we ought to have a Starbucks, we ought to have -- what's the new brand that Bacardi's coming out with, to challenge that Smirnoff brand? Does anybody know? Bacardi Silver. You know, there ought to be a Bacardi Silver store in there. I mean, you know, what this is is what everybody says, is that this should be a place where people come and it really should be camouflage. And I would urge anyone who would like to take note of what is happening up there on Biscayne and 87, it is called an Antique Gallery and it is a total camouflage of a huge mini storage warehouse facility, just like this one. Better camouflage, perhaps, because it has two buildings that come out and behind it on the extreme western side, 226 March 7, 2002 the entire building is nothing but -- this kind of stricture with a warehouse facility. And, so, I'm convinced that we've got to begin to work together. We've got to think outside of the box. I think, as a matter of substance, that the use is consistent with our Code. I think, as a matter of substance, that it is a mixed use, not because of the one housing unit that is represented here, caretaker unit, but because of the retail character which is what we want. We want attractive upscale, non adult, commercial activities, like Starbucks, like Bacardi Silver, like newsstands and those kinds of things there. And, so, I'm prepared to withdraw my second, if somebody's prepared to apologize. Mr. Rojas: Mr. Teele, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Mr. Rojas: Mr. Teele -- Chairman Regalado: Your name? Mr. Rojas: My name is Luis Rojas. And we certainly would apologize to you, Mr. Teele. But, however, I do want -- Mr. Rojas: Well, what I do want to say is that none of the professional staff that has been hired by Mr. Brown said anything derogatory about anyone. There were some people from the audience that were neighbors that did mention the name Bacardi. But no one on the legal staff that has been hired by this client said anything derogatory. And we've kept our presentation professional at all times. If an apology is needed because one of the neighbors said that, we publicly apologize now. Commissioner Teele: To who? Mr. Rojas: To Mr. Bacardi or anybody who's offended. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my second. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion to deny the appeal. But it has no second. Vice Chairman Winton: And I would add that there was a similar project proposed, I believe, for your district, Mr. Regalado, on -- Chairman Regalado: And you all approve it. Vice Chairman Winton: On Southwest 8th Street that was also -- did we approve? I thought we denied it. Chairman Regalado: No. You approved it. Ms. Slazyk: It was approved. It was approved. 227 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: You -- over my objection, you all approved it. Vice Chairman Winton: So much for that argument. Chairman Regalado: See? Think twice. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I actually asked staff the question first, so I got a wrong answer. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: The Special Overlay District that we passed for Coral Way and 8th Street set up rule to prevent these types of developments to come into the area. This area doesn't have one. Therefore, you want to look at -- if that's the project -- and that's something that was stated on the record -- if that's the project that's going to go there with the commercial -- and it looks like that -- I mean, that doesn't look to me like a mini warehouse. I'm very content with the commercial on the bottom, where you will have storage -- and, then again, pictures don't usually end up being what they are. But based on the rules that there is no special overlay there to prevent that -- and maybe, Johnny, you should jump on an overlay district as soon as possible. Ms. Slazyk: Excuse me, Commissioner. There is an SD -20 overlay there. But the SD -20 overlay there does not prohibit this use. That is -- it's very similar in nature to the SD -9 and it pulled out a bunch of uses -- Commissioner Sanchez: But it doesn't prevent that from being established. If it did, we wouldn't be here. Ms. Slazyk: It does not prohibit this use here. It does not. Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. And based on the arguments that I have heard here today and your recommendation for approval, I'm prepared to vote when the time comes how I feel, based on the arguments heard here today. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion. Mr. Maxwell: Did you get another second? Chairman Regalado: For the second time, there is a motion. Third time, there is a motion. Motion fails. It does not have a second. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, would you like to yield? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Go ahead, sir. 228 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: All right. I'll take the chair. Is there a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: Motion -- Vice Chairman Winton: You want me to start over again? Yeah, I'll make a motion again. Same one. Commissioner Teele: There's a motion to deny the appeal. Is there a second? Motion dies for lack of second. Is there a second motion? Commissioner Sanchez: Motion to approve the appeal. Commissioner Teele: Motion to approve the appeal. Is there a second? Chairman Regalado: I'll second the motion. Commissioner Teele: Motion is seconded. Madam Clerk, call the roll. Mr. Maxwell: This will be a motion reversing the decision of the Zoning Board and granting the Special Exception. Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Scheider: Commissioner Gonzalez Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Ms. Scheider: Vice Chairman Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: No. Ms. Scheider: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Yes. Ms. Scheider: Chairman Regalado. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Teele: The matter passes on a vote of four to one. 229 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-246 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD THEREBY GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, TO ALLOW A MIXED USE STRUCTURE INCLUDING SELF -STORAGE FACILITY FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2322, 2332, 2336-44 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD AND 2323, 2329, 2339, 2347 NORTHEAST 2ND COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A," PURSUANT TO PLANS ON FILE, AND SUBJECT TO A TIME LIMITATION OF TWELVE (12) MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Chairman Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton ABSENT: None. Chairman Regalado: I am -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, can we take a recess? Unidentified Speaker: Thank you very much. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm starving. I've been here since 8 o'clock in the morning. 230 March 7, 2002 39. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 11, SECTION 1102 NONCONFORMING LOTS, TO PROHIBIT DIVISION OF CONTIGUOUS NONCONFORMING LOTS UNDER SAME OWNERSHIP. (Applicant(s): Carlos A. Gimenez, Miami City Manager). Chairman Regalado: Yes. But remember, we have the PUD (Planned Unit Development). We have -- let's do -- this is easy. This is in support. Please, let's do 18. Excuse me. We need to continue. We have a situation that we had waiting, the executive of the agencies -- the housing agencies that were promised to have some kind of resolution. So, we need to have something in the next few minutes as directed to the Manager, to resolve this. So, we're going to take PZ -18. PZ -18 is to amend Ordinance 11000. Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): This is an order to prohibit the division of contiguous nonconforming lots under the same ownership. This is a first reading ordinance. It's recommended for approval unanimously. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. This is a public hearing. Anybody -- are you Vice Chairman Winton: In favor or against? Chairman Regalado: Are you supporting this? Unidentified Speaker: No. I'm for this. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, don't support unless there's opposition. Chairman Regalado: Then we're all going to support it. Unidentified Speaker: Great. Commissioner Teele: What are you here for, Dr. McKay (phonetic)? Unidentified Speaker: I'm in support of the PUD ordinance. Commissioner Teele: Is that what we're on now? Unidentified Speaker: Next one. Unidentified Speaker: Next one. Chairman Regalado: No. The next one is. 231 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Bring opposition up. Chairman Regalado: Mister -- Commissioner Teele: Call the question. Chairman Regalado: Mr. Attorney, read the ordinance. Madam City Clerk, call the roll. An Ordinance entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO, 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 11, SECTION 1102, NONCONFORMING LOTS, TO PROHIBIT THE DIVISION OF CONTIGUOUS NONCONFORMING LOTS UNDER THE SAME OWNERSHIP; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: It passes. This is a first reading. So, thank you very much for all of your comments. 232 March 7, 2002 40. FIRST READING ORDINANCE. AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 5, ENTITLED "PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT", TO MODIFY REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Applicant(s): Carlos A. Gimenez, Miami City Manager). Chairman Regalado: PZ -19. This is a First Reading Ordinance. And this is to modify the regulation pertaining to PUDs (Planned Unit Developments) in residential zoning districts. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Commissioner Teele: Is there objection, Mr. Chairman? Is there somebody who wants to speak on it -- in opposition? Chairman Regalado: Any anybody in opposition? Nobody. We close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. Call the roll. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 5, ENTITLED: "PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT," TO MODIFY REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 233 March 7, 2002 41. (A) FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 8, SECTION 800, ENTITLED "NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS"; TO INTRODUCE PROVISIONS RELATED TO CREATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS, PROVIDING FOR INTENT STATEMENT, QUALIFICATION CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR CREATING AND MODIFYING SUCH DISTRICTS (Applicant(s): Carlos A. Gimenez, Miami City Manager). (B) SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 23-5 OF CITY CODE RELATING TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION TO MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION AND GUIDELINES FOR UNREASONABLE OR UNDUE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP. (Applicant(s): City of Miami) Chairman Regalado: Twenty-one. PZ -21 is related to all of this that we're doing now. It's a First Reading Ordinance. This will create the Neighborhood Conservation Districts. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It has been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You opened and closed the public hearing, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: Yes. The public hearing is open. Anybody -- Commissioner Teele: In opposition? Chairman Regalado: -- that oppose this item? No one. Read the ordinance. We close the public hearing. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 8, SECTION 800, ENTITLED "NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS"; TO INTRODUCE PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE CREATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR AN INTENT STATEMENT, QUALIFICATION CRITERIA, AND PROCEDURES FOR CREATING AND MODIFYING SUCH DISTRICTS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 234 March 7, 2002 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. (APPLAUSE) Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. We are -- Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, could we second reading on PZ -13, which is -- Chairman Regalado: Sure. Vice Chairman Winton: -- which are the demolition on historic properties ordinance? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes. Chairman Regalado: PZ -13, a second reading. Do we have a motion? Commissioner Gonzalez: Move it. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You open and close the public hearing, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. This is a public hearing. Vice Chairman Winton: There's somebody here that wants to speak on the public hearing. Commissioner J. F. Redford: I kind of waived it to speak on that neighborhood protection ordinance, but no one saw me on it. Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm very sorry. Commissioner Redford: Well, like you said, it was a public hearing, so -- Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, can we stop the process so he can speak? 235 March 7, 2002 Mr. Maxwell: You've acted on that, but certainly in comity, if you'd like to extend the courtesy to the gentleman to speak on it, you can. And you should, maybe. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Yes, by all means. And I'm very sorry. I didn't see you. Mr. Maxwell: And if, as a result of that testimony, you -- Chairman Regalado: We have to -- Mr. Maxwell: -- want to reconsider the item, you can do that. Chairman Regalado: We have to reverse the -- Commissioner Teele: No. No. If he says something that changes anybody's opinion, then there will be a motion to reconsider it. Mr. Maxwell: That's what I just said. Chairman Regalado: Right. That's what I'm saying. Go ahead, sir Commissioner Redford: All right. My name is Redford, R -E -D -F -O -R -D, initials J.F., 3975 Little Avenue. That's in Coconut Grove. I'm generally in favor of this Neighborhood Protection Ordinance, because one thing that seems to be overlooked in all these protection ordinances and that is the County Appraisal's Office. Now, there's a number of houses in Ye Little Wood, mine is one of them, that is appraised where the land is nine times higher than the house. Nine times higher. Now, what is the Appraisal Department saying to me? They're saying that house should be torn down, because that is not the ratio of land to house. The reason for that is, my house was built in 1919. It's on block. Not on concrete walls. My house is all wood. All the way. Wooden roof, matched wooden ceilings, wooden floors. And -- except for one little room I added on. The rest of the house has a screen on it. And it's plastered -- not plastered, but stucco over the screen. In other words, this used to be called -- well, just a plastic or a stucco house. A frame stucco house. Now, that house -- you spoke earlier about the difficulty of getting permits through. I'm one of the owners of the Burger King here at 27th Avenue and Dixie and I tell you, it took us 11 months to get a permit through to redo that place up there. Now, this is long ago. This was about 18 years ago. But it took eight -- no, 18 months. That was the original. This was about three or four years ago. It took -- . Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, sir. Did you give us your name for the record? Commissioner Redford: Name for the record is R -E -D -F -O -R -D, J.F. Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Commissioner, I apologize. I did not -- Commissioner Redford: Well, that's all right. I don't even like to mention it anymore. I pray every night hymns of praise to Joe Gersten for defeating me, even though he's way out there in 236 March 7, 2002 Australia. OK. Now -- all right. Now, the thing about this is -- now, you have this situation where you're taking a long time to get permits, 11 months for my Burger King. Now, you're going to add another wall that I'm going to have to jump over before I get a permit, because my house is not a saleable house. It doesn't meet the Code. There was no Code in 1919, so we have no setbacks or we don't conform to the setback. My garage has no setback. It's right on the line. It's a house that is old. It's wood. It's not a historic. We have other houses in there. We have a prefab house. It belongs to a retired lawyer, who is -- completely prefabbed. The walls are already built, brought up and it has asbestos siding on it. There again, I don't know what his appraisal is, but the same thing happens. The appraisal of the house -- I'm going to just give you rough figures. My house is appraised -- and I'll just give it to you rough. It's very close. At four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000,00), my whole property. The house is forty thousand dollars ($40,000). The house is forty thousand dollars ($40,000). And the land is three hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($360,000). I can sell it for more than that. More because the land is bringing in more. And besides that, down at the County, they, generally speaking, appraise about 85 percent of what they think the true value is. Now, the problem is what you're going to do with some of these things, if you don't have a ruling where the people can say we want to be in a historic district. We want to have neighbor protection or we want to do something of the sort. Then all of a sudden, the City imposes on us another wall to hurdle. Now, we would like to go ahead with this kind of neighborhood protection. We have a park coming up across the street from us, where someone wants to put in eight units to an acre on seven and a half acres. It was sold easily. We want to protect the area, but we want to have a little more consideration of the thing. In other words, what about the people who have no historic value, who have an old, old house? What are they going to do with it? Are they going to tear it down? What if we're told we can't tear it down? This is the difficulty with this particular ordinance. I'd like to see you do something with it, but I'd like to see you change it and take -- there's about six or seven houses in Ye Little Wood, which is the name of this subdivision, and those houses all fall under that category, our 30 houses. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: Our Planning Director can respond to all of his comments and I think allay probably all of his concerns. The question is whether or not we want to put that on the public record, since we've already passed this issue, or have them talk privately? Commissioner Teele: It is (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: No. It is -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, I know. Chairman Regalado: I think she should -- Vice Chairman Winton: But we passed the -- we've already passed the ordinance, so -- 237 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but she should do it on the public record. Vice Chairman Winton: Fine. I was asking that question. Commissioner Teele: But we only passed this for first reading. Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct. Chairman Regalado: Right. Commissioner Teele: And as Commissioner Redford knows, in -- Commissioner Redford: Oh, yeah. Commissioner Teele: -- at the County, we've -- the County doesn't even allow you to speak on first readings, that is, the public. I think what we should do -- or if you would, as the district Commissioner, would be to pass a motion to -- pursuant to his comments, instructing staff to review the ordinance and to make whatever changes that can be accommodated, based upon the testimony. Chairman Regalado: I think that what Commissioner Redford is saying -- and maybe, we don't even have to change what we did in essence -- but he's talking about a few cases, which I think are unique in the City of Miami. Because I don't think that we have that problem in Shenandoah or the Upper Eastside or Liberty City or Flagami. I don't think we do. We don't have that much land like you have, and a small house within. I think that your area is very, very unique in the City of Miami. And we've got to figure out something to be applied to cases like this. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, in respect to the time here, I would simply request that staff meet with Commissioner Redford, have this discussion with him, and staff be prepared on second reading to respond -- Chairman Regalado: Or a separate -- Vice Chairman Winton: -- publicly to this issue. Chairman Regalado: Or a separate entity in terms of addressing his -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think they have answers, so that's the reason I'm not trying to get into all this -- Commissioner Redford: Well, you can see what happened. I bought the house. I think I paid twenty-six thousand dollars ($26,000). It was appraised at five thousand dollars ($5,000). And in those days, Homestead Exemption was five thousand dollars ($5,000). And it's gone on from there. 238 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Does the staff have a brief response? Is there some way we can accommodate these kinds of situations within what we're doing? Chairman Regalado: Yes. Because you know what? People are watching on TV. And his case may be unique, but there may be 3, 4, 10, 20 cases like him. And we need to tell the people that there is a remedy. Because -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, let her come up and state it so we can move on. Chairman Regalado: -- he has a problem, if he goes to sell the property. Vice Chairman Winton: I understand. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): Ana Gelabert, Planning Director. I just want to clarify that what you have in front of you, that you voted on first reading, it is just the definition of what a conservation district would be. Right now what that means is it would give us, the Planning Department, the tool to go to the neighbors and address the issues individually. It means that what -- for example, what may be important for Coconut Grove might not be what's important for Edgewater, might not be what's important for Model City. What you have and what you have voted is not on the set of guidelines, so it would not affect the gentleman. It's really just the definition of what it will become. Once the Conservation Districts are designed, per neighborhood, it will come back to you. And at that point, then all these other issues, as character and scale, would be addressed. We certainly can meet with the gentleman and any other concerns he may have, but it's not affected by what you voted just now on the Conservation District. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Ms. Gelaberc It's just the definition, what you had in front of you. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you very much. Commissioner, I would invite you back to the next reading of the ordinance, if you will, and then you'll give us your take on the remedy that the City has given you. Commissioner Redford: Yes. I would like to see the ordinance survive. Its intent, I think, is great. It's just some of the details haven't been fixed. Chairman Regalado: Well, thank you. Commissioner Redford: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: OK. On PZ -13, I think I am -- Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. Commissioner Gonzalez: Moved and second. 239 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: Moved and second. Mr. Maxwell: Just one procedural thing. Commissioners, if you will, Madam -- Mr. Chairman, could you please direct the Clerk to include the testimony of Commissioner Redford, the Board's comments and staffs comments on this all in Item 21, I believe he was addressing. Chairman Regalado: Twenty-one. It's so directed to the City Clerk. Thank you. PZ -13, Second Reading Ordinance. This is a public hearing. Vice Chair Winton. Vice Chairman Winton: And we've got a motion and a second. So, I guess we need opposition? Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and it's been second. Anybody in opposition to PZ -13? No one. We close the public hearing. Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Teele: What is the effective date of this ordinance? Mr. Maxwell: Ordinances take effect 30 days after second reading Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton, I mean, I realize that you sort of adopted this, and I'm very much supportive of it. I really think the one thing we should do is move the effective date out for three months or a year or six months, because we need to make sure that we train our staffs and get ourselves ready for this. We've gone for 100 years without it, and we need to implement it properly. And I'm really concerned about how this is implemented at the board levels, et cetera. So, I mean, I don't want to make a big issue out of it. If you want to have the effective date in 30 days, like all other ordinances, fine. But I really do think we need to have some training of boards before we just do this. And I think we ought to take our time -- Vice Chairman Winton: Who gets -- who's -- what's the entity again that's going to review this? Sara Eaton: The Historic and Environmental Preservation Board. Sarah Eaton, Preservation Officer for the City. Historic and Environmental Preservation Board through this ordinance -- Vice Chairman Winton: Of the City. Ms. Eaton: -- of the City would have the authority to deny demolition. Any decision of that board could be appealed to the City Commission. Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton, this has been a part of a two-year, three-year process. Two years ago we started first with the Community Development dollars for historic preservation. Last year we moved Historic Preservation dollars into the Planning Department for the purpose of bringing this forward. But what is still missing is, we've not had any training. 240 March 7, 2002 And we have a commitment. We've had several commitments. We've put, what, two or three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) in -- how much money did we put in planning from Historic Preservation staffing and training process last year? Ms. Eaton: Two hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($225,000). Commissioner Teele: And my point is that we need to get everybody trained before we start implementing. We don't need to wind up with the first case going to court and then winding up with an issue. And so, all that I'm suggesting is, that board and the community-based organizations that we have involved in this really need to be trained. And there was a training session, I think, recently up in New Hampshire or somewhere. I talked to staff -- a national training session on Historic Preservation and how to do this. I think the worst thing that we could do would be to implement something, make it go into effect, have a board consider this, not have a sufficient training -- because this is the first time out for us, and there is going to be opposition. We're going to have people who are going to take us to court over this before it's over. And so, my only issue is, I'm in favor of this 1000 percent. Been in favor of it for four years that I've been here. But I really think we ought to have a lead time in which we get everybody trained before it becomes -- in other words, we pass it tonight, but we would just make the effective date 90 days from now or somewhere before we begin that process. We also have the issue right now, for example, of the facility that has been in the papers in Overtown. You know, there's a lot of discussion about how this goes. And so, however you'd like to proceed on it, you're the maker of the motion. But I would recommend that the effective date be at least 90 days away. And, in the interim, we get everybody on these boards and the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) trained as exactly what it would take to properly implement this and the kinds of consideration and guidance -- Vice Chairman Winton: What is our plan for training? Ms. Eaton: We have been training -- effectively training the board for the last two years in our discussions of this ordinance, be it proposed amendment, and how it would be applied. I mean, we've discussed it at I don't know how many meetings. And I can certainly, you know, conduct any kind of training that the Commission -- Vice Chairman Winton: Do you feel that the Board's trained now? I mean -- Ms. Eaton: I do. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think that -- Commissioner Teele: I withdraw my concerns. Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. OK. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 241 March 7, 2002 An Ordinance Entitled -- 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 PROVISIONS RELATED TO PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR ISSUING CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION AND GUIDELINES FOR UNREASONABLE OR UNDUE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of January 24, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12195 The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 242 March 7, 2002 42. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD -19 OVERLAY; 4101 NW 11TH STREET, 1135-1187 AND 1145-1147 NW 41sT AVENUE (2.0 F.A.R). (Applicant(s): Pell/Cruz Investments, Inc.). Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gonzalez: Could we hear PZ -12? That is in my district. And we have a group of neighbors that are here in support of this application. Chairman Regalado: Sure. PZ -12. PZ -12, Lourdes. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -12 is a change of zoning for the property at approximately 4101 Northwest 11th Street, 1135 to 37 and 1145 to 1147 Northwest 41" Avenue. This is in order to add the SD -19 Overlay District to a piece of property that already has C-2 zoning. What the SD -19 Overlay District does, it adjusts the FAR (Floor Area Ratio). This is a district in which the base FAR is 1.72 and the request before you is to raise the FAR to 2.0. The Department has recommended denial, and the Zoning Board has recommended approval by a vote of 7 to 0. Our denial was based on the fact that this could be an over- development of this site. It's one of those things where extra FAR sometimes can be used in ways to develop something that is out of scale and character with the neighborhood. So, our concern was based on a possibility that it be an overly massive, over -development for something that may not fit in the neighborhood. And once they get the FAR, there's no guarantee that they come back to us for Design Review or anything. So, that was our denial. Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public hearing. Lucia. Lucia Dougherty: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Lucia Dougherty, with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. Here today on behalf of the owner and the applicant. Ron Petitero (phonetic) is with me this evening. He's owned the property since 1992. And in 1995, it was zoned C-2. Since that time, he's been working towards getting a franchise with a national franchiser for a hotel. He finally signed a franchise agreement in the year 2000 with Wyngate Hotel. He is now, however, working with Ramada to get a different franchise for the property. Now, I'm just going to show you this property. It is on 11th Street. This is Le Jeune Road. This is the property right here. It's -- and this is l lth Street. This is the McDonald's. This is the Marriott Hotel. There are several hotels. There's one right across the street. There's a McDonald's -- I'm sorry. This is a gas station. This is a McDonald's. And one of the interesting things about this district is that there is going to be 1000 less hotel rooms in this area within the next year. And I've taken this map here and I've actually "X'ed" off the hotels that are actually gone as of today. And within the next year or so, because of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE), there's going to be literally 1000 less hotel rooms in this district. Now, why is that important to us? Yes, sir. Why is that important? Because this will make this hotel a success. One of the other 243 March 7, 2002 interesting things is that I've got these two diagrams from the Greater Miami Convention and Visitors Bureau, and I think you'll find this interesting. One of them is the monthly occupancy and room rate. This one is the room rate and this is the occupancy. Out here -- these airport hotels. The room rate is actually the smallest of all of the hotels in all of the down -- in all of the City of Miami, or actually, Greater Miami. However, the occupancy is actually the highest and it has been always the highest. The occupancy out at the airport hotels is literally the highest in all of Greater Miami. So, we know that this hotel is actually going to be a success. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: I think you lost quorum. Chairman Regalado: No, we're not. Commissioner Sanchez is in the room. Mr. Maxwell: OK. I'm sorry. I looked around. I didn't see him. I apologize. Ms. Dougherty: The actual site has 11 units on it right now. These are very marginal units. This is not a great neighborhood. All of the people in the neighborhood are supportive of this rezoning because they want this hotel to occur. And I'm just going to -- I can -- I don't know if you can see it very well. But if you come and look at the photographs of the actual houses on the property, there are literally 11 very marginal houses. One of the things that we did is, we turned in his tax returns. Now, how many applicants ever turn in their tax returns to you? We turned them in at the Zoning Board. Here is a copy of our -- yes. This is the actual summary of his taxes. Every year he is losing more and more money on this property. Now, why do we need the increased FAR? It's because we need to have at least 120 rooms and we need to have at least two meeting room facility areas. We can't do it under the FAR that's permitted. That's our request. We are also willing to go through Design Review for any use that we don't have to have Design Review for. In other words, for this hotel we have to have a Class II permit, which we're willing to do. We have nei�hbors here today who would like to have this street closed off. This is, I think, 41a, 40th and 39 Street, as they're approaching. They are supportive of the hotel, no matter what. But they say this is giving them an opportunity to come to tell you today that they would like the support of the City Commission to close these streets to vehicular traffic. Therefore, they would -- I don't know if they're still here. Are they still here? They are? OK. Anyway, that's -- we are supportive of their request. And we're also going to contribute to a Traffic Study for them to go forward to Dade County to try to close these streets. So, with that, I would urge your approval of this application. Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe the issue was -- what they were discussing was to have a Traffic Study done because -- they were concerned about the traffic flow on 11th Street. Eleventh Street has, especially in the afternoon, it has a lot of traffic going west. What -- we're doing something in that neighborhood. We're going to be improving 14th Street, which is going to take away some traffic from 11th Street once we get the project done between the City of Miami and the Department of Transportation, which is -- that is a project that is going to be done 244 March 7, 2002 in conjunction with the Florida Department of Transportation. Supposedly, it -- supposed to start by September of this year. So, I believe that is going to alleviate the situation. Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, you -- we have to make sure because, as you know, FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) has decided to abandon the Intermodel, which is across the street from 14'x' Street. So Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. Chairman Regalado: So, you know, I think that what they wanted is work on the same area. So, we need to make sure and talk to Jose Abreu. Commissioner Gonzalez: I did talk to Jose last week and we had a meeting in our -- my office, and we went over the plans and the design of the street and what they were planning on doing. And they wanted to see if we were in agreement with them. So, I think the project is going to still go on. Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public -- Commissioner Sanchez: Does it have City approval? Ms. Slazyk: Our recommendation had been denial because of a potential of something that was going to be massive and out of scale and character. I believe the applicant has proffered Design Review even if they go for a use that doesn't normally need Design Review. So, that -- Commissioner Sanchez: It'll have to come back for Design Review and all that stuff. Ms. Slazyk: Well, for what they want to do is a hotel. Hotels in C-2 require a Class II, so we will have Design Review. Commissioner Sanchez: Is there any opposition? Ms. Slazyk: There is none. Chairman Regalado: Anybody in opposition? So we close the public hearing. Is there a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: Motion to approve. Commissioner Gonzalez: I move for approval. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved to approve the -- increase the Floor Area Ratio. And it's been second. First reading. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 245 March 7, 2002 An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 27 OF THE ZONING ATLAS 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 C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL TO C-2 LIBERAL COMMERCIAL WITH AN SD -19 OVERLAY (2.0 F.A.R.), FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 4101 NORTHWEST 11 STREET, 1135-1137 AND 1145-1147 NORTHWEST 41 AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A;" CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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 Deputy City Attorney. Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much. 246 March 7, 2002 43. (A) DEFER PROPOSED APPROVAL OF REVISED CITY LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN FOR JULY 1, 2001 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2004, FOR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION OF CITY IN FLORIDA STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) PROGRAM) TO MARCH 14, 2002 AT 11:00 A.M.; REQUEST ADMINISTRATION PROVIDE ANALYSIS EVALUATING EACH AGENCY FOR PAST FIVE YEARS (See #16). (B) FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ARTICLES 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 AND 25, TO MODIFY PROVISIONS REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS AND TO MODIFY USE REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BUSINESSES; CLARIFY LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO REAL ESTATE SIGNS, AND ALLOW FOR HEIGHT VARIANCES FOR BILLBOARDS ONLY WHEN GOVERNMENTAL ACTION AFFECTS REASONABLE VISIBILITY OF SUCH SIGN. (Applicant(s): City of Miami) Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: PZ -15 is the Billboards, but we need the City Attorney hereto give us -- maybe you can -- there is some legislation in Tallahassee that would impact, Mr. City Attorney, the -- Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: So, you want to tell us what do you recommend for us to do tonight? Should we go ahead and listen and vote on this or should we wait for the State legislation? Mr. Maxwell: No, sir. You should proceed. There is legislation -- Vice Chairman Winton: With all due haste. Mr. Maxwell: There's legislation in Tallahassee, House bill that may go to vote by Monday, that would place, if adopted by the legislature, place serious limitations on the City's ability to control billboards. It would do a couple of things. One, it would require compensation for any billboard in the City on any road -- located on any road. Wherein now, the compensation issue is pretty much settled along federal highways and interstates and so forth, as far as the compensation issue goes. And it would negate the ability of municipalities to utilize amortization provisions for purposes of compensating billboard owners. Commissioner Teele: Are you saying municipalities or are you saying the City of Miami? Mr. Maxwell: Well, City of Miami -- well, included the way the statute now reads, it would include the City. But whether or not the signs that are the subject of litigation at this particular point would come within that would be something that the court would deal with. But it would include the City of Miami as far as the language that was pending. Now, we have submitted amendments for consideration. I do -- I cannot tell you now whether those amendments have been incorporated into the legislation and whether or not once the legislature acts, it would include the protection that we had sought. But my recommendation to you would be that you proceed with the legislation, the local legislation in front of you now. 247 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. We'll do that. But before we do that, Mr. Manager, now that you came back, we had waiting for hours some of the executive of the Housing agencies and it's unfair to them and to us to deal with this issue after we get done with the PZ items. So, what I would like to suggest is that the Community Development will not take any action to change anything at all until next week on the policy issue. These two projects, the people are here. They need the money. So, you know, everything should be as it is for one week. And come back next week, 11 o'clock, I guess, in the morning for action. So they can go home and, you know, keep working for a week. So -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: That's a commitment that we have. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, are you going to do the PZ agenda then tonight? So we should all stay for the remainder or what is your wish? Chairman Regalado: Well, it depends on how good are the good people that are going to talk about billboards with us, you know. It -- Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, there is one item, Ms. Toledo, the item -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -7 and 8. Mr. Maxwell: -- where we have an operation of law issue that you could dispose of in one moment, in a very short period of time. And it's important that you address this issue tonight for Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Because of time limits. Mr. Maxwell: -- reasons that will become apparent. Chairman Regalado: Yeah. I was thinking that that -- because this has been here for how many times? Eight times or -- Ms. Garcia-Toldeo: Almost two years. Mr. Maxwell: Two years. Chairman Regalado: Two years. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: You heard this on first reading on January 27, 2000. 248 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: I'd like to -- Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Chairman Regalado: -- wind. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, excuse me. You started one discussion. The Attorney started talking about something totally different, before we finished that discussion. So, let's -- Chairman Regalado: No, no, the Manager -- the Manager -- Commissioner Teele: No, no. You started the discussion relating to Community Development Housing. Commissioner Gonzalez wanted to be recognized. I want to be recognized. The Attorney immediately said there is something else, then Ms. Toledo. Can we go back and let the people that are here on Housing go? But can we just -- can we all agree on what we're going to do? Chairman Regalado: What I suggested, Commissioner, is to the Manager, to bring back this at 11 o'clock on the next meeting, next week. And tell the CD (Community Development) Department not to take any action whatsoever regarding the policy matter, and just wait for the Commission to make decision next week. One week from today. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: And the Manager concurs, but go ahead. Commissioner Gonzalez: Do we have to do this process on Community Development necessarily next week? Chairman Regalado: Yes. On this thing. On this -- Commissioner Gonzalez: On the administration -- Chairman Regalado: This is an urgent matter because they have ongoing projects. So, at least -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. I realize that. But I mean, is there an urgency? Chairman Regalado: Oh, the whole thing? The whole thing? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. Is there an urgency on Community Development -- Chairman Regalado: No. No, no, no, no. 249 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Gonzalez: -- stopping the funding on these people next week or can they wait and give us some time to maybe sit down with the directors of these organizations, each one of us -- Chairman Regalado: Anything can happen. So, just make sure -- Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, that's exactly what I just instructed staff to do. Commissioner Gonzalez: So, what we're doing then is deferring this item for next week, for the meeting of l ltn Chairman Regalado: Yes. For a report from the Manager so they can be assured that what they're doing -- Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Great. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir Commissioner Teele: On the request, I would like to understand. Was this item advertised as a public hearing today, under the Community Development rules? Unidentified Speaker: Yes, it was. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): It was. Commissioner Teele: OK. So, we need to properly move to defer the item. Otherwise, we've got a notice problem. And we really need to be in compliance with the Federal Rules as relates to notice. If we defer this item, then we don't necessarily have to renotice and get all of that. Although, I would recommend that you do. Ms. Warren: We would run an ad anyway. Commissioner Teele: Number two. I'm requesting, as one Commissioner, that the staff do a new analysis, as opposed to the document that we've got, that has more relationship to the kinds of testimony that we heard today about whether something should be looked at at five years or two years or four years, but just looking at three years really gives us a mis -- snapshot of what it is. That's number two. Number three. I am requesting that staff meet with each of these organizations that's affected and their board of directors or members of their board, if they're available, and explain to them, one by one, what you're proposing and how it would affect them, before we come back. That's my personal request. I'm not making a motion on that. But I think that would be very helpful in terms of focusing on the issues so we're not arguing about facts. And with that, Mr. Chairman, for the purposes of the federal notice proceedings, I would move that the item be deferred to the next meeting of the 14th. Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second the motion. And I support your request very strongly 250 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: And, Commissioner Gonzalez, would you include in the motion what Commissioner Teele requested, in terms of meetings with the agencies and a new analysis? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, of course. The motion will be with the amendment that the staff will meet with the agencies' executive directors and every board members that could attend the meetings. Vice Chairman Winton: And may I add just a comment to that to both sides, to the agencies and to our staff? There's been some rocky roads traveled between the two sides here over the course of the last few years. And I would encourage both sides to go in with very open minds listening to each other's point of view and understanding what the issue that each side really has so that you can come out of there with something that's going to be beneficial to everyone. Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele: That at least means empty your revolver so that there's no bullets in the meeting. Chairman Regalado: No. Ms. Warren: OK. Chairman Regalado: We can say -- Commissioner Sanchez: Just show up to the meeting unarmed. Chairman Regalado: No nuclear weapons. Unidentified Speaker: Check for guns at the door. Maybe next Thursday. Commissioner Teele: Call the question.' Commissioner Sanchez: Check for weapons at the door. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 251 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-247 A MOTION TO DEFER AGENDA ITEM 5C (PROPOSED APPROVAL OF REVISED CITY OF MIAMI LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN FOR JULY 1, 2001 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2004, FOR THE CONTINUED PARTICIPATION OF THE CITY IN THE FLORIDA STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP ("SHIP") PROGRAM) TO MARCH 14, 2002 AT 11:00 A.M.; FURTHER REQUESTING THAT THE ADMINISTRATION PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS EVALUATING EACH AGENCY FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS; FURTHER REQUESTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO MEET WITH EACH OF THE AFFECTED ORGANIZATIONS IN ORDER TO EXPLAIN TO THEM WHAT THE CITY IS PROPOSING AND HOW IT WILL AFFECT THEM BEFORE SAID ISSUE IS HEARD ON MARCH 14, 2002. 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. Chairman Regalado: OK. We go back to PZ -- Unidentified Speaker: Seven, Chairman Regalado: -- 15, billboards. PZ -15, signing regulations within the City of Miami. Where is -- who is going -- Ana Gelabert or Juan Gonzalez or -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it's clear that we've let these sign companies really manipulate us to the point where they pull this indrawn in Tallahassee that's about to wipe us out, you know. All the illegal billboards are about to become legal. Chairman Regalado: OK. So, what are we doing here? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Well, PZ -15 is -- Commissioner Sanchez: The Governor vetoed it once. He'll veto it again. 252 March 7, 2002 Ms. Slazyk: It really does a whole lot more than just the billboards. It's a new sign ordinance for the City. With regard to billboards, the only thing it's really doing is eliminating them as permissible in C-2. And what it will do is say, within five years, they either have to be removed or come into a trust fund. Regardless of what the state legislation, you know, does or what happens with billboards, the rest of this sign ordinance fixes deficiencies in our current sign ordinance regarding potential constitutional issues, inconsistencies, contradictions. It was a comprehensive look at the entire sign ordinance and fixes a lot of other problems. So, I don't know if you want a full-blown presentation for first reading -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. Ms. Slazyk: Or if you have questions. Chairman Regalado: No, we don't. Ms. Slazyk: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Regalado: All right. This is a public hearing. So, it's a motion and we need a second. Commissioner Gonzalez: And a second. Chairman Regalado: OK. Public hearing. Go ahead, sir. Name and address and comments Dusty Melton: Name and address for the record, Dusty Melton, 3430 Poinciana Avenue. And I have an enthusiastic 10 or 15 -minute presentation, but given the hour and the fact that it is first reading, if it's the will of the Commission to hear the public testimony and the various industry requests and citizen observations at the public hearing and if there's general agreement from the other interested parties here, then I'll defer my comments. Otherwise, I'll give you my enthusiastic presentation for the next 10 or 15 minutes. Chairman Regalado: And that is very -- and it's a very good one, because I think it's the same that you gave to me. But let's decide what are we going to do. We need to have really a public hearing on this, and a presentation from the industry, the administration, Dusty. Vice Chairman Winton: So, the City Attorney says we can accept that full-blown public hearing on the second reading. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: And, so, they make a great offer 253 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Now, let's -- see, what we did last meeting, Johnny, is that everyone requested a time certain after six and this is what we get. So, what are we going to do? Why don't we take two or three hours, you know, making sure that -- Commissioner Sanchez: Not tonight. Chairman Regalado: No, no, not tonight. On the next meeting or whatever meeting we decide - - and not place any other items at least from PZ -1. So, we can start, you know, around six and leave around nine, because this is what we can expect, three or four hours minimum of debate. So, do you want -- Mr. City Attorney, we cannot do this on the 14th, right? Mr. Melton: Is it an open -- a public hearing right now? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we're talking about it. Chairman Regalado: Yeah, it is, but one second. We can do this on the 141h, the second reading? Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): You could -- oh, I'm sorry. No, sir, you cannot do this. I apologize. You can consider it on first reading on the 14th. Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry? Mr. Vilarello: You can defer this to the 14th. Vice Chairman Winton: For the first reading. Mr. Vilarello: Second reading will not be -- cannot be on the 14th. Chairman Regalado: Well -- but if we defer this to the 14th, we will be sending a very weak message to Tallahassee. And we should vote today because, you know, the state legislators need to know that the City wants to have control on this matter. So, you know, this is a public hearing. And, go ahead and -- Commissioner Sanchez: But, Mr. Chairman, may I? What are we going to basically vote on, a resolution that's supporting it? I mean, is that -- Chairman Regalado: No, no. Vice Chairman Winton: No. We're -- Chairman Regalado: No. We have the first reading ordinance of the billboards on the signs. Vice Chairman Winton: And, so, we're trying to pass it for first reading now. 254 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: We are trying to pass this on first reading. But the thing is that we do have presentations from the administration and from the industry and interested parties and all that. And it would take two or three hours. A good two or three hours, if we do the -- Don Deresz: Three minutes for me. Chairman Regalado: Because you've been sending emails, making sure that, you know, that we are accommodated. So, go ahead. But we will invite you back for the presentation so you can respond. Mr. Deresz: Thank you, sir. Chairman Regalado: As a resident. Mr. Deresz: Would someone be kind enough to send me an email or a letter or a notice when there are further -- Chairman Regalado: I will do that. Mr. Deresz: -- presentations or hearing on this, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, we will do this on the 11th of April. Second reading. Second reading will be on the l la' of April. Your name and address. Mr. Deresz: Thank you, sir. In 2001 legislative -- Chairman Regalado: Your name and address. Mr. Deresz: Thank you. My name is Don Deresz. I'm a resident, 1852 Southwest 24th Street, Miami, Florida. In last Legislative Session 2001 the transportation that required similar billboard legislation that was vetoed by the Governor. So, Commissioners, I urge you to agree with the City Attorney on pursuing the goals that were set by the City back -- citizens, residents, citizens of Miami back in 1985. Billboard companies trying to do the same thing every year. So, hopefully, if it doesn't pass, the Governor will veto it like he did last year. I want to thank the City Commissioners and City staff for correcting zoning ordinance abuse on the billboard issue. You have an industry, the outdoor advertising industry, that have arrogantly and illegally not only installed over 375 illegal billboards, which should have generated over thirty-six million dollars ($36,000,000) in fines, and honored collective fees. Illegal construction that has a history of electrical mortality, deaths of our citizens, possible hurricane missiles. Does the wording of these ordinances -- this is my question, because we're dealing with PZ -15, 16 and 17, I believe. Does the wording of these ordinances assure that we can take these illegal outdoor advertising billboards down, remove them from industry that jubilates creating a saturated sign community? Billboards that generate thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) per month illegally for each billboard company. So, that's my question. Do these ordinances assure that we can remove these billboards? 255 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. Don -- Mr. Desresz: Thank you. Chairman Regalado: -- as you heard, this ordinance will do that, but there is legislation in the state legislature. Hopefully, the Governor, like you said, will veto it. Well, we don't know that. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Winton: There may be, I guess on the reruns of Net 9, there will be people watching this. And on the basis of the people I've talked to in Tallahassee, unless you get off your rear end and get on the phone tomorrow and start calling our legislators from the County and get all your friends doing the same thing, this is not going to get vetoed by the Governor. It is going to go through and we're dead. So, it's going to take a concerted effort on the part of the citizens of Miami getting on the phone, calling their elected officials in Tallahassee and raising holy hell over the billboard companies stealing our City away from us. So, you guys better do that. Mr. Deresz: You're correct, Commissioner Winton. And the same thing was done last year, but the billboard companies, they had the lobbyists, the attorneys that were able to go in and keep fighting for this every year. You are correct. And this was done last year. That's the reason that was vetoed in the Transportation Bill, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I'm one hundred percent in favor of everything the gentleman said. But I don't think we ought to mislead the public. The Governor didn't veto this bill over billboards. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: I mean, and go read the Governor's veto message. Let's don't start getting this -- ourselves a sense of power or issues that we don't really have right now. This bill -- the Governor's veto had absolutely nothing to do with this bill, with the billboards. It was a part of a major budget issue and it's contained in the Governor's veto relating to dollars and the way the transportation earmarked certain projects that the Governor had strong objections to. So, I mean, that's not the point. I don't want to debate it with you. But I do think this. If we're relying upon the Governor vetoing this bill, because the billboard legislation has, you know, attacked and taken over the City of Miami, folks, we may as well not even pass this on first reading. Mr. Deresz: Yes, sir Commissioner Teele: Because we're dead. 256 March 7, 2002 Mr. Deresz: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: We've got to take this very seriously. And we've really got to be very careful that we don't send the wrong sign tonight to Tallahassee, that we're declaring an attack on the legislature. And, so, somewhere between hearing from the public on this issue and then trying to work with the Manager and the Attorney regarding our legislative delegation and the various committees that are sponsoring this, we have no objections to what the legislature policies are relating to billboards, if they're statewide. But this legislation literally relates largely to the City of Miami. And, so, we've really got to be very careful. And I really would hope that what we could do tonight is hear from the public, defer the details report from the staff -- and it's a very comprehensive thing that has much more to do than billboards than -- much more to do with outdoor advertisings and billboards, and then have that full report at second reading. Is that what we were going to try to do, Mr. Manager? Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. Mr. Deresz: Yes, Commissioner Teele. I'm sorry. I'm not as familiar with the billboard issue at Tallahassee as perhaps you are, but I guess you're right. Commissioner Teele: I'm relying on our Attorney. Mr. Deresz: But all I know is, it was vetoed last year Chairman Regalado: Thank you, Don Vice Chairman Winton: That -- right. Chairman Regalado: Don, we'll be back with this issue on April 11, 6 p.m. Come back. Six p.m., April 11. Go ahead. Bret Bibeau: Honorable City Commission, I'll be brief. My name is Bret Bibeau and I'm the Assistant Director of the Miami River Commission, with offices located at 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, in Miami, Florida, 33149. Pursuant to City Resolution 00- 320, I'm here to provide you with the Miami River Commission's official statement on PZ -15, which pertains to the Miami River Corridor. The City of Miami Neighborhood Enhancement Teams have determined that several outdoor advertising signs within the Miami River Corridor do not conform with the City of Miami's Zoning Ordinance. The Miami River Commission supports the City Commission's determination and I quote today's ordinance, "To enforce its sign regulations and to enforce the removal of all illegal signs, including those nonconforming signs, whose amortization period has expired, enforcement will result in a more aesthetically pleasing waterfront environment." And thank you for your time. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Mr. Rojas 257 March 7, 2002 Luis Rojas: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll take less than a minute and a half. My name is Luis Rojas, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard -- Vice Chairman Winton: Set the timer, please. Mr. Rojas: You can do that. And I just want to submit this one to the Clerk and one to each member. Those are our proposed changes to the ordinance. But what I'd like to say is that having been in Tallahassee for a while -- it's still a gamble, 50/50. It could happen. It couldn't happen. It might happen. Odds are probably against you. But let me tell you, we're still willing to sit down with the management and work out a compromise. What we had put on the table was we would take down 451 faces immediately. There would be a dedicated source of funds for the City. I just spoke to Mr. Knox and his client. He represented to me his client would still want to do that. So, we are saying that we're still willing to offer to take down signs to give money to the City, irregardless of what happens in Tallahassee. And that offer is being made right now, here. So, I -- we still want to sit down with you. We still want to work something out. And that's our position. Commissioner Teele: Do you know who Hirohito was? Mr. Rojas: Hirohito? He was the Japanese guy. Mr. Giminez: The emperor of Japan. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, the Japanese guy. Commissioner Teele: What was the foreign minister's name that was in Washington negotiating a day -- a few hours before -- Vice Chairman Winton: Pearl Harbor. Commissioner Teele: -- Pearl Harbor? Commissioner Sanchez: Pearl Harbor. Mr. Gimenez: I think his name is Rojas. Mr. Rojas: We didn't -- listen -- Vice Chairman Winton: Luis Rojas. Commissioner Sanchez: Luis, in other words, you're a dollar short and a day late. Mr. Rojas: Let me tell you. Let me tell you. I recommend to you guys -- Chairman Regalado: The Trojan horse. 258 March 7, 2002 Mr. Rojas: I recommend you create a committee of one, one Commissioner. He sits down with the Manager, he puts the industry in, and we could come back with a deal. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Rojas, if this Commissioner's done something here is, we've drawn the line in the sand. Mr. Rojas: Commissioner Sanchez, that's fine. I mean, you can have an ordinance and you can pass it on second reading. You're going to be in court for 10 years. And you're going to get no money and you're going to get no signs down. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, what you're offering us and what the billboards are offering us now is not acceptable. Mr. Rojas: That's fine. And we'll just -- Commissioner Sanchez: I'll tell you that right now, as 20 percent of this Commission. Mr. Rojas: OK, Chairman Regalado: Better yet -- well, I mean, if we want to get closer to history. Remember the Russian Ambassador to JFK (John Fitzgerald Kennedy). There is no -- any nuclear missile in Cuba. Mr. Rojas: There is a bill in Tallahassee that has -- the House bill and the Senate bill are different. The House bill hurts you tremendously. That bill passed last year. The Governor vetoed a comprehensive package, like Commissioner Teele said. The industry -- Clear Channel Communications is still willing to sit with the City, remove signs, and I think -- and the industry completely will give a dedicated source to this City. If this ordinance passes, I believe, as it is, that the City is going to be in a prolonged litigation just like the City of Lakeland was for 10 years. And that's just what I'm representing to you. We believe there's still a chance to reach a compromise. This ordinance is not going to get you what you want. If the Tallahassee bill passes, you're not going to get what you want. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the House bill was placed on special order calendar. So, that means it's soon to be going to the House side. Mr. Rojas: "Special order" means it will be heard. Commissioner Sanchez: It will be heard. And I believe they'll use the same tactics that was used last year, they're using this year. They're ramming it in through transportation. Mr. Rojas: I believe the bill this year is a clean bill. I don't think it's part of a complete package. I think the house bill was 715. I think it passed today on second reading. It's up on third reading tomorrow. 259 March 7, 2002 Mr. Gimenez: I think he's right. And that makes it much less likely it's going to be vetoed by the Governor, because it (UNINTELLIGIBLE) by itself. But let me clarify one thing. You said that the industry is willing to take down signs and also to donate some revenue to the City, but not your particular client, correct? Mr. Rojas: No. My client is willing to take down signs and I believe -- and that we would also be willing to put in some money. Now, the other -- I spoke to Mr. Knox and he said that his client was still willing to do a deal with the City. His client was going to put substantial more money. Clear Channel has so many signs in the City that really what we bring to the deal is, we can take down a 151 faces, somebody like Carter has some few faces that they can give money rather than -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Knox, always a pleasure, sir. Is there anything you want to put on the record? George Knox: I would just indicate for the record that my name is George F. Knox. I'm an attorney with offices at 150 Southeast 2nd Avenue. And the Carter Advertising Company is on record as indicating that it is ready and willing to cooperate with the City in order to establish a reasonable method by which outdoor advertising may be regulated and it is prepared to contribute whatever resources it may have in order to achieve that end. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Knox, I'm sorry to interrupt you, sir. But are your clients prepared to take down signs? Mr. Knox: Well, we're prepared to conform to the requirements of the ordinance that you would ultimately adopt. If the ordinance requires that we take down signs, then, of course, we'll do so pleafully. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, sir. Mr. Knox: Thank you. Anymore questions? Chairman Regalado: Thank you. We have -- we are going to have a public hearing on April 11, at 6 p.m. So I'm closing the public hearing. You -- OK. Steve. Steve Hagen: I know you -- the Commissioners know this, but I just want to remind you that there's a lot more to this rewrite of the ordinance than just billboards. We're talking about a rewrite covering all signage in the City of Miami. And I sat through the Planning and Zoning Hearing. I think the ordinance that's been rewritten is basically very good, but I found some things that I think ought to have more attention. And there's a few things that are not covered at all in the ordinance. And, so, I don't know how that works into the scheme of things in terms of - Chairman Regalado: Would you be so kind at least to send it to us and then we can -- Mr. Hagen: You all have it. I've sent to you my six-page -- 260 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Well, I have it. Mr. Hagen: -- faxed out. Yeah. Chairman Regalado: That, I have it. Mr. Hagen: Yeah. And those are concerns that I would like to see addressed. Chairman Regalado: And we will do that. Mr. Hagen: But I don't know what the time frame is, how you can do that between -- Chairman Regalado: We can do that by sending that to Planning and to the City Attorney and getting their feedback. Mr. Hagen: Steve Hagen, 725 Northeast 73rd Street. Chairman Regalado: OK. We will do that. Thank you. Mr. Melton: Mr. Chairman, just very briefly. I wanted to say how -- Chairman Regalado: Your name. Mr. Melton: Dusty Melton again, 3430 Poinciana Avenue. I just wanted to say on the public record how refreshing it is to see some of the larger outdoor advertising companies in this town come to you and explain how much they long to comply with the laws of this County and this City, and make substantial financial contributions and take down signage here as we get close to passing an ordinance. But I think the record should also reflect, with all due respect to my friend and neighbor, Mr. Knox, and my friend Mr. Rojas, their clients, as well as other outdoor advertising clients in this community, are responsible for dozens, if not hundreds, of signs, billboards and all other kinds, in all other locations, in all sorts of zoning districts, in every community in our City that they know do not comply with the law. And that's what this is all about. It is refreshing to hear them coming to the table with such generous offers, however. And we look forward to the public hearing. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Don. Mr. Deresz: Ten more seconds? Chairman Regalado: Yes, please. Mr. Deresz: Don Deresz, 1852 Southwest 24th Street. One of the things that I find kind of humorous was after the last election, I saw billboards, actually signs and bus shelters from Clear Channel and it said -- it was a public service message "Congratulations Mayor Diaz." That's a public service message? I don't understand where these companies are coming from. That's not 261 March 7, 2002 a public service message. That's not helping anyone in this City or the people with AIDS (Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome), whatever. Chairman Regalado: Well, it didn't help them. Anyway -- OK. James Jude: May I speak? You know, we seem to hear from the -- my name is James Jude. I have property at 111 Southwest 5th Avenue, in Miami. We seem to hear from the lobbyists, except for one other gentleman here that's been speaking, and the public doesn't seem to be heard very often. You know, they're -- the lobbyists' full job is just to influence you. They flood you with information. Your 15 minutes you've heard before and so forth. And maybe the public will hear it also. But, you know -- a lot comes down -- I hear the word "illegal." A lot comes down to what the definition of "is" is. Or what is the definition of "illegal?" Tomorrow you should insist that every one of the illegal billboards be taken down. If not, you ought to have buzz saws out there and cut them down. How -- what is illegal? I mean, you're supposed to be representing the people and, yet, you allow something that -- unless you're rewriting Merriam's Dictionary -- you know, you're allowing it to occur. Illegal is illegal. I, for one, am totally opposed to this visual pollution that we've had. And now we have these high tech. signs, which we're going to have auto accidents from people trying to watch something that's moving at the same time that they're driving down I-95 or other big highways. So, I ask you to enforce the laws. That's what should be done. Illegal is illegal. Commissioner Teele: Sir? Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Sir? Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes Commissioner Teele: Dr. Jude is a distinguished citizen. And, sir, tonight, you are a great American, too. Thank you for your testimony. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. The public hearing is closed. is first reading. Second reading of -- it's been moved and second Attorney. Roll call. (COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL.) Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, ma'am. Ms. Scheider: Commissioner Gonzalez? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am. So, do we have a motion? This . Read the ordinance, Mr. City 262 March 7, 2002 Ms. Scheider: Chairman Regalado? Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele is in the room. Ms. Scheider: Excuse me. Commissioner Teele? Commissioner Teele: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. Chairman Regalado: Yes. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLES 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, AND 25 TO MODIFY PROVISIONS REGARDING THE SIGN REGULATIONS AND TO MODIFY USE REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BUSINESSES; AND FURTHER BY CLARIFYING LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO REAL ESTATE SIGNS, AND BY ALLOWING FOR HEIGHT VARIANCES FOR BILLBOARDS ONLY WHEN A GOVERNMENTAL ACTION AFFECTS REASONABLE VISIBILITY OF SUCH A SIGN; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 263 March 7, 2002 44. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND CHAPTER 62 "OF CITY CODE "ZONING AND PLANNING," BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS 62-300 TO 62-302, CREATE NEW ARTICLE X ENTITLED "STREETSCAPE MITIGATION TRUST FUND"; PROVIDE FOR ADMINISTRATION, REGULATIONS, AND FEE SCHEDULE FOR TRUST FUND PAYMENTS FROM "FREESTANDING OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS". (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: OK. We have items -- we need to do -- if you -- Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): No. Two other items. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Sixteen and 17 are companion items. Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry? Ms. Slazyk: PZ -16 and 17 are companion items. Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -16, first reading ordinance. This is the fee schedule for signs. Ms. Slazyk: This is what actually sets up a Mitigation Trust Fund. There is no actual fee set up yet. The City is going to conduct a study and come back to insert the -- Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion? Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's second. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 264 March 7, 2002 An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 62, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ZONING AND PLANNING," BY CREATING A NEW ARTICLE X ENTITLED "STREETSCAPE MITIGATION TRUST FUND"; ESTABLISHING SAID FUND; SETTING FORTH INTENT AND PURPOSE; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION, REGULATIONS, AND FEE SCHEDULE FOR TRUST FUND PAYMENTS FROM "FREESTANDING OFF SITE ADVERTISING SIGNS" TO MITIGATE RELATED AND ASSOCIATED ADVERSE EFFECTS AND MAINTENANCE, MORE PARTICULARLY BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS 62-300 TO 62-302 TO SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, 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 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 Deputy City Attorney. 265 March 7, 2002 45. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATIONS FOR OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS REGULATED UNDER SECTION 926.15, ET SEQ., OF CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE. (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -17. Chairman Regalado: PZ -17, first reading. This is a moratorium on new applications for billboards and signs. Commissioner Sanchez: So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: Double move. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Public hearing open. Public hearing closed. Read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATIONS FOR OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS REGULATED UNDER SECTION 926.15, ET SEQ., OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI; PROVIDING FOR A TERM; PROVIDING FOR PENDING APPLICATIONS; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL REVIEW; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, 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 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 Deputy City Attorney. 266 March 7, 2002 46. WITHDRAW BY APPLICANT BAP DEVELOPMENT, INC. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL" AND CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL; 3163, 3165, 3171, 3175 AND 3179 SW 22ND TERRACE. Chairman Regalado: OK. We need to do 7 and -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Eight. Chairman Regalado: -- 8. After that, if you all want, we'll do the pocket items and we'll -- Vice Chairman Winton: No. We have to do Item 14 tonight. Chairman Regalado: Fourteen. OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Regalado: Not a problem. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): This is PZ he was talking about. Chairman Regalado: Hey, no problem. Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Should I proceed, Mr. Chairman? Chairman Regalado: PZ -7. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Seven and eight we can do together. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, you're saying PZ -7? Chairman Regalado: I said PZ -7. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I'm sorry. The item I was talking about is Item 14 in the regular agenda, that we have to do tonight. Chairman Regalado: Oh, oh. No. OK. OK. No, we'll go back. But I mean after this because this is in litigation. So we need to do something about this. PZ -7. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: PZ -7 and 8, these items have been before you, pending for approximately two years. Mother and daughter sued each other over the ownership of three of the lots in this application. The court has determined that Ms. Lima's daughter is the owner and Ms. Lima's daughter has sent a letter to the City of Miami withdrawing her property from this application. 267 March 7, 2002 By her withdrawal of those -- of her property from the application, the remaining land will not support the project that we had represented to you and promised the neighbors would be developed on this site. So, we basically -- we're bound -- our hands are bound. We cannot proceed with the application, with the remaining lots. I think your Attorney will advise you that your Code says that you have to take action within two years. And, so, by not talking action, the time will toll and this application will die by operation of law. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): That's right. It will be deemed denied. Chairman Regalado: So, what do -- do we need to do anything? Mr. Maxwell: Nothing. You don't have to do anything at this point. The record, as -- the information placed on the record by Ms. Garcia -Toledo will be sufficient. There's nothing else for you to do at this point. You cannot act on this item because the applicant has withdrawn their permission for it. And the applicant herself has indicated they no longer wish to pursue t. Chairman Regalado: OK. This is about PZ -7 and PZ -8 Ms. Garcia -Toledo: PZ -8. Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. 268 March 7, 2002 47. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; 1852 & 1900 N. BAYSHORE DRIVE. (Applicant(s): Parkshore on the Bay, LLC.). Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Is there any chance that we could hear Items 9 and 10, which are non controversial -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): It's second reading. Chairman Regalado: Non controversial? Ms. Slazyk: They're second reading. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: It's second reading. You approved it unanimously. This is in Commissioner Winton's property. It's the site of the Carlyle next to the 1800 Club and we're rezoning -- Chairman Regalado: PZ -9 -- Vice Chairman Winton: Move PZ -9. Chairman Regalado: PZ -9 -- Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. It's a public hearing. No one oppose. We close the public hearing. Second reading. 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 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. 269 March 7, 2002 was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of January 24, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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 Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12196 The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 270 March 7, 2002 48. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-4 "MULTIFAMILY HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO SD -6 "CENTRAL COMMERCIAL - RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT"; 1852 & 1900 N. BAYSHORE DRIVE. (Applicant(s): Parkshore on the Bay, LLC.) Chairman Regalado: PZ -10. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. We open the public hearing. Anybody oppose? No one has come forward. We close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled -- AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT, AMENDING PAGE NO. 23 OF THE ZONING ATLAS 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. 271 March 7, 2002 was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of January 24, 2002, was taken up for its second and final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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 Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12197 The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. 272 March 7, 2002 49. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 918. OFFSITE PARKING, TO MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO OFFSITE PARKING REGULATIONS (Applicant(s): Carlos A. Gimenez, Miami City Manager). Chairman Regalado: We go back to -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, before you do, I would move PZ -20. Chairman Regalado: PZ -20. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. PZ -20, off-site parking requirements. It's been moved and second. First reading. We open the public hearing. No one is opposed. We close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): An ordinance -- Vice Chairman Winton: By the way, how many blocks is 600 feet? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): In the long direction, it's probably no more than two. In the shorter direction, it's almost three. Vice Chairman Winton: Thanks. Ms. Slazyk: It's a couple blocks. Chairman Regalado: Five hundred feet is one block. Big block. Ms. Slazyk: Yes. So, it's a block and a half. But in the shorter direction, it's about two and a half. Chairman Regalado: You want more feet? Vice Chairman Winton: No, no, no. I'm done. Read the ordinance. Chairman Regalado: OK. Read the ordinance. Roll call. 273 March 7, 2002 An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMIISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 918 OFFSITE PARKING TO MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO OFFSITE PARKING REGULATIONS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Was introduced by Commissioner Teele, 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 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 Deputy City Attorney. 274 March 7, 2002 50. (A) DIRECT MANAGER TO INCLUDE IN APPLICATION TO STATE OF FLORIDA TO REDESIGN BOUNDARIES OF EMPOWERMENT ZONE, AREAS OF WEST GROVE, COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS ALONG FLAGLER STREET, IST STREET, 8TH STREET AND CORAL WAY AND/OR ALL OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE A 25% OF POVERTY LEVEL. DIRECT MANAGER TO SCHEDULE SECOND READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO GRANT AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTIONS TO NEW AND EXPANDING BUSINESSES WITHIN AREA LOCATED IN ENTERPRISE ZONE JUNE 27, 2002. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AUTHORIZE COMMISSION TO GRANT AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTIONS TO NEW AND EXPANDING BUSINESSES WITHIN AREA LOCATED IN ENTERPRISE ZONE. (B) BRIEF COMMENTS ON SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 27, 2002 FOR ACTION RELATED TO PENDING LABOR UNION CONTRACTS (See #28). Chairman Regalado: OK. We go back to the regular agenda. Item 14, this is a First Reading Ordinance, and this is something that was approved by the voters of the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Winton: And, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move it and make a couple comments. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Do we have a second? Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, I second the motion. Chairman Regalado: It's been second. And go ahead. Vice Chairman Winton: In discussions -- there's two points here. One, it's very important -- there -- two meetings are required for this to pass. It's very important that this get passed tonight because it sends a signal to Ryder Corporation that we're trying to recruit to downtown Miami for their world headquarters. However, that said, and discussions with the Mayor -- because, you know, the devil's always into details and we don't have the details all worked out. And, so, we want to pass this on first reading, but the Mayor is going to appoint a Study Committee to further review national standards and bring back some additional standards to go into this ordinance at the second reading. Now, if those standards are determined to be a substantial deviation -- then, obviously, we'll have to do the first reading again, but at least we get the first reading done, round 1, which is the crucial issue here. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes. Yes, sir. 275 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, let me just state for the record that I do not support this ordinance, as it is. Let me just say that when I got in this City Commission three years ago, I participated in some of the meetings at Steven P. Clark Building and if I know what I know today back then, I guarantee you this would have never happened. Let me just state for the record -- and I'm going to support it on first reading, because I think it's prudent for us to bring big corporations in. But I was disgusted at the process of how this was manipulated and how areas were deprived, such as my area, taking it to the port of Miami -- now, you tell me that the port of Miami needs to be stimulated when it generates eight billion dollars ($8,000,000) and it creates more than 45,000 jobs? Let me tell you the areas that suffer. And you're talking about stimulate economic development, well, Little Havana got -- where other areas benefited, Little Havana got BOHICA'ed. The abbreviation for that is "Bend over. Here it comes again." I stated it very clearly and I opposed this at the County level. And what they did is, they -- you know, the circus was in town and that room was full of clowns because they took away from certain areas and took it over to areas that really didn't really need it. Watson Island at the time. Now, they talk about also -- Vice Chairman Winton: Blue Lagoon. Commissioner Sanchez: Huh? Vice Chairman Winton: Blue Lagoon. You know, the waterfront Blue Lagoon. Commissioner Sanchez: Well -- but, see, Johnny, I have some concern with it. And you know what -- Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's what -- I'm agreeing with you Commissioner Sanchez: -- I'm prepared to pass it today. Vice Chairman Winton: I'm agreeing with you. Commissioner Sanchez: But I want to put them on the record. One of the things that had -- that was a selling tool was to provide employment to hire people in the Enterprise Zone. Well, that really doesn't do this, OK? Because what it does -- that's the way it was sold. And just like everything that comes down from Washington, which is a good package -- you know, a good package -- you know, a decent package deal, when it gets down here and when bureaucracy gets a hold of it, you know, all of a sudden, it's like throwing meat in the lion's (UNINTELLIGIBLE) when -- you know, people just rip it apart and try to take the big chunks. The City of Miami got screwed on this, OK? Homestead got a big chunk of it -- a big portion was sent. One of the arguments that I made was that public areas should not have been included and those areas should have been taken over to -- not to be self-serving -- Little Havana/Flagami area. There's some Commissioners here that really should have some concern on this. Regalado, you're one of them, because your district is deprived from this and I don't think anyone would argue here that some of your areas need to be stimulated -- you know, stimulated -- economic development in the area. So, I'm prepared to pass it on first reading, but when it comes back, I will fight it vigorously. I will ask that the City's administration apply or submit an application to the state to 276 March 7, 2002 redesign the boundaries to include commercial corridor, such as Flagami and 8th Street. We have Flagler, which is one of our most historic corridor here. If you look at this, it's got such a little portion of it. Now, you go to Flagler and tell me that it doesn't need to be economic development stimulated. So, as it is right now, I'm just going to -- I'm going to vote it on first reading because I believe it's good. But when it comes back for second reading, I want at least adequate time to put on the record that I totally disagree with it. Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- but what you should do, though, Commissioner Sanchez, is bring back at that next reading, the request that you just made, which is that the Commission pass a separate resolution that directs us to go try to change the legislation in Tallahassee. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the way to do it is to -- and I could make the motion right now, if you want -- is to direct the administration to submit an application to the State redesigning the boundaries to include commercial along Flagler, 1st and 8th Street, and Coral Way also. Commissioner Teele: Are we talking about the boundaries -- boundaries of what? Chairman Regalado: Empowerment Zone. He's talking about -- Vice Chairman Winton: Enterprise Zone. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Enterprise Zone. Vice Chairman Winton: Enterprise Zone. No, Enterprise. Commissioner Sanchez: Enterprise Zone. Chairman Regalado: Oh,OK. Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: But, you know, Joe, you -- Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: -- were at the County. I went to the County Commission, too, but it was the City's fault. Commissioner Sanchez: You're right. The City did not have representation. The Mayor barely show up at the meetings. Chairman Regalado: The Mayor never showed up. Commissioner Sanchez: The Mayor of Homestead showed up and -- Chairman Regalado: And the other Manager -- 277 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: -- took most of our portion (INAUDIBLE) Chairman Regalado: -- never took interest. We send somebody who didn't do the job, and nothing happened. So -- and what they did is, they draw a line, you know. It's one block through 7th Street, Northwest. One sidewalk. One sidewalk of Northwest 7th Street. So, they can come from Homestead to the port of Miami. And -- I mean, you know, you've got to praise these people. They, you know -- Commissioner Sanchez: There was special interest there pushing over to the port of Miami, pushing over to Jackson Medical Institutions, and they were pushing over to the airport. Those sites were never in the original Enterprise Zone. So, they took from areas that needed the money and they deferred it that way. And you know what? We deserve it because we didn't have the right presentation -- the representation to stand there and go toe -to -toe with them. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez: But there's a way to correct the problem, and that is by applying -- submitting an application to redesign the boundaries through Tallahassee. Vice Chairman Winton: However, what we don't want to do is throw the baby out with the bath water, right? Commissioner Sanchez: I'm prepared to vote on it on first reading. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a -- Vice Chairman Winton: Even with a -- Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir. Al Dotson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Al Dotson with offices at -- where is my office? -- 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. First, I just want to thank the Commission and the staff for their leadership in making sure that the City has tools to bring economic development within the City of Miami. To Commissioner Sanchez's point, economic development is a fluent process. And right now there are many communities doing exactly what you're suggesting the City of Miami do in Tallahassee, by recommending that the boundaries be changed so they are more inclusive as opposed to excluding communities that need to be a part of the Enterprise Zone. Your recommendation to staff to direct them to expand the Enterprise Zone or to change the boundaries is something that staff can do through the existing process. However -- I just want to go to Commissioner Winton's comment -- you don't want to miss opportunities to create smart economic development in those areas that you, as a Commission, decide you want that investment to occur. So, by not passing this ordinance on first reading or on second reading, you may miss an opportunity. But, concurrently with that, I think there is an opportunity to direct staff to apply -- and you must do this with Miami -Dade County -- to change the boundaries of the Enterprise Zone as it affects the City of Miami, because it is a joint application process. And 278 March 7, 2002 there is time that it's going to take in order to accomplish that objective. But I just wanted to put that on the record so that we can start the process that you're looking to start without missing the opportunity this ordinance seeks to achieve. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Dotson. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Vice Chairman Winton: And I would suggest that when the administration gets ready to do that -- I've sat through two or three meetings, where Mr. Dotson has described the benefits that come from both the Empowerment Zone and the Enterprise Zones and I've never, never -- and I've sat through, I'll bet you, 30 different meetings where people have described these benefits and I've never understood them in any meeting, until I sat in a meeting with Al Dotson, who could describe this stuff in plain English so that a company that wants to be the beneficiary could understand it. So, when it comes time for us to do that, if you need an expert to sit at the table with you to help craft it, call him. Commissioner Teele: Call the question Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance, please Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. Chairman Regalado: Hold on. Brett Bibeau: If I may, very briefly. Brett Bibeau, Assistant Director, Miami River Commission, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway. I have good news for the Commission. The Miami River Commission has been working in Tallahassee on the issue. We have a bill. It has -- Senator Meek is the sponsor. Co-sponsor Randy Ball. It has been moving through. It has not had any opposition yet. It is an expansion of our Enterprise Zone. And the new areas in the City of Miami will be as follows. On the south shore of the Miami River, we're going to be going east/west from 12th Avenue on Northwest 7th Street, 12 Avenue as far west as Southwest 37th Avenue, and then north to Northwest 20th Street on the north shore, between currently non- designated 12th Avenue going west to just west of 22nd -- I have a map I'll give you -- just west of 22nd Avenue. The southern border is 14th Street. The northern border is Northwest 20th Street. Commissioner Sanchez: Brett, 20th Street Northwest? Mr. Bibeau: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Already has it. It falls in the Enterprise Zone. Mr. Bibeau: Parts do. Parts do not. 279 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: OK, Mr. Bibeau: The little chunk here will be filled in and designated and this whole area on the south, including 8th Street, Flagami, Commissioner Regalado's district, this has all been moving forward very well. And, again, if we can express our support to Senator Meek and Representative Randy Ball, I see it passing at the end of the session. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. Mr. Bibeau: And this would just give the City the opportunity to have that as an Enterprise Zone and have these economic incentives. It doesn't force you to do it, but if you so choose, you'll be given the green light by this. Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. Read the ordinance. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 56 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "TAXATION" TO GRANT AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTIONS TO NEW AND EXPANDING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE AREA IN THE CITY OF MIAMI LOCATED IN THE ENTERPRISE ZONE; PROVIDING SCOPE AND TERMS OF EXEMPTIONS; PROVIDING PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATION AND RENEWAL REVIEW BY THE DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY COMMISSION; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND AN EXPIRATION DATE. was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, 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 Gonzilez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 280 March 7, 2002 The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Motion directing the administration to submit the application to the state of Florida redesigning the boundaries to include commercial corridors, such as Flagler, 8th Street and I", all the way down to City limits. And from -- the City limits in your district, too. So, it's not seen as self-serving. Chairman Regalado: Thank you. It's -- did we have a motion? Did we have a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I would like to -- as we're expanding that, I would like to make sure that the area encompassed by the West Grove gets -- because it's not an Empowerment Zone, an Enterprise Zone. No zone. So, I'd like it in the Enterprise Zone, as well. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, now is the time to put it in. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Mr. Bibeau: The way I -- and I'm sure that the area would qualify, is it has to be an average of essentially 25 percent poverty rate by Census Tract. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely qualified. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's my entire -- Mr. Bibeau: Oh, I'm sure it would. Commissioner Sanchez: -- district qualifies for that. Mr. Bibeau: Exactly. And, so, I said -- when we were doing that expansion, I said, that shouldn't be a problem. All that information's available online. We gave all the information to the representatives and it qualifies. Chairman Regalado: OK. So, it's amended as to include the West Grove or any area in the City with 25 percent poverty level, is that -- would you do that, Joe? Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me? Chairman Regalado: Or any area of the City with 25 percent poverty level. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that -- I could tell you that much. Any area of the City that falls under those guidelines. 281 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion 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. 02-248 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INCLUDE, IN THE APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO REDESIGN BOUNDARIES OF EMPOWERMENT ZONE, AREAS OF THE WEST GROVE, COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS ALONG FLAGLER STREET, 1 ST STREET, 8TH STREET AND CORAL WAY AND/OR ALL OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE A 25% OF POVERTY LEVEL. 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: OK. We have several items that have not been dealt with. You want to -- I would like to defer that, some of them, because we have some pocket items from the Manager and from the Commissioners that we need to do. And it's almost 10:30. Mr. Manager, for next meeting, what we want to do, we're going to have some of these items that have been deferred. So, if you have any zoning items that you want to place on the next agenda, we might do that. We'll still -- we're deferring some zoning items for next Thursday. So, if you want to place some items, after three will be fine. So, we are going -- we need a light agenda on April 11`" because we're going to have the public hearing on the billboards. And it's going to take like about three hours. We will have also something regarding this ordinance that we just passed on April l ltn because by then the -- you know, we have a second reading or something. Vice Chairman Winton: Which ordinance? The one we just passed on Economic Development? Chairman Regalado: Yeah. 282 March 7, 2002 Vice Chairman Winton: We probably won't -- that probably won't be back for several months. Chairman Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Winton: Because the Mayor's -- Chairman Regalado: Anyway, but we need three hours, at least, for the billboards. We meet on the 14th to start the process for the appointment of members of the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel). And, also, on the 14th, we need to appoint the members of the Oversight Committee for the bond that was passed by the voters. That's on the 14th. Now, think about it because it's important. The sooner we get going with this Oversight Board of the bonds, the better for us and for the administration to get input from the residents. Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, could I make an additional motion on the motion -- on the economic development thing? And that is to call for the second reading to be held at the first or second meeting in June. Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." Commissioner Teele: The second meeting. Vice Chairman Winton: Second meeting. Chairman Regalado: The second meeting in June? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Chairman Regalado: That's what it is? OK. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Three -- two or three quick housekeeping things. The Manager said that we're going to have to have a special meeting before the end of March to deal -- but after the 25th of March to deal with that. Was that date ever established? Chairman Regalado: Yeah, during the -- 283 March 7, 2002 Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Well, the -- Chairman Regalado: -- speech of the Mayor, we will do this. Commissioner Sanchez requested at 2. Mr. Gimenez: The 27th. Chairman Regalado: The 27th. So, if there's no need for it, then the Manager will send a memo saying that we don't need to meet. But the meeting has been set. Special meeting has been set for 2 p.m. by -- only the union contracts. Commissioner Teele: What time is the Mayor's speech? Chairman Regalado: We don't know yet, but it will be around 5 o'clock. Commissioner Teele: OK. All right. Mr. Chairman, the other thing is -- Vice Chairman Winton: Don't we need to vote on that motion, though, before we get to that, Commissioner Teele? Commissioner Teele: You probably should set the meeting -- Vice Chairman Winton: No. No, no, we didn't vote. Chairman Regalado: We did. We did. We did. Vice Chairman Winton: We did? Commissioner Teele: We voted on that? Chairman Regalado: Yes, we did. We did. Vice Chairman Winton: No, no. On my motion that 1 made for -- Chairman Regalado: But we do need to vote on your motion now? Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: The motion to have the second hearing -- second meeting in June. Chairman Regalado: Second hearing on June, on the last meeting of June. All in favor say aye. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 284 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-249 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SCHEDULE THE SECOND READING OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO GRANT AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTIONS TO NEW AND EXPANDING BUSINESSES WITHIN THE AREA LOCATED IN THE ENTERPRISE ZONE AT THE SECOND COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 2002 (CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 27, 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 Arthur E. Teele. Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez 285 March 7, 2002 51. (A) STAFF TO WORK WITH CONSULTANTS ON CONVENIENT TIME TO COME BEFORE COMMISSION FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN MAJOR STUDY BETWEEN MIAMI AND MIAMI BEACH ON TRANSPORTATION RAIL SYSTEM. (B) DIRECT CHAIRMAN TO REPORT BACK TO COMMISSION BY END OF APRIL 2002 WITH RECOMMENDED SALARY AND BENEFITS PACKAGE FOR CITY CLERK. Chairman Regalado: OK. So -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: The other thing is, we had requested that there's a major study between Miami Beach and Miami on a Transportation Rail System. That was scheduled for the meeting - - that's going to be done by the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) for the meeting of March 28th. It really is not going to make a lot of sense to do that on April 11, because we're just not going to have enough time. And, so, I would ask staff to see if we can work to get a convenient time and work with the consultants, because this is a -- you know, a major initiative of Miami Beach and Miami, and we need to try to do that. And, finally, the other item -- housekeeping item is on 2A, which relates to the salary and benefits. I would move that the City -- that the Chairman of the board be directed -- requested to report back to the board recommendation at the next meeting regarding the -- Chairman Regalado: What I did is, I told the City Clerk to meet with -- she has not met with two members of the City Commission. So, I told her that I would rather wait, that she will meet -- because I'm OK with the salary and the proposal. But I told her -- Commissioner Teele: I don't know if the -- Chairman Regalado: I told her she needs to meet with Johnny. Commissioner Teele: I don't know if the salary's -- let's -- could we do this. I would move that the Chairman of the board be directed to report back to the board by the end of April with a recommended salary and benefits package for the Clerk. I would so move. Chairman Regalado: We will do that. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second_ Chairman Regalado: I can do that on the meeting of April I Ith. Commissioner Teele: Call the question. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 286 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-250 A MOTION DIRECTING CHAIRMAN TOMAS REGALADO TO REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION BY THE END OF APRIL 2002 WITH A RECOMMENDED SALARY AND BENEFITS PACKAGE FOR THE CITY CLERK. 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 Gonzilez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 287 March 7, 2002 52. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "HOMELESS PROGRAM DONATIONS" AND APPROPRIATE $15,000 TO SAID FUND RECEIVED AS DONATION FROM TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF AMERICAS FOR PURPOSES OF ENHANCING SERVICES PROVIDED BY HOMELESS PROGRAM. Chairman Regalado: Pocket items. Pocket items. Mr. -- let's start -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Mr. Gimenez: Could we pass Number 12? It's accepting -- establishing a new revenue fund. Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. First Reading Ordinance. It's a public hearing. Anybody from the public? No one from the public. We close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. Number 12. Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "HOMELESS PROGRAM DONATIONS" AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 TO SAID FUND RECEIVED AS A DONATION FROM TECHNOLOGY CENTER OF THE AMERICAS FOR PURPOSES OF ENHANCING THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE HOMELESS PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID DONATION, AND TO EXECUTE ANY DOCUMENTS NECESSARY, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR ACCEPTANCE OF SAID DONATION, ALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000.00 FOR SAID SERVICES; AND CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. 288 March 7, 2002 was introduced by Commissioner Teele, 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 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 Assistant City Attorney. Mr. Gimenez: Thank you, sir. Chairman Regalado: OK, 289 March 7, 2002 53. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND CITY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 10- 22 TO MODIFY DEFINITIONS TO RENAME "OMNI AREA MEDIA DISTRICT" TO "FIRE STATION NO. 2 MOTION PICTURE DISTRICT", IN RECOGNITION OF HISTORIC FIRE STATION NO. 2 WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN DISTRICT. (Applicant(s): City of Miami). Chairman Regalado: We have a pocket item from the Manager. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: Yes Commissioner Teele: If I could, I've got some people that have been waiting for a meeting. Could I take up my items, please? Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to take up two non -controversial PZ (Planning & Zoning) items, as well as a couple of pocket items. PZ Number 14, which is non- controversial, relating to the motion picture. This is the ordinance that names the Omni area media to the Fire Station 2, Motion Picture District. And I would ask that the -- Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Commissioner Teele: -- that the public hearing be opened and the Attorney to read it into the record. Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): This is 14? Commissioner Teele: Fourteen. Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Mr. Maxwell: Moved and second. Commissioner Gonzalez: You need a second, right? Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: I would move it and you second it. Moved by Commissioner Gonzalez. I second. Mr. Maxwell: An ordinance of the Miami City -- Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Commissioner Teele: Moved and second. Could we call the question? 290 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: Call the question. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE MIAMI CITY CODE, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 10, SECTION 10-22 IN ORDER TO MODIFY DEFINITION TO RENAME THE OMNI AREA MEDIA DISTRICT TO FIRE STATION NUMBER 2, MOTION PICTURE DISTRICT IN RECOGNITION OF THE HISTORIC FIRE STATION NUMBER 2, WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN THE DISTRICT; 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 Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzilez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 291 March 7, 2002 54. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY AMENDING TEXT OF GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT TO INCLUDE SPECIFIC GOALS ASSOCIATED WITH NEW PARK IN LITTLE HAITI AREA. (Applicant(s): Carlos A. Gimenez, Miami City Manager). Commissioner Teele: And the last PZ (Planning & Zoning) item is PZ Item Number 22, which is non -controversial. It's a text amendment relating to the land use policies and goals of parks and open space, related to the proposed park in Little Haiti. I would ask that the public hearing be opened. Chairman Regalado: We have a public hearing, which is open. Anybody from the public to make a comment? No one has come forth. So, we close the public hearing. Do we have a motion? Commissioner Teele: So -- Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved. Commissioner Teele: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. An Ordinance entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION OPEN SPACE ELEMENT, TO INCLUDE SPECIFIC GOALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW PARK IN THE LITTLE HAITI AREA; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 292 March 7, 2002 was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney. 293 March 7, 2002 55. INSTRUCT MANAGER TO REPORT BACK TO COMMISSION AT APRIL 11, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING, ON STATUS OF FIRST SOURCE HIRING AGREEMENT AS RELATES TO PERFORMING ARTS CENTER PROJECT AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO MAXIMIZE INCLUSION OF BUILDING TRADE UNIONS. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you. On the pocket item, it's a resolution requesting that the Manager report back to the Commission regarding the April 11"' Commission Meeting, on the status of the First Source Hiring Agreement, related to the Performance Arts Center; and further recommending -- requesting that the Manager make recommendations on how to maximize the inclusion of building trades, which utilize laborers located within the City of Miami limits and prioritizing revitalization districts; and further requesting that the Chair and Executive Director of the Performing Arts Center be requested to provide input, participate in discussions on the subject matter. And this has been conferred with Gail Thompson. who would like for us to work with her on this. So moved. Vice Chairman Winton: This First Source Hiring, is that what you said? Commissioner Teele: It's First Source Hiring, but it's asking the Manager -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right. Commissioner Teele: -- to sit down with him and work with him on -- 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. 294 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-251 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT A REPORT AT THE APRIL 11, 2002 CITY COMMISSION MEETING, CONCERNING (1) THE FIRST SOURCE HIRING AGREEMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER PROJECT AND FURTHER (2) RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAXIMIZE THE USE OF LABORERS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF BUILDING TRADE UNIONS AND ARE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI LIMITS AND THE COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION DISTRICT* FURTHER REQUESTING THAT THE CHAIRPERSON OF AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR T CENTER PARTICIPATE IN THE DISCUSSION MEETING. THE ADVISORY BOARD HE PERFORMING ARTS AT THE COMMISSION (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: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Chairman Tomas Regalado NAYS: None ABSENT: None 295 March 7, 2002 56. APPROVE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND SITE FURNISHINGS AT BUENA VISTA PARK BY HUNTER KNEPSHIELD COMPANY, $23,863, PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF SITE FURNISHINGS AT ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK BY CONTRACT CONNECTION, INC., $45,000; UTILIZING MIAMI- DADE COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 4907 -02/03 -OTR -SW ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK BOND PROGRAM AND PARK FACILITIES GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS ACCOUNT. Commissioner Teele: The second item is an item relating to the playgrounds at Buena Vista. This item comes by way of the Manager's Office, requesting the purchase and approval and installation of equipment and site furnishings at Buena Vista by the company designated -- Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Commissioner Teele: -- in an amount -- Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Commissioner Teele: And further relates to Virrick Park, Elizabeth Virrick Park in the same contract matter, not to exceed the same -- similar amounts of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000). Moved and second, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: OK. 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. 02-252 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AND SITE FURNISHINGS AT (1) BUENA VISTA PARK FROM HUNTER KNEPSHIELD COMPANY, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $23,863, AND (2) ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK FROM CONTRACT CONNECTION, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $45,000, UTILIZING MIAMI- DADE COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 4907 -02/03 -OTR -SW FOR BOTH PURCHASES AND INSTALLATIONS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOODS PARK BOND PROGRAM AND THE PARK FACILITIES GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS ACCOUNT, AS APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED. 296 March 7, 2002 (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. 297 March 7, 2002 57. PROVIDE IN-KIND GRANT TO DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY INC., $424 FOR POLICE SERVICES, SURCHARGES, AND PERMIT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH "INTERNATIONAL DAY OF SERVICE -DST FIGHTS HIV/AIDS" DAY EVENT SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE ON SATURDAY, MARCH 9, 2002. Commissioner Teele: The third item is a resolution approving an in-kind grant of Delta Sigma Theta not to exceed four hundred and twenty-five dollars ($425) for police services. Chairman Regalado: It has been moved and seconded. All -- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to put on the record for the public that this is associated with the "International Day of Service" fighting HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) and AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) day event scheduled to take place on Saturday March 9, 2002, which will leave from Miami City Hall to the Miami City limits between the junction of 27th Avenue and 36th Street -- actually, it's 19'h. And this will be a part of about 20 different caravans going throughout Dade County making people to become aware, more aware of HIV, which obviously Dade County, Miami has one of the highest rates in the nation. So moved, Mr. Chairman. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and seconded. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): "Aye." The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 02-253 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING AN IN-KIND GRANT TO DELTA SIGMA THETA SORORITY INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $424, TO COVER COSTS OF POLICE SERVICES AND PERMIT FEES REQUIRED FO THE "INTERNATIONAL DAY OF SERVICE -DST FIGHTS HIV/AIDS" EVENT SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 9, 2002, WHEREBY PARTICIPANTS OF SAID EVENT WILL TRAVEL FROM MIAMI CITY HALL TO THE JUNCTION BETWEEN NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE TO NORTHWEST 36TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA. 298 March 7, 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: Chairman Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton Commissioner Angel Gonzalez Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: None ABSENT: None 299 March 7, 2002 58 URGE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE TO ENACT ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO HOUSE BILL HB 1341, WHICH, IF ADOPTED, WILL INCLUDE IN DEFINITION OF "BLIGHTED AREA," GOVERNMENTALLY -OWNED PROPERTY WITH EXISTING ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND ADD CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALLY - OWNED LAND THAT QUALIFIES AS BROWNFIELDS AREA TO BOUNDARIES OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. Commissioner Teele: And the final pocket item, Mr. Chairman, is a resolution of the City Commission urging that the legislature of the state of Florida enact additional amendments to House Bill HB -1341, which, if adopted, will expand the definition of blighted area to include governmentally owned property with adverse environmental conditions, whether they're caused by public or private entities, which will add contiguous municipally -owned land that qualifies as Brownfield to the boundaries of redevelopment agencies, and said amendments will more particularly set forth in the attached draft. And I would so move. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, this amendment would only add to the word "blight." Definition of the statute blight. An adverse environmental condition similar to -- such as conditions that may exist in Bicentennial Park. It would then mean that the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) could spend money with -- for the City or with the City from the Tax Increment District to assist in removing those blight conditions. And, so, it's a way of trying to work with the City and the activities that are being talked about by you, Commissioner Winton, to be of assistance to you. And it would also allow us to expand the boundary to include that area, if those conditions exist. Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 300 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-254 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, URGING THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA TO ENACT ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO HOUSE BILL HB 1341, WHICH, IF ADOPTED, WILL INCLUDE IN THE DEFINITION OF A BLIGHTED AREA, GOVERNMENTALLY -OWNED PROPERTY WITH EXISTING ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WHETHER CAUSED BY A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ENTITY AND WHICH WILL ADD CONTIGUOUS MUNICIPALLY -OWNED LAND THAT QUALIFIES AS BROWNFIELDS AREA TO THE BOUNDARIES OF A COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, SAID AMENDMENTS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED DRAFT AMENDMENTS, FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICIALS. (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. 301 March 7, 2002 59. AUTHORIZE CITY ADMINISTRATION TO EXPEND UP TO $5,000 FROM SPECIAL EVENTS FUNDS FOR EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH AMISTAD EVENT. Commissioner Teele: And I guess this is in conjunction with the Manager's Office. And, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to the Manager and to the staff, so much of the department heads, the City Attorney, City Clerk, where there for the Black History Month celebration at the Amistad. It was standing room only. We had several hundred people, more than we anticipated. It was a wonderful event. And your staff, Mr. Manager, did a simply outstanding job in coordinating this. This resolution helps us pay for the unanticipated surge of people that showed up, even though there were Dade Day going on somewhere else. It's a resolution authorizing the administration to expend up to five thousand dollars ($5,000) from special funds, account number for the expenditures associated with the Amistad event that was previously held as part of Black History. 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 Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-255 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING RESOLUTION O1-1270, AS AMENDED BY RESOLUTION NO. 02-201, TO INCREASE FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000, FOR PORT VISITATION EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DOCKING OF THE HISTORIC FREEDOM SCHOONER "AMISTAD," IN MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM JANUARY 5 TO MARCH 2,2002; ALLOCATING THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM THE SPECIAL FUNDS ACCOUNT, ACCOUNT NO. 001000921054.6.289. 302 March 7, 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. Commissioner Teele: Thank you. 303 March 7, 2002 60. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT (FPL) FOR OVERHEAD TO UNDERGROUND CONVERSIONS OF ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES ALONG (1) NW 9TH STREET FROM NW 3RD AVENUE TO NW. 2 AVENUE, $312,429.27, AS PART OF PHASE 3 OF 9" STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL AND (2) NW 3RD AVENUE, $792,935.00. AS PART OF PHASE 4 OF 9TH STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL. Commissioner Teele: And, finally, I would move Item Number 16, and changing the date, that the item be placed on the agenda from March 7th to March 11th. And this is simply a request asking that the Manager -- to sit down and consider the request relating to Florida Power and Light overhead and underhead and all this kind of stuff. And it doesn't spend any money. It doesn't direct any money. It requests that the Manager sit down and work it out. So moved. Chairman Regalado: OK. Item 16 has been moved. Is there a second? Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: Second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-256 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORMS, WITH FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY FOR THE OVERHEAD TO UNDERGROUND CONVERSIONS OF ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES ALONG (1) NORTHWEST 9TH STREET FROM NORTHWEST 3RD AVENUE TO NORTHWEST 2ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $312,429.27, AS PART OF PHASE 3 OF THE NORTHWEST 9TH STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL; AND (2) NORTHWEST 3RD AVENUE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $792,935.00, AS PART OF PHASE 4 OF THE 9TH STREET PEDESTRIAN MALL, CONTINGENT UPON THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SEOPW/CRA) PROVIDING FUNDING FOR THE TOTAL COST OF BOTH PROJECTS. 304 March 7, 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. 305 March 7, 2002 61. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ACCEPT $1,250,000 GRANT FROM SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT IN FLAGAMI NEIGHBORHOOD. Chairman Regalado: Could you just stay for a while? Mr. Vice Chair, I need to do something from the margin here. So, can you take the chair, please? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I will. Chairman Regalado: I am very happy to introduce a resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept a grant in the amount of one million, two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000) from the South Florida Water Management District for a drainage system and flood mitigation in the Flagami area. This impacts Commissioner Gonzalez and myself district. And, as you know, we've got to move this because rains are coming. And -- Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Chairman Regalado: -- we have a problem. So, I move this -- Vice Chairman Winton: I'm the chair. Sorry. I can't second. Chairman Regalado: -- item. You can't second. Vice Chairman Winton: Right. Sorry. Chairman Regalado: That's why -- Commissioner Gonzalez: I second. I second the motion. Vice Chairman Winton: Got a motion and a second. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The motion carries. 306 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-257 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A GRANT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,250,000, FROM THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT FOR A DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT IN THE FLAGAMI NEIGHBORHOOD; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO ACCEPT THE GRANT. (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. 307 March 7, 2002 62. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 2-1153 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATIONBOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS/COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD" TO CREATE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS. SUPPORT MAYOR DIAZ' DECISION RELATING TO ADDITION OF POLICY ADVISOR POSITION, WITH BUDGETARY RESPONSIBILITY. Chairman Regalado: The other item is an ordinance. This is an ordinance of the Miami City Commission to amend the Charter and the Code administrations and boards to create -- to give the Manager the power to create the Office of Community Relations, which shall consist of a Community Relations Coordinator and a staff to assist the board in facilitating its purposes. I move this ordinance. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been -- Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: Call the roll, please. An Ordinance Entitled — AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE XI/DIVISION 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATIONBOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS/COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD" ("BOARD") TO CREATE THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS WHICH SHALL CONSIST OF A COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR AND STAFF TO ASSIST THE BOARD IN FACILITATING ITS PURPOSES, POWERS, AND DUTIES AND PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-1153 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 308 March 7, 2002 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 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 Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice Chair. The Mayor and the Manager have requested that we do Item 9. It's an emergency ordinance. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's a four-fifths vote. It's been moved by Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: Second by Commissioner Gonzalez. A public hearing. It's about the capital improvement projects and new projects that need to be funded. So, we -- this is the list of projects, right? Marcelo Penha (Assistant Director, Management & Budget): Excuse me, Commissioner. Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance. Mr. Penha: Excuse me, Commissioner. Marcelo Penha, Assistant Director, Management and Budget. There are some floor amendments that were just handed out that need to be noted. Chairman Regalado: Like what? Mr. Penha: On page one, there are some permanent positions for the protocol. Chairman Regalado: It is an emergency ordinance. Oh, I'm sorry. I made a mistake. I made a mistake on the CRB (Community Relations Board) thing. It needs to be an emergency ordinance. What do we do, Madam City Attorney? Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Move to reconsider as an emergency. Commissioner Teele: Which one? 309 March 7, 2002 Chairman Regalado: The one that I did on the CRB. Would you take the chair again? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I will. Chairman Regalado: OK. I will move, as an emergency ordinance -- Ms. Chiaro: First, you have to move to reconsider it as an emergency. Chairman Regalado: Motion to reconsider and -- Vice Chairman Winton: Need a second. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second to reconsider -- what item was that? Ms. Chiaro: The pocket item that -- Vice Chairman Winton: The pocket item on CRB. Ms. Chiaro: -- establishes a Community Relations Coordinator. Vice Chairman Winton: Any discussion? Being none, all in favor "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. The motion carries. The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-258 A MOTION TO RECONSIDER PRIOR VOTE ON ABOVE LISTED ORDINANCE WHICH PASSED ON FIRST READING TO CREATE THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS. 310 March 7, 2002 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: Now, Mr. Chair, I move to introduce, as an emergency ordinance, the Manager's recommendation on this matter. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Ms. Chiaro: An emergency ordinance of the Miami City Commission amending Chapter 2 -- Vice Chairman Winton: Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion. We don't have a second yet. Commissioner Teele: Second. Vice Chairman Winton: We have a second. Discussion. Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion. You know, this is something you don't bring here at the last minute of the day. Come on. This ordinance, this emergency ordinance with all these changes -- you just -- come on. You can't bring this at -- Chairman Regalado: Why? Commissioner Teele: Which one are you talking about? Chairman Regalado: Which one you're talking about? Commissioner Sanchez: The Item 9, which just been brought here. Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, no. He's on something else. Chairman Regalado: No, no. I'm doing other things. 311 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, OK. Well, I just -- Vice Chairman Winton: He's on a different issue. Commissioner Teele: He's on the CRB, right? Chairman Regalado: No. I'm doing the CRB. Vice Chairman Winton: He's on CRB. Chairman Regalado: No. This is different. Joe, this is different. Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, it's fine. But did you see what you just got? Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Well, we're going to deal with that then. Vice Chairman Winton: We'll deal with that in a minute. So -- Commissioner Sanchez: No, I'm not going to deal with it today, I can assure you that. Vice Chairman Winton: But right now we're on the CRB issue and it requires a four-fifths vote. Chairman Regalado: Right. Vice Chairman Winton: Actually, it requires a -- Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance. An Ordinance Entitled — AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE XI/DIVISION 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION/BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS/COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD" ("BOARD") TO CREATE THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS WHICH SHALL CONSIST OF A COMMUNITY RELATIONS COORDINATOR AND STAFF TO ASSIST THE BOARD IN FACILITATING ITS PURPOSES, POWERS, AND DUTIES AND PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-1153 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 312 March 7, 2002 was introduced by Chairman Regalado and seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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 Chairman Regalado seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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. 12198 The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney. Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much, Johnny. And now we go back to nine -- Commissioner Teele: On Number 9 -- Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Teele: Before we take up Number 9 -- Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman -- Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Sanchez: I believe I had the floor. I requested to have the floor. Chairman Regalado: Yes, you did. 313 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: Well, let me just caution you. We've had a long day today. We've been here since 9 o'clock. It's almost 11 o'clock. You know, let me just caution ourselves when we try to -- and I know it's probably for the good of the City that we -- you know, we have busy, voluminous agendas, but let me just caution you when we start taking these, you know, last minute dash to try to get our ordinance across. This ordinance that's in front of us -- I mean, you're talking about capital improvement projects appropriation. I would feel comfortable if this was brought in like the beginning of the day, where we could have ample time and not bring this as a pocket item. Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, we'll be happy -- Commissioner Sanchez: Not that I have anything against this pocket item. I just don't feel comfortable ramming it through now. Well, it's an ordinance. Mr. Gimenez: We'll be happy to bring it back for you at next meeting Commissioner Sanchez: It's not on the agenda. It's not in the order of the day Vice Chairman Winton: No. It's agenda Item 9. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Sanchez is one hundred percent correct. And I have some very -- I want to do everything that is being proposed, but I have some process issues -- because I'm going to tell you this. There's two things: Number 1, we passed a resolution, when the previous Mayor was here, requesting that the Mayor establish a position in his office to review budget. I don't know how to get where we are tonight, but I want to get here tonight. I would like to move that this Commission resolve that the position of a budget -- of a Policy Advisor, with budgetary responsibilities, be added to the Mayor's Table of Organization and head count, effective immediately. I would so move. Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a motion. Actually, isn't this a resolution? But what Commissioner Teele -- Commissioner Teele: This is a motion. This is not (INAUDIBLE). Chairman Regalado: No. I understand. But what you're doing is, you're taking out one line -- Commissioner Teele: No, I'm not. No, I'm not. I'm not dealing with that. What this does is it gives everybody the notice that the Commission has approved -- it's already approved, candidly. The question is a budget issue. But I think what we need to do is go on record as supporting what the Mayor has already announced in the papers. Commissioner Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE). Was it approved? Commissioner Teele: No. What we have approved is, we approved when Carollo was Mayor, that he hire a senior budget person to advise the Office of the Mayor at that time. That 314 March 7, 2002 resolution's still in effect, if anybody cares to research it. And I think the Mayor has made an announcement. I think, you know, we do have some issues relating to timing, and I think we need to be on record, at least, as letting the Mayor know and the Manager know we're going to support that decision. And that's all that I'm doing. It's a statement of intent. And I would therefore move that this Commission resolves that we support the Mayor's decision relating to the staffing addition, which is already a part, and that we are committed to approving the Table of Organization adjustments to add one position. I would so move for budgetary purpose. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion. Do we have a second? Vice Chairman Winton: Second. But if you read this first paragraph -- and I can't -- I don't know what it says exactly. Commissioner Teele: I'm not dealing with the ordinance, because I think -- Vice Chairman Winton: I understand that. Commissioner Teele: -- 1 think Commissioner Sanchez is right about that. Vice Chairman Winton: But I'm not dealing with the whole ordinance. I'm dealing with the first paragraph, which deals with the Mayor's request. This other stuff doesn't. Commissioner Teele: All of this is Mayor. Vice Chairman Winton: Only the -- no. Commissioner Teele: Oh, I'm talking about the three or four position -- Vice Chairman Winton: No. The only -- the first paragraph really deals with the Mayor's budget. Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm only talking about one position. Vice Chairman Winton: 1 understand. But in this it says, "The adjustment reflects the addition of a Senior Financial Advisor. Then it says, "The possible addition -- so, then, we don't necessarily have to act on that tonight -- "of an Economic Development Advisor parenthesis (currently planned to be filled by a consultant) end parenthesis, and an assistant." Now, I don't know if this says, "and the assistant" is really needed to go with something else here or not. I don't know if that's the thing that we can defer or not defer. Commissioner Teele: But, Johnny, I'm not trying to figure out where he's going. I'm only trying to say to the Mayor's Office and to the Budget Office and the Manager, that he has the authority to go ahead and do what it is he's proposing from us. Vice Chairman Winton: But you may not be saying that by saying that it's only one position. 315 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Teele: That's all I'm moving tonight. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, I'm going to introduce another motion. Commissioner Teele: Well, that's fine. I don't have a problem with that. The only concern that I have is on this whole thing is, as it relates to the protocol position. I have no problems with staffing that position -- any position or financing it out of there, but this City needs a career person, who is totally available to the Mayor and can work for the Mayor, detail to the Mayor, but we need a career position without regard to who the Mayor is. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. But this doesn't -- Commissioner Teele: And transfer -- yes, it does. This transfers the GSA (General Services Administration) career position to the Office of the Mayor. And I just think that that position -- it says, "one permanent position from" -- "transferring one permanent position from GSA to the Office of the" -- I'm sorry -- City Manager. I apologize. To the Office of the City Manager. Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So, those are different things. And I'm just wanting to -- you know, my amendment to your motion just simply, I want to send the same message you're sending, except that we're saying that the tools the Mayor needs -- and he's only talking about -- oops, excuse me. His is only paragraph 1 here and I'm suggesting that we say that the tools the Mayor needs to do his job, we're willing to support in that resolution. Commissioner Teele: I accept it. I accept the amendment. But we're not passing a budget or appropriations item tonight because Commissioner Sanchez is right. We need to think this stuff through and go through the line items. Vice Chairman Winton: Correct. Commissioner Sanchez: I need to study this. I mean, I don't mind -- Vice Chairman Winton: Correct. I'm not arguing that point. Commissioner Sanchez: This has got nothing to do against me going against the Mayor in any way. Vice Chairman Winton: Not arguing the point. Commissioner Sanchez: I just don't feel that at the 11th hour, being exhausted (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Chairman Regalado: Not only -- Commissioner Sanchez: I'm going to vote on this conflicts -- I think I should read this -- Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. We're not arguing that point. 316 March 7, 2002 Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Chairman Regalado: Not only that -- Commissioner Sanchez: I could accept the motion. Chairman Regalado: Someone has to brief each members of the Commission, if they wish, because I think it's major changes. I frankly don't understand what does a career Protocol Office does in GSA. I don't understand. Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's not a part of what Commissioner Teele and I -- Commissioner Teele: That ain't a part of my motion. Vice Chairman Winton: -- passing here. Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no. I understand that. But I want to understand for next week this kind of thing. Anyway -- Commissioner Sanchez: Are you (INAUDIBLE) that position for the Mayor? Chairman Regalado: Huh? Commissioner Sanchez: Is that what you're voting on? Is that what the motion -- Commissioner Teele: We're voting on -- no. We're voting on a statement of intent to support and give the Mayor the resources that he has requested -- Chairman Regalado: But not on budget. Not on budget. Commissioner Teele: But we're not making the budget. But he can go ahead and do anything he wants to, because all he's got to do now is just put them on existing budget lines. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. I don't have a problem with that. Chairman Regalado: All in favor -- Commissioner Teele: And increasing the head count associated with that. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 317 March 7, 2002 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-259 A MOTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION IN SUPPORT OF MAYOR DIAZ' DECISION RELATING TO THE ADDITION OF A POLICY ADVISOR POSITION, WITH BUDGETARY RESPONSIBILITY, AND THAT THIS COMMISSION IS COMMITTED TO APPROVING THE MAYOR'S TABLE OF ORGANIZATION ADJUSTMENTS TO ADD SAID POSITION. 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. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, the only message that I'm saying here is that we need to be careful, because this is how you get in trouble. And if there's a message out here that, you know, I'm not going to rubber stamp any issue. 318 March 7, 2002 63. PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO REVIEW CONDITIONS PLACED ON HEALTH CLINICS IN R-3 ZONING DESIGNATION WHICH ARE SPECIFICALLY BOUNDED BY SOUTHEAST 26Th ROAD AND SOUTHEAST 15Th ROAD AND DETERMINE WHETHER SAID SPECIAL CONDITIONS SHOULD BE REPEALED. Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's do pocket items. Commissioner Gonzalez, pocket items. Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I have a motion directing Planning Department to review the conditions placed on the health clinic in the R-3 zoning designation, which are specifically bounded by Southeast 2e Road and Southeast 15 Road, and determine whether said special condition shall be repealed and, if so, forward legislation to the Planning Advisory Board. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. Vice Chairman Winton: What does that mean, though? Angel, what are you -- what's your intent there? Commissioner Gonzalez: Send it back to the Planning -- Vice Chairman Winton: So that we do what, though? Commissioner Gonzalez: You know, if the special condition -- Vice Chairman Winton: We need those things (INAUDIBLE). Commissioner Sanchez: But what is he focusing on, the (INAUDIBLE) -- those homes? Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): No. This is actually on health clinic. Vice Chairman Winton: No, on health clinic. Commissioner Gonzalez: No. That's in the health clinic. Ms. Slazyk: Health clinics. There is -- Chairman Regalado: What he's saying, he's sending it to you so you bring it back to us and to the Planning Department. Commissioner Teele: We're not approving anything tonight? Ms. Slazyk: No, no. Chairman Regalado: OK. 319 March 7, 2002 Ms. Slazyk: It requires to go to -- it would require to go to PAB (Planning Advisory Board), and we'll do that. Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-260 A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DIRECT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO REVIEW THE CONDITIONS PLACED ON HEALTH CLINICS IN THE R-3 ZONING DESIGNATION WHICH ARE SPECIFICALLY BOUNDED BY SOUTHEAST 26TH ROAD AND SOUTHEAST 15TH ROAD AND DETERMINE WHETHER SAID SPECIAL CONDITIONS SHOULD BE REPEALED, AND IF SO, FORWARD LEGISLATION TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. 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. 320 March 7, 2002 64. AUTHORIZE AND DIRECT MANAGER TO CO-SPONSOR MIAMI RIVERDAY WHICH WILL BE HELD AT JOSE MARTI PARK ON SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 2002; APPROVE PLACEMENT OF PROMOTION BANNERS ON CITY CONTROLLED RIGHTS- OF-WAY TO ADVERTISE SAID EVENT. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have a pocket item, request the City Commission consider co-sponsorship of the Miami Riverday, which is held at the Jose Marti Park, on Saturday, April 20, 2002. The Miami Riverday Organization Committee organizes this Festival and they are requesting to place light pole banners in the City of Miami to advertise the event. So moved. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion. Do we have a second? By Commissioner Gonzalez. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 02-261 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CO-SPONSOR THE MIAMI RIVERDAY WHICH WILL BE HELD AT JOSE MARTI PARK ON SATURDAY, APRIL 20, 2002; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPROVE THE PLACEMENT OF PROMOTION BANNERS ON CITY OF MIAMI CONTROLLED RIGHTS-OF-WAY TO ADVERTISE SAID EVENT. 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 NAYS: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. 321 March 7, 2002 65. AUTHORIZE $50,000 GRANT FOR SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE AND FIRE -RESCUE FOR OCEAN RACE MIAMI EVENT, SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 27 — APRIL 14, 2002; ALLOCATE FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES FROM SPECIAL EVENTS, SAID GRANT CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS. Chairman Regalado: Johnny, you have pocket items? Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir, I have two. One involves a Volvo 2000 Race. And it's a resolution authorizing a grant in the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for services to be provided by the Departments of Police and Fire -Rescue in the Volvo Ocean 2000 Race, scheduled for March 27th through April 14th. Now, to put this in -- and this is -- you know, this is -- we're giving them a grant instead of waiving the services fee. Now, to put it in perspective, the total room nights that are already confirmed for Volvo 2000 are 13,000 room nights. And they expect to generate a sixty million dollar ($60,000,000) economic impact on our City for this. So, I think it's an investment well worthwhile. So moved. Chairman Regalado: And they're going to pay us for the permits back, so -- Vice Chairman Winton: Right. And for the services. So moved. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and it's second. You know what, you should talk to them, Johnny, so they can provide you with some videos to promote -- as a City is the co-sponsor of this race, we should promote it in Net 9, and they should give you videos of past races so we can do sort of a, you know, nice program to promote this race, which is what the station should be doing, promoting the City of Miami and everything related to the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely. Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Chairman Regalado: It passes. 322 March 7, 2002 The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-262 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 FOR SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE AND FIRE -RESCUE FOR THE OCEAN RACE MIAMI EVENT, SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 27 - APRIL 14, 2002, ALLOCATING FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES FROM THE SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT, CODE NO. 001000921054.289, SAID GRANT CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1) OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED BY LAW; (2) PAYING FOR ALL OTHER NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT; AND (3) COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE. (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. 323 March 7, 2002 66. AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SIGHTSEEING TOURS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, $6,000, TO COVER COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RECEPTION AND CRUISE TO HONOR CITY CONSULAR CORPS; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM BUDGETS OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE BOARD AND SISTER CITIES PROGRAM. Vice Chairman Winton: And my second resolution -- pocket item comes from the Mayor's Office, and it's a resolution for the payment of six thousand dollars ($6,000) to Sightseeing Tours Management for services associated with cocktail cruise for the City of Miami Consular Corps, and funds are available from Sister Cities and International Trade Board accounts, which are both co -sponsoring this event. And all Commissioners are invited to participate in this, so -- (INAUDIBLE COMMENTS) Vice Chairman Winton: So, so moved. Chairman Regalado: We're going to get invited to the Volvo Race. Commissioner Gonzalez: Second. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye." Commissioner Sanchez: One no. The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 02-263 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SIGHTSEEING TOURS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,000, TO COVER COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A RECEPTION AND CRUISE TO HONOR THE CITY OF MIAMI CONSULAR CORPS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE BUDGETS OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE BOARD AND SISTER CITIES PROGRAM AS FOLLOWS: ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.921084.6.690 ($2,500) AND ACCOUNT CODE NO. 00 1000. 920215.6.690 ($3,500), RESPECTIVELY. 324 March 7, 2002 (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 NAYS: Commissioner Joe Sanchez ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. 325 March 7, 2002 67. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 5590 N.W. 7 STREET AND 5594 N.W. 6 STREET. Chairman Regalado: OK. This meeting is continued to -- Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Wait. PZ -- Chairman Regalado: -- to the April --I'm sorry. To March 14th. Vice Chairman Winton: What is it? Ms. Slazyk: PZ -11 has to be continued to a date certain, if it isn't taken tonight, or else we have to renotice and readvertise. Chairman Regalado: PZ -11 to a date certain. Ms. Slazyk: Of April 11th. Chairman Regalado: April 11th. Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. 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. 02-264 A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, AS AMENDED, THE CITY OF MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT APPROXIMATELY 5590 N.W. 7 STREET AND 5594 N.W. 6 STREET FROM "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL", TO THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 11, 2002. 326 March 7, 2002 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. 327 March 7, 2002 68. CITY COMMISSION RECESSED MARCH 7, 2002 MEETING AND CONTINUED ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP TO COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 14, 2002. Chairman Regalado: This meeting is not adjourned. This meeting is continued to March 14'x. March 14`h, we'll be here with some of the items that were not approved. 328 March 7, 2002 THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 10:57 P.M. ATTEST: Sylvia Scheider ACTING CITY CLERK MANUEL A. DIAZ MAYOR 329 March 7, 2002