HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-04-11 MinutesMINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 11`h day of April 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 9:19 a.m. by Chairman Tomas Regalado with the following
members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez (District l )
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton (District 2) (9:25 a.m.)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Chairman Tomas Regalado (District 4)
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5)
ALSO PRESENT:
Carlos A. Gimenez, City Manager
Alejandro Vilarello, Assistant City Attorney
Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk
April 11, 2002
1. PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS
(A) SALUTE TO JOSEPH L. DAVIS, JR., JERRY MARKOWITZ, THOMAS MASSANA, THOMAS
RINGEL AND CANDIS TRUSTY OF MARKOWITZ DAVIS, RINGEL & TRUSTY FOR
DONATION OF LEGAL SERVICES TO PEOPLE IN NEED.
(B) PROCLAIM MARCH 16, 2002 AS MIAMI-DADE HIV/AIDS PARTNERSHIP DAY FOR ITS
PROVISION OF MEDICAL SERVICES AND EDUCATION TO COMMUNITY; ACCEPTED BY
MR. JOHN MOHAMMED.
Chairman Regalado: The proclamations. We have guests here and we will just go ahead with the
proclamations. But, first, we're going to have Commissioner Teele with a moment of silent prayer, and
Commissioner Sanchez with the pledge of allegiance.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen -- Mr. Lopez, it's a pleasure to
have you here and I'm particularly glad you're here at this point in time.
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Teele, followed by Commissioner Sanchez leading those
present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Note for the Record: Commissioner Winton entered Commission Chambers at 9:25 A.M.
Chairman Regalado: Before we go into the executive session, Commissioners Teele and Sanchez have
some awards and proclamations. So, Commissioner Winton -- Commissioner Gonzalez, you have any
proclamations? Go ahead, Commissioner.
2 April 11, 2002
2. ORDER OF DAY
RECESS REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING TO COMMENCE ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION
TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION RELATED TO WYNWOOD COMMUNITY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT CORP. VS. CITY.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have some announcements. The Mayor has requested that we discuss the
AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph) issue after 7:30 P.M. He has several meetings to attend and
he has requested that. We have already -- 7:30 tonight. That would be one of the -- I guess the first of the
20 things we have to do after 8 o'clock. So --
Commissioner Teele: Motion to adjourn is going to be at 8 o'clock, too.
Chairman Regalado: Also, the administration yesterday requested some time to consult with members of
the Commission on the Raceworks item. And the counsel for the Homestead representative of Raceworks
have requested to do this in the afternoon. So, if you all agree, we'll do a time certain around 3 o' clock
with the City Attorney --
Vice Chairman Winton: I move to do it at 9 a.m.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You've got one side here.
Unidentified Speaker: I'll start now.
Chairman Regalado: Anyway -- so -- I guess that -- Mr. Manager, are you OK with that? Would you
have time to consult with the members of the Commission?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. So, now we should go into executive session. Mr. City Attorney.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, I would ask to be recognized so that the City Attorney may read the
appropriate resolution -- motion into the record.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): We're now proceeding into executive session, pursuant to Florida
Statutes 286.011(8). The City Commission will announce the commencement of the closed
attorney/client session for the purpose of discussing pending litigation of Wynwood Community
Economic Development Corporation versus the City of Miami. The closed door session will begin
approximately at 9:32, in Commissioner Angel Gonzalez' conference room, and conclude at
approximately 9 -- at approximately 10 o' clock. Session will be attended by the members of the City
Commission, Tomas Regalado, Angel Gonzalez, Joe Sanchez, Arthur E. Teele, Jr. and Johnny Winton;
the City Manager Carlos Gimenez; the City Attorney Alejandro Vilarello; Assistant City Attorney Maria
Chiaro; Assistant City Attorney Ilene Temchin; and Assistant City Attorney Charles Mays. A certified
court reporter will be present to ensure the sessions are fully transcribed and a transcript will be made
public upon the conclusion of the litigation. At the conclusion of the attorney/client session, the regular
City Commission meeting will be reopened and the Chairman will announce the termination of the
attorney/client session. Mr. Chairman, you can proceed at your discretion.
Commissioner Teele: I so move, Mr. Chairman.
April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. It's a motion -
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -to go into executive session and a second. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-350
A MOTION TO RECESS THE REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING IN ORDER TO
COMMENCE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING
LITIGATION RELATED TO WYNWOOD COMMUNITY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT CORP. VS. CITY OF MIAMI PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED FOR
9:00 A.M. ON THIS SAME DATE.
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: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION RECESSED ITS REGULAR MEETING IN ORDER TO
MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:33 A.M. AND ADJOURNED THE EXECUTIVE SESSION
AND RECONVENED THE REGULAR MEETING AT 10:04 A.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE
CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT, EXCEPT COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ AND
COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: At this point, you can conclude at 10:04 the attorney/client session in the case of
Wynwood Community Development Corporation versus the City of Miami.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. We have concluded the meeting. If we can have lights. We have a
quorum and Commissioner Sanchez and Commissioner Gonzalez will be joining us.
4 April 11, 2002
3.CONSENT AGENDA.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have the Consent Agenda. If we can have the lights --
Commissioner Teele: I would so move the Consent Agenda, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion --
Vice Chairman Winton: I have a number of things I want to --
Chairman Regalado: Right. But the City Attorney is asking to withdraw an item from the Consent
Agenda, but the -- he wants a discussion on that item.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): That would be CA -19.
Chairman Regalado: CA -19.
Mr. Vilarello: The Deloitte and Touche settlement.
Chairman Regalado: We really need the lights, because I think that we will have problems doing the live
TV broadcast of the meeting.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, as maker of the motion -- I would assume Commissioner Winton
second the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, for discussion.
Commissioner Teele: I would assume that there's no objection from the maker of the motion to withdraw
item CA -19.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to defer to the afternoon CA -3.
Commissioner Teele: Without objection, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: On CA -6, there's a request to spend one point four million dollars ($1,400,000)
on an environmental clean up site in the City. I'm not sure I know where that site is, but the question I
have is -- because I know we have a number of sites throughout the City and what I want to understand is
whether or not --who determined that this is the most pressing environmental clean up issue that we have
in the City? Is this the right place to do that first attack or not? CA -6 is whether or not -- and could the --
maybe the thing to do is —on these that I have questions on, I'm just going to defer them all until this
afternoon and give them to the Manager and he can work on answering the questions so we don't spend
too much time this morning because we have a long agenda. So, in that regard, I would like to defer also
CA -6.
Chairman Regalado: OK. CA -6 --
Commissioner Teele: No objection, Mr. Chairman.
5 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- has been deferred to the afternoon, some time in the afternoon.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, which one is the one, CA --
Vice Chairman Winton: CA -3 and 6.
Commissioner Teele: CA -3 and 6. CA -19 has been withdrawn from the agenda.
Mr. Villarello: From the consent agenda.
Commissioner Teele: From the Consent Agenda.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right. And then I have a couple of questions. On CA -11, which is La Liga
Contra Cancer, for their telethon held at the Coconut Grove Expo Center, you know, again, that's a
fundraiser. If y'all remember at the -- I don't know -- last Commission meeting or Commission before
last, there was a request to defer the fees and all this stuff that we go through every time on the March of
Dimes in Coconut Grove. And just so you all understand, the people who ran that -- the volunteers who
ran that are friends of mine and I told them "no." So, we come back around the curve here. We have
another fundraising event in our City, and we're looking to give the -- to waive the fees for renting the
Coconut Grove Exhibition Center. And, so, I get kind of caught in this bind, you know. So, I want to try
to understand this better.
Ms. Christina Abrams (Director, Public Facilities): Christina Abrams, Director of Public Facilities. This
was for the event held in June 2001. The City Commission passed a resolution requesting that the Miami
Sports and Exhibition Authority host and present this event. Unfortunately, this item was never approved
by the board, so it remained an outstanding account. In order to make that account current, we're asking
for the Commission to approve it, retroactive to 2001.
Vice Chairman Winton: And what is our position as it relates to the future? Or do we have one?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have --
Vice Chairman Winton: We have to deal with that in the future. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't have it on -- I believe this is on the next Commission meeting, on the
agenda for this year's events. The League Against Cancer is the center that has been providing treatment
for people with cancer, without distinction of race, nationality or class. They've been operating for over
20 years, and it's a good cause. I worked as a volunteer of the American -- of the League Against Cancer
every year on their fundraising events, answering telephones. And also go throughout the Allapattah area
collecting donations from different business owners to assist them with the treatment of people that are
sick with cancer.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I understand who they are and I'm very, very respectful and appreciative
of the work they do because I think they do great work, but -- that's CA -11 -- but the issue,
Commissioner, is that, from my standpoint, it's -- there are literally hundreds of not-for-profit
organizations involved in fundraising causes to do good work, and the March of Dimes is another one of
those. And I voted against providing public dollars in support of the March of Dimes event, which was in
Coconut Grove just this past weekend. And La Liga Contra Cancer is the same thing. It's a fundraising
event in the Grove. And, so, from a philosophical standpoint, I struggle with providing freebie stuff to
6 April 11, 2002
not -for -profits that are just doing fundraising. And this is different than festivals, parades and things.
This is just pure fundraising. And I'm not sure that our role in government is to give them freebie stuff
for their fundraising efforts. And, so, that's the reason why I was -- I understand that this is a retroactive
issue. So, I'm now going to support it. But when it comes forward with a debate about future support,
I'm probably not going to support those kinds of things. Because I think we're already engulfed enough in
this whole festivals and parades stuff, where we're kind of wiping that slate clean and I'm real nervous
about getting involved in the fundraising community now, and letting them have all of our facilities for
free. So --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I understand your concerns and -- you know, I think that it will be good maybe
if you go to their center and see the kind of work that they do. There are doctors that they became one
day a week to operate people free of charge, people with cancer. They're also -- they're volunteers. Their
staff is a meaningless staff. They -- what they spend on administration is ridiculous amount. Most of the
money that these people collect is dedicated to medicine, operations and pay for hospitals.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I know they're outstanding. So, CA -11, I'm going to leave in. CA -13 --
the request on CA -13, fellow Commissioners, is for -- this goes to the -- I think the number's wrong in
here, by the way.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): The number is the original number, but I think we need to make a
correction on the floor and increase that to forty-five thousand.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right. OK. And what I wanted to point out in CA -13 is that the reason that
we're asking for a maximum of 45,000 is because we have a request before MSEA (Miami Sports &
Exhibition Authority) -- because I think MSEA ought to be participating in this study. And what we're
doing -- the Greater Miami Visitors and Convention Bureau just recently completed a Countywide study
to determine what kind of meeting and convention facility needs we have Countywide, particularly in
light of all of the new hotel development that's gone on for the last 10 years, a lot of which has occurred
in the City of Miami. And their study said, in essence, that over the course of the next 10 years, there is a
high probability that there will be a need for up to 150,000 square feet of kind of meeting convention
facility space in downtown Miami. But it's just that simple. So, what we are doing is hiring a consultant.
The DDA (Downtown Development Authority) has already committed to one fourth of the cost of that.
We talked to the City Manager -- or was it a third? Was it one third, one third, one third?
Mr. Gimenez: It's one third.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh. Off -Street Parking, MSEA, DDA and City of Miami were the players that
we've asked to participate, one fourth, one fourth and one fourth, in doing the next phase of the study,
which is to do an in depth analysis of what that need may be looking at downtown and Coconut Grove.
And so, that cost is eighty some thousand dollars and we've gone to each of these entities. The DDA has
already approved it. The Off -Street Parking has approved it. And MSEA's been balking a bit, but we're
hoping that they come around and the City's going to make a commitment. But this resolution -- in case
MSEA doesn't agree, this resolution obligates the City to pay one half the cost, Off -Street Parking will get
a quarter and DDA will get a quarter. So that's what's going on here. And if MSEA says "yes" to the
request, then the City's contribution will drop by one half. So, is the -- do we have to amend CA -13?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes. For amendment that says instead of 21,750, it will be a max of 45,000, and that
should give us enough wiggle room if MSEA does not come through.
Vice Chairman Winton: So the maker of the motion on the CA has to accept the amendment on --
7 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: I accept the amendment.
Vice Chairman Winton: And so does the second. And last one, CA -15, the Water Sports Center at
Baywalk, I just couldn't figure out where that is.
Mr. Gimenez: We'll bring --
Vice Chairman Winton: And it doesn't need to be held up. So, I'll -- just let me know where it is after
the break.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fifteen is a grant, correct? It's an application of a grant?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. And so, I just want to know where it is. It's just curiosity. No -- nothing
beyond that.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question on the CA items, as presented.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I will do that. I just wanted mention to you guys that CA -21. CA -21 is about
the "Keep the Sun Shining" campaign in Miami. We have to accept donations -- first of all, the City of
Miami has agreed to use the ad agency J. Walter Thompson services to oversee this campaign. This will
be done pro bono. And we have a representative here of J. Walter Thompson. The City of Miami is
accepting a thirty-five thousand dollars donation from Clear Channel Outdoor Media, with the City
approval of billboard signs.
Unidentified Speaker: Billboards.
Chairman Regalado: Vista Color will donate posters, 5,000 posters, in the amount of two thousand four
hundred and sixty-seven dollars and twenty-five cents ($2,467.25). And The Miami Herald and El Nuevo
Herald are committed to run four quarter -page ads in each publication, which is a total value of thirty-one
thousand dollars ($31,000). So, this is all donations to the City of Miami. And I think that the
Commission should be very grateful, first of all, to J. Walter Thompson, which came up with the idea.
They have done all the work. They have done all the products to Clear Channel Outdoor Media, Vista
Color, and especially The Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald. So, these are donations that we will be
accepting in CA -21.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may on this item. CA -21, you know, there may be nothing
wrong with it. I just feel that it might leave a sour taste in someone's mouth, being that we are in
litigation with Outdoor Advertising. I mean, there's been so much --
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Sanchez: There's been so much back and forth in Tallahassee and here with the Outdoor
Advertising. Here we're accepting a donation of thirty-five thousand dollars. I mean, it might — and there
may be nothing wrong with it. I just think that there is the perception that may be tossed in there or
maybe the sour taste in somebody's mouth, but there's been a legal battle back and forth between us and
Outdoor Advertising and here they are making a donation to us for thirty-five thousand dollars.
Chairman Regalado: Right. Remember, just before Johnny -- remember, this plan is -- it goes back to
last September, after 9/11, J. Walter Thompson came with the idea, and they did with -- to the billboard
April 11, 2002
without the knowledge that the City was in the middle of litigation with the billboard industry. However,
you know, we can always not use the billboard and do the other part of the campaign.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I was going to -- if we could, I'd like to pass the item. I was going to try to
make a motion following that to instruct the Manager not to move forward with the billboard unless they
check back with the maker of the motion and the Attorney and a whole series of things -- because one
thing we don't want is -- the worst thing that could happen is that the billboard people now put this in a
residential area, where you've got some illegal billboards or something. I mean, you know -- so, I agree
completely with what Commissioner Sanchez is saying, but I just thought it might be easier to pass it and
then instruct the Manager on how to implement it following that. And even come back to us and get the
money.
Chairman Regalado: Right. Because we can proceed, Joe, with the other part of the campaign.
Commissioner Sanchez: I understand, Mr. Chairman. My -- I'm just telling you, my position is that I
don't think it should be used on the billboards. If there's other availabilities or other options that we could
use beautifying our community or doing something else, it's perfectly fine. But I find it ironic and I find
it, in a way, sort of bad taste to accept that, and have them -- exactly as Commissioner Teele -- you know,
most of these billboards are illegal and then they're going to putting the message out there, you know,
"Beautify Miami" and all this. And it's just -- I hate to take three steps forward, you know, and have to
take one back on this issue.
Chairman Regalado: We can amend this, directing the City Manager to holdout on the billboard proceed
with the rest of the project, the "Keep the Sun..." --
Commissioner Teele: I accept the amendment, as the maker of the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second does, too.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Johnny, you wanted -- OK.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second for the Consent Agenda. 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 Commissioner Teele and seconded by
Vice Chairman Winton, the consent agenda items were passed by the following
vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
9 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
3.1 ACCEPT BID OF METRO EXPRESS, INC. FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE CURB
REPLACEMENT PROJECT 2001 (SECOND BIDDING), B-4646"; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TOTAL COST $91,500.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-351
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF
METRO EXPRESS, INC, THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE
BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS, DATED FEBRUARY 5, 2002,
FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE CURB REPLACEMENT PROJECT
2001 (SECOND BIDDING), B-4646", IN THE AMOUNT OF $77,750; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 341182, AS
APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT
OF $77,750 TO COVER THE CONTRACT COSTS, AND $13,750 FOR EXPENSES,
FOR A TOTAL COST OF $91,500; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
3.2 ACCEPT BID OF GANCEDO TECHNOLOGIES, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO.
00-02-037R, FOR ACQUISITION OF LIGHT FIXTURE REPLACEMENT SERVICES AT
BAYFRONT PARK FOR BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST, $42,982; ALLOCATE
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET OF TRUST.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-352
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF
GANCEDO TECHNOLOGIES, THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT
TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 00-02-037R, DATED DECEMBER 17, 2001, FOR
THE ACQUISITION OF LIGHT FIXTURE REPLACEMENT SERVICES AT
BAYFRONT PARK FOR THE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST
("TRUST"), IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $42,982; ALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET OF THE TRUST.
10 April 11, 2002
3.3 ACCEPT BID OF BIO -MEDICAL WASTE SERVICES, INC., PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR
BIDS NO. 01-02-068, FOR ACQUISITION OF DISPOSAL SERVICES FOR BIO -HAZARDOUS
WASTE FOR DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, TO BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY
DEPARTMENTS, $15,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM FIRE -RESCUE GENERAL OPERATING
BUDGET AND FROM GENERAL OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-353
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF
BIO -MEDICAL WASTE SERVICES, INC., THE SOLE RESPONSIVE AND
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-068,
DATED FEBRUARY 20, 2002, FOR THE ACQUISITION OF DISPOSAL SERVICES
FOR BIO -HAZARDOUS WASTE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, TO
BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS, 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 $15,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM FIRE -RESCUE GENERAL
OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.280601.6.340, AND FROM
EACH OF THE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL
3.4 AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE PROGRAM TO ASSIST WITH
EXPENSES RELATED TO OPERATION OF PROGRAM, $717,574.36; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-354
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
FUNDING OF THE POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE ("PAL") PROGRAM TO ASSIST
WITH EXPENSES RELATED TO THE OPERATION OF THE PROGRAM, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $717,574.36; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NOS. 690001, 690002, AND
690003, SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF
POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
AND JUSTICE'S "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING," AND SECTION 932.7055,
FLORIDA STATUTES (2002); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, WITH PAL FOR THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS.
11 April 11, 2002
3.5 APPROVE PROCUREMENT OF MASS STORAGE TAPE CARTRIDGES FOR DEPARTMENT
OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FROM STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, UNDER
EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 250-050-97-1, $15,000.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-355
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE
PROCUREMENT OF MASS STORAGE TAPE CARTRIDGES FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FROM STORAGE
TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, UNDER EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA
CONTRACT NO. 250-050-97-1, EFFECTIVE THROUGH APRIL 30, 2002, AND ANY
EXTENSIONS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $15,000; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.460101.6.722.
3.6 APPROVE ACQUISITION OF MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PARTS AND
SERVICES FOR HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
CONTRACT NO. 5380 -2/06 -OTR -LW, $170,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, HEAVY FLEET DIVISION AND PUBLIC WORKS, STORMWATER
MAINTENANCE DIVISION.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-356
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT
PARTS AND SERVICES FOR HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, AS
MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN "EXHIBIT A", ATTACHED AND
INCORPORATED, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CONTRACT NO.
5380 -2/06 -OTR -LW, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2002 THROUGH JANUARY 31,
2005, AND ANY EXTENSIONS, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN A TOTAL ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $170,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, HEAVY FLEET DIVISION, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
509000.420901.6.670 AND PUBLIC WORKS, STORMWATER MAINTENANCE
DIVISION, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.311002.6.670, SUBJECT TO
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.
12 April 11, 2002
3.7 AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN CONTRACT WITH AERO PRODUCTS CORPORATION FOR
PROCUREMENT OF ONE EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE VEHICLE FOR DEPARTMENT OF
FIRE -RESCUE, $127,619, FROM $765,714 TO $893,333, TOTAL AMOUNT $931,371, UNDER
EXISTING MIAMI-DADE CONTRACT NO. 5472-4/01-4; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-357
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING AN
INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT WITH AERO PRODUCTS CORPORATION, FOR
THE PROCUREMENT OF ONE EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE VEHICLE FOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$127,619, FROM $765,714 TO $893,333, WITH A CONTINGENCY RESERVE OF
$5,434, FROM $32,604 TO $38,038, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT
NOT TO EXCEED $931,371, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE CONTRACT NO.
5472-4/01-4, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MAY 31, 2002, AND ANY EXTENSIONS;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 313233,
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 289401.6.840, AS FUNDED BY THE FIRE ASSESSMENT
FEE, AND THE IMPACT FEE, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 313246.289401.6.840.
3.8 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE LICENSE AGREEMENTS WITH COSTAR GROUP
FOR SUBSCRIPTION LICENSES TO COSTAR PROPERTY AND COSTAR COMPS FOR OFFICE
OF ASSET MANAGEMENT, $17,500; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM ASSET MANAGEMENT
GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-358
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE LICENSE AGREEMENTS,
IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORMS, WITH COSTAR GROUP FOR
THE SUBSCRIPTION LICENSES TO COSTAR PROPERTY AND COSTAR COMPS
FOR THE OFFICE OF ASSET MANAGEMENT FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, IN
A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $17,500; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
ASSET MANAGEMENT GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
810101-270.
3.9 WAIVE RENTAL FEES, $16,934 FOR USE OF COCONUT GROVE CONVENTION CENTER
FOR LA LIGA CONTRA EL CANCER, INC. TELETHON HELD ON JUNE 10, 2001; ALLOCATE
FUNDS FROM SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-359
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WAIVING RENTAL FEES
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $16,934 FOR USE OF THE COCONUT GROVE
CONVENTION CENTER FOR THE LA LIGA CONTRA EL CANCER, INC.
TELETHON HELD ON JUNE 10, 2001; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE
SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000921054.289, FOR SAID
PURPOSE.
13 April 11, 2002
3. 10 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH
TEMPLE ISRAEL FOR USE OF 1.56 ACRES OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 150
NORTHEAST I9TH STREET, FOR PARKING ON EXCLUSIVE BASIS EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT,
SATURDAY MORNING, SUNDAY MORNING AND HIGH HOLY DAYS, MONTHLY FEE $834.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-360
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A REVOCABLE LICENSE
AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
WITH TEMPLE ISRAEL ("LICENSEE") FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 1.56
ACRES OF CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 150
NORTHEAST 19TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR PARKING ON AN
EXCLUSIVE BASIS EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT, SATURDAY MORNING, SUNDAY
MORNING AND HIGH HOLY DAYS, AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
GENERAL PUBLIC AT ALL OTHER TIMES NOT SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED,
ON A MONTH-TO-MONTH BASIS, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF
JULY 23, 2002, AT A MONTHLY FEE OF $834, PLUS A FIVE PER CENT
INCREASE AT EACH ANNIVERSARY DATE, PAYABLE TO THE CITY OF
MIAMI, PLUS STATE USE TAX, IF APPLICABLE, WITH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT.
3.11 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO PAY TO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY $21,750,
REPRESENTING ONE-FOURTH COST OF STUDY TO ANALYZE FEASIBILITY OF
DEVELOPING DOWNTOWN CONVENTION CENTER AND POTENTIAL USES FOR COCONUT
GROVE EXPO CENTER SITE; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM NON -DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNT.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-361
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PAY TO THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $21,750,
REPRESENTING ONE-FOURTH THE COST OF A STUDY TO ANALYZE THE
FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPING A DOWNTOWN CONVENTION CENTER AND
POTENTIAL USES FOR THE COCONUT GROVE EXPO CENTER SITE, AS
MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHMENT; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM NON -DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.921002.6.270.
14 April 11, 2002
3.12 ACCEPT DONATION OF GOODS AND SERVICES FROM DADE AMATEUR GOLF
ASSOCIATION FROM PROCEEDS OF CITY GOLF CLASSIC HELD DECEMBER 7, 2001, $35,660,
CONSISTING OF FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION OF ADA
ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND AT KINLOCH PARK FOR USE BY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS
AND RECREATION PROGRAMS FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-362
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING A DONATION
OF GOODS AND SERVICES FROM DADE AMATEUR GOLF ASSOCIATION FROM
PROCEEDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI GOLF CLASSIC HELD DECEMBER 7, 2001,
WITH AN ESTIMATED VALUE OF $35,660, CONSISTING OF FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT, VALUED AT $12,660, AND THE INSTALLATION OF AN ADA
ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND AT KINLOCH PARK, VALUED AT $23,000, FOR
USE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION PROGRAMS FOR
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
3.13 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDING, $235,000, TO
FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT (FIND) WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
FOR CITY INTERNATIONAL WATERSPORTS CENTER PUBLIC BAYWALK AND OVERLOOK
PROJECT AND APPROVE ALLOCATION OF REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS FROM SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK BOND FUNDS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-363
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT FUNDING IN THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $235,000 TO THE FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION
DISTRICT ("FIND") WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI INTERNATIONAL WATERSPORTS CENTER PUBLIC BAYWALK AND
OVERLOOK PROJECT AND APPROVING THE ALLOCATION OF REQUIRED
MATCHING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $235,000 FROM SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK BOND FUNDS; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
15 April 11, 2002
3.14 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
AON CONSULTING, INC. TO ADMINISTER PERSONALITY COMPONENT OF EXAMINATION
PROCESS OF ENTRY-LEVEL EXAMINATION FOR POLICE OFFICERS FOR DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN RESOURCES, $25,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM POLICE GENERAL OPERATING
BUDGET.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-364
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH
AON CONSULTING, INC., THE FIRM APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER, TO ADMINISTER
THE PERSONALITY COMPONENT OF THE EXAMINATION PROCESS OF THE
ENTRY-LEVEL EXAMINATION FOR POLICE OFFICERS FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $25,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE POLICE GENERAL
OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.270.
3.15 AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY CHRISTOPHER MICHAELS $50,000, IN
COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST CITY FOR CHRISTOPHER MICHAELS
VS. CITY; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-365
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY CHRISTOPHER MICHAELS, 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, FOR THE CASE CHRISTOPHER MICHAELS US. CITY OF MIAMI,
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 01-3358 CA (01), 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.
16 April 11, 2002
3.16 AUTHORIZE ENGAGEMENT OF LAW FIRM OF YOAKLEY & STEWART, P.A. TO RENDER
LEGAL SERVICES CONCERNING LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON ISLAND BY
FLAGSTONE PROPERTIES, LLC, $200,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-366
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW FIRM OF YOAKLEY & STEWART, P.A. TO
RENDER LEGAL SERVICES CONCERNING THE LEASE AND DEVELOPMENT
OF WATSON ISLAND BY FLAGSTONE PROPERTIES, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$200,000, PLUS COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 344102.239501.6.250, FOR SAID SERVICES.
3.17 AUTHORIZE CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT OF LAW FIRM OF RONALD J. COHEN, P.A.
FOR REPRESENTATION OF POLICE OFFICER ALEJANDRO MACIAS IN LYNN AND PERRY
RUNNELS, VS. CITY, $35,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE
TRUST FUND.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-367
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CONTINUED ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW FIRM OF RONALD J. COHEN, P.A.
FOR REPRESENTATION OF POLICE OFFICER ALEJANDRO MACIAS IN THE
CASE OF LYNN AND PERRY RUNNELS, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES
OF JESSE STUART RUNNELS VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE U.S. DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, CASE NO. 00 -2930 -CIV -
KING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,000 PLUS COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE AND
INSURANCE TRUST FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.652, FOR
SAID SERVICES.
3.18 ACCEPT $35,000 DONATION FROM CLEAR CHANNEL ADVERTISING MEDIA;
MANAGER TO ENGAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF J. WALTER THOMPSON U.S.A. INC.
TO COORDINATE CITY'S "KEEP THE SUN SHINING CAMPAIGN," $20,000.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-368
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING A DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,000 FROM CLEAR CHANNEL ADVERTISING MEDIA;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENGAGE THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OF J. WALTER THOMPSON U.S.A. INC. TO
COORDINATE THE CITY'S "KEEP THE SUN SHINING CAMPAIGN," IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM
ACCOUNT CODE 001000.921002.6.289.
17 April 11, 2002
4. SCHEDULE SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 15, 2002 AT 3:00 PM TO CALL
EXECUTIVE ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION FOR PURPOSES OF DISCUSSING PENDING
LITIGATION RELATED TO NATIONAL ADVERTISING CO. VS CITY OF MIAMI
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, you want to discuss the --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Before he does, on the billboard issue, which is -- I think Commissioner Sanchez
was exactly right. He called it ironic. It's almost hypocritical, is more appropriate word. Mr. Manager,
whatever we do on billboards -- and I know -- I think we took it out -- but in the future, let's ensure that
any public service that we use with billboards that are with the City, that they are only on legally erected,
properly zoned billboards. And in that regard, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, as you know,
since we last met, Johnny, since we last met, the governor has signed a bill into law that literally gives the
billboard industry the right to maintain all of the billboards that are there now that were quote "legally
erected," whatever that is. And furthermore, to punish the citizens of Miami by making the citizens pay
tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars to take them down. It was a dirty trick. I
can't believe the Governor did it. I can't believe the Governor signed it. But I'm sure, as the Governor
said in his message to the Secretary of State, there are a number of conflicting public policy issues and the
Governor chose to side, using his own words in the letter, on the conservative principal of protecting
property rights, whether they be real property or personal property. Mr. Chairman, I am requesting of the
City Attorney, if he would give us an opinion before the end of the day, as to whether or not an executive
session is warranted on this matter. I believe that we should -- we've had war declared on us, and I think
we should respond in kind, plus one. And, so -- plus two -- and so, the position that I'd like to take, if the
City Attorney will recommend it, is that in that there's going to be a MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition
Authority) board meeting on Monday, in which three of the members of the Commission will probably be
in attendance, as well as the Mayor, that if the Attorney so recommends, that on Monday, at the
conclusion of the MSEA meeting, at some time that you all — the attorney and the Chairman, who's the
Vice Chairman of MSEA, could agree on, that there be an executive session for the purpose of developing
a comprehensive strategy and response -- nuclear response to the billboard industry, as far as I'm
concerned. So, I'm making this as a statement and a request to the City Attorney, because only -- an
executive session may only be called upon the advice of the City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: OK. For the record, we should have in attendance on the MSEA meeting,
Commissioners Gonzalez, Commissioner Teele, and myself. This starts at 1:30. According to the
agenda, we could be done by 3 o'clock or a little later, if the other two members of the Commission,
Commissioner Sanchez and Vice Chair Winton, wish to hear, if the attorney recommends an executive
session right after the MSEA meeting, which, by the way, will take place at the MSEA office in the
Miami Arena building. Depends on you guys.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not sure I can be there. But let me make a public comment about this. And
I told a lot of people this. I'm not, even my constituents who are avidly anti -billboard, I told them that
anti -billboard stuff isn't my -- that's not my deal. That's not my flag. I'm not opposed to -- I'm not one of
these wipe out all billboards all over the place. I think some of them are entertaining and attractive,
frankly. But as you said, Commissioner Teele, they declared war on us and me, as far as I'm concerned,
and I am ticked beyond belief and I want to -- I want to echo your commitment to go nuclear on these
people. They are taking away our community's rights -- absolutely taking away our community rights in
18 April 11, 2002
trying to destroy our City and I'm in favor of taking all the responsible action we need to take to win our
rights back.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioners, certainly this case qualifies for an executive
session, after the acts of -- recently in the legislature and the Governor signing that statute into law. I
think it would absolutely be appropriate to call an executive session so we can discuss the strategies of
handling this litigation from this point forward. You would have to call a special Commission meeting.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton, you cannot attend?
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think so. I'm trying to remember what -- because I think I have some
real business that has potential to make me some money on Monday afternoon. If I do, rest assured, I
ain't coming.
Chairman Regalado: More power to you. More power to you. Commissioner Sanchez, can you --
would you be able to attend an executive session on the Miami Arena building, MSEA office, on
Monday, around 3 o'clock
Commissioner Sanchez: No, sir, I'll be out of town on business, but I will prepare a memo in support.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would encourage you to move forward with it, by the way.
Chairman Regalado: OK. So, we're going to have going to have three members of the City Commission
Commissioner Teele: Need a motion.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, you need to make a motion.
Mr. Vilarello: The City Commission -- I requested the attorney/client session and the National
Advertising versus the City of Miami. And there's a second case number, National Advertising versus the
City of Miami. And then you need to call a special Commission meeting.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move, pursuant to the advice of counsel, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second for an executive session around 3 o'clock, on
Monday. This is April 15th? April 15th. The MSEA office, in the Miami Arena building. All in favor,
say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
19 April 11, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-369
A MOTION TO SCHEDULE A SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 15,
2002 AT 3:00 PM TO CALL AN EXECUTIVE ATTORNEY-CLIENT SESSION FOR
PURPOSES OF DISCUSSING PENDING LITIGATION RELATED TO NATIONAL
ADVERTISING CO. VS CITY OF MIAMI.
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.
20 April 11, 2002
5. DIRECT MANAGER TO CREATE MEDIA PRESENTATION TO AIR ON CITY TELEVISION
HIGHLIGHTING WORK AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF AMBASSADOR DAVID MCLEAN
WALTERS.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I really hate to do this to the distinguished counsel, but I'm sure he's
fully in agreement. I would ask that item -- special item -- presentation be brought forth at this time. I
note the presence of the distinguished Ambassador David Walters. And the Mayor had wanted to be here.
And, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, and that of the Commission --
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: -- we would ask Ambassador Walters to come up. I understand he just had a
birthday to boot. So Ambassador, if you would come up. If a Sergeant at Arms or someone would escort
him up, please. Mr. Chairman, this is only going to take approximately six minutes. But what we'd like
to do is let the world know that Ambassador Walters is a great resident of Miami. And I'll read a part of
the proclamation that says that "Whereas: The City of Miami values those talented personalities who,
with vitality, integrity and professionalism, contribute to the growth and well-being of our community."
And, please join us, Ambassador, and his staff, please -- and "whereas Ambassador -- the Honorable
Ambassador David McClean Walters, through 60 years of distinguished leadership and outstanding
philanthropy, has provided a clear and courageous vision and forged an honorable and exemplary path
and a life-long commitment to his country, to Miami, where he has spearheaded the transformation of the
old Miami Variety Hospital, now the Miami Children's Hospital, into one of the finest pediatric centers in
the world; and whereas the Ambassador, David Walters, has, with dogged determination and activism, on
behalf of Miami Children's Hospital Foundation assures the funding necessary to support the hospital's
noble goals and has taken an active role as the patriarch in forging strategic alliances for Miami Children's
Hospital, thus leading the way to reaching the Foundation's goal of raising one hundred and fifty million
dollars ($150,000,000); and whereas it is fitting and appropriate that the City of Miami and its officials
pause in our deliberation to join in his 85th birthday anniversary celebration --
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Teele: -- of the Honorable David Walters, an outstanding Miami humanitarian, producers
of miracles, whose noble embrace of his philanthropic mission provides the purest example of a life
dedicated to excellence and inspired by a duty to God and a service to mankind. And while it's not in the
proclamation, it should be noted that the Ambassador is not an honorary ambassador. He served as our
nation's representative to the Holy See in 1977 through 1980, representing our nation with the Vatican,
the Holy See. "Now, therefore, I, Manuel A. Diaz, as Mayor of the City of Miami, do hereby proclaim
Thursday, the 4th day of April, in the year 2002 of our Lord, the Ambassador David M. Walters Day and
Miami Children's Foundation." And we call upon the good citizens to join in standing in salute of this
great humanitarian and man of God.
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, with your permission, we'd like to have a very short video that was
aired recently to be shown so that the citizens can see some of the great work that the Ambassador has
done. Are we ready?
Note for the Record: At this time, video shown highlighting accomplishments of Ambassador David M.
Walters.
21 April 11, 2002
(APPLAUSE)
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, would you like to -- before we hear from the Ambassador, would
you like to add the details of another tribute to this great resident of the City of Miami?
Commissioner Teele: I would assume, Mr. Chairman, that I would move that the Manager and the Net 9
be instructed to create a package, a media package that would be aired throughout Net 9 that would
highlight the work and the contribution of Ambassador Walters so that the citizens of our community can
witness firsthand through Net 9 this tremendous man's accomplishments and success. I would so move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and four seconds. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-370
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CREATE A MEDIA
PRESENTATION TO AIR ON CITY OF MIAMI TELEVISION (GOVERNMENT
ACCESS CABLE CHANNEL) HIGHLIGHTING THE WORK AND
ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF AMBASSADOR DAVID MCLEAN WALTERS.
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.
Ambassador David Walters: This is a great honor, particularly since I've had a long experience with the
City of Miami. After I tell you about that experience, you may ask for the honor back. One of my first
experiences was in 1952. You noticed that the video indicated that I was expert in maritime law and
aviation law. In 1952, Dan McCarthy, who was then Governor, who I -- very dear friend of mine --
appointed me as Chairman of the Port Wardens and Pilots Commission. You probably don't know what
that is these days. But in those days, it was more important. One of the first things I did when I got that
appointment -- you've got to know that the pilots bring the vessels into the port, and if you don't have a
pilot aboard of a certain sized vessel, you can't go into the port. So, I was so unhappy with the condition
of the City of Miami port, which was crumbling into the water, as you watched. And I said to myself, I've
got to do something about this. I don't know how much power I had, but I used whatever I had and I
condemned the City of Miami port. And I also issued violations to everybody who owned land on the
Miami River to get the junk out of the river so that the pilots could bring the ships in.
22 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Might bring you back.
Ambassador Walters: Well, the then Mayor of Miami, the historic Abe Aronovitz, was a little upset with
my action because it slowed the port down. There was only one cruise ship and that was the PNO steam
ship company that went between here and Havana and back. So, we made the statement that my greatest
idol, he said, in government was Abraham Lincoln. And Abraham Lincoln always gave a job to the
person who criticizes you. So, he made me Chairman of the Port Study Committee of the City of Miami.
After a long term of study, we did something you may either like or dislike, depends on whether I stay up
here or leave with things being thrown at me. But we decided that the port should go to the County on
Dodge Island. And that's in the early `50s.
Chairman Regalado: Do we have to say that in the program or --
Ambassador Walters: But this is a tremendous honor and I really don't deserve it entirely. There was a
little girl about that size at the time, who was six years old, who used to play down here on the pier where
I kept my boat and enjoyed life. And, suddenly, neither she nor I were enjoying life again because there
was no suitable facility here to take care of the terrible leukemia. I had been, five years earlier, 1965,
Chairman of the National Leukemia Society, and also the Chairman of the Miss Universe Ball, the first
one in the City of Miami Beach. And the little girl was a poster girl, died the same week that my
granddaughter fell sick with leukemia. Danny Thomas, who was a great friend of mine, and particularly,
Hubert Humphrey, who was a great close friend, called and wanted her to be transferred up to the hospital
so they could do the job.
She was too sick to travel and she died. If we had stopped there, we wouldn't have Miami Children's
Hospital. If you don't make a positive out of a negative, then you don't belong here. You're just a person
taking up space. So, in your lives, try to turn your negatives to positives. Thank you so much.
(APPLAUSE)
Ambassador Walters: I forgot to say that Arthur Teele himself, as a member of our board trustees, has
made a great contribution on the part of the City to the hospital.
(APPLAUSE)
23 April 11, 2002
6. AGENDA ITEM D -1-A -- SEWELL PARK PROPOSAL.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Now we go into the blue pages. The Mayor has requested, as we announced, that we
deal with the AT&T (American Telephone and Telegraph) -Comcast merger report by after 7:30 p.m. District 1,
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez. Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. OK. Mr. Chairman, I have a motion in reference to Sewell Park. The motion is a
request for the City staff to meet with the appropriate parties -- the River Commission, the Parks Advisory Board,
the surrounding residents -- to discuss the placing of the City stables in the Sewell Park in order to increase security
for the uses of the park without interfering with the residents' use or the beauty of the park as seen from the Miami
River, and authorizing Public Works to develop preliminary drawings for the discussion purposes, and directing the
administration to consult with the Commissioner of the district in the development of the project, and bring
recommendations back to the City Commission. That is my motion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a --
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- a motion and a second. This is a public hearing. Anybody -- go ahead, sir.
T.J. Marshall: Morning, gentlemen. My name is T.J. Marshall. I'm a resident of the Sewell Park community. I
have just a brief statement that I'd like to make if I could. Chairman Regalado, fellow Commissioners, thanks for
your time. I'm a local resident, and I have spent the past month researching the police proposal for Sewell Park.
And I recommend that you grant approval to the project in a scaled down version. Gentlemen, I delivered a briefing
and history of this project to your offices yesterday. As you know, the proposal for Sewell includes horse, canine
and marine patrol facilities. I believe that if the project is scaled down to horse stables only, concerns within the
community will be mitigated, and expenses will be saved. With the horse stables only at Sewell Park, the
community on the south side of the river would have the police presence they deserve, and the community on the
north side of the river would retain the lush green view of the park that means so much to them. I see this project as
an opportunity. As Mayor Diaz noted yesterday, the river is a budding community. The proposed greenway will be
underway soon. The placement of the mounted division along the river would provide security for the
neighborhood, and allow mounted officers direct access to the greenway, to keep it free of vagrants and criminal
activity. For those who say, "Who needs a mounted division?" I reply that the mounted division is extremely
beneficial for the presence they provide. A mounted officer provides more visibility than 20 police officers. The
mounted division also provides a friendly face to the police when it's needed most, such as riots, protests and
special events. If the expense of a mounted division needs to be justified, take a look at the city of Seattle, and the
City's poor image because of WTO (World Trade Organization) protests. If Seattle had a significant mounted
patrol, the national media would have seen friendly looking horses controlling the crowd instead of police in riot
gear with tear gas. If Miami wants to be the City of tomorrow, it needs a mounted patrol. Gentlemen, the public
recently approved the Homeland Security Bond issue. I know when I voted for it that I expected the money to be
spend on items such as this. The Police Department and Commissioner Gonzalez' office have had an open door on
this issue. Police officials have recently given a verbal commitment to scale back and change the plan's design in
an effort to meet the whole community's needs and those of the Miami River Commission. I strongly recommend
you approve Commissioner Gonzalez' item for the police to move forward with the scaled down plans. Thank you,
gentlemen.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you very much, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
24 4/11/02
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Regalado, I met with the Trust for Public Lands folks in my office on this
very issue earlier in the week, and they had some of the same concerns that have just been expressed. But it seemed
to me that -- and I agree with what everybody is saying here. But it seems to me that there may be yet another
opportunity for the mounted patrol in Sewell Park, because that's a pretty big park. It's a park, also, that very few
people know in the City of Miami even -- that know even exist. It's a beautiful, beautiful park. There is -- it seems
to me that with the -- some of the reshaping of that park that's planned for the future, we may have an opportunity
to turn the horses and the mounted patrol into yet an additional asset, because horses and the park work together.
They are complementary. So if the buildings are designed appropriately to create a park -like environment, if we --
And that park, I think, is big enough to create some riding trails in the park for the horses, for not only exercising
the horses, but inviting kids in from the neighborhood. And you could provide riding lessons to kids. Most kids in
the City of Miami never have even seen a horse, never mind been able to get close to a horse, understand how to
care for a horse, understand all the issues related to the care, and grooming, and feeding, and riding horses. I think
we have a wonderful opportunity here to combine all of those aspects to create a real new community asset within
that neighborhood, and meet all of our other objectives. So that's what I told those folks.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: I would yield to the district Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Colleagues, the situation with the mounted patrol -- Well, first of all, the park is a
beautiful park, as Commissioner Winton just expressed. And all the designers are familiar with the park. But the
situation that we have been confronted there for years is that the people of the neighborhood are not able to use the
park or enjoy the park, because the park has been plagued with prostitution, drug dealers, gangs and the whole nine
yards. Any negative thing that you want to find, you can go to the park and find it there. So on the other hand,
we're also paying Miami -Dade County two hundred thousand dollars a year to keep our horses there. And our
Police Department mounted patrol is protecting Dade County, and in top of that, we're paying Dade County to
protect them. I mean, I believe we've been talking about the port; we've been talking about the airport and things
that we have transferred to the County in the past. And I believe that it's time that we start taking back our assets.
And the mounted patrol is an asset that the City of Miami has. I believe that we need to proceed with this. Of
course, it's going to be done in a down scale, as the gentleman just expressed. And I also have to still meet with the
Police Chief and the person in charge of the mounted patrol to exactly find out how many horses we have, how
many officers we have, and build the stables in a way that will not affect the view of the park, that will not affect the
trees of the park, that make it -- that make it likeable by everyone in the community. So -- pardon me?
Vice Chairman Winton: Not everyone (inaudible).
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, you know, people have been so disgusted with the things that have been happening
in that park and in that neighborhood that when we had the first meeting, the Chief of Police was there, the Manager
was there, Mr. Ruder was there, the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team), everyone. And the neighborhood
was so appreciative of the -- of what we were trying to do in that park, because they are not able to use the park.
Their kids, they have to take their kids to another park in the City of Miami in order for their kids to play. I mean,
that is -- that is unreal. So it's time for us, as the Mayor said yesterday, it's time for us to start changing things in
this City. And it's time for us to start taking control of our parks, of our streets, and to do the things that we have to
do to combat the crime and turn our City back to its residents. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I think enough has been said on this item, and I concur with the statements
made by both of my colleagues. But let me just elaborate on one thing. In the short term, it's going to cost the City
some money, but in the long term, it's going to save the City a lot of money. It saves the City money on liability.
Right now, they have to drive from Tropical Park over -- you know, traffic is bad, driving time, liability is bad, and
25 4/11/02
they could get involved in an accident. And the horses are brought in the trailers. They'll be right there close to all
their facilities, 22"d Street Police Station, substation downtown. And once again, I think we've done such good
improvements to our parks with the lighting, and going and focusing on our parks. This is something that I would
love to see in the future, to make sure that we have police officers in every park in our community. So just to state
that I -- I couldn't support it the way it was, because I really thought it was just going to be too much construction,
and too much demand on that public land. You know, Sewell Park is one of the most beautiful parks we have, next
to Simpson Park, but I won't get into that. So, you know, I'm going to support it as long as it's a down version of
what was originally on the table.
Chairman Regalado: Ma'am.
Ava Barnes: My name is Ava Barnes, 1700 Northwest North River Drive, Unit 908, River Run Condominium.
Commissioner, I don't know where you live, but I live directly across from the park, and it is the most beautiful
park on the Miami River. I know parks are very precious, because I lived in Spring Garden before, and we fought
very hard to get two parks in our area. And I hate to see it desecrated and turned into a livestock pen. I am a farm
girl. I know what horse manure smells like. And the prevailing breeze is from the south. So that means I'm going
to be smelling that in my condominium. I walk my dogs three times a day, utilizing that park, looking into that
park. Three times every day for the last year and a half, I have not witnessed one crime. If we had crime in that
park, then the police should enforce the law. That's all I've got to say about crime. I have not seen it. What I have
seen, family gatherings, birthday parties, little boys playing with Frisbees. I've seen pick up soccer games. I have
not seen any crime. It's a lovely park, and I would feel very, very disheartened with the City of Miami again using
the Miami River as a dumping ground for horses. OK? That's all I have to say. Thank you very much.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Ma'am, can I just respond? Ma'am, let me just say that these horses probably live better
than all five Commissioners up here. Their stables are always clean. They have the best medical care. As a matter
of fact, I have horses, so I know what I'm talking about. They have the best, if not the best veterinarian in this
community when it comes to horses, which is Templeton, correct? Templeton is still doing your -- ? So they clean
their stables every day. I mean --
Ms. Barnes: Why ruin a beautiful park? I understand that you considered Fern Isle Park, but that had been dumped
on with construction dump so much that it would take eleven million dollars to clean it up. Why do the same thing
to this park?
Commissioner Sanchez: Ma'am, do you honestly think that by the City putting stables out there --
Ms. Barnes: Absolutely.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- it's going to destroy the park?
Ms. Barnes: Absolutely.
Commissioner Sanchez: I happen to disagree with you, with all due respect.
Ms. Barnes: Well, you didn't grow up in a farm, then.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Barnes: Thank you.
26 4/11/02
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. I -- go ahead, sir. Your name, address.
Christopher Rayborn: Thank you for letting me speak today. My name is Christopher Rayborn. And like Ms.
Barnes, I live across from the river. I'd like to weigh in on the subject as being against it. And taking into
consideration your analysis of it, I think there's some things that you're probably going to discover as you move
along. I can't say that what we say today will have any effect on you, because I can see that you all pretty much
have a pretty firm opinion as to where we stand at this day. I'm not --
Commissioner Teele: I don't think you should assume that.
Mr. Rayborn: Well, excuse me, but I'm not quite used to extemporaneous speaking, so I'm going to refer to some
notes that I made beforehand. Afterwards, I'll probably remember some things I wish I had said. But in the interest
of brevity, which I'm sure you'll all appreciate later on in the day, I'll move along. I wish you could move horses to
Sewell Park. A police officer on horseback is an uplifting sight, representing high visibility, therefore security. But
I'm not a criminal and I don't propose to know what effect a police presence will do, except, reasonably, crime
would be suppressed by officers present. But don't most parks to some degree have crime? What attracts criminals
is the darkness of the park, poor fencing and possibly the perception of a thinly stretched night shift police force.
My understanding is that the police presence will be negligible after 7 p.m. at night. As to crime during the day,
what community meetings have been held, before the issue of bringing the horses there, have addressed this issue?
I don't know of them, but I'm sure they may have occurred. What was the result? This is an opportunity for you to
move your horses to the park, and it brings into, you know, focus the problem of crime. But crime is not just in
Sewell Park. Crime is endemic to that community. It's not any more, I assert, or less than there is in, for example,
Jose Duarte Park down the street. The only difference is that you're not considering Jose Duarte Park to put the
horses. OK. There's conflict in testimonials that I've heard as to the safety of the park. What statistics are
evidence to prove this? I mean, I've heard a lot of rhetoric just now. And I believe in, you know, conclusion that
Sewell is a poor choice. Not for the security issue, but basically, just like Ms. Barnes stated, building and
maintaining stable horses seems like a good idea. But you're not taking into consideration the special conservation
designation that the park enjoys. OK, the park is not another park. This park has very significant -- And you'll
find out later there are going to be some groups that are going to come forward and make you very aware of this --
archeological, historical, in addition to the scenic beauty that it obviously has. OK. People do need to be able to
enjoy the park, and nobody is here to get in the way of anything that you plan to do, to do that. But I don't think
that moving the horses there is the end-all situation. And I do, you know, hope that you do come to some, you
know, plan. And I know that there is actually a parks master plan in the works that's set to be implemented
probably within a year, you know, given funding that's due to be authorized. But until the City exhausts any
options, it'll remain, my belief, as a poor choice.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Chief Martinez, you want to add something to this?
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yeah, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you giving me a chance. Raul Martinez, Chief
of Police. The issue of the mounted patrol has been an issue for many years. We have been, for the lack of a better
term, a bastard child of the Police Department. We used to be at the County Jail for many years, where we were
moved. We have been in Tropical Park for many years. We're basically adding police visibility to a County park,
not to a City park. Beyond the loss of travel time, every morning, between seven, eight o'clock in the morning,
traveling from Tropical Park to any place in the City, dealing with what the traffic looks like on a normal day.
Whenever you have an accident, especially if you're carrying a trailer with one or two horses, even more, it makes it
that much more difficult to get there. The City even gives back to the County, as part of a tradeoff, their use of the
parking for what used to be called the Virginia Slims -- I'm not sure what the tennis match is being called right now
-- as a tradeoff for us using their stables. And the last thing is, sooner or later -- but it's going to be a lot sooner than
later -- they're going to kick us out. They kicked out the Miami -Dade Mounted Patrol from Tropical Park, and they
just unveiled a plan of what their equestrian plan is going to look like. It doesn't have Miami Police Department
Mounted Patrol on the far corner over there. It shows other items that they feel should be there, and probably
27 4/11/02
should be there. Mounted patrol adds a tremendously visibility wherever you put them. You know, in downtown,
you're walking around, you don't know whether the officer is there or not. You obviously know whether the cop's
on the horse or not. And the bad guy knows. You know, not just the good people know. The bad guy knows when
an officer is on a horse. And he says, I'm going to do it somewhere else, because the officer is here. I want to
thank Commissioner Gonzalez for bringing this up, because the committee was asking for the Commissioners to
help us in this park. The park is a beautiful park, I know. I've been going to that park since I was a little kid. But
unfortunately, it's used -- some of the use is not the type of use that we all wish would happen at the park. And it's
had that reputation for many years. You know, parks do have problems, unfortunately. We have open spaces.
People go to open spaces. But sometimes, locations gather a reputation. Some people nationwide go to the park to
do certain things, because they've been told that is the park to do it. We have affected numerous arrests. I don't
have the numbers to tell you right now, whether it's one in 100. But, you know, this will add constant visibility,
officers going to and from. Our push is not to negatively impact the park. If we negatively impact the park's looks,
we obviously don't want to be there and do that, whether you're on the south side of the river or the north side of
the river. I think that having small parks there to house 16, 17, 18 horses and office space for the officers to do their
paperwork and keep their horse feed or whatever is not going to negatively impact the park. The issue of the smell.
Technology has changed drastically as far as stables. You know, they have fumigation devices to make sure it
doesn't smell for the horses' sake, and they pick up the manure and all these things on a daily basis to make sure it
doesn't stay there and rot and stink the whole neighborhood. I don't think that it's going to negatively impact the
park, but that's a decision that the Commission is going to make with the input from the citizens. But we obviously
need to put that park where it adds visibility to our City, where it adds visibility to any place you put it, and it cuts
down the loss time that you taxpayers pay on a daily basis, and where the officers are in traffic versus doing what
you pay them to do. Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: If I may. I'm sure that Commissioner Gonzalez is going to have community meetings;
they're going to have a charrette process. The residents and the surrounding neighbors are going to have a say on
how the stables are going to look, where they're going to be placed. I mean, this is just not something that the City
is going to go out there and build a stable wherever they want to. I mean, the philosophy here is that we, when we
make a decision that Public Works and everyone involved in the process has ample opportunity and accessibility
with the surrounding neighbors to sit down and come to an agreement on that. So there will be participation from
the neighbors on this issue. I assure you of that.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Gonzalez, I wanted to weigh in very heavily on this item. I
want to first congratulate and commend Commissioner Gonzalez for bringing it up. The item on our agenda today
is a discussion item. And, you know, the Sunshine Law doesn't allow us to talk. The only way we can do it, it may
not be an efficient way, but it's certainly the legal way to do this. I can be persuaded that horses could be based or
have a location on this park. I'm very open to that. I only have one vote, and I could be convinced of that. But I'm
100 percent opposed, Mr. Manager, to the manner in which this matter is being brought forth, not by Commissioner
Gonzalez, but by the Manager's staff for an analysis. And I would take this opportunity to send to you directly and
your staff what I expect. Number one, when this item is going to be addressed for a decision, Madam Attorney, as I
have said every time that we've talked, I want the item noticed for the public. I believe -- and I've asked you all
repeatedly to prepare an ordinance that says any governmental action that changes or affects the use of publicly
owned land needs to be publicly noticed before an action is taken. That's not where we are now. We're discussing
it. But I want to start out by saying there can be no sneak attack on this item or any item like this, whether I want it,
28 4/11/02
or Johnny, or Commissioner Gonzalez or whomever. We have a duty to the public. This land is not owned by the
residents of that district, just like the Bicentennial Park is not owned by the residents of District -- of CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency) and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) and that. This is valuable
land that we hold as trustees for the whole, in trust. Number two; the Parks Director should be leading this
discussion, in my opinion. We're talking about a park. And the first thing, Commissioner Gonzalez and others of
us need to be informed as to what is the national ranking and the national reporting regarding the status and the
conditions of our parks. The last time I saw this 18 months ago, we were like dead last. One of the problems is the
kinds of intrusions and incursions that we put on our parks. One of them was a lack of space, in terms of per citizen
per open space. So any time you start putting a building on a park, you're literally de -mapping that portion of the
park for purposes of national parks gurus that come out and do these comparative analyses. And folks, I've got to
tell you, as beautiful as the parks that we have in Miami -- and I've got to tell you, I think we have some of the most
beautiful parks in the world -- we're dead last among major urban cities. Mr. Director, correct me if I'm wrong,
now, because that study came out, and I took exception to it. You know that. I don't think they added our
cemetery, for example, as space. I think certain things that they didn't do that they should have done, or we should
have done, they didn't do. But the way that report was written, we were in the lower ranking or the lower
percentile. Is that a fair statement?
Albert Ruder (Director, Parks and Recreation): The report, I haven't looked at it in a while, but it basically
criticized us for how much money we budget for parks based on per capita, compared to other cities, and also, open
spaces, compared to population.
Commissioner Teele: Well, open spaces is what we're talking about right now. We're talking about closing some -
- But I want you to correct or state clearly on the record, because Commissioner Gonzalez was not here when that
study came out. I don't know if Commissioner Winton was here. But that study, which was a recognized study,
rated Miami in the lower percentile. Is that a fair statement?
Mr. Ruder: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So before we start talking about parks, let's don't go backwards. In other words, if
we're going to build a building on a park, somebody needs to be identifying new parkland somewhere else to
replace it with. My view is, if you need open space, the best place to put it, Commissioner Winton -- If this were
just a drill on where to put the stable, and if parkland is a valid consideration, obviously, what's the biggest park
we've got that's abutting water, et cetera?
Mr. Ruder: We have Virginia Key, and, of course, we have Morningside and --
Commissioner Teele: All right. Morningside that would be a nice place to put the stable. OK? But you know why
we're not going to talk about putting the stable in Morningside? Do I have to say why? Because it's Morningside.
And nobody is going to consider putting a stable in Morningside. OK? So let's just go ahead and put this thing out
here, because the Mayor says we need to be open, and we need to have a new day here. The point is this: If you
take the value, the historical, archeological value of Morningside to this park, to probably any other park in the City,
with the exception of Lummus, this park is probably one of the most, valuable, in terms of historic preservation of
any park in the City with the exception of -- is it Lummus Park? Fort Dallas area there, which is historically
correct? So we need to be very, very careful, because this ain't going be a fight about just the parks. We're going
to have the historic preservationists breathing down our back. Now, I'm going to tell you something else, Mr.
Public Works Director. When you start talking about building a building on a historic site, something should come
to mind. Dah. Maybe there's a bone down there. Maybe we're going to uncover some rare Indian tee -pee
headquarters where all the tee -pees came together. But I've got to tell you one thing. This is much more than it
sounds like. Now, the real problem that I have with this is this: Because this is the way everybody in this City has
done business for the last 30 years. They see some land, and everybody runs around and says: What can I do to it?
What can I put on it? Instead of saying: Here is the need that we have. Now, where can we place the need? You
29 4/11/02
see, everybody's seen the land, so now you're trying to put the building on the land, instead of saying to the
Planning Director -- And I'll be willing to bet you -- Wherever the Planning Director is, and the Asset
Management Office, have you all met with the Police Department on this item, Asset Management Director and
Planning? Planning, have you all met with them, Madam Director? Because what we -- Madam Planning Director
first -- because what we expect the private sector to do is to go out and do a proper plan, Johnny, and to come to us
with something well thought out, not just what you want to build here. And Madam Planning Director, I'm asking
you this in two contexts. Are you not the representative of the City for the Greenway or the Miami River Plan that's
being done? Is your office not coordinating that?
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes, it is.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Has this -- And you all the Planning -- Are you the Planning Director for the whole
City?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, I am.
Commissioner Teele: Have you and the Police Department sat down and worked on this item?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: There is someone from staff who has been working --
Commissioner Teele: Has this matter -- It's up here to us.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: But we certainly will be working with them.
Commissioner Teele: Madam Director, it's up here to us. We rely on your advice on historic preservation. We
rely on your advice on planning, and land use. This is before you for three different reasons. You're our
coordinating person with the Miami River. You are also our coordinating person for historic preservation. Has this
matter been -- properly been before you, as the Planning Director?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Commissioner --
Commissioner Teele: That's not a fair question, I know. OK. So the point is, the answer is the answer. And thank
you very much. The fact that you're trying to frame the answer correctly helps me. But this is the point I'm only
making: I'd be willing to bet you, Chief, honestly, that if we sit down with the greenway people and look at that
whole greenway, from the mouth of the river to the sea, whatever it is, canal, right there, back there where the very
thing is, I'll be willing to bet you -- a fair man -- I'll be willing to be you a hotdog at the next Heat game, when they
have a chance of winning -- not this season, but the next season -- that we can find an appropriate site somewhere
along that Miami River, between the cleanup that's going on, between what DOT (Department of Transportation) is
doing in terms of the -- and the American Airlines expansion, and all of that stuff that's going on down there on that
south end of the river, somewhere down there, around the Jai -Alai facility, et cetera, if we would only sit down and
do it. And so my issue is simply this: I want to pass a resolution, whenever Commissioner Sanchez wants to bring
it up, instructing the Manager to find an appropriate site for the stable. And among those sites, I have no objection
to studying any park along the area, including this park, including a park in my district. OK? I don't have a
problem studying everything. But what I do have a problem with is just grabbing a piece of land because it's there
and saying that's what we're going to do with it, without going through a planning process, without coordinating
this, without the Planning Director doing their thing, the archeologist, the Public Works Department, the Asset
Management. We are a complicated, complex City, and we have the resources. And I say this every budget year,
Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Sanchez, as far as I'm concerned, we need about two more Assistant
Managers, because Assistant Managers should be here coordinating. And this City is not coordinated. Every
department sort of does its own thing. And, you know, that's a whole `nother story. But if you want to look at --
The best example is Community Development. I mean, they've got cars, they've got equipment, they've got this,
30 4/11/02
they've got that. Everybody's got to do their own thing. You remember when all this stuff comes up? So all that
I'm saying to you is this: Let's agree that we want to do this, but let's agree that we're going to let the process,
including the Parks Advisory Committee, have a part in weighing in on this. And if it winds up being at this park,
and that's the staff recommendation, and the community supports it, I will support it. But I don't think it should be
the Police Chief's recommendation that this is the best place, because I don't think we're anywhere near that
decision yet. And so I respectfully, Mr. Manager, urge you -- Mr. Manager, I respectfully urge you to convene a
process, pursuant to what Commissioner Gonzalez has brought to the table, with a view toward solving the problem
of the stable, and considering this park among any other venues, whether in the City, or outside of the City --
preferably near the City -- that we could identify. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Commissioner
Gonzalez, for the opportunity to elaborate on your item.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: If I just may. Taking into consideration the future of Miami and what I see, and what the
Mayor yesterday on his speech said, you're talking about the greenway. The greenway is going to be one of the
things that's going to help us take that river to another level. What better way to patrol greenways than to patrol
them on mounted police and bicycles? You cannot drive your car through the greenways. So this is the thing that
I'm taking into consideration. I'm all for going out and doing a study of whatever park that it may be. And, yes, of
course, we have to take into consideration that we don't find no bones. That's always a risk we take here in our
great City. But at the end of the day, they are things that we need to take into consideration. Sooner or later, the
County has a different plan for that park. We know that they're -- right now, they're focusing on bringing in Paso
Finos, all kinds of shows that are being very productive for the County, and we are going to be kicked out. If the
County mounted police got kicked out, I could guarantee you, we're next. And we have to find a way to find this.
So taking that into consideration, I support the site. But I could also sit back and say: Hey, if we do have the time,
let's do the study and make sure that we do it right. And I, for one, don't want to be later on criticized, which we
will, because no good deed goes unpunished. But that is something that we need to take into consideration. The
greenways could only be patrolled by bicycle police and mounted police. You look at every park throughout the
United States. In every great park, there are two, or three, or four or five mounted police. We just want to be like
every great City in this nation.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me clarify a couple of things. First of all, during my campaign, for those who don't
know or that were not there, I had four meetings at that park during my campaign, before I became a Commissioner.
In those meetings, there was a concern of the residents of that area south of the river, which are the people that lives
across the street from the park and near the park. They expressed to me the concerns of the illegal activities that
were happening in that park. I have been to that park. I have seen the illegal activities happening in that park
myself. Nobody told me about it. I have seen it myself, with my own eyes. I've been in that park at 7 p.m. I've
been at the park on Sundays. I've been at that park on Saturdays. I've been at that park during the weekdays. And
I have seen prostitutes. I have seen drug dealing. I have seen gangs, and I have seen -- And by the way, the day
that we had the meeting at the park with the Police Department and the neighbors, and we had two meetings there
with City staff, with the neighborhood south of the river -- OK? -- that same day, standing in the park, the police
officers had to run behind two guys that the day before assaulted two elderly persons in the park. And they
identified them. They were at the meeting, and they said: Those two guys held us up yesterday. And the police
officers followed the guys. OK? That's for the record. So I have had meetings with the community. I have
31 4/11/02
consulted the community. We sent City staff north of the river to one of the buildings -- I believe it's your building.
There were nine City staff people there, and there were people from my office there. And I was not there, because I
had another meeting to attend at the same time. I had two meetings going that night. Another point that I want to
make clear is that the Chief of Police, Mr. Teele, didn't come up with the idea of putting these stables in the park.
OK? The Chief of Police suggested to me that that was a solution to that park, since we had to get the horses out of
Tropical Park. So it's not the fault of the Chief of Police. Now, when we're talking about not building buildings in
the parks, I have heard in this Commission the idea of building two museums in Bayfront Park to attract people. So
are we going to build the museums with paper, or towels, or are they going to be tents, or are they going to be
buildings? OK? So, you know, in some areas, some things are good. In other areas, some things are not good. It
all depends on where we are trying to make changes. We had the meetings with the neighbors. The Chief of Police
is not responsible for this idea. This was my idea. I consulted with the Chief of Police. He told me he had no
problem in bringing the horses to that park, because eventually, we're going to have to take the horses out of
Tropical Park, because they're going to push them out. All right? We are losing about four hours. They said on
their reports we're losing three hours downtime. I'll be you it's four hours of downtime. That is costing us,
between the time that we're losing every year on police officers providing service to the community, plus what
we're paying the County, plus the free parking that we're giving the County for the Lipton Tea event, we are losing
about a million dollars probably, or more than a million dollars. And those are the things. We're talking about
conducting an efficient government, that we need to find efficiency. And the Mayor said it yesterday in his address.
Well, this is a way to look for efficiency. We are wasting over a million dollars every year, just on down time and
paying the County money to store our horses. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Robert, do you want to address as the Waterfront Advisory Board Chairman?
Robert Parente: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Robert Parente, Chairman of the City Waterfront Advisory
Board. That's the hat I'm wearing right now. The Parks Department did bring the issue, because the park is on the
water. So the citizens can rest assured that it has to go by ordinance to the City's Waterfront Board. All they did
was present us a concept. They said, without any designs or any drawings: What does the Waterfront Board think?
We, too, are concerned about parks being swallowed up, and waterfront land not being used for waterfront
purposes. But 1 must concur completely with Commissioner Gonzalez. We've heard for years, and I've seen it
myself, on water tours of the river, how under-utilized that park is. When I personally toured it on foot, I'm a big
guy, and I don't scare easily, I've got to tell you, that park makes me a little nervous. So we said yes, with the
caveat that they must come before our board first, so we could advise -- you are, you know, the people we advise --
as to what their plans were. And they promised us they'd come with drawings, plans, and so on and so forth. And
lastly, our board is blessed with -- we have an historian now. And our -- the Waterfront Board historian is Dr. Paul
George. And you all know Dr. George, so I don't have to tell you his credentials. I asked Dr. George what his
thoughts were. His concern, of course, like everyone's, was how much space would be used. He didn't -- I asked
him if he thought there were artifacts there. He didn't seem to think so, but he said if done properly, you could
make the horses -- He said mounted patrol have been around. They're historical. They've been around, as far as
policing in this community, since the very beginning. And he said that if done right, you could build it to be
historical. And I suggested that programmatically that the mounted patrol could then do things for the community
there that had to do with relating to the horses, and teaching the kids about the horses. As a kid, I can relate to you
that growing up in the Roads, we loved the days when the Miami Motormen would come through our neighborhood
and practice for the Orange Bowl Parade. And they left such a lasting impression that all the kids I grew up with to
this day remember the image they received of the Miami motorcycle guys. And I'm sure that'll be the effect that
will happen with the horses. Make sure the citizens are involved, make it look historic, and I think you have
something. But again, citizens, the Waterfront Board is duly noticed, we meet the second Tuesday of the month.
They have to come before us, and we'd be glad to sponsor any charrette or meetings that you'd like to have that
people can be involved. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. We really need to move on. We're going to have a public hearing -- no, I'm
sorry. We're going to have a public hearing when this item comes back. I just want to briefly say that back in '97,
32 4/11/02
several months after I was elected for the first time, we had the committees in the City Commission, and I was
appointed Chairman of the Parks Committee. And I had to go through a hole in the fence with Mr. Ruder to enter
Sewell Park. At that time, there were about ten homeless there, plus two or three people doing the kind of voodoo
that they do near the water and the river, plus someone from the hospital next door who apparently was -- had a very
severe mental disorder. And so that was it. And unfortunately, that park has not changed much. It's much better
now than it was in '97, but there is something we have to do to that park. And what -- I was talking the other day to
Commissioner Souto from the County, and Javier was the one that sponsored the equestrian center in Tropical Park.
That's his pet project. Tropical Park is in his district. And I can tell you that the City of Miami Police Department
is going to be told to get out of Tropical Park very soon. That's the way it is. They want the equestrian center as a
money making operation. They have these plans. So expect any day a notice from the County to evict the mounted
patrol of the City of Miami. Having said that, Commissioner Gonzalez, do you have anything to offer in terms of a
resolution?
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, that the resolution had to do with -- it was a motion to request the City staff to meet
with the appropriate parties -- the River Commission, the Parks Advisory Board, the surrounding residents, to
discuss the placing of the City stables in Sewell Park, in order to increase security for the uses of the park without
interfering with the residents' use, or the beauty of the park as seen from the Miami River. And authorizing Public
Works to develop preliminary drawings for discussion purposes, and directing the administration to consult with the
Commissioner of the district in the development of the project, and bring recommendations back to the City
Commission. That is my motion.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion, for discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Commissioner Winton first, Commissioner Teele.
Vice Chairman Winton: Just one comment. In your motion, you direct Public Works to develop preliminary
drawings. I think the absolute key -- and I concur with, frankly, everyone up here, because there's pieces of this
that need to be melded together. Commissioner Teele is 100 percent right in that relative to the process, we really
need to look at -- We need to look at from a planning standpoint where the right spot is to put it. I happen to
concur with you, Commissioner Gonzalez, that a park, even if we created a new park to put the horses in, is not an
inappropriate setting for the horses, because I think you could turn it into a park where the horses can be used by the
kids. And that's a whole new activity center that this City simply doesn't have. So I think there's -- you can look at
both of those. But the key, nonetheless, no matter where this goes, is going to rest with the design. No one is going
to buy into this thing, period, I don't care what, except a few people, if you're not presenting -- It's just like
building a building, a high-rise in the neighborhood. If you don't have a design that's looked at all of the issues that
concern people, everybody is going to say no, because it's always easier to say no than yes. And so l don't know if
it's Public Works or whether you hire someone else, and I'm in favor of either one, but you've got to get the right
person, the right planner/architect working on the plans to figure out how you lay this out, wherever it may go, so
that it's presented as a visual, clear asset to the community. So that's where I'm coming from.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: On the motion, I'm in total agreement with everything that was said previously, as I said. I
started my statement by saying I could be convinced to vote for the affair. What I want Commissioner Gonzalez at
least to be open to in his motion, if you would, please, is an amendment that simply would say: "And to look at any
other alternative sites that may be appropriate." I have no problem designating this as the preferential site. I have a
problem by not looking at any other site. I'll go two steps further in that. I think it is not only appropriate, I think it
33 4/11/02
would be very helpful to have a stable at this park. That's where I start out from. I don't know if a 17 -horse stable
is what you're looking at. And it's not about buildings versus no buildings, Commissioner. I want to make this
very clear. It's about whether or not there's public access to those buildings. In other words, a museum, a
basketball gymnasium, a tennis court, community -- Buildings on parks are always good. But building a building
that is not for the public, building a giant laboratory, or a storage facility for hazardous, and nuclear and biological
items, or horses, or cars or anything that is a purely administrative function may not have the same dignity as a
building for which the public comes in. I think the argument, though, is an argument that Commissioner Winton
and you are making, which is the argument that I would like to see that staff adopt. And that is, is that the stables,
themselves, if properly designed, properly laid out could be a part of the park's attraction. And the question is,
which Johnny Winton goes back to again, is how is it designed? How is it laid out? You know, I was talking to a
guy yesterday. You know, making cigars or brewing wine or beer has become something that people pay to go see,
you know. And so if you're going to make cigars, do it in a way where people can go. It's a world of difference.
And so all that I'm asking, Commissioner Gonzalez, is that in addition, that you would allow the Manager and the
Planning Department, and the Parks Department, and Asset Management to look at any other site that may be
appropriate, and to come back with a recommendation, which specifically the site that you identified, but any other
site that may be appropriate. And I would --
Commissioner Gonzalez: The maker of the motion accepts the amendment.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Anybody else? The public hearing is closed. There is a motion, amended and accepted,
and a second. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes five to zero.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-371
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE APPROPRIATE
MEMBERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF MEET WITH THE MIAMI
RIVER COMMISSION, THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD AND
RESIDENTS OF THE AREA TO DISCUSS PROPOSED PLACING OF THE
CITY STABLES IN SEWELL PARK AS A PREFERRED SITE, BUT ALSO
TO CONSIDER ALTERNATE SITES IN ORDER TO INCREASE SECURITY
FOR THE USE OF THE PARK WITHOUT INTERFERING WITH THE
RESIDENTS' USE OR BEAUTY OF THE PARK AS SEEN FROM THE
MIAMI RIVER; FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO COMPLETE
PRELIMINARY DRAWINGS FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES; AND
FURTHER DIRECTING CITY ADMINISTRATION TO CONSULT WITH
THE COMMISSIONER OF THE DISTRICT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
THE PROJECT AND BRING RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO THE CITY
COMMISSION.
34 4/11/02
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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
35 4/11/02
7. ACCEPT SETTLEMENT FROM DELOITTE & TOUCHE, L.L.P. TO SETTLE ALL CLAIMS IN
CITY VS. DELOITTE & TOUCHE, L.L.P. AND DELOITTE & TOUCHE, L.L.P. VS. CITY, SUBJECT
TO DELOITTE PAYING CITY $1,900,000, INCLUSIVE OF ATTORNEY FEES, IN
CONSIDERATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS. (See #3.19)
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, before you do that, you pulled an item from the consent agenda.
Chairman Regalado: Yes. We need to discuss -- it's Item 19 --
Commissioner Teele: Nineteen.
Chairman Regalado: -- from the consent agenda. The City Attorney wanted to discuss that. I -- before
we go into this discussion, I want to ask you if you want to come back at 2:30? Remember that we have -
- OK. We have a 3 o'clock Raceworks, plus we have some public hearings. The Mayor has requested a
report after 7:30. We have a lot of things. So, if you want to go back at 2:30 is fine. Is it OK with you,
Commissioner Teele? You have an MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) meeting today or -- no
MPO meeting. OK. All right. Mr. City Attorney.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, I requested that the item be pulled from the consent
agenda so that an additional item that Deloitte and Touche is prepared to provide to the City's community
based organizations could be discussed. Mr. Tom Tew is in the audience and I think can address the
issue. Mr. Tew is special counsel for the City in the litigation of the City of Miami versus Deloitte &
Touche, and is coming forward with his recommendation for settlement.
Tomas Tew: Thank you, Commissioners. We are recommending this settlement. In addition, after we
had considered the economic aspects of this, we inquired as to Deloitte, as to whether or not they would
be in a position to assist the agencies, the community agencies dealing with the City in an educational
fashion. They have come forth voluntarily, not as a condition, to the settlement and have given the
commitment of their managing partner, Mr. Cheryl Hudson, and partner Kim Hunter, to undertake a
series of seminars. The focus of those seminars are to focus on the strategic initiatives needed to be
successful in a not-for-profit environment. These are not simple issues. We have already received a
proposed seminar that has numerous items, attempting to help a community agency organize itself, how
to make its grants, the very detailed and technical things that firms of Deloitte and Touche's capacity can
assist and train on. They are proposing three different sessions, eight hours a day, in six month intervals.
The various items are how to put your board together, how to account for your grants, how to effectively
use the grant applications that are needed? Many very technical things that takes professional input. I
commend them for coming forth voluntarily to add this assistance. And I would want to really place that
on the record, because their counsel have advised that the City Attorney, who's asked me, could make
these commitments on the record to the Commissioners.
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we need a motion to accept?
Mr. Vilarello: It's a motion to adopt the resolution.
Commissioner Teele: I would like to move it, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
36 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Tew, I would like to add three provisos to this resolution. Number one, that
the persons and entities that would be invited would be from the Manager's recommendation of entities
that do business through our CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) process or through our --
what's that account over there in Conventions, where everybody comes and -- Conventions and -- you
know the people that come and get money to go do something in Bayfront Park or like we had at the
Miami Arena. These organizations that we're providing support to for -- in other words, I want this -- I
don't want this just to be anybody that's in the City of Miami.
Mr. Tew: Commissioner, we have -- that has been anticipated. And in the draft seminar that was
provided to us, under the initial set up of terms, participants would be invited based on the list --
Commissioner Teele: That's in the resolution?
Mr. Tew: It's in the agenda that --
Commissioner Teele: Is it in the resolution?
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, we will place it in the resolution.
Commissioner Teele: OK. In other words, what I want to do is that this will be -- these participants will
come from the Manager's recommended list, primarily of entities that are CDBG guarantees, public
service guarantees, et cetera, as well as those entities that have applied for funds from our Conventions
and -- what's the thing called? Christina Abrams? What's it called?
Mr. Vilarello: We do also have LETF (Law Enforcement Trust Fund) grants that we do -- I assume
you're including those.
Commissioner Teele: The what grant?
Mr. Vilarello: Law Enforcement Trust Fund grants.
Commissioner Teele: Right. The law -- those entities that are --
Mr. Vilarello: That receive grants --
Lena Blanco (Special Events Coordinator): Conferences, Conventions and Public Facilities.
Commissioner Teele: State your name and address for the record.
Ms. Blanco: Lina Blanco, Special Events Coordinator.
Commissioner Teele: See, Lina deals with a lot of organizations that don't come through our grant
process, but they're here using our parks, our conventions, et cetera. And one of the big problems, for
example, with Goombay, Commissioner Winton, was that Goombay's inability really to be able to put
their board structures together and systems together has really hurt our ability to give them money and --
or to assist them. And, so, I want this to be something that is structured. I don't want this to be people
from Opa Locka or Hialeah, necessarily, just coming in because we're having a seminar and somebody
thought it'd be a nice thing to invite them. That was number one, Mr. Attorney. And number two is that I
would appreciate that, in each of the seminars, there would be at least one representative of the Hispanic
community, and one representative of the African-American community invited to speak, that is either on
the board of a Fortune 500, Fortune 1000 company, or one of the top 100 businesses, Hispanic or -- CEO
37 April 11, 2002
(Chief Executive Officer) -type of one of the top 100 businesses, Hispanic, or one of the top 100
businesses, black. And what I'm talking about now is not just having a local meeting where everybody
sort of comes together and you all serve some bologna sandwiches, but we bring in someone like a Cathy
Hughes, who owns Radio 1, an eight hundred million dollar ($800,000,000) corporation, which, by the
way, has an office here in Miami. Or we bring in someone like the CEO of Goya Foods or the guy --
what's the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that owns all the restaurants here?
Unidentified Speaker: Felipe (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: Felipe (INAUDIBLE). Somebody that is well-known and accepted and,
particularly, that we should include women as these panelists, if you will, an outstanding or distinguished
panelist, who would make a brief presentation either as a board member of a company like American
Airline. You've got people like the guy that owns Black Enterprise Magazine, Johnson -- is on the board
of American Airlines, for example. He's in and out of here all the time. So, there's a lot of ways we can
bring something that's more than just a private little meeting, where we all sit down. Something that
really gives people a reason to want to come and gives them an opportunity to meet people that are
professional in the business and corporate world that otherwise they would not like -- they would not get
to know. Those would be my two conditions that I would like to add into it; that for each of the three
sessions, there would be at least two persons invited -- that would be invited to be distinguished panelists
from the Hispanic and Black communities, as well as from the broader communities, and particularly, we
look for women that are on the boards of companies that could come in -- it's fine to talk about what you
need to be to be a good board member, but in bringing a person who sits on the board of a united airline
or Ford Motor Company or General Motors to be a part of this, I think would be a great help to our
community.
Mr. Tew: Commissioner, I think the theme that you've expressed is actually within the first proposal,
because the suggested speakers and participants cover the range of individuals that you've just identified
and, again, I think Deloitte is already in that spirit of who the speakers and participants might be.
Commissioner Teele: Fine. But I just want those as the two conditions of this. So that if they decide they
don't really want to do it, then, you know, we've got a problem.
Chairman Regalado: Would you -- Commissioner Teele, would you add another condition, that all these
seminars will take place within the limits of the City of Miami?
Commissioner Teele: Oh, absolutely. The third condition would be that the seminars would be within the
limits of -- City limits of the City of Miami, and certainly would work in consultation with the Manager,
both in terms of timing, location, and all of the other administrative prerequisites.
Chairman Regalado: But they said that they will take care of all the arrangements, so why do they need
to arrange that with the Manager?
Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean, just as a formality. They can't arrange it with --
Mr. Tew: Well, one of the things that they rightly asked for is the guest list or the invited list from the
City. And, of course, they'll have to cooperate and coordinate in that, and we will certainly be glad to
help participate in that. It's just a coordination, to make sure that you all identify those people you want
present.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
38 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Mr. Vilarello: The resolution, as amended?
Chairman Regalado: The resolution --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, as amended.
Chairman Regalado: -- as amended.
Mr. Tew: Thank you, gentlemen.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner --
Commissioner Sanchez: And to make sure that this never happens again.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Tew.
39 April 11, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-372
A RESOLUTION OF MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
SETTLEMENT FROM DELOITTE & TOUCHE, L.L.P. ("DELOITTE") TO SETTLE
ALL CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS ASSERTED IN THE CASE THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA ("CITY") VS. DELOITTE & TOUCHE, L.L.P. AND DELOITTE &
TOUCHE L.L.P. VS. THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CASE NO. 97-25179 CA (21), SUBJECT TO DELOITTE PAYING THE
CITY THE SUM OF $1,900,000, INCLUSIVE OF ATTORNEY FEES, IN
CONSIDERATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS AND
COUNTERCLAIMS, AND EXCHANGE OF MUTUAL GENERAL RELEASES;
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO
EFFECTUATE THE SETTLEMENT; FURTHER, ACCEPTING DELOITTE'S
PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE A FULL DAY SEMINAR COVERING MANAGERIAL
AND FINANCIAL TOPICS RELATED TO COMMUNITY AGENCIES OPERATING
WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
40 April 11, 2002
8. DIRECT AND AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO MAKE SPECIFIC GRANTS, $10,000 TO AFRICAN
AMERICAN COMMITTEE OF DADE HERITAGE TRUST AS CITY'S SUPPORT OF 9TH ANNUAL
COMMEMORATIVE SERVICE HONORING AFRICAN AMERICANS BURIED IN CITY
CEMETERY.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez —
Vice Chairman Winton: I thought—
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like --
Chairman Regalado: You have items?
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I didn't see anything on here.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to yield my time. I have something I'll bring up on blue sheets
after lunch, but I'd like to yield to Enid Pinkney, who's been here all morning. She can't wait until -- to
come back at 2:30, and that's on Item 7.
Chairman Regalado: Would it be possible for you to chair until the lunch break, because I have to leave?
Vice Chairman Winton: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: I would move Item 7 for discussion, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Note for the Record: Commissioner Gonzalez entered the Commission meeting at 11:45 a.m.
Vice Chairman Winton: Need a second. Discussion. Enid, would you like to come up and give a
presentation, please?
Ms. Enid Pinkney: Thank you very much. I want to thank the City Commission, the Mayor and the City
Commission -- well, the Mayor wasn't here before, but in the past, for the past eight years, the City
Commission of the City of Miami has supported the commemorative service that we have had in the City
cemetery honoring pioneers buried in the City's cemetery, as a part of Dade Heritage Days. And I also
want to thank Mr. Ruder and his staff, and the City Manager and everybody who has provided us with the
assistance that we need in order to put this project on. As I'm talking, I would like to pass to you some
fliers for Dade Heritage Days, and also the -- for our commemorative service and a news release, if I have
it. I might have it -- OK. The news release that we're putting out on this event, I'd like for you -- I'd like
to share this with you. Today I'm here to ask you, all of you to be marshals for our procession. I'm here
to ask you for proclamations for the families of Mr. Archie Willis, who was an African-American
incorporator of the City of Miami, whose name appears on the City Charter. And Mr. M.T. Mitchell, also
an African-American incorporator of the City of Miami, and Mr. George Kelly, a musician with the Ink
Spots, who -- and the -- We will be honoring these people on April 28th at the City cemetery. The other
thing I'd like is the tent -- I'd like to have a larger tent, because we're going to have the Arcola Singing
41 April 11, 2002
Angels this year, and they are retired people. They will walk in our procession -- even though they're
senior citizens, they will walk in our procession from St. Agnes Episcopal Church with the coronet band
to the City cemetery, and we'd like for them to have a place to sit after they get there, because a lot of
times the people who get there early take up the seats. So, we need a larger tent and we would -- and
chairs for about 200 people. We need six tables. We need a microphone and sound system, and someone
to operate the sound system. We would like to have a waiver of the insurance fee and a waiver of the
parade permit. We also would like to have police escorts, which will escort us from St. Agnes Episcopal
Church on Northwest 3rd Avenue, to the City's cemetery, and then back from the City's cemetery to St.
Agnes Church. Since all of us are so patriotic at this time because of the incident of September 11th, we
also would like to have some of the police in the procession and the firemen to show our respect for the
service that our local police and our local firemen give to this community. So, we would like to have
them, as well as have all of you, as a part of the procession and also participating in the service. It's been
my pleasure to work with you in the past, and you have cooperated, of course -- because Commissioner
Teele has always been with us. He's out there walking with us. Now, I'd like to see some more of the
Commissioners join him on that Sunday, April 28th.
Commissioner Teele: I've walked for the four years that I've been here, and it is a very wonderful tribute
to the past and to the shoulders -- the giants, whose shoulders we stand on. Ms. Pinkney, all of this is laid
out. It's in the motion. Is there anything that's not in the memo -- and, by the way, Mr. Manager, this
item is dated January 23rd, and it's just getting here. I don't have a recommendation, in writing, from you
on this. I don't know if you all put an endorsement on it. But, obviously, this is one of the best programs
we could ever do, because it, again, brings the life in our cemetery. Cemeteries are among the nation are
some of the most visited tourist attractions in our urban core today.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, one thing that, we discussed this item in our agenda
review, and I've asked the Parks Director to see if there's a way we can put some kind of markers on these
headstone, because, apparently, you know, the headstones and stuff are there, but you really don't know
what that person is. So, we really need to put some kind of a little marker that says who that person was
and what they did, for the significant people that are buried there. And we have some pretty significant
people there in our history that are buried there. And unless you know the name Julia Tuttle, I mean, you
really don't know what it is that she did, et cetera—
Commissioner Teele: Right.
Mr. Gimenez: --and other people that are pioneers that are buried there, so we're going to be pursuing
that.
Commissioner Teele: That would go to that committee. There's a cemetery committee and they would
sort of work through all of that. But for the event, what time is it? We normally do this at two -- what
time is it?
Ms. Pinkney: Two thirty. The -- well, we ask you to assemble at 2:30 so the band strikes up at three. We
want everybody in place.
Commissioner Teele: And this would be at St. Agnes Church again?
Ms. Pinkney: St. Agnes Church. The band strikes up at three and we walk from St. Agnes to the City's
cemetery. Now, we have had a little fundraising project that we're going to -- yes.
Commissioner Teele: Let's do this one and then let's talk about the other one.
42 April 11, 2002
Ms. Pinkney: OK.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So, my motion is to approve the request as contained in the letter dated
January 23rd, with the attachments. Is there a proper resolution with this, Mr. Manager?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, if I could just address one issue with regard to the
waiver of insurance requirement. My recommendation is that you not waive it. But you --
Commissioner Teele: Well, we will not, absolutely.
Mr. Vilarello: However, you can fund the cost of the insurance, if you wish to address it that way.
Commissioner Teele: And thank you for that item. But I would move that the request be approved, not --
by the Manager -- with the discretion, not to the organization, but to the Manager to expend the funds, not
to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) in pursuit of the request made by the Dade Heritage Trust. And
then the Manager can perhaps make specific grants to you, as necessary. But most of this is going to be
logistical work. It's the cost of the Police and Fire escorts. It's the cost of the headstones and the PA
(public address) systems and the tables. The kinds of things that we, as a City park -- as a City cemetery,
which is under our Parks Department, should do in house, so to speak. So, what we're doing is approving
the expenditure of the dollars, not to exceed ten thousand dollars and granting to the Manager the
authority to make a grant within that amount to the Dade Heritage Trust for anything that may be deemed
appropriate, like -- I think there's a three hundred dollar fee for the band, for the coronation band or
something like that.
Ms. Pinkney: Yes. The band, yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second your motion, Mr. Teele.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Discussion.
Commissioner Teele: Not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
Vice Chairman Winton: I have a question. What is the total cost of this event?
Commissioner Teele: As stated, it's probably about eighty-five hundred dollars ($8,500) if you take the
Attorney's recommendation and put in the money for the insurance and then --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. But that's the total cost. So, the City of Miami really pays the total cost of
putting on this event?
Ms. Pinkney: No.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's my question.
Ms. Pinkney: No. Because, see, we have an essay contest that we -- for the Dade County School System
on "Why I'm Proud of My Heritage?" and the trophies and the certificates, you know, we pay for
everything that deals with that. And there are some other events that we do in connection with this
commemorative service that we pay for.
Vice Chairman Winton: But, Enid, I'm looking at -- I'm assuming that y'all prepared this schedule of
costs and in that schedule of costs, which adds up to seventy-one hundred dollars, is a three thousand
43 April 11, 2002
dollar -- three thousand of the seventy-one hundred is awards for essay contest winners. So -- and that's a
part of the motion that Commissioner Teele made towards the ten thousand dollars. I'm still struggling to
understand who's paying anything other than the City of Miami.
Commissioner Teele: In the past, I can tell you this -- what's the bank Enrique is with?
Ms. Pinkney: Union Planters.
Commissioner Teele: In the past, Union Planters --
Ms. Pinkney: Union Planters.
Commissioner Teele: -- gave out five or six thousand dollars last year, I know.
Albert Ruder (Director, Parks & Recreation): Commissioner, that was a total budget, and they have
raised some of the money already. I think -- I don't want to speak for Commissioner Teele, but he's given
us the flexibility up to that amount, because there's costs like insurance, that we're going to pay. But they
raise a lot of that money. Some of this stuff we provide in-kind, like --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's just -- see, that's important on the public record. That's all I'm
trying to get at here. I assumed that somebody else was paying some significant cost here, --
Ms. Pinkney: Yeah, they—
Vice Chairman Winton: --but you can't tell it from what's going into the public record. So that's --
Commissioner Teele: And last year they flew people down here and they had some hotel bills and all of
that.
Ms. Pinkney: Right.
Commissioner Teele: So, we don't get -- we're not looking at those costs. And I think your point is well -
taken. But the expenditure that I was authorizing was the "not to exceed" amount that the Manager. I
don't think it's -- I mean, it's a cemetery. It's a City owned and controlled cemetery. I don't think that we
should, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: And one other --
Commissioner Teele: -- charge them the park fee of two hundred dollars ($200) or the tables and chairs
and the PA systems and the flags and the -- you know, the postage and the security—
Vice Chairman Winton: Agreed.
I
Commissioner Teele: -- and the Police, but somebody's got to account for those costs and that's why we -
- I was doing it that way.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, you've answered mine. We have a motion and a second. Any further
discussion? Being none, all in favor, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
44 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. The motion carries.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-373
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING A GRANT
AWARD, IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000, FOR THE AFRICAN AMERICAN
COMMITTEE OF DADE HERITAGE TRUST IN SUPPORT OF THE NINTH
ANNUAL COMMEMORATIVE SERVICE HONORING AFRICAN AMERICANS
BURIED IN THE CITY CEMETERY; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS FROM AN
ACCOUNT TO BE IDENTIFIED BY THE CITY MANAGER; AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR 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: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Winton: Is there one other thing?
Ms. Pinkney: One other thing. I want -- the Mayor isn't here, but this was in the Associated Press and
someone sent it to me with my picture and the Mayor of the City of Miami, and I got some calls from all
over saying that "things must be getting better in Miami, because the Mayor is talking to you." So, I just
want you to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, here here.
Ms. Pinkney: Thank you very much for --
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: What paper was that in?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Ms. Pinkney: This was the -- I think this was the St. Petersburg --
Commissioner Teele: The St. Petersburg Times.
Vice Chairman Winton: St. Petersburg Times.
45 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
46
April 11, 2002
9. MR. CAMILLE MERILUS FROM CAMILLE AND SULETTE MERILUS FOUNDATION FOR
HAITI DEVELOPMENT TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
Vice Chairman Winton: We're on—
Commissioner Teele: Blue pages.
Vice Chairman Winton: Blue items. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, if I may. I am not going to have sufficient time to get into
some of my items. What I would like to do, since I have some special guests here that have been here all
morning, I'd like to call them first and take care of those, and then the rest of my items, I would
respectfully request that it be brought at 3:00 sharp so I could finish them. So, at this time, I do apologize
for deviating from the order of the day, but if I can introduce to you-- Mr. Camille, sir, we apologize for
having you sit there so long, but as you could see, we're pretty busy here, so --
Camille Merilus: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: That is Item C on the blue pages.
Mr. Merilus: Yes. Good morning, Commissioners, Commissioner Joe Sanchez, Commissioner Arthur
Teele, Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Regalado, Mr. City Attorney, Mr.
Manager, Mayor Manny Diaz and good morning to everybody else. My name is Camille Merilus and I
am the Founder and Executive Director of Operation Save Eyes, lately called Camille and Sulette Merilus
Foundation for Haiti Development, Inc. What is good for Haiti is also good for Miami, Florida and the
United States of America. As you all realize that because of the chronic joblessness situation currently
existing in Haiti, people keep on coming here by boat risking their existence, and I'm here to thank all of
you for your willingness to help solving this problem, to help us doing whatever we can to bring our own
contribution to the solution of this problem. On Friday, April 26`h, there is going to be an activity at Little
Haiti at Jean Jacques Lesant Community Center (phonetic), and I think I sent an invitation to all of you to
be there, and I'm here today to call upon the City to sponsor this event. Yesterday I had a conversation
with the Chief of Staff of the Haitian Ministry of Commerce and Industry. A delegation conducted by the
Executive Director of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry will be in town to address the April 26`h
special event on investing in Haiti. We think that one of the ways that we can slow down the boat people
situation is by helping to create jobs over there, and the only way jobs could be created in Haiti is by
people to invest over there, and this delegation is coming to Miami to address people who want to invest
in Haiti. And what I was told yesterday afternoon, during my conversation with the Chief of Staff of the
Ministry of Commerce is that the Haitian Parliament has just passed a new law, a good investment law.
That means it's a law that will tell people what to invest over there, what the country is provided them.
So, we are here to say thank you to you because Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Teele, Mr.
Chilton Harper sent me a correspondence that I forwarded to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
They're going to send an answer to Mr. Chilton Harper about that, and we have to say thank you to you.
But we are here so that the City could sponsor the April 26`h special event and the City could be there
with us at that activity and the City could really provide a warm welcome to the members of the
dedication.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Camille, what day do you anticipate on doing this?
Mr. Merilus: On a Friday, April 26`h. That's at Jean Jacques Lesant Community Center, 8325 Northeast
2°d Avenue in Little Haiti. That's that new center. That's where the big event is going to take place. And
47 April 11, 2002
the Haitian -American business community has been invited to attend the activity. So, we are here to ask
all of you, Mayor Diaz, Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Regalado, to be
there with us and to speak to the people and to have a special meeting with the members of the delegation.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Thank you so much, sir. I'll get with you. When you get a chance, come
see me so I could help you as much as I can. And we'll be there -- we'll try to be there.
Mr. Merilus: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
48 April 11, 2002
10. PEDRO DAMIAN, DIRECTOR OF ARTEOCHO TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION
REGARDING THE WORLD TRADE CENTER MONUMENT PROJECT.
Commissioner Sanchez: I just want to take care of all the personal appearances. Pedro Damian, the
Director of Arteocho, to address the Commission regarding the World Trade Center Monument Project.
Sir. Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Bayfront Trust? While they're coming, Commissioner Winton and Commissioner
Sanchez, this Bayfront Trust entrance that is on the southern most entrance there, right in front of the
Intercontinental, I don't know if --
Commissioner Sanchez: (Inaudible) Challenger monument.
Commissioner Teele: Right behind the Challenger monument. I don't know if the improvements that
have been done are Raceworks or Bayfront Trust, but I've got to tell you something. That place looks a
thousand percent better. As you walk out of the Intercontinental -- because there was a berm there and so
much vegetation -- it is a spectacular view to walk out of the Intercontinental and look over at that park.
In fact, your eyes go directly to Senator Pepper's statue now that's standing there, and a lot of folks didn't
even know it was there. I was with someone two days ago. So, I want to commend you, Commissioner
Sanchez. I don't know if that's some of the Raceworks grading or something, but I'll tell you, it really
looks beautiful now.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. Vice Chairman, if I may. This presentation falls within the
concept of what I would like to get accomplished and we're making forward -- we're moving forward on
this, and it's the -- it's concerning the Cuban Memorial Drive Promenade Project that we're looking at, to
include more green space. That's basically the philosophy of it. That area there, from Coral Way to 81h
Street, allows us an opportunity -- and right now, I would say about 30 percent of the area is an area that's
devoted to monuments. It's got the Brigade 2506, the Cuban Prisoners. I would like to take it a step
further, and not just because of the name, Cuban Memorial Drive. I mean, I would like to have that area
an area -- a promenade with monuments to signify our whole community. We could have a monument
for the Jewish community, the Afro-American community. This is something that a lot of cities
throughout the United States are doing now, is putting together monument reference the September I I1h
So, when the gentleman came to me -- and a lot of these funds are coming from the private sector. He's
just looking for support. I said, well, it's a perfect opportunity to put everything together and, in the
process of the Planning and Zoning and process that goes along, we could toss this in there. And he's got
a perfect site that I went and visited on 13`h Avenue and 13`h Court. There's an area -- there's no trees or
anything -- that that would fit in perfectly, the way that it's described here today. So, when he came to
me, I told him I would give him an opportunity to come in front of the Commissioners, explain, then later
on we could direct him to sit down with the administration and work with the process of the promenade.
And, again, any monument in this community, anyone that wants to put forth, that is a perfect opportunity
for people to walk -- it really does a lot for our community because it connects two business corridors that
are growing. Coral Way Corridor, which Coral Way right now is -- a lot of money is going into it with
the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation), and also connects Calle Ocho, which is also booming.
So, it's something that -- you know, we talk about improvement and the message that the Mayor sent and
the message that we want to send here. It is something that people are going to see because at the next
Commission meeting, next month, I am bringing a presentation to show you what an eyesore, an
embarrassment that is to our community and what we could turn it out to be. What I do believe, not a
significant amount of money -- I don't know where those two million dollars ($2,000,000) came back
from because I don't think it takes that much to do that, but I don't want to put a price on any project now.
This is a perfect example of a beautiful monument that could go there, and then I think this is going to
49 April 11, 2002
open the door for other people to come, professionals, and the arts and sculptural. And put that there
where people could walk and enjoy the beautiful tropical setting, the beautiful green way that we'll have
in the future, and include visiting all the monuments. So, sir, you're recognized.
Pedro Damian: (COMMENTS IN SPANISH)
Commissioner Sanchez: If you may, where the idea came from, where the fundings are going to come?
I'm sure that the City will have to -- we'll help you as much as we can, but I do want to make sure that you
state for the record that a lot of the funds here are going to be privately obtained.
Pedro Damian: (COMMENTS IN SPANISH)
Commissioner Winton: Could you put your name and address on the record, please, sir?
Commissioner Winton: And address and your address?
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Let us get the interpreter. We have an interpreter.
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): My name is Pedro Damian.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We need the address for the record, please.
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): My present project of a sculptural nature is
a tribute...
Commissioner Winton: Sir, excuse me. We need his address on the record, as well, please.
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): Sixty-eight Street -- 1600 8`" Street.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you. Proceed, please.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, if I may?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Sir, he needs to speak into the mike. He needs to speak Spanish. There are a lot of
people who listen to this speaking Spanish. You need to just translate for him. OK. But he...
Manuel Matienzo: If I may, please, contribute my expertise to this proceeding. Simultaneous translation
would be horrendous because nothing is going to be heard over each voice.
Commissioner Teele: You're not going to be able to testify for him. He's got to testify for himself.
Mr. Matienzo: I agree with you.
Commissioner Teele: And you're going to give us your name and address.
Mr. Matienzo: It will have to be...
Commissioner Teele: We need your name and address now.
50 April 11, 2002
Mr. Matienzo: I'm the Certified Court Interpreter brought here for this purpose Mr. Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, I understand. But your name and address for the record.
Mr. Matienzo: My name is Manuel Matienzo. My address is 6518 Northwest 41" Street.
Commissioner Winton: And please have him speak into the mike.
Mr. Matienzo: You want him to speak then?
Commissioner Winton: He can speak into the microphone right there. You can stand beside him and
then he can pause and you can...
Mr. Matienzo: Exactly. That's consecutive mode, and that's the only way we can...
Commissioner Winton: That's fine.
Mr. Matienzo: Thank you.
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): The present sculptural project is a tribute to
the victims of September I Vh, a date that, without any discussion, changed the course of humanity. The
third portion of the people that were (inaudible) in these horrendous acts were forming part of that ample
broad ban of citizens and residents of Hispanic origin that, today, occupy an important step in cultural
development of a social and political nature as well of this powerful and beautiful nation. The victims
comprehend hundreds of Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Colombians, Argentines, Central Americans, that in
diverse manners were laboring in the most prestigious towers of the continental world, contributing with
their work and their presence, their best of our individual effort, thus helping in some manner to the
development of this new fatherland. Conceived as a sculptural -- cultural whole, where two cement --
structural cement towers are mixed together of 20 and 18 feet in height, respectively, rising out of a
pentagon with 10 -foot radius, the interior of which is constructed with thick Plexiglas, which is
transparent. They would reflect the whole as illuminated surface. The base, lit by four red reflectors that
would highlight the higher (inaudible) where, in a permanent manner, virtual flames would remain lit as
an offering of this very lamentable date. To create, to construct and to give closure to a work such as this
deserves the support of governments and institutions of a local jurisdiction in order to give to the world
and the local area a message of love and respect. It's a very everlasting homage, which would transcend
the local scope and be recognized as a deserved tribute to the rest of the nation brought about by the City
of Miami.
Commissioner Sanchez: Great. Let me just ask you something. The names of the victims will be either
on the tower or on -- see, on the tower, people aren't going to be able to read it. Maybe on the -- OK.
Yeah. There you go. So, you have two versions. All right. OK. And the next question, of course, is one
that we're all waiting to hear. How much is this going to cost? (COMMISSIONER SPEAKING IN
SPANISH) Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000)? And most of that money will be raised
through the private sector. (COMMISSIONER SPEAKING IN SPANISH).
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): I don't believe that will all be able to rise out
of that sector.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Well...
Mr. Damian (INTERPRETED BY MANUEL MATIENZO): Here's the engineer who would be able to
51 April 11, 2002
fill you in on the technicalities.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I don't think we -- I don't think we need to get into because, I mean, you
will have to go through the City permits and maybe the Review Design Committee to look at it and make
sure it's appropriate and not offensive to anybody and it's done. Have you looked at a site? Are you still
set on the site on 13th and 13th? Thirteenth Avenue. Because there are no trees there, and the last thing
that I told you is that I will not take down a tree to put any monument. OK. Well, you know, does any of
the Commissioners have any questions on this?
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez, questions?
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no questions.
Commissioner Teele: I have no questions.
Commissioner Sanchez: At this time, all that I'll do is -- maybe direct the administration to sit down with
him and have him sit down with Planning and Zoning and just basically make sure that this falls within
the concept of the promenade and have the Planning and Zoning and the administration assist him with
locating a site to put the monument. We won't talk about funding right now. Yes.
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): If I could just inform the Commission. There is a board
established by the City Commission to evaluate the acceptance and appropriateness and placement and
construction.
Commissioner Sanchez: It would go through every appropriate board.
Commissioner Teele: What board is that, Madam?
Ms. Chiaro: It is the Miami Arts and Entertainment Council.
Commissioner Sanchez: Perfect.
Ms. Chiaro: Used to be your Arts and -- your Cultural and Fine Arts Board. You incorporated its duties
with some additional duties.
Commissioner Sanchez: It will have to go through all the channels that it needs to go. If we're focused
on putting together a world class promenade, I think that, just like all great cities are doing -- Boston is
doing something similar, you know, putting a monument somewhere where people could come and visit
and, you know, feel, you know, the devastation and sadness that New York experienced on September
11th. That's the motion.
Commissioner Teele: All right. There's a motion. There's a second by Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Is there objection? All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Commissioner Teele: All opposed?
52 April 11, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-374
A MOTION DIRECTING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
INSTRUCT APPROPRIATE MEMBERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF TO
MEET WITH PERDO DAMIAN, DIRECTOR OF ARTEOCHO, TO ENSURE
THAT HIS WORLD TRADE CENTER MONUMENT PROJECT FALLS
WITHIN THE CONCEPT OF THE CUBAN MEMORIAL DRIVE
PROMENADE PROJECT AND TO ASSIST HIM WITH IN THE LOCATION
OF A SITE FOR THE MONUMENT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Teele: Is there any other matter to come before the Commission before we recess?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, sir. I would ask that the remaining items, "A", "B", "D" and "F" and "G" be
heard at two -thirty, when we come back, sir.
Commissioner Teele: All right. The order of the day 2:30 we'll come back. We'll hear those items.
We've set aside three o'clock, I believe, to take up Raceworks matters and the Commission stands in
recess.
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:17 P.M. AND
RECONVENED AT 2:49 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, EXCEPT
COMMISSIONER TEELE, FOUND TO BE PRESENT.
53 April 11, 2002
11. DISCUSSION CONCERNING AN UPDATE ON THE ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS
PERMIT.
Chairman Regalado: And I understand Vice Chairman Winton, you have something about downtown and
charter school that you want to deal with some time between five and six, I'm told. Is that....
Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have the Roads project, six time certain plus the other PZ items around six
o'clock. We have a three o'clock Raceworks and...
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, probably, this item shouldn't take more than three or four minutes. So, it
should be very, very quick. So, any time after -- you know, maybe -- if it's after Raceworks -- Raceworks
is at three?
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, if Raceworks -- hopefully, Raceworks won't take two and a half hours
Chairman Regalado: Well, you never know.
Vice Chairman Winton: I guess the Homestead people will be around somewhere. They'll crank it up.
They'll waste a bunch of more of my time.
Vice Chairman Winton: Raceworks will be right after all my Commission items.
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. Commissioner Sanchez, you still have several items that you have to
presentto us?
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My first item that I would like to address is the
construction debris permit. As you are aware, we have brought forth this fee not too long ago and we've
had numerous complaints from residents, of course, sign companies and awning companies, and I don't
think anyone here would dispute that this permit or this fee, which was brought over from Miami Beach
when Garcia -Pedrosa was the City Manager here, is an unfair fee. Let's just say that today -- up to today
they have collected on this one million dollars ($1,000,000) so far on this year -- on this fee. Now, there
was a concern that we wanted to relieve the residents of Miami who had the burden of paying for this fee,
when they were putting an awning or they were putting a sign up or a shed in their back yard, and, really,
it was very --just -- unjustifiable and unfair fee. We looked at ways -- and we directed the administration
to come back with some recommendations on this, and one of the concerns that Vice Chairman Winton
had was that we didn't pass the burden on to the developers, and, of course, you know that we have had a
Development Summit here to attract developers to come to Miami and do major projects, and we have
been very successful in doing that. So, I don't think it would be justified if we passed the burden on to
them. But let me just say, let me just say that the cap that exist today on a house that's a hundred and fifty
thousand dollars ($150,000), if we put it -- it used to be at two percent. If we're able to reduce it to point
two percent, and the administration will explain this a little better than I can -- an average house of a
hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) would only pay -- as it is right now, it pays five hundred
dollars ($500) for debris pick-up, with the reduction to point two percent, it's three hundred dollars
($300). So, there is a relief there. On the awnings and the other signs, let's just say they have presented to
us a fee comparison of what would cost -- it used to cost before almost three, four hundred dollars ($400)
-- in some cases, even five hundred dollars ($500) when you wanted to put an awning. Today it's
54 April 11, 2002
compatible to other cities or municipalities surrounding our City, which it only cost fifty-three dollars and
sixty cents ($53.60) now. I think that is more than reasonable. So, at this time, what I'd like to do is have
the administration to present that and then I am prepared to enter a motion to proceed them to go ahead
and change the ordinance to reduce the Miscellaneous Specialty Permits and when I say Miscellaneous
Specialty Permits, I want you to understand that it's just on a small items. OK. And let me tell you. The
way it was designed that it came back, the big -- the big developer was going to be in. I mean, they were
going to be -- they were going to have to pay fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). It wasn't fair. We came to
an understanding of just maybe ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per big, big, big project. More than five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). It didn't affect family homes or single-family homes or duplex.
And in that way, there is a short fall of about four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) -- and correct me
if I'm wrong. Is it four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000), more than that?
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): No. We actually come out — we looked at it and we're revenue
neutral there's shortfall.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. So, that's even more than -- that's great. All right. At this time, you
know, either -- Vice Chairman, if you have any questions or we can let the administration explain what
they're coming back with.
Ms. Bianchino: Let me just give you the overview. Hector will give you the details. We took your
guidance. We wanted to deal with the smaller permits that people who live in single-family houses and
duplexes and small businesses have to deal with. We did also reduce the fee for single family and duplex
and we did...
Vice Chairman Winton: From what to what?
Ms. Bianchino: Hector will go through the details.
Hector Lima (Director, Building Department): Good afternoon, Hector Lima, Building Department. To
answer your question, Commissioner, we went from two percent to point two percent. In other words,
twenty cents ($0.20) per hundred dollars on residential single family and duplex, on all the permits, which
is the same as what we charged for the trade permits on residential also. So, every residential permit is
now twenty cents ($.20) on a hundred. We eliminated the Solid Waste fee completely on the
miscellaneous permits that were addressed by this Commission. Mainly awnings, sheds, windows, doors,
shutters, store fronts, which was a major issue, fences, driveways, and roofing permits. So, all of those
permits that enhances the property that are needed will not pay the Solid Waste fee. At the same time, we
have to come up with some funding to make that up. And what we did is, we looked at the majority of
the commercial buildings permits. We separated that into new construction and additions and alterations
and by figuring that a one million dollar ($1000,000) project could not be hurt by ten thousand dollars
($10,000) cap, we capped it at 10 and all others, less than a million, would be capped at five thousand.
When we looked at the whole report, there are some building permits that are going to be increased from
the twenty-five hundred dollar ($2,500) cap that existed before to five thousand. And that's what makes
up the difference.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. I'm sorry. Explain to me -- give me an example of the kind of projects that
are going to jump from twenty-five hundred to five thousand.
Mr. Lima: If a project before cost a hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) in construction
costs, it pays twenty-five hundred. That's at two percent. OK.
Ms. Bianchino: He wants to know what kind of building structure -- what is...
55 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: If it cost a hundred and twenty-five thousand, you said was the twenty-five...
Mr. Lima: Twenty-five hundred. The two percent would be twenty-five hundred dollars ($2500).
Anything above that, up to five hundred thousand, will be a little bit more and it will be capped at five
thousand. So, those projects between hundred and twenty-five thousand up to five hundred will be
paying a little bit more. Anything that hits...
Vice Chairman Winton: A little bit more? They'll be paying double.
Mr. Lima: At some instance, yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: And, you know, this is all well and good over this residential business, but the
fact of the matter is, this construction debris removal fee is irrational as it relates to commercial properties
because they have to pay a private hauler to haul this stuff out that doesn't have a damn thing to do with
the City. Nothing. Zero. Zip. This is just a -- it's an unfair, irrational tax for commercial properties,
period, and it's only, only, only about generating revenue.
Commissioner Sanchez: Here here. But -- Johnny, if I may? I think that later on, in the future or early
on in the future, we could revisit this, but right -- let me tell you...
Vice Chairman Winton: This coming budget year. And, by the way, I'm in agreement with you a
hundred percent. We have potential to generate more revenue, I think, on the single-family stuff by
having rational costs associated with it because we're going to really discourage illegal work and maybe
more people who are doing work will get permits. We could even end up with more revenue. I mean, I'm
not saying -- this whole thing is nuts anyhow. Forget it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I agree with you a hundred percent. Let me add that throughout the meetings at
Solid Waste Department -- as you all know, I'm the Chairman of the Solid Waste Department. We find
out that there are some companies that are picking up solid waste illegally because they are not registered
with the City of Miami or they don't have a contract with the City of Miami and they are not paying the
dues that they're supposed to pay as the other companies that are hauling solid waste. OK. There is
money. OK. And once again, we go back to the speech of the Mayor yesterday, efficiency. We need to
start -- you know what? Instead of creating more taxes, instead of creating more fees, instead of creating
more ways to charge the citizens of this City of Miami, the residents of the City of Miami and the people
that are trying to invest in the City of Miami, we need to be more efficient. We need to be out there on the
streets. I keep saying that day after day, day after day. We need to be out on the field looking at the
different problems that we have and the different areas where we can justifiably collect money. We have
that problem. We also have problems of construction sites, OK, that are building and they don't have a
company that is holding the debris, OK. And I'm telling you by experience, in my district, in my district,
five blocks from my house, they demolish a property, a house, they build three -- four duplexes. They got
on the construction up to the stage where they were painting the buildings and it had to be me that went to
the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Administrator and told them, these people have been
building here for six months and they don't have a company to pick up their debris and they had a
mountain out there, OK. Finally, after I notified the NET Administrator -- after I met with the NET
Administrator and went to the site, those people hired a company to remove the debris. We lost "x"
amount of dollars in that project. I don't know. Maybe it was ten dollars ($10). Maybe it was a
56 April 11, 2002
hundred. Maybe it was a thousand dollars ($1,000), OK, that we lost. We have problems with businesses
operating illegally in the City of Miami without any Certificate of Use, without any occupational license,
and let me tell you, when I look at the sheet of the NET administration, it really bothers me that we are
spending about eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) in administration for "x" amount of people that
are sitting on a desk on the 10th floor of the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) Building and what we need
to do is to minimize that expense and get -- if we need those people, just get them out on the field. Just
put them out there to collect money. There is plenty of money out there. All we have to do is just go and
get it, without charging more and more and more to the same people all the time. To the residents of the
City of Miami and to the people that are trying to come to the City to invest and to come up with new
developments that is going to increase our tax base and it's going to help us alleviate the taxes on our
residents. So, it's a matter of just looking for efficiency, be out there. Go out on the field and start
working on the field. Let me tell you, the sun is not going to hurt you. The sun isn't going to kill
anybody, OK. The rain doesn't kill anybody, OK. You know, the weather doesn't kill anybody. We need
to be out there. I mean, I know it's comfortable to be in the air conditioning, you know, looking at the
bay. All of that is beautiful. It's very comfortable. But that doesn't cover our expenses. We need to be
more aggressive on the street, looking for money. The moneys are there, believe me. The moneys are
there. And when I speak it's because I have grounds to speak. If you want me, I'll take you, both of you,
I'll take you to my area and I'll tell you right now that, in one day -- I promise you that in one day, we're
going to raise five thousand dollars ($5,000) in occupational licenses and Certificate of Use. One day.
Just tell me when you want to go with me. I promise you that we'll bring five thousand dollars ($5,000) a
day.
Vice Chairman Winton: It's a deal.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, the -- Hector and Ms. Bianchino are working under my
direction. We were directed to come back and try to, you know, help the smaller applicants because the
fees were too great. My direction to them was, fine, let's go ahead and do that, but then you have to shift
the cost of this to the larger developments in order to be revenue neutral, and that was my direction to
them. And I agree wholeheartedly with you about efficiencies and all that, but I'm looking at it from a
management point of view, that we're trying to be revenue neutral, but we're also trying to see that the
residents get a break because -- if you look at the sheet, an awning permit will go from three hundred and
thirty-three dollars ($333) down to fifty-three.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I know what you're saying, Mr. Manager, but what I'm telling you is this: We
were penalizing these people. Now we decided to alleviate these people, but now we're going to charge
these other people. And we have to do that because we haven't had the initiative to go out there and find
new moneys. What we have to find is new money, not -- you know, stay away from keeping on top of the
same people. You know, one time we penalize these people and next time and then, next time we're
going to alleviate these people and penalize these people, but it's always from the same quality of people.
Let's go and find new revenues. There's plenty of new revenues out there. Like I told you, buildings that
are not paying enough for Solid Waste, buildings that are using illegal companies, OK, buildings that are
being constructed without having service and paying any dues to the City of Miami. We're wasting
money. I mean, the money's out there. All we have to do is go and get it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Back on the awning permits, can you just go through the fee comparison and --
Dade County was fifty-six dollars ($56) --
57 April 11, 2002
Mr. Lima: That's correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- and two cents ($.02).
Mr. Lima: That's on a minor permit. Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: On what we're classifying today as Miscellaneous Specialty Permits.
Mr. Lima: That is one of the miscellaneous permits, yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Hialeah was three sixty.
Mr. Lima: Three hundred and thirty...
Commissioner Sanchez: We were around that ballpark even more than three sixty on...
Mr. Lima: We were three thirty-three.
Commissioner Sanchez: Three thirty-three. Miami Beach is one fifty-five sixty. Coral Gables is ninety-
three dollars and sixty cents ($93.60); City of Miami at that time was three hundred and thirty-three
dollars and sixty cents ($333.60). What this proposal, once we change the ordinance; it will be fifty-three
cents and -- 50 -- no. I'm sorry. Well, we wish. Fifty-three dollars and sixty cents ($53.60), correct?
Mr. Lima: Not quite. That's correct. And, also, going back to the efficiency. If you look at the other
page, we've also reduced the reviews from five by agreeing -- Public Works has agreed to join with
Zoning in the review, and also the electrical and plumbing have been released and Building is going to
take care of that. So, we are being more efficient in that manner. And also the inspections have been
reduced to possibly two or three.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well that was the direction of this legislative body. One, to reduce to fee and to
simplify the process. Mr. Chairman, I have a motion.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: The motion is to proceed the -- change the ordinance to reduce the
Miscellaneous Specialty Permits to be compatible to other cities at this point, being fifty-three dollars and
sixty cents ($53.60), and, of course, this will take two readings and I would like the Commission to bring
it back -- the administration to bring it back in front of this Commission by May the 9`h for the first
hearing, if possible?
Ms. Bianchino: Absolutely possible. And if you'd like, we could probably do it on an emergency basis?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, I don't want to do it on an emergency basis.
Ms. Bianchino: You don't want to do it -- because we're amending the Code.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Well, just go ahead -- I mean, it's going to take public hearing -- two
hearings. I just -- we all agree that this is an unfair fee. We are taking the burden off of the little people
and passing it on, and we'll review that in the near future, maybe with the budget time, but right now let
me tell you. This is the future of the Facade Program in the City of Miami and if we don't take the steps
that we're taking now, we're going to continue to have people doing, Johnny, just as you said, illegal stuff,
58 April 11, 2002
getting -- you know, throwing illegal trash. I mean, it's not going to end. This is the cycle of nightmares.
So, at this time, so move, Mr. Chairman, the motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Now that Commissioner Sanchez mentioned facade, that's another area. That, if
you look at it, OK, we have -- I can tell you the problem. Out of all the signs in Allapattah, out of all the
signs -- of all the signs we have installed in businesses in Allapattah, I bet you that probably the only
signs that have permits are the signs that have been done throughout the different CBOs (Community
Based Organizations), Community Based Organizations, that do Facade Programs. Because under the
rules of the Facade Program, every contractor that is going to install a sign has to get a permit from the
City of Miami, OK. That's another area that we have thousands and thousands of dollars. If we go out
there and we start implementing the Code on the signs, I don't know how much money we're going to be
able to generate, but I'll tell you, it's going to be hundreds of thousands of dollars. And what are we
doing? We're penalizing or we have been penalizing the contractors that want to do the things the right
way; that want to do the things under the law. Get their permits; pay their fees, you know. We just stick
it up to them, while hundreds of others; they just do signage on Saturdays. I have seen people installing
signs on a Saturday.
Vice Chairman Winton: And Sunday.
Commissioner Gonzalez: On Sundays. I have seen them Saturdays and Sundays. I mean, installing
awnings on Saturdays and Sundays, OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's what happens when they elect an elected official who knows the business.
He knows it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Are they going to be sorry?
Commissioner Sanchez: They're going to be sorry about that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It was my business for 12 years until I was forced to resign.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do you want to state that for the record again forced to resign.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Until I was forced to resign. And we're going to deal with a resolution today
that I have a problem with because I said, if I don't find a job, I'm going to be selling lemons on Flagler
and 27"', and the Herald published it, and now I see that we have an ordinance coming against people
selling lemons. So, you know, it sounds very fishy to me.
Commissioner Sanchez: But it doesn't sound funny to me.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner?
Chairman Regalado: Why --
Commissioner Sanchez: There's a motion. Is there a second?
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, there is a second. But why fire is optional? Who decides that?
Mr. Lima: That's something the inspection section -- when the Fire reviews it, if he deems it necessary,
Fire will go out. If he doesn't, then he will not go out. That's why it's optional.
59 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: That's why it's optional?
Mr. Lima: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Why would the Fire need to inspect an awning?
Mr. Lima: There are awnings that require -- and I'm not an expert on this -- that require sprinkler heads
and the fabric has to be fire retardant. I believe that's what the Fire does look for them.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, if I may? Commissioner Gonzalez, you'll be happy to hear that, on May I'`,
we have a team of 18 inspectors, headed by Eddie Borges, who will be looking for people without CUs
and occupational licenses and additional building units for garbage, et cetera. And, so, we are taking a
proactive stance in that regard, to try to find, you know, revenue that's really there, that has been slipping
through our hands.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Great. Congratulations. It was about time that we start doing something like
that.
Mr. Gimenez: We did that about four or five years ago. We looked at the numbers again. It was time to
do it again.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I remember. And it brought up a lot of moneys.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes it did.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele, we have a motion and a second on a proposal by
Commissioner Sanchez to review the fees and inspection process of the Omni. You remember that we
had a group of people here that complained, the last Commission meeting, and the Commissioner has
already made the motion. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
60 April 11, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-375
A MOTION DIRECTING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
PROCEED WITH CHANGING THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE TO
REDUCE THE MISCELLANOUS SPECIALITY PERMITS TO BE
COMPATIABLE TO OTHER CITIES, OR AT THIS POINT, $53.60;
FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO BRING THIS
LEGISLATION BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR FIRST READING
AT THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR
THURSDAY, MAY 9, 2002.
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: We'll see you back on the 91h for the first hearing.
61 April 11, 2002
12. DISCUSSION CONCERNING UPDATE ON HOPWA.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, my other discussion is concerning the update on HOPWA
(Housing Opportunities for Persons Living with AIDS). Let me just say that it's alarming and I'm sure
you've read the paper that Miami is the number one City with the most AIDS (Acquired Immuno
Deficiency Syndrome) residents. It's also alarming that Ft. Lauderdale is number two, and West Palm
Beach is number three. Clearly showing you that throughout the United States, they're moving down to
this area because of the climate and the services that are provided here, as well as they go to San
Francisco. Let me just say that it's a sad situation. It's something that I hope that none of us ever
experience. But Miami -- I looked into it. I know that HOPWA has had some problems in the past. I've
analyzed the whole situation. Let me just tell you that it comes down to not having enough funds. It
comes down that we have funds for about twelve thousand clients. Well, let me just say that we have
thirty thousand clients on list waiting for assistance. That is, one out of seven residents are affected with
the AIDS (Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome) virus. That's alarming. The money that's there, we
only get ten million dollars ($10,000,000) allocated. Out of those ten million dollars ($10,000,000), three
million goes for administration and seven goes to staff. As it is right now, we have a closing on the list
that we have. We have people that call my office because I happen to sit on the HOPWA -- (inaudible) I
don't vote on the issue. That's something that we need to change also. I think that we need to look at
ways of -- one, to maybe create an advisory board for the City of Miami -- an advisory HOPWA board for
the City of Miami because as it is right now, we are the City that is ranked number one when it comes to
AIDS. We don't have enough money. I don't want to get on the difference between HOPWA and the
Ryan White, which only just covers -- Ryan White only covers food, your utilities. It does not cover rent.
So, one of the things that we -- that I would like to do here is one -- is first -- let me just say that we have
two million dollars ($2,000,000) left out of that. What I don't want to do is open up the list again and on
short term, eight months later; when we don't have any money, have to kick people out of those programs
or out of those houses. And, so, I've looked at that and that's a very tough decision for me to make and
until we get more money or until we find ways to bring more assistance, my suggestion to this legislative
body, as the representative from HOPWA, is to take those two million dollars ($2,000,000) and put them
out there for prevention, to focus on schools, to focus on ways that children understand the issue, the
importance of it. So, Gwendolyn, if you could just come up for a minute and ...
Commissioner Gonzalez: Commissioner, can I ask you, what are we doing to get more money?
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's something that I was going to ask her now. What can this City do to
try to obtain more money from the federal government on this issue, being that we're number one with
AIDS cases?
Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Gwendolyn Warren, Director of Community
Development. What we're doing right now is going through the usual steps of trying to apply for
additional federal funds. There's money available under the Super Nova and we're putting in grant
applications, but based on the (inaudible) issue, one of the things that we would recommend -- and I've
talked to Commissioner Sanchez about -- is the City possibly putting together a Blue Ribbon Panel of
sorts to actually help us with our legislators to get additional allocation for the City of Miami from the
federal government, not just as a grant, but, again, the numbers are staggering. We can only afford twelve
hundred people. We've got thousands. And we need additional money and being the number one city in
the nation right now, we need the legislative body to basically impanel a Blue Ribbon group of
professionals, medical, business, educators to assist us with the Washington legislative process to get a
larger designation for the City of Miami. Because one time is not going to help.
Chairman Regalado: Gwen, can I ask, who did the survey?
62 April 11, 2002
Ms. Warren: I beg your pardon?
Chairman Regalado: Who did the survey that placed Miami on first?
Ms. Warren: The Center for Disease Control in Washington.
Chairman Regalado: That is the official United States of America health organization?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Don't they have some kind of an emergency funding?
Ms. Warren: I'm not sure. I would...
Chairman Regalado: They do.
Ms. Warren: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Do we have the ability to go to them and tell them that we are in the midst of a
crisis? They have said that. I mean, because if we have to wait for the political process -- the budget
process in Congress is too complicated. It's very national when it comes to share the money. But we
have a crisis and the federal government has recognized that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, it's not only a crisis. It's a health crisis, and it's a health crisis
that will continue to affect us. I guarantee you. It will get to a point that it will affect our number one
revenue, which is tourists. You know, you look at the statistics that are out there and they're alarming.
Fifty percent of the homeless are HIV positive. They fall in a situation where their medication, at the end
they lose it; they're abandoned by their family; they have to go out on the street, and they have to survive.
Where do they end up? They end up in Florida because of the climate. They end up in Florida because
we have one of the nation's top programs, the Homeless Assistance Trust Fund, and they come here, and
it's going to affect -- I mean, we can talk about moving the Camillus and we can talk about having a great
program, but if we don't focus on this issue, it's going to have a long-term affect on this City that we're
going to find ourselves in a situation where we're going to have to have more than one emergency
meeting to deal with it. So, I tell you what, Alex Penelas took the homeless issue and made something out
of it. I am prepared to take this issue and work whoever I want to have. I already contacted a friend of
mine, Dr. Pedro Jose Greer, who everybody knows, to work with and work on this issue because I'm
telling you, that we grab the bull by the horns now or the bull's going to kick us in a couple of years.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. But, Joe, but the first thing that we need to do is to find out from the CDC
(Community Development Corporation) what kind of emergency funding they have and they do.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, the first thing that we should do is set up an advisory committee, a
committee with professionals that know, and then we will go on the process of writing grants, looking at
the avenues that exist there because the word is out there. The word is out there. Miami today is the
number one City with AIDS cases. I mean, I'm open for recommendations and, of course, the expertise of
the administration.
Chairman Regalado: I agree with you. My recommendation to you is that we take a two -track approach.
First, immediately contact the CDC and say, we have a crisis in the City of Miami. We need emergency
funding. We have a waiting list. We have clients that we need to attend. We cannot expel them from the
63 April 11, 2002
City of Miami. And this is the situation. They have to come up with something because you know what?
The AIDS patients, it's a cost that no one opposes if the United States, and then, you do the Blue Ribbon
or contact Dr. Pedro Greer, who has a -- who's a very visible community leader, and do the long-term
thing. But I -- as having worked in Washington with the federal government, I know that with several
phone calls and e-mails and letters and faxes, we can get emergency funding from the CDC. In fact, we
should pass a resolution today asking the CDC to send a specialist to the City of Miami to assess the
situation as soon as possible, and they will do that because that is their job.
Commissioner Sanchez: Would you like to present that motion?
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. You do it.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. The motion will be to contact the CDC and have them send a specialist to
Miami to give us a report or --
Chairman Regalado: To assess the situation.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- to assess --
Chairman Regalado: The situation, and see the needs -- emergency funding we need.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- situation and the need, and also to direct the administration to come back with
a creation of our own advisory board or our own HOPWA Advisory Board to the City of Miami. So
moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-376
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTACT THE
CENTER FOR DISEASECONTROL AND REQUEST THAT THEY SEND A
SPECIALIST TO THE CITY OF MIAMI TO ASSESS THE HIV/AIDS
SITUATION HERE AND THE NEEDS OF THE CITY AS SOON AS
POSSIBLE IN AN EFFORT TO RECEIVE EMERGENCY FUNDING;
FURTHER DIRECTING CITY ADMINISTRATION TO COME BACK TO
THE COMMISSION WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CREATION
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI'S OWN HOPWA ADVISORY BOARD.
64 April 11, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Commission Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Chairman Regalado: Good.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let the record reflect Commissioner Teele voted yes.
65 April 11, 2002
13. DISCUSSION CONCERNING AN UPDATE ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE
REVERSAL OF DIRECTION OF SW 8TH STREET (This item was deferred from the meeting of March
14, 002).
Chairman Regalado: Anything else?
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving on to "A", discussion concerning an update on the economic impact of
the reversal of the direction of 8`h Street. As you all are aware, I guess that this started since 19 God
knows who, and I have picked up the flag with it to try to turn the traffic on 8th Street -- hopefully, we'll
get it before my kids are 16, maybe my youngest, who's four months old -- and we had to do a study on
the -- first we did a traffic study, which was done by the City of Miami after almost two years, and now
we're working on an economic impact which was passed in this Commission about four months ago, and I
just want an update on where we are on it because I continue to say the success of Calle Ocho is to revert
the traffic and I don't care what -- you know, people are saying out there, the expert people on their way
from their home to their house stop for three things: coffee, gas -- four -- bathroom and doughnut. OK.
On the way back home is when they stop to do all their shopping and right now, the way the street's
designed, it's a major thoroughfare having people go to work and then, on the way back, they have to go
through 6`h and 7`h Street. I've made that argument. I'm tired of making that argument. I just want to
know where the administration is on the economic impact study of 8th Street.
Arleen Weintraub (Director Real Estate and Economic Development): Arleen Weintraub, Department of
Real Estate and Economic Development, the Director. The Commission directed us to go forward and
hire a consultant to do exactly what Commissioner Sanchez just described. We issued the RFP (Request
for Proposal). We received five proposals on March 18`h, and a seven -member selection committee has
now met and received the proposals and have begun their evaluation. They met on March 28`h and they're
meeting again tomorrow, April 12th. As soon as they conclude their findings, I'll make a
recommendation to the Manager in the next couple of weeks, and that will be before this Commission as
soon as -- thereafter and that work will then begin.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I -- I'm just going to give you heads up. You'll be back every month on
this item.
Ms. Weintraub: Absolutely. I'd be please to.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Madam Clerk, can you provide me copy of the minutes on all my
Commission items? Thank you.
66 April 11, 2002
14. DISCUSSION CONCERNING AN UPDATE ON THE 13TH AVENUE CUBAN MEMORIAL
DRIVE PROMENADE PROJECT (This item was deferred from the meeting of March 14, 2002).
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving on to the next item is discussion concerning update on 13th Avenue,
Cuban Memorial Drive Promenade Project. Ana I just have one question. Who came up with the two
million dollars ($2,000,000) costs for that project?
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Planning and Zoning): On the Cuban monument I believe it was the
Public Works Department.
Commissioner Sanchez: Two million dollars ($2,000,000). What, are you building the sidewalks out of
gold?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I cannot answer that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, somebody needs to answer that.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Public Works prepared that.
Chairman Regalado: Two million dollars ($2,000,000)?
Jorge Avino (Assistant Director of Public Works): Yes. Jorge Avino, Assistant Director of Public
Works. The two million dollars ($2,000,000) is not -- it's curb and gutter, it's drainage, it's new painting,
it's sidewalks, it's street lighting -- sorry, pedestrian lighting. So, it's encompassing a lot of issues and it's
also one mile remember that.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. But who made that determination? Was it Public Works or was it
engineer?
Mr. Avino: Well, we made -- no, no. We made a preliminary estimate. This is still subject to whatever
the workshop creates and what would come about from it. So, it's still very preliminary...
Commissioner Sanchez: Where are we in the process? I mean, have we -- eventually somebody went out
and looked at it and came up with an estimate of two million dollars ($2,000,000) to do it. So, we've
made progress.
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: What we have done, Commissioner, Public Works and Planning met with the
consultant. The meeting happened yesterday and the information I have is that by Monday or Tuesday of
next week, we should have a proposal. We are expecting that the design, including the survey, design
workshop, schematic guidelines, budget estimates and facing will be ready in three months.
Commissioner Sanchez: And what are we looking at money -wise?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: We're looking at the old portion of the Cuban Memorial from 8th to Coral Way.
Commissioner Sanchez: From 8th to Coral Way. Let me tell you. We talk about lack of open green
space. We talk about lack of trees in an area people could just walk through an area that people jog
through there. I believe that -- how many blocks from 8th Street to 13th have -- they have -- one area has
it. The other one doesn't have it. It's the curbs. OK. But those curbs are in horrible condition. Some of
them are in horrible condition. So you probably have to do all of them. But you have -- look; I get
67 April 11, 2002
complaints people park there. People change their oil in their cars there. That's destroying the green way
and destroying the plants. I mean, it's a perfect opportunity to take one mile long of green space and turn
it into an area where people could walk out and walk through it or walk their dogs or sit outside and have
a cup of coffee and read the paper. I mean, we have a perfect opportunity to take one place that looks very
bad and do something beautiful. I hope it doesn't cost two million dollars ($2,000,000), but if it does, I'm
still going to go ahead with it. I never imagined it would be two million dollars ($2,000,000).
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: That's the design that we're looking at. That's what we're going to look at. And
when I said at the end, we've asked the consultants to provide us the budget estimates and the facing in
the event that it's -- you know, if it's less or if it's more, depending what it is, that we might be able to face
the project. Enrique Nunez is with the Planning Department. He's the landscape architect and we will be
working together with the Public Works Department to make sure that -- but all those things are being
looked at. It's the design, but including the curb and gutter.
Commissioner Sanchez: Enrique, have you gone out there and seen what I'm talking about? You have?
OK. So, when would you come back with another report and at least have --?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I could do it on the next City Commission meeting because by next week, we
should be able to have a budget. So, I'll be able to at least report to you and give you a status of where we
are.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. I would also ask that this item be put on the next agenda for further
discussion. Thank you.
68 April 11, 2002
15. DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE CITY THEATRE'S SUMMER
SHORTS.
Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion concerning the co-sponsorship of the City's Theatre Summer Shorts?
What is that? Oh, that's the film fest and that's for the banners. I so move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: There's a motion and a second. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-377
A MOTION APPROVING THE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS
THROUGHOUT CITY THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE CITY'S
THEATRE'S 7T' ANNUAL SUMMER SHORTS NEW PLAY FESTIVAL,
AMERICA'S SHORT PLAY FESTIVAL, TAKING PLACE JUNE 5 — 30, 2002
AT THE RING THEATRE AT CORAL GABLES.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, that's it with my items. Thank you.
69 April 11, 2002
16. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO REQUEST PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF QUADE & DOUGLAS,
INC., CONSULTANTS FOR "BAY LINK", PROPOSED MIAMI -MIAMI BEACH
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, TO RETURN TO METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
(MPO) TO INDICATE DESIRE TO EXPAND BAY LINK STUDY TO INCLUDE PROPOSAL THAT
WILL GO AS FAR NORTH AS POSSIBLE.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, that's it with my items. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Teele, you have your blue page items. If you want to do it
now, go ahead, sir. If not, we'll take another --
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to try to return to the order of the
day.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: We agreed at 2 o'clock today we would hear from Bay Link. We agreed that at 3
o'clock we'd hear from Raceworks. And, so, I'd like to try to get to Bay Link and then to Raceworks, and
I'll yield my time to Bay Link, if that's --
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. How long do you think you need for the presentation?
Ric Katz: No more than 10 minutes.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would only like to produce as the City of Miami representative --
current representative to the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization), this project is a project that the
MPO initiated. The motion was made by the Mayor of Miami Beach, who is no longer Mayor, and has
been succeeded. I think it's very important that Commissioner Winton, in particular, because most of this
project will interface not only with his district, but with the downtown area, as well as the Omni and
Redevelopment areas. I guess the most important thing that can be said about the project is that our
Mayor, in his State of the City yesterday, has already taken the giant step of endorsing that we ought to
get on about the business of looking at this project and moving forward with it. And, so, with that, I'd like
to introduce the consultants, who are working on this project, not on behalf of the DOT (Department of
Transportation) and not on behalf of Dade County Transit, but on behalf of the appropriate agency that
has no vested interest in the outcome and that's the Metropolitan Planning Organization, the MPO. And,
so, Parsons is a consultant to the MPO, trying to determine whether or not the Bay Link that would link
Miami Beach and Miami makes sense. And, so, I would yield to Mr. Katz, who's a representative --
community representative, who's well-known to this Commission. Sometimes we're throwing tomatoes at
him. But, Mr. Katz, why don't you just make a statement and introduce the team that will be making the
presentation. And welcome, Mr. Katz. It's a pleasure to have you here.
Mr. Katz: Commissioners, we thank you for giving us some time. Mr. Teele, thank you. We're very
pleased to be here today to present to you a study, as Commissioner Teele has pointed out --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Katz, you always give your name and --
Mr. Katz: I'm sorry. Ric Katz, speaking for the Metropolitan Planning Organization, with offices -- my
office is at 4141 Northeast 2nd Avenue, in Mr. Teele's district. We -- we're here today to apprise you of
70 April 11, 2002
this very important study. Larry Foutz is the project -- program manager for Parsons Brinckerhoff
conducting the study. It's a very interesting fast track activity that we hope can remedy some traffic
situations in the east side of the City of Miami. Let me present to you gentlemen today Mr. Larry Foutz.
Chairman Regalado: Let me suggest something. Would you rather face the --
Larry Foutz: I can stand on the side and I can --
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead and use the handheld mic and -- we need the lights off. Why don't you
use --
Mr. Foutz: Actually, I can --
Chairman Regalado: Just use the handheld mic. And we need the lights off for -- we still need the lights
off. OK.
Mr. Foutz: Thank you. My name is Larry Foutz. I'm with Parsons Brinkerhoff. Our address is 5775
Blue Lagoon Drive, Miami. And we're here to talk about Bay Link. Bay Link is looking at a premium
transit connection between existing Metrorail line in downtown Miami, and the Convention Center in
Miami Beach, going across the McArthur Causeway. We're here today to provide you information. We
will be back very shortly to look for a recommendation back from this group, as far as the preferred
alignment through downtown Miami. And we will be going to the MPO in July for a locally preferred
alternative that will go forward to the federal government for funding. And this study has been around a
long time. It's been -- effort has been made three times in the past. What we're working off of right now
is the east/west multimodal study that was completed in 1998. There was a locally preferred alternative
that's shown on this map that ran from the Palmetto through the airport to downtown Miami, and into the
port of Miami. But the draft Environmental Impact Statement for this study included a light rail line from
downtown Miami to Miami Beach. That was not considered because of opposition on Miami Beach at
that time. I am then --When the MPO brought this back up, with the support of the Mayor of Miami
Beach, we are now looking at that connection, which has always been one of the priority transit corridors
in the reg-- South Florida. The purpose of this project-- there are several folds. One is to create, in
conjunction with the Earlington Heights extension of Metrorail to the airport, a transit connection from
Miami airport to downtown Miami Beach, to the hotel areas along the eastside of Miami Beach and up to
the Convention Center. The second purpose of this is to connect downtown Miami and the hotels in
downtown Miami to the Convention Center on Miami Beach. Miami Beach does not have enough
premium hotel space to fill their convention center and the light-- and a rail connection between
downtown Miami will help them get the larger conventions that can fill their convention center. So, it's
important economically. There are also a lot of South Beach residents, especially with the development
of the apartments along West Avenue, that work in downtown Miami and they need the premium transit
connection back to come over to downtown Miami. There's been a 30 percent increase in traffic on the
McArthur Causeway in the last 10 years. You know, there are recreational opportunities on the
weekends. Traffic backs up. The rail connection would help that. And, finally, we need to -- the City of
Miami, downtown is investing million and millions and millions of dollars in new infrastructure and the
connection downtown is essential to make things like a Performing Arts Center, the museums at Bayfront
Park work. As I mentioned earlier, we'll be coming to the City for a recommendation on a locally
preferred alternative in June. The MPO will be selecting that. And then we will come back and do a final
Environmental Impact Statement. In about March of next year, we'll be finished with this project and
going for funding. At this time, we've had 44 stakeholders meetings. I mean, we've been averaging two
and three meetings a week since this project started. Commissioner Winton, this is the fourth time he's
sitting through this presentation. I'm sure he's ready -- or he's really tired of me. We started off with a
technology assessment, and what we found is what would really be suitable in this corridor, is either a
71 April 11, 2002
light rail technology, which operates in the median or on the street surface. It's not grade separated.
Light rail is about forty million dollars a mile, as opposed to heavy rail, which is what Metrorail is, it's
about a hundred million dollars a mile. So, it's a cheaper -- a less expensive transit service than the heavy
rail. Or what's now called Bus Rapid Transit, which is advanced design buses operating in bus guideways
that can self -circulate when they get into the heart of downtown or into the heart of Miami Beach. But
bus rapid transit is the other option that's -- we're looking at. What we have already dropped from
consideration is an extension of Metrorail to 5th and Alton, because Miami Beach has a -- has already
have cited they will not accept a grade separated rail line on Miami Beach. We've looked at extending the
Metromover to Alton Road. We were asked to look at ferry service between downtown Miami and South
Beach, and there's even been recommendation to look at suspended cable cars between downtown Miami.
We've looked at those and determined those were not feasible for this project. The Bus Rapid Transit, the
solid red line shows where we would build actual bus ways that would be up and down Biscayne
Boulevard and across southern side of the McArthur Causeway and then the busses would be self -
distributing in downtown Miami off of Biscayne and through Miami Beach. We also got three
alternatives in downtown Miami for light rail transit, and this is what we are -- will be coming back to
you to ask for your recommendation among these alternatives. The first of one, which I got -- I here on
this, I can put it up, but we've come along the south side of McArthur Causeway. We've come onto
Biscayne Boulevard and we stay south -- on the south side of the McArthur Causeway, and the south side
of 395, and our first station in downtown Miami is co -located with the Bicentennial Park station and we
are looking at providing the pedestrian connection between that station and the Performing Arts Center.
We were asked to look at how best to tie in the Performing Art Center. It's physically impossible without
reconstructing or destroying the Miami Herald building to come on the north side and tie into a closer
connection to Bicentennial Park. Excuse me, to the Performing Arts Center. But this location gives us
equal connections to both the Performing Arts Center and the proposed museums in Bicentennial Park.
Our next station is down at the arena. One at Bayside. Then we've got two along Flagler. The
Government Center Connection on Northwest I st Avenue and the final station at Overtown. This
alignment, you can see the dash lines in the background. That's the existing rail lines downtown. This
current alignment, if you look at it, it's double tracked along this whole way, and it's poised for extension
up through the northeast, up through Little Haiti or even up to Aventura. So, this could be a work, you
know, in the longer run in conjunction with a northeast corridor, light rail line that could come down
along the FEC (Florida East Coast) Corridor or Biscayne Boulevard or any of those, but this line works
perfectly for that. A second alternative would also work very well by creating a loop in downtown
Miami. This would come in the same way off the McArthur Causeway. It would turn and head west on
9th Street, going through the pedestrian area, serving the new Technology Center, then would turn and
come south on Northwest 1st Avenue with stations again at Overtown. And just by building a "Y," this
loop would work in conjunction with the northern extension. But we tie in the Government Center. I
think we would have one-way operation instead of two-way operation on Flagler, with stations along
Flagler. And then a northbound operation up Biscayne Boulevard. This takes up slightly less room in the
medians and allows us more room for landscaping or other activities. Our final option in downtown
Miami was two-way operations up and down Biscayne Boulevard and then a one-way loop through
Miami -Dade Community College, taking advantage of the pedestrian streets along 4th, over with the
station at over -- excuse me -- at the Government Center, and then coming back on 2nd Avenue. That
could be on any street. We could still drop it down and serve Flagler. But for this alternative in order to
look at the impacts on as many streets or the ridership on as many areas in downtown, we went ahead and
looked at 2nd Street as opposed to having them all on Flagler. But this loop through the college could
work on any of those locations -- any of those streets to the south. Just quickly on Miami Beach. We
have three alternatives on Miami Beach, as well. One comes all the way over to the east, comes up
Washington Avenue, and it's really oriented to the tourists and serving the high profile areas on Collins,
Ocean Drive, and Washington Avenue. And goes up to the Convention Center. Our next alternative is a
loop through Miami Beach, which is by far the most expensive of the alignments. And finally, we've got
an alignment that runs up the west side of the island, Alton Road, serving the home to work trip for the
72 April 11, 2002
people living on the west side of the island and terminating again at the Convention Center. Just to give
you and idea of what we're talking about, for the light rail line, it is in -street running. It will affect -- if it's
at the curbside, it would affect either parking or lanes of traffic, or we could be in the median. When
medians are available, such as Biscayne Boulevard, and allow the -- and have no impact on the side lanes.
Capital costs for the entire project between downtown Miami and the Convention Center is three hundred
to four hundred million dollars depending on which culmination of alignments we look at. This is in
2001 dollars. Operating and maintenance cost is eight to ten million dollars per year. Travel time from
the Convention Center to Government Center is about 25 minutes and our estimates are extremely
conservative, I believe, because we've already got 8,000 riders per day on buses crossing the McArthur
Causeway today, and we're only looking at about fifteen 15 to 17,500 riders additional for the
transportation model for the light rail line between Miami Beach and downtown. And if there's any
questions from the Commission, I'll be happy to take them at this time.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, I have questions.
Mr. Foutz: Certainly.
Chairman Regalado: The costs for, I guess, the simple project would be between three hundred and four
hundred million dollars?
Mr. Foutz: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: How long would that take, you think?
Mr. Foutz: What, to fund it or construct it?
Chairman Regalado: No, not to fund it, to construct it.
Mr. Foutz: Probably about two years, you know, from start to finish. You can have -- you can let
multiple contracts and have them go in simultaneously and cut that down to a shorter time, as possible, or
you can, you know, work from one end to the other, like they seem to be doing on the toll road -- I mean,
like they have on the turnpike.
Chairman Regalado: When do you need like a policy from the City Commission?
Mr. Foutz: In June, sir.
Chairman Regalado: In June. Let me -- Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Winton, let me say
something. What I've seen and I like -- but let me tell you something. The County definitely will be
taking to the ballot a referendum to raise half a penny for transportation. What I've seen from the County,
the City of Miami is not included. There is nothing on the plans -- although they say that they are doing
public hearings in different areas of the County to get input from the residents. What I have heard from
Mayor Pinelas and Danny Alvarez and other members of the staff is that they need the Metrorail to
Aventura, the Metrorail from Homestead to FIU (Florida International University). There's nothing for
the City of Miami. The City of Miami is the largest single voting block in Miami -Dade County, not
because the number of vote, but because the number of people that go to vote. And that is what it counts.
If we come up with a unified voice -- we have a hearing organized by the County, I think on the 22nd, at
the Knight Center -- if we come up with a unified voice and demand that this project will be included in
the plans for funding by the result of the referendum, if it passes, I think that then we can go out and tell
the people of Miami, as a unified Commission -- and I'm sure that the Mayor will be leading this effort --
that we really need this project. But I tell you something, myself -- and I have the advantage of having a
73 April 11, 2002
radio and TV (television) program everyday. If we don't get that or a major project from what the County
is proposing that we, in the City of Miami, pay in sales tax, I will try to defeat that tax. So, my suggestion
to the members of the Commission is that we need to think if we really want to do this. If this will
benefit, you know, the supply (UNINTELLIGIBLE) economics -- this will benefit downtown Miami, the
way he's telling us it would do; if this will bring downtown alive with tourism from the beach going back
to our downtown, because -- but we need to make a decision and we need to speak with a unified voice
and commit that if we get that on the plans from the County, we will support this tax. If we don't, well,
we have to go out and defeat it. It's very simple. Because as of now, I have not seen a single project from
the County that benefits the City of Miami. Mr. Vice Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, many times timing, it works out very well. Sometimes timing
isn't quite as good as we would like. As you all know, this was Commissioner Teele's idea almost two
years ago. I got charged with the task of chairing the Downtown Comprehensive Master Transportation
Planning Committee. Frankly, when we started this committee way back whenever it was, I think my
push was to have us complete this project by about now. But as with most of these kind of planning
processes, we're not quite finished and I think that now it would be sometime during the month of June,
before we will bring the proposed master plan to this Commission. And that's the unfortunate part,
because of the timing of the County's bond issue. But from a positive standpoint, the fact of the matter is,
we have the meat of this thing done, and there's a whole host of projects. So if you think about the City of
Miami, downtown is the hub of the spoke that drives a big economic engine that allows all of our
neighborhoods to thrive. And, so, the focus of this master planning effort hasn't been just about
downtown, even though that's -- the study area is downtown. The focus of this plan, which I told the
consultants and other staff people from day one, is that at the end of the day, I want to present a plan that
will allow us to move residents within the City of Miami from neighborhood to neighborhood to
neighborhood quickly, efficiently and dependably, which means this won't be about how we're going to
build new roads or wider roads or all of that jazz, because there isn't any place to build them. It's going to
be about transit, in some fashion or another, whether it's -- and it will be a combination -- and it will have
a whole host of things in it. We have the lion's share of those things already identified and they're on a
list. And I had a meeting this Monday morning with the consultants going over that list, and what we
agreed is that, even though we don't have all of the I's dotted and the T's crossed and all of our data
completely finalized, we got enough done that we could get that whole list -- and that list includes this
project. But it will include other things, like the tunnel connecting Brickell to downtown. It will have
connections that make -- that will allow the Bay Link to go up the Upper Eastside -- through that FEC
corridor. It will talk about how we're going to create linkages to Little Havana from downtown. All of
those kinds of things. So there's a whole laundry list of projects that will be in this. And there -- you
know, it's a 22 -year deal. So, we have that list finalized and the consultants are going to make sure that
that list is communicated to the County so that we're not left out of the whole thing. Now, what we don't
have -- and that would have been the logical next step and was the next step that we were already thinking
about -- is what the component parts are that allow us to make this really work out in all the
neighborhoods. And this study wasn't anticipated nor designed to do that. That would have been the next
phase, so we don't have that done. But we looked at the master planning effort for downtown and
designed a plan that anticipates doing those next things. So, while the dollar cost associated with how we
get into all the neighborhoods and exactly where we go into those neighborhoods won't be available to us.
The concept of how we get in there will be done. So, that's just kind of an update on the FYI (for your
information).
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, all I'm saying is, whatever we want to do, we've got to tell them, but not
ask them. We've got to tell them what we want.
Vice Chairman Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and agreements.
74 April 11, 2002
Mr. Foutz: Can I make --
Commissioner Teele: Before you do—
Mr. Foutz: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: -- on the point that Commissioner Winton is making. I think, Johnny, you
shouldn't be so hard on the process or yourself, in this regard. What is going on now with this study is the
first time, in -- and the Manager can tell us when -- that I would say probably 30 years that there's been a
really orchestrated effort to just sort of look at downtown and determine what's needed. And while I
deeply respect what Chairman Regalado has said about the Bay Link -- and I want you to know, I am 100
percent with Manny Diaz, that this project is a great project, not for Miami, but it's a great project for
Miami Beach and Miami. And I want to talk about that in a minute. But even more important than that,
in the context of the one cent sales tax or something, I think what Commissioner Winton is doing in
trying to come up with a smorgasbord of little projects and big projects, et cetera, is more important to us
as a City than Bay Link. I mean, I don't mean to be parochial now, but solving some of the problems
between Brickell and Biscayne Boulevard, the tunnel there, looking at some of those things, to me we
have to weigh those projects versus anything else. I happen to think that Bay Link will wind up being
right up there with them at the top, and probably, it may even be the number one, but I think the process
is, speaking on behalf of the City, we need to make sure that whatever we demand from the County, as a
part of the transit tax, it really does address some of the discreet mobility and transportation problems of
downtown. Now, having said that, I think it's critical that the DDA (Downtown Development Authority)
and the downtown business establishments give this Commission instructions, Johnny, before June, on
the alignments and the linkages. I don't think this ought to be a vote simply of the Commission based
upon what the consultants are saying and with all due respect to the Public Works Director, and the
Planning Director, and the Economic Development Director, those three departments, among others, who
ought to weigh in, I just want to say publicly that I think we've got to listen closely to what the DDA
wants to do because that is the board -- body that is advising us pursuant to statute, as well as the Miami
Sports and Exhibition Authority. The important thing, Johnny, and Mr. Chairman and members of the
public is that this project puts Miami Beach's infrastructure and Miami's infrastructure, that is quality
hotels -- I mean, there's only one six -star hotel in this town. I mean, there's three or four or five-star
hotels, but there's only one six -star, if that's -- that's the Mandarin. I mean, you know, you go all over the
world and the Mandarin is sort of in a category of its own. And if you want to be able to have people at
conventions living in the Mandarin, you've got to have a Bay Link kind of thing, and that's what Detroit
understands, that's what Dallas understands, that's what Los Angeles understands, and as far as I'm
concerned, the City of Miami, the Commission and our mayors need to be talking to the Miami Beach
Commission and mayors and possibly even having a joint meeting on this, if it makes sense, because I'm
telling you, I'm hearing some rather parochial and shocking things coming out of Miami Beach, like this
project is going to benefit Miami more than it's going to benefit Miami Beach. Well, you know, that may
be true, if you figuring it from that way. But I can tell you one thing. You know, we could start talking
about building our own Convention Center over here, and that would be the dumbest thing, in my
opinion, that we could do. We ought to work to make Miami Beach's Convention Center a regional
convention center so that our hotels can be linked to that and this is one community. So, I want to
basically say to the Chairman and the public and the Commission that the DDA really needs to weigh in
on this decision before we get here in June. Obviously, I think that Jim Jenkins, Mr. Jenkins from MSEA
(Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority), ought to be a part of this process. As the Chairman of the CRA
(Community Redevelopment Agency), I'm willing to say candidly, we will support, as far as Ms. Lewis is
concerned and to the extent she'll hear me or listen to me, that our interest is certainly subordinate to the
interest of the DDA and MSEA in this; and with the exception of the Grand Promenade, there -- the link
there between 10th Street and I Ith Street, we ought to try to fold in to what is in the broader interest of
the overall community. And, so, Commissioner Winton, I don't mean to put this on you again, but I do
75 April 11, 2002
think there's one important aspect that is not being studied and the one motion that I would like to make at
the conclusion of this, if it has not been done, is that we look at a spur that goes to the north consistent
with the study that Commissioner Winton has had going on, which involves three or four districts,
Wynwood, Allapattah, the Design District, Little Haiti and all the way up to El Portal and eventually
perhaps to Aventura -- but we really should look at a spur that could be, you know, that could feed this
thing that goes up toward the north, certainly toward the City boundary -- beyond the City boundary,
consistent with the FEC Study. And at the appropriate time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to move that the
consultant be requested to go back to this MPO on behalf of this body and indicate our desire to expand
the study to include a feeder spur, something that will feed this system that will collect people as far north
as possible, say 167th or 154th or somewhere up in there.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second that.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have a question.
Chairman Regalado: And a second. Go ahead, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: How much would this project cost to the City of Miami?
Mr. Foutz: Right now, Commissioner Teele's charging me zero because there's a lot of funding
mechanisms that are being looked at. Part of that would be some costs to the City looking at amount of
service on the O&M, or the annual operating costs, but there are other ways of looking at it where a toll
on the McArthur Causeway would pick up both the capital and the operating cost of the system. So, the
financial plan is part of what will be going forward as part of the locally preferred alternative in July, but
that's still being worked on at this time. So, I'm sorry, Commissioner Gonzalez. I can't --
Commissioner Gonzalez: You don't have an answer to --
Mr. Foutz: Not -- depends on how --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no. You're wrong.
Mr. Foutz: -- the determination's made — OK.
Commissioner Teele: You're 100 percent wrong, Larry. The Charter of the County and the ordinances of
the County confer upon Miami -Dade County the general government authority among which is
responsible for health care and transportation. The City is not a transit grant recipient. The last time the
City put up money was at the lots that the County's now trying to sue us to get back, which we put up all
the money, OK. And the reason we didn't get the grant was because the City is not a grant recipient.
Under this current Charter and the ordinances of Dade County, this facility -- this would be properly run
through the MPO and through the Transit Authority unless otherwise designated, which means Dade
County government and the state of Florida would put up 100 percent of the local match and the local
match would constitute less than 50 percent of the project. Over 50 percent will be federal dollars and the
remainder will be a local match, 50 percent funded by the State and 50 percent funded by the County.
Now, how the County raises those dollars, maybe they work with us and say we'd like for you to put some
of your parking surcharge in and drop the lawsuit against us maybe. You know, I'd be willing to talk
about that. There's a whole lot of things, but it's their responsibility. And I hope you will conform your
report to that.
76 April 11, 2002
Mr. Foutz: Thank you for the clarification.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's why, Mr. Teele, I --
Mr. Foutz: Sorry I fumbled on your question, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's precisely why I asked the question, because I had understood that it was
the County's responsibility to provide transportation, and I wanted to make sure that whatever the County
come up with, you know, doesn't — its not money that's going to come out of our pockets, OK. Thank
you.
Chairman Regalado: There's a motion.
Commissioner Teele: But, Mr. Chairman, but, see—
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: -- it does come out of our pocket, because a half cent sales tax --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Commissioner Teele: --one -- about 25 percent of that money is going to be collected in the City of
Miami, see.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, but what I mean, it's not going to be, you know, new taxes — not taxes
imposed or, you know, it's not going to come out of our general funds or anything like that.
Vice Chairman Winton: I have another question and that is, relative to this June deadline -- the last time
you were at the DDA, I asked you to give us a specific set of issues that you wanted us to deal with and
the time frame in which you wanted us to do that. Now, I'm not sure that I remember hearing June then.
Maybe I did and it went right over my head. But June now --
Mr. Katz: Is two months away.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- is much closer today than it was --
Mr. Katz: Was a month ago.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. So, I think we need to have a public hearing, frankly, downtown, that we
advertise as best we can and get as many property owners in downtown Miami and residents and
merchants to show up at a public hearing and at that -- and in that public hearing, we could make sure we
have folks from the DMP (Downtown Miami Partnership), the DDA, the CRA, the homeowners
associations from Omni, those kinds of things, get all the people there so we do this presentation and get
input from folks.
Mr. Katz: Because this is being done as a draft Environmental Impact Statement for the federal
government, public hearings are required before any action can be taken on the plan.
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- but do you have a plan to hold those public hearings? I mean, is that
already in the --
77 April 11, 2002
Mr. Katz: They will be set up -- I mean, it will be set up. So we can have the hearing. You know, it has
to be within the study area, so you know, the downtown hearing is --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. But we need to have it before June.
Mr. Katz: It -- the public hearings are required after the draft environmental. The first draft is available
for public comment, and that's what you hold the public hearing on. But that's what the basis for the
selections of the locally preferred alternative is based on the public hearing and, you know, municipal
input.
Vice Chairman Winton: But the municipality, which is us, as Commissioner Teele said, I think 100
percent correctly, we don't want to make this decision from up here until we've heard from the public on
this issue.
Mr. Katz: But you -- we did come back to you after the public hearing. I mean --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Mr. Katz: We can come back --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's what I'm suggesting.
Mr. Katz: Because that's when we go to the MPO, is after the public hearing. So, we --
Vice Chairman Winton: But if you want a decision from us by June, you have to have this public
hearing in downtown before June.
Commissioner Teele: But, Johnny, I think the term is we're not making a decision. The City of Miami
and the City of Miami Beach are making a recommendation. The decision will be made by the MPO and
that decision is whether to go forward or not. That decision will include a public hearing of everyone.
So, the official record and public hearing would be held at the MPO. We're obviously free to have a
hearing of our own but --
Vice Chairman Winton: But -- OK. I understand what you're saying. But what they need to do -- and
that's what I'm trying to get cleared here --
Mr. Foutz: We will do it. I mean, if that --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. You have to -- because we can't make -- somebody's got to make this
decision about the alignment recommendation. You've got three alternatives.
Mr. Foutz: Right.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, you know, we want to make some sort of recommendation, but I don't think
we can make that recommendation appropriately without real input from the stakeholders within the area.
Mr. Katz: Excuse me. Commissioner, we'll work with you and others in the Commission to set up a
meeting that is properly called, large enough public notice that will allow you some information before
this comes before your body.
78 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: And I would like you to -- Rick, if you could, call Alonzo Menendez, from the
DDA --
Mr. Katz: Sure --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- tomorrow. We've got a board meeting tomorrow, executive committee
meeting, I guess, in the morning, and this isn't even on the agenda, but I'd like you to call them tomorrow
and move that process forward. Just tell them I asked you to call.
Mr. Katz: OK, and we'll continue to --
Vice Chairman Winton: So that they can help work with you to get the DMP involved so that we can get
the notices out and pick a date.
Mr. Katz: And we'll continue to work with the CRA and we'll bring in Sports Authority.
Vice Chairman Winton: Perfect, right. And when we have the public hearing, I want to make sure that
Annette Lewis gets notices out—
Mr. Katz: Absolutely.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- to all the people she has contact with and all these organizations. Thank you.
Mr. Foutz: Just in response to the Chairman's one comment. The County will be holding the first of their
public meetings or the first really major --
Mr. Katz: Summit.
Mr. Foutz: -- summit this Saturday at the Ramada --
Mr. Katz: At the Radisson Mart at the airport.
Mr. Foutz: At the Radisson Park --
Mr. Katz: At Milam Dairy Road and -- south of the airport, commencing at eight in the morning, running
until about noon. This is the first of two summits. They'll be two weeks later. We mentioned this to
Commissioner Winton at a meeting earlier. We would love for the City of Miami to participate in that.
That's not a Bay Link meeting, but it's another project that Larry and I are working on. We would very
much like the City to be represented at that and then two weeks later at the final summit. There's also a
Mayor's round table that City of Miami's Mayor is co -hosting that will bring all the mayors of the County
together. So, there are an awful lot of public meetings dealing with transportation. It gets a little
confusing to the general public. But I think there are a lot of different forces working hard to see if they
can remedy our transportation dilemma.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Regalado's gone. Yeah. We have a motion and a second. Any
further discussion?
Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE) study asking the MPO (INAUDIBLE)
79 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second. Further discussion? Being none, all in
favor, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. Motion carries.
80 April 11, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-378
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST PARSONS
BRINCKERHOFF QUADE & DOUGLAS, INC., THE CONSULTANTS FOR "BAY
LINK", A PROPOSED MIAMI -MIAMI BEACH TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, TO
RETURN TO THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO) ON
BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION IN ORDER TO INDICATE THEIR DESIRE TO
EXPAND THE BAY LINK STUDY TO INCLUDE A PROPOSAL THAT WILL GO
AS FAR NORTH AS POSSIBLE; SAID STUDY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
FLORIDA EAST COAST (FEC) STUDY BEING SPEARHEADED BY
COMMISSIONER WINTON.
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele. Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Winton: Anything else?
Mr. Katz: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Mr. Foutz: Thank you.
Mr. Katz: Appreciate your time.
81 April 11, 2002
17. STATUS REPORT AND DISCUSSION CONCERNING AGREEMENT WITH RACEWORKS.
Vice Chairman Regalado: What item were we on?
Priscilla Thompson: Raceworks.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Raceworks was set for 3:00.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. What was that?
Commissioner Teele: Raceworks at 3:00.
Mr. Gimenez: Raceworks was set for 3:00 if you want to go with that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. What item was that?
Unidentified Speaker: Four -A.
Vice Chairman Winton: Four -A. Who's doing the status report?
Mr. Gimenez: Frank Rollason, but we need some lights.
Vice Chairman Winton: Lights are coming, going, indecisive. I think we need to have a training session
for everybody that sits in those chairs back there on lighting. You're ready?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): They're on.
Vice Chairman Winton: You're ready?
Mr. Gimenez: I'm ready, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Rollason, it's all yours.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Good afternoon, gentlemen.
Vice Chairman Winton: Name.
Mr. Rollason: Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager for Operations.
Commissioner Sanchez: I didn't quite hear you. Can you please say it again?
Mr. Rollason: Frank Rollason, Assistant Manager for Operations.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Mr. Rollason: This is going to be an easy presentation. I can tell already. We've got several items that
we want to bring before you today and make you aware of concerning the race in total. The first thing I'd
like to report to you is the status of the construction on the current racetrack. The paving was completed
late Tuesday night, early Wednesday morning, and at this point now, all the asphalt paving is finished and
what is left to do is to start to build the replaceable curbs, the portable curbing, that they can come in and
82 April 11, 2002
take in and out when it's time to actually set up the race itself. Stripping is being done, so there are
punch -list items that have to be done, but the entities with Bayside and with the Bayfront Park Trust and
the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation), everybody's happy at this point where we are with the
construction. The next item I want to talk to you about is the -- what you have before you is a new
agreement and go over the substantive changes of that agreement. The first items I want to cover with
you are items that were removed from the old agreement that are no longer in this agreement. The first of
those is that the seventy-five thousand dollar ($75,000) payment that was due to Raceworks by the City if
the track was used by some other entity has been removed. So, if it's used by somebody else, there's no
payment. It goes to Raceworks. Also removed was the item in there that was the Right of First Refusal
by Raceworks in the event that somebody else came with an event, picked some dates, and under the old
agreement, we had to go back to Raceworks and say, "Would you like to run the event on these dates?"
That has been removed. Also removed is -- there is no longer a right to exclude the City or the Trust from
the property, and that was allowed in the original agreement. That has been removed. What does that
mean? It simply means that the City cannot be excluded or barred from going on any property in the park
and or within right-of-way. All right. The next item that we're going to talk about now inclusions or
items that are now in place in the new agreement and on the back up that you have that was sent to you,
that is highlighted, you can look at those items specifically, if you want, as we go along here. The first
one is that all improvements become the property of the City from day one of the agreement, once the
improvements are completed and have passed the inspections, been accepted, and that's on Page 19, Item
Number 23. In the old agreement, it was at the other end. This time it is from day one. It is -- the
property belongs to the City, all improvements. If you look on Page 8, Number 3, there's no exclusive
possession of property and the intent behind this is that the course in change is not set and fixed. For
instance, as an example I gave you in a project over on the point is -- comes into fruition, then the course
would have to be altered or if there was a decision to alter the course and run something further up the
boulevard, that the course is not a fixed course. It can change from time to time, depending upon the
needs. On Page 10, Number 6; this is the item that deals with the agreement being revocable. The old
agreement was a non -revocable agreement. This one specifically states that the agreement is revocable at
will of the Commission, and that's a pretty simple statement. And the last item of change is that -- or
significant change is that the license agreement is not assignable, and that's on -- that's Number 9 on Page
11, and that's exactly what that means. They cannot assign this agreement to some other entity. And
those were some of the items that were specifically enumerated by the judge, that he had concerns with.
Now, at this point, with this agreement, we are recommending to you that this agreement be adopted by
the Commission and passed and would look for some action on that part -- on behalf of the Commission.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, the two issues pertaining to the judge, where the lease versus
license and the revocability, have those been addressed in this agreement?
Mr. Rollason: Yes, they have been addressed. Those were the two items -- two of the three items that I
spoke to you about. They are specifically addressed.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the City Manager feels comfortable with it, so does the Legal Department?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, sir.
Mr. Rollason: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
83 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public hearing, so we're going to be hearing from both parks, also the
City staff, the City Attorney. Let's -- Mr. City Attorney, you're -- first of all, your opinion of what
Assistant City Manager, Frank Rollason, has just informed the Commission.
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. I concur with the Manager's recommendation. The document before you that was
distributed in the agenda package is legally sufficient and complies with regard to revocability and
assignability with the judge's order when he considered the previous agreement.
Chairman Regalado: What would you recommend the City Commission to do today?
Mr. Vilarello: This revocable license agreement is properly before you. It's legally sufficient and I would
recommend the adoption of that agreement.
Chairman Regalado: Has this been properly noticed as a public hearing? Any problems at all in taking
action today?
Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. This agenda item was placed before you as a discussion item, a status item, as the
agenda provides. Any item that is discussed by the City Commission at a regularly called Commission
meeting can lead to formal action by the City Commission, and that would be -- if you approve this
revocable license agreement today, that would be the formal action taken by the Commission, which is
appropriate.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Anybody from the public wants to address -- Frank, we'll hear from you later
on. You have anything else?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. Mr. Chairman, there's another item. I think, if we handle this one first, then I'll come
back and talk about the other item.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Let's address what Mr. Rollason has informed. Go ahead, sir. Your name and
address.
George Lopez: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Honorable members of the Commission. My name is George
Lopez, an attorney with law firm of Steel, Hector & Davis at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 4100.
I'm here today, once again, representing International Speedway Corporation and its wholly owned
subsidiary Homestead Miami Speedway. We thank you, once again, for this opportunity to at least
express our views on some of the issues that I think are on this record today. We certainly reserve and
respectfully request that you would give us an opportunity to actually look at this document before final
action is taken; although, understanding that your agenda does allow for this protocol by which you've
indicated you're going to have a discussion, then you actually take formal action on something that, in this
particular instance, could be up to 25 years. We would respectfully request that you give us at least a
couple of weeks or some time to review it and maybe provide you with better comments than the ones
that we're going to be here presenting to you. Along with me today is Mr. John Graham from -- who
came into town today to also share with you some thoughts and concerns, not only on this item, but also
the item that's scheduled under Commissioner Teele's portion of the agenda, dealing with an invitation for
unsolicited proposals. I want to narrow my comments to three basic areas. One is, I think it's incumbent
upon us to properly characterize the status, the legal status of this case, not only the action that the court
has taken, but the action the court is being asked to take, and subsequently other actions that may legally
impact the ability of this Commission to actually effectuate what it intends to do in this contract. It is
important to note that although a very good question by Commissioner Sanchez, the court did not
specifically narrow its order on the lease issue. It went further. And the court, in fact, in a 16 -page
84 April 11, 2002
opinion, considering many, many other items, after six hours of argument, not only concluded that as a
lease, that agreement was void, but as a contract, it was also void. But, more importantly, one of the
reasons why we're here today, the court also directed the City to comply with applicable...
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: With regard to the ongoing litigation, this litigation is continuing. It's currently on appeal
to the Third District Court of Appeals. This matter is a license -- revocable license agreement for your
consideration today. My suggestion, Mr. Chairman, it's at your discretion, however, that you limit your
comments to the revocable license agreement, which the Manager is asking for you to consider today, as
opposed to a debate on the legal issues, which Mr. Lopez is adequately representing his client in court,
and our office is representing the City of Miami in court, and Raceworks has their attorneys representing
its interest in court. This is not the appropriate forum to be discussing the court matter. Simply, the
consideration of this City Commission is the revocable license.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Lopez, do you agree with the City Attorney?
Mr. Lopez: Well, clearly, we disagree with his interpretation of the court order. But, Mr. Chairman, if
you wish to narrow our comments...
Chairman Regalado: I would ask --
Mr. Lopez: -- I respect the City Attorney's observations.
Chairman Regalado: -- you to do that as a favor for us to consider --
Mr. Lopez: We respect that.
Chairman Regalado: All what we're supposed to vote if we go to vote. We need you to give us your
views.
Mr. Lopez: We appreciate that, we understand that, and we, although often disagree, do not act in any
disagreeable fashion with the City Attorney. I think he's done an admirable job for you. The court's
order, as I think has been characterized, speaks to only one portion of the litigation that is pending. The
more important part of our litigation deals with sunshine law, and I think your City Attorney will confirm
that that portion of our case is pending before the court and will be heard on April 24`h. It could have the
same effect of nullifying any action this board has taken in the past leading up to this moment. But let me
further indicate for this record that notwithstanding that piece of litigation, there's other litigation involved
here. What may or may not have been clarified for you is that there is litigation pending against the
individuals that you're contemplating issuing this license agreement or whatever it is, for 25 years, that
are litigating with a gentleman by the name of Sheer. A lawsuit filed in January, which is pending,
claiming, among other things, declaratory relief for fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment,
breach of fiduciary duties, among other things. That case is pending and has a motion set for May 7`h. In
addition, there are two other legal matters pending that affect your decision here today. One is an appeal
of a Class II Permit. Our appeal of that Class II Permit is set so be heard on April 22"d. Crescent, the
operators of the Miami Center, their appeal of that Class II permit is set to be heard in June. Additionally,
there's one very important legal issue that's outstanding and that is whether, in fact, Bayfront Park is the
appropriate place to hold the street race. Your Parks Advisory Board has taken action and resolved on
two occasions now that, in fact, Bayfront Park is not the appropriate place, but more importantly has
85 April 11, 2002
requested an Attorney General opinion on that issue. We leave that for you to determine, whether it's
appropriate to consider or not. There's three final points on the legal side of this and then, Mr. Chairman,
I'd like to speak directly to this agreement, if I may. The first is, there may be further action, legal in
nature, that may be contemplated and we certainly are reviewing our rights there with regards to the
proposed MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority) loan. You all recall that MSEA has
contemplated entering into a loan for three point two million dollars ($3,200,000) to assist Raceworks in
this activity. When this announcement was made that Clark was coming, that loan was retracted and now
we've been informed that the Finance Committee that, in fact, that loan has been resurrected, and
therefore the potential use of CDT dollars will clearly be reviewed from a legal standpoint.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Lopez, we have a MSEA meeting on the 15`h, which will be on a Monday, and
the Raceworks issue is not on the agenda. We are not going to discuss anything at all this coming
Monday, on the MSEA meeting, for your information.
Mr. Lopez: I appreciate that. Thank you. I was commenting based on the Finance Committee. The last -
- and I can speak to this. I think the City needs to take this into consideration, and that is potential right to
a third party. Clearly, there are individuals out there who may or may not have already considered their
legal rights. We not at least of one group that has communicated with this City and that is the
construction company that, in fact, has filed nonpayment letters with regards to the work that was done,
Central Florida Equipment Rentals, in a letter dated March Oh indicates that they've done 90 percent of
the work at that time and hadn't been paid for a penny. They were owed over five hundred and thirty-five
thousand dollars ($535,000) and, in fact, they were waiting to be paid some time in April 22"d. I can't
speak to their rights but, clearly, your records reflect that these issues are out there. If I may, Mr.
Chairman, focus on your agreement. There are three very important issues that we think you should take
into consideration, and they speak to the best business practices, that therefore -- the best business
practices that this City should consider and thereby protect the interest of the taxpayers. First is, who
you're doing business with. It is clear that there are number of companies involved, including some
companies involved for Raceworks, Raceworks Management, Delaware Corporations, Ford Corporations
doing business in Florida. Is this really the best deal, is the second point? Then, finally, the issue of
dates. We did a very quick search of the Dade County Finance Department's tax collection and we find
no occupational license for either Raceworks, Raceworks Management or anyone for that matter. So, in
essence, to do business in your City maybe they do have occupational licenses in your City, but clearly
Dade County they don't. But there's also the introduction of a new company. Company by the name of
Habria Shrugged, H -A -B -R -I -A, and then followed by S -H -R -U -G -G -E -D, Limited Corporation, not
authorized to do business in the State of Florida, but a Delaware Corporation, which, in fact, has issued --
or at least documents from MSEA indicated -- has issued a one point five million dollar ($1.5 million)
convertible loan. Now, that loan is supposed to be able to be converted into thirty-three and a third
interest in Raceworks. All of that has been disclosed in the MSEA documentation. And, more
importantly, we don't know who that company is. Do you know who that company is? That's important, I
think, when you make decisions of issuing whatever it is, lease, license, contract agreement, agreement to
agree later for 25 -- potentially 25 years, you need to know who you're doing business with, and I think
it's incumbent, as fiduciaries, to seriously look into that issue. There's also been discussion in this
agreement as to whether assignable or non -assignable or interest. Well, the MSEA documents clearly
indicate that CART (Championship Auto Racing Team), which has been recently introduced as a sponsor
for the event, has the right to subscribe for or otherwise acquire membership in Raceworks. In fact, they
have a right to acquire directly or indirectly a majority of equity interest in Raceworks Management or in
Raceworks. So, whether you assign or not assign in this agreement, clearly there's some contradiction in
the public records as to what, in fact, these companies can and cannot do or what they intend to do or not
intend to do. The next point I think is even more important. Clearly, is this the best deal for the City?
You've had some discussions about another sponsored event in the weekend. Now, you're going to have
three total events, and your staff has done an admirable job of identifying that as a potential revenue -
86 April 11, 2002
maker for you. In fact, Mr. Rollason has e-mailed -- and the City Manager -- and indicated that there may
be some ideas of getting more money from Raceworks. Well, Raceworks' response -- Mr. Reshefsky
from Greenberg Traurig, replies to the Manager indicating, I have just spoken with Raceworks following
our phone conversation. The ticket prices have not changed, despite the addition of CART
(Championship Auto Racing Team) and Raceworks does not plan to raise the prices. Tickets range in
price from thirty-five to a hundred and twenty-five dollars ($125). This can be confirmed under
Raceworks website. With the addition of CART -- this is a very important fact. This is an e-mail public
record -- with the addition of CART, Raceworks will pay CART a two million dollar ($2,000,000)
sanctioning fee. Since Raceworks has incurred considerable costs at this point and will incur additional
costs to provide Miami with two tier one racing series, Raceworks is not willing to increase its payments
to the City. I remember distinctly, a couple weeks ago, when Commissioner Teele inquired of CART
their liquidity, possibility of up to a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) of potential capital to be
used, but, yet, they're asking to be paid two million dollars ($2,000,000). But when your staff, correctly
so, inquires as to whether there's more money that could come to the City, the answer is no. We're happy
to spend it to get it. The final is, the last time we were here there was an issue raised regarding dates. We
suggested to you, please reconsider. Dates are very critical. Now, we see that reference to dates in the --
Commissioner Teele's resolution, where we can't conflict if we're to submit a proposal, but the fact is that
the dates that are chosen conflict with the City -- at least one City of Miami event, maybe two. More
importantly, they conflict with other sporting events in South Florida. The first is that on Saturday,
October 5`h, the University of Miami is playing Connecticut in the Orange Bowl at the same time that
supposedly the street race -- the Le Mans Series race is taking place. Second, on October 6`h, the City --
not the City, but the Miami Dolphins are playing the Super Bowl Champion, New England Patriots.
You're competing with other activities that are taking place in our community. And, then, finally, based
on the public records of Bayfront Park alone, it seems that on October 5`h, originally there was an
American Cancer Walk scheduled for that, and now October 4th through October 6`h Discovery of
America Day, Hispanic Heritage Council is also involved. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for your courtesy.
I'd like to close with just a small reference to some case law that is very critical in these determinations.
In fact, they were discussed extensively in a lot of previous discussions, and that is that in Florida, when
you deal with competitive bids, which we hope you would consider giving us that opportunity, it is those
laws are -- they serve an objective of protecting the public against collusion -- collusive contracts and
prevent favoritism toward those contracts. We hope that you would consider what you're doing here and
defer, allow us to participate in competitive bid process, but, more importantly, ask yourself, is this really
in the best interest of the City of Miami and thereby the taxpayers. With that, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to
introduce John Graham from ISC (International Speedway Corporation).
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
John Graham: Thank you. I'm John Graham with International Speedway Corporation. I have some
questions that relate to the proposed resolution.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You direct it to me and I'll direct it to the administration, sir.
Mr. Graham: All right. The resolution says that the City seeks to invite any entity that may be interested
in promoting a motor sport race in downtown Miami to make an unsolicited offer for such a race in
downtown Miami. My question is, is that an invitation to submit a competing proposal with the existing
race that's being contemplated today?
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, would you respond to that or you want administration to do that?
Mr. Vilarello: The question was what?
87 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: The question was what he thinks that we implied in the agreement that the City's
inviting entities to bid for this event.
Mr. Vilarello: The agreement does not do that.
Mr. Graham: I'm sorry. My question has to do with the proposed resolution that's going to be taken up
that we received a copy of...
Chairman Regalado: Oh, oh, oh, oh. But we are not -- we're not dealing with that now. We are -- that
would be --
Commissioner Sanchez: That will be heard later on...
Chairman Regalado: -- later on, when Commissioner Teele decides to be recognized and bring this issue.
We are now trying to focus on what the administration has presented to us in terms of the agreement and
changes that were made and that is why we're trying to hear from both sides on this matter. Now,
whether -- if you want to be heard on the other issue, of course, you will be afforded the time that you
need.
Mr. Graham: I'll come back on the resolution when the resolution comes up, then.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Mr. Graham: Relative to the revocable license agreement, I think you called it being proposed...
Commissioner Sanchez: The revocable license?
Mr. Graham: Whatever what's being proposed is entitled.
Commissioner Sanchez: Revocable licenses.
Mr. Graham: OK. Relative to that, it's Homestead Miami Speedway's and International Speedway
Corporation's request that we be given a full and equal opportunity to submit a proposal for the event
contemplated by the agreement that you are apparently about to consider. Now, we've not been given that
opportunity and we would respectfully request that. In that regard, may I read one sentence from the
judge's order?
Mr. Vilarello: The Chairman is accepting public comments.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. Vilarello: Interest is no there is no --
Commissioner Sanchez: Might as well put it on the record. Everything else has been on the record.
Mr. Vilarello: There is no -- you want -- you wish to make a statement; you do so until the Chairman tells
you not to speak anymore on the issue.
Mr. Graham: All right. I respectfully make that request for an equal opportunity to bid because we have
sought that and wanted that all along, and it is completely consistent with this portion of the judge's order.
"The City is hereby directed to comply with all applicable competitive bid procedures and thereby to give
88 April 11, 2002
to Speedway a full and equal opportunity to submit a competing bid and to have its bid fully and equally
considered before entering into any lease" -- now the next part of this I think is very important -- "or any
contract for use of the City's waterfront property for motor car races." Again, we respectfully request that
equal opportunity to make a competitive proposal on this event.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. When we deal with that, you can come back...
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are you done, sir?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, he is.
Mr. Graham: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, he's done.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because I continue to be baffled. Your argument is that you've never had an
opportunity to be a competitive bidder. Since day one, your argument was -- wasn't a good deal for the
City; it's bad for downtown; it's a losing proposition; it's bad for the park; it's a bad race weekend; there's
another event; it's going to be a cloudy day. That has been your argument. Your argument has never --
since the beginning, it wasn't, "Hey, we'd like to compete on it. We don't want to race in downtown."
And now, at the end, you've basically have changed your course. You know, if you guys want to have a
race here, there's other days that you guys could have a race. I would like to have five races a year
downtown.
Mr. Graham: So, you're continuing to preclude us from submitting a competitive proposal on this event...
Commissioner Sanchez: No, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me.
Mr. Graham: If I may respond to you, please, sir?
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Excuse me.
Mr. Graham: If I may respond to your point.
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Excuse me. We're trying to deal with an issue that's represented by
administration. You will be afforded the time that you need when Commissioner Teele...
(INAUDIBLE COMMENTS)
Chairman Regalado: I know but he's talking about (inaudible) or whatever you have on item on your blue
page. We are dealing here with the agreement. I would ask you to direct your comments to what the
administration has presented that you have heard.
Mr. Graham: May I respond to Commissioner Sanchez's question that he just asked?
89 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: You may.
Chairman Regalado: You can do that, of course.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a public hearing.
Mr. Graham: I beg your pardon?
Chairman Regalado: You can do that. Go ahead.
Mr. Graham: Thank you. You said from day one that's not so. Day one, on this proposed race, day one
was when the City entered into an exclusive no bid arrangement with Raceworks. We were completely
foreclosed from that process and then coming forward after that and making the statements that we made,
was the only course of action available to us. We could not try to participate because we were not
afforded an equal opportunity from day one.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because you didn't want to participate. You wanted to kill the race.
Mr. Graham: You didn't seek to find out whether we wanted to participate or not.
Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Clerk, could you provide me with the minutes of the first meeting that
we had here pertaining to this item, please?
Mr. Graham: I believe, the first --
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Graham: -- public meeting...
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: If I could encourage the Commission to consider the matter, which is before you, which is -
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm trying to do.
Mr. Vilarello: --the recommendation of the revocable license agreement by the City Manager
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm trying to do. But let me tell you. The City Commission is willing
to sit down here and listen to everyone and all that you all have to say, but we're -- what we're trying to do
is to keep an order. If we want to address first what the administration and then, when we take the other
item, you can, you know, discuss and challenge whatever comments have been made. So, I would rather
ask you to defer your comments on the bidding process and your timing and all that when we discuss the
other item, if that's possible.
Mr. Graham: That would be all right. I'll certainly comply with that. I want to ask Commissioner
Sanchez if I'm responsive to his question, and should we continue or did you want to defer that until...
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm going to wait for the minutes because my (inaudible) understanding is that
90 April 11, 2002
you never -- since the beginning, never even questioned (inaudible) competitive. It was bad for the City.
It's a horrible thing for the City. The park has no right to hold a race there. It was just one negative thing
after another that derailed us and then, all of a sudden, now it's wait. It's a good deal. It may be a good
deal. We want to have a part of it. And then I'm going to find that because I'm going to show you that on
the first minutes that we had, it was never -- the word competitive bidding never came out on your behalf.
Mr. Graham: And I will go back to the characterization from day one -- day one was an agreement
between the City and Raceworks and a proposed deal before we had any opportunity to participate. We
were foreclosed from the opportunity to participate, and at the first publicly noticed meeting, regarding
this...
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry to interrupt again. But let me advise you that they're simply
trying to make a record with regard to a matter that is not before you. The only matter before you -- the
item before you now is a revocable license agreement...
Chairman Regalado: I just don't want to be rude, although I can. I mean, I don't have any problem being
rude, but, you know, I keep asking ...
Mr. Graham: This subject, with due respect, was not one that I brought up. Commissioner Sanchez did.
Chairman Regalado: Well, the Commissioner has all the right, but he wants to wait until he gets the
minutes to, you know, reinforce what he's saying. So, let's give him that courtesy to wait for the minutes
that he's asking, which, by the way, Madam City Clerk, are you going to have that soon for Commissioner
Sanchez?
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): We're just pulling them right from the file right now.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Then we wait on that matter for the Commissioner to get minutes and he'll
decide if he continues this debate, but we're going to hear from Raceworks. Anybody from Raceworks
that wants to make comments on the administration's proposal? Any comments or do we hear from
members of the City Commission on the matter that is at hand right now? Go ahead.
Willy Bermello: Mr. Chairman, Willy Bermello, with address at 2601 South Bayshore Drive, representing
Raceworks. We have been working hard for the last couple of weeks together with your staff, and we
fully endorse the new agreement that is presented to you today, which takes into account the concerns that
was stipulated in the order by Judge Kendall, and we're in full support.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you. Any comments from members of the City Commission regarding
the Administration's proposal?
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, just as a point of information --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: -- before you close the public hearing portion, we did advertise this as a public hearing, so
you may wish to solicit comments from the public.
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. I already did. Anybody who wants to comment on this matter? Do
you wish to continue your presentation on this matter, Mr. Lopez? Do you wish to bring somebody else
before we close the public hearing? You wish to rebut anything that the administration has said on this
matter that was presented to us?
91 April 11, 2002
Mr. Lopez: Mr. Chairman, I think we've put in all the matters we need into the record. I do want to
acknowledge that Mr. Frank Rollason has given us a copy of the agreement. We have received previous
copies so, we're comparing them and make sure that we have what you're voting on today, but we want to
acknowledge that for the record. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move to accept the administration's proposal.
Chairman Regalado: First we close the public hearing, and we have a motion by Commissioner Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been second by Vice Chairman Winton.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Attorney, Mr. Lopez began his speech or discussion by stating
that -- well, I assume that I'm correct in hearing that Mr. Lopez may have stated that this item was not
publicly noticed.
Chairman Regalado: No, he did not say that. He said that they haven't read the agreement and he just
said, for the record, that Mr. Rollason gave him a copy.
Commissioner Teele: So, Mr. Lopez is not complaining about the notice. He's complaining about the
speed reading ability, or what's the complaint?
Mr. Lopez: We're always complaining, of course, but it was publicly noticed. I think it was
acknowledged the last time the Commission took this up. We've seen the advertisement. We appreciate
that. I acknowledge that you can take final action (inaudible). It's just a comparison of the documents
making sure we knew what it was all about and, unfortunately, we may not have been able to put every
other comment we felt on the record, but that's part of this process.
Commissioner Teele: As a courtesy to you, Mr. Lopez, the time is now 4:45. Would you like to take an
hour? Maybe we could recess this item and give you an opportunity to read it?
Mr. Lopez: I would greatly appreciate that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, you have a motion and a second, but we can always just hold this in
abeyance and let him read it. I mean, I think what we're dealing with now is clearly a record being built
and I think one hour -- we're going to be here until 9:00 tonight and I'm just trying to figure out a way to
make Mr. Graham miss his flight or frustrate his pilot so that he'll be obliged to spend the night because
you see --
92 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: He'll spend it in Homestead anyhow, so let him go home.
Commissioner Teele: -- the only way we can pay for our public infrastructure is through our hotels and
our visitors. So, it's very important whether you stay in Homestead or Hialeah doesn't matter. Just don't
stay in Broward. That's the main thing. So, we need to do that. The other point that I'm very interested
in trying to get on the record is that the judge's order -- Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner Teele, if I could just -- one point on the document. The document itself
was distributed with the agenda package and that...
Commissioner Teele: Four days ago.
Mr. Vilarello: Five day rule. What he was just handed was a highlighted or redlined copy of the
differences.
Mr. Lopez: Right.
Mr. Vilarello: So, he's had --the agreement...
Commissioner Teele: Is that the reading impaired version of ...
Mr. Lopez: There you go. Just want to make sure we have the same document that's all.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I think you should -- as a member of the Bar; you should take counsel's word
for it. Counsel, Mr. Attorney, is this the same version that he has?
Mr. Vilarello: It's a highlighted version of the changes (inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: And as a member of the Bar, are you telling him that?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. However...
Commissioner Teele: Would you take his word, Mr. Lopez?
Mr. Lopez: Commissioner Teele -- yes, sir, I will take his word. We don't need a deferral accordingly.
Chairman Regalado: OK. That's good.
Commissioner Teele: So, that's helpful on that point. Now, the point that I want to be very clear on the
record, Mr. Attorney -- Mr. Attorney, the point that I want to be very clear on is that the comment read by
the judge, did that make reference to the proposed event that we're discussing today or did that make
reference to the event that was scheduled to have taken place in March?
Mr. Vilarello: It dealt with a revocable license agreement that the judge felt that was scheduled for an
event in April.
Commissioner Teele: In April. So, when the judge made that reference, he was talking about the April
event?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes.
93 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: In the direct context of that?
Mr. Vilarello: The order is broader than that, Commissioner, and it is our intention to address that
(inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: Well, would you read the language that he just read again? Because the point I
want to be very clear on the record on is that anyone could have submitted for the matter that is before us
today? In other words, the permit that we're talking about today -- the instrument that we're discussing
today is for what day?
Mr. Vilarello: It's October 5t"
Commissioner Teele: OK. October 5th. And I just want to determine whether or not ISC or Daytona
Speedway or Homestead Motorsports in any way was told they could not apply?
Mr. Vilarello: Absolutely not, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So, they would -- once the judge ruled, they were free to apply from any day in the
month of May, June, July, August, September, October, November, or December?
Mr. Vilarello: The court's order doesn't really address...
Commissioner Teele: I'm not talking about the court's order. I'm talking about the facts.
Mr. Vilarello: The order precluded no one from submitting an opportunity to hold a racing event in the
City of Miami. Concluded that -- it did not preclude anyone.
Commissioner Teele: I'm not talking about the order. I'm saying, did you or the Manager's staff, to your
knowledge -- that's the only question that I've asked. You know, listen to the question. Did you or
anyone on the Manager's staff say or give any instructions that would preclude ISC from having
submitted for an opportunity to run a race in the month of May?
Mr. Vilarello: No, sir.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: In the month of June?
Mr. Gimenez: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: July or August or September?
Mr. Gimenez: I'll make it easy. We haven't said no to anything.
Commissioner Teele: So the race that is before us now, that we're talking about, is a race that is going to
be on two days, is that right? Three days?
Mr. Vilarello: It's a race event weekend and it's a Friday, Saturday, Sunday.
Commissioner Teele: Of what month?
94 April 11, 2002
Mr. Rollason: October.
Commissioner Teele: Was there any reason that ISC did not submit for that event for that date? Was
there anything, Mr. Rollason that you all said or did that precluded them?
Mr. Rollason: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: If they were to submit for any day between now and December, with the exception
of those four days, will you give them the same careful review and benefit of the opportunity to run that
race as you're giving these folks?
Mr. Rollason: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, would you do so?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I just want to make sure that we're complying with the judge's order. Because the
judge is saying give him a chance and my resolution, when we get around to it, is going to basically
codify this, I would hope, but I want the record to be very clear that they have every chance -- they've had
every chance. There's been no estoppels or favoritism. Anybody could have applied. You could apply --
well, let me ask you this: do they have that date next year, Mr. Rollason?
Mr. Rollason: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Do they have the second weekend in October of 2003?
Mr. Rollason: As we stand here today?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
Mr. Rollason: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we -- maybe you should inquire at a later time, in writing, as to whether or
not they can take that date, 2003. So, one year they have this weekend; the next year someone else has it,
and let's just rotate that weekend and then, in the meantime, any other weekend -- how many weekends
are there a year?
Mr. Gimenez: Fifty-two.
Commissioner Teele: About 52. So, we've only taken out one, is that right?
Mr. Rollason: There's 51 left.
Commissioner Teele: So, let's be very clear that you should give them the opportunity to apply and give
them fair and careful consideration for the other 51 weekends. As far as I'm concerned, we should give
them a priority right here today, once we pass this, of pick of the litter.
Commissioner Sanchez: And that's...
Commissioner Teele: Any weekend in 2003.
95 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: And that's a lot of weekends to pick.
Commissioner Teele: Any weekend in 2003 that they want. As far as I'm concerned, they ought to get
two bonus points because they missed -- they missed applying in a timely way this year. So, let's do that.
But let's open that up and give them five or six days -- 10 days to do that and then there could be no one
saying that they weren't given a fair chance. Because I think even a judge knows that you can't run Super
Bowls at the Joe Robbie Stadium or the Pro Player Stadium on the same weekend, just like you can't run
two races on the same race track on a given weekend, and I don't think the judge's order is saying they've
got to have that weekend. I think the judge's order is saying they've got to have an equal shot at getting
access to the venue, and I'm in agreement with this judge. So, I just want to be clear on the record that we
will give them an opportunity, if they submit consistent with the judge's order, Mr. Rollason.
Mr. Rollason: And, for the record, from the administration, there have been no overtures, applications,
for any weekend, including the same weekend that they have at this present time, that they've asked for.
There has been no -- nothing that has come to us indicating that they're interested in running a race.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, the one thing that I would hope you would do is prepare a
memorandum -- do the legal research. It's more factual -- and inform this board and be prepared to
inform the court as to what Aacus is, and how the schedule of events works consistent with deference to
antitrust laws, that this is not something that we're discussing, that the racing industry has a calendar and a
clearing to deal with these things. Obviously, the court did not take notice of Aacus in the last
proceeding, and Aacus should very much be a part of our lexicon and understanding of how this
scheduling process worked, and I'm sure Mr. Lopez is going to -- is an expert or will soon be an expert on
Aacus.
Mr. Lopez: If I may just correct two points.
Chairman Regalado:
Excuse me. The public hearing is closed, although Commissioner Teele wants to
recognize Mr. Lopez.
Commissioner Teele:
Mr. Lopez.
Chairman Regalado:
And Mr. Bermello.
Commissioner Teele:
Very important member of our community and I'd love to hear anything ...
Mr. Lopez: I appreciate
that Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele:
Wonderful wife.
Mr. Lopez: (Inaudible) continue that.
Commissioner Teele: And I appreciate ...
Mr. Lopez: Yes. I think there's only two factual points that need to be corrected. Obviously, the rest
(inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: She got mad at me because I was short to you the last time.
Mr. Lopez: I think she correctly did so.
96 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. All right.
Mr. Lopez: That is my better half. Commissioner, I think you raised two very important factual points
and I want to make sure this record is not absent with the truth. First of all, if you directed the question to
your staff and your attorney, you're correct but you may want to review the press conference, as well as
The Miami Herald account of the Mayor's statement regarding the future of this race in the City of Miami,
and the full force and effect behind that statement that impacted our ability to submit (inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: I think you're well aware of the Charter of the County and the City and the fact that
the Mayor's statements generally, in a legal context, will be viewed as dictum.
Mr. Lopez: We'll talk about that in court. And the second is the factual statement that Raceworks has not
sought additional dates. Well, I have it and I'll give it to your City Attorney, a copy of an e-mail from
Jose Gell.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we -- the issue is not Raceworks asking for date. The issue is ISC ...
Mr. Lopez: How can we ask for dates if they're already taken in 2003 and 2004?.
Commissioner Teele: They're not taken.
Mr. Lopez: They're taken.
Commissioner Teele: Is there a date you'd to like, on behalf of your client, ask for the remainder of this
year, other than the one that has already been taken?
Mr. Lopez: We certainly would want to consult with our client.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, this is an interesting e-mail. It's sent from Jose Gell to Jose Gell. So, I
guest he must be talking to himself.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I think it's very clear that if these fine people would like to run a race, this
body is open to it. There is no reason, earthly reason in the world, why we would not want to have an
additional 20, 30 or a 100,000 people downtown, and speaking for myself, I will more than give ISC and
any other race promoter an opportunity to run downtown if it comes to a vote of this Commission. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman..
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Teele -- Commissioner Teele, do you wish to hear from Mr. Bermello to -- I
think he wants to address something that you said.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir, I always like to hear from Mr. Bermello.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Mr. Bermello: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Commissioner Teele, I'd like to explain one thing
regarding our dates, and then make an offer to the City or to ISC. First, in selecting a date in October, it
was a function of which dates both Le Mans and CART could race in the same weekend. We had a
couple of options. One of those options would have gone head to head I guess ISC and the Winton Cup.
We decided no way. We would not do that. The one date that was available was the first week in
October. That's the week that we chose. If ISC and George Lopez and Mr. Graham that are here today
97 April 11, 2002
find that the first week in October is what they would like to have in 2003 and 2004, we would give that
to them. This year we think we should go in the same premise that the City has always gone with any
kind of event, which is on a first come/first serve basis, but we'll be a gentleman. If they'd really like that
first week in October, we'll give them that in 2003/2004. We'll take the second week or the third or fourth,
whatever's available. But we are more than open to work with them in finding dates that are compatible
to their schedules and to our schedules. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. So, we're closing again the public hearing. There is a motion and a second.
We are not voting, Mr. City Attorney, just to be clear on the record. Mr. Bermello spoke of next year and
2004. What we're voting here today is what?
Mr. Vilarello: This is simply a revocable license agreement.
Chairman Regalado: For this year, 2002?
Mr. Vilarello: This is a long-term agreement, which is revocable.
Mr. Rollason: It does identify the first race.
Mr. Vilarello: Identifies the first race.
Mr. Rollason: Which is that October race. From then on, there are no identified races, as did the original
agreement identified the first race date as October 5, 6, and 7. I mean, April 5, 6, and 7.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: And what this does, just to be clear, is, Mr. City Attorney? What this does -- if
approved, what it means? It means that the City Manager has the authority to start a process to grant a
permit to run the race in October?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. This agreement provides for a process with the ultimate issuance of a permit to run a
race in October.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Madam City Clerk, call the roll one by one.
98 April 11, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-379
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
BETWEEN RACEWORKS, LLC ("LICENSEE"), CITY OF MIAMI AND
BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST ("TRUST") FOR
RACE/MOTORSPORTS EVENTS IN DOWNTOWN MIAMI, FOR AN
INITIAL PERIOD OF FIFTEEN YEARS, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND
THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS,
SUBJECT TO LICENSEE PROVIDING THE CITY AND THE TRUST
WRITTEN NOTICE OF ITS INTENTION TO EXERCISE ITS OPTION AT
LEAST SIXTY DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE
AGREEMENT, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH OTHER TERMS AND
CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT, SUBJECT TO THE
LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA, DATED AUGUST 8, 1990, AND SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL
OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS PRIOR TO THE CITY OF MIAMI EXECUTING THE
AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER AGREEMENT WITH ARMY CORPS IF
ARMY CORPS PROPERTY IS UTILIZED.
(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
Chairman Regalado: Motion passes five to zero. Commissioner Teele, you're recognized
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Frank's got something else he needs to address.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Rollason: We have one other item, Mr. Chairman. First thing for the record, I'd also like to state that
the license agreement that we just discussed has been on our website and it's on there for the public to
pick up off the City's website, since it was finalized. The last item that we wish to bring you aware of is
that we're in the process of working on a Memorandum of Understanding with Raceworks, which we are
prepared to bring back to you at the Commission meeting on the 25`h, April 25`h, which will enable the
99 April 11, 2002
administration to issue a race permit, not tied to the agreement that you've just passed. It will be
independent and it will stand on its own merit, and the Memorandum Of Understanding would protect the
City from all the business and protection that we want that we have taken from the agreement, but not to
tie that particular permit to any agreement. It would be issued on its own merit. I would stand on its own
and that once that Memorandum of Understanding, if it were to be passed by the Commission, we would
then subsequently issue a race permit with the requirements that they meet all of the requirements by the
statute. And we're going to bring that back to you on the 251h
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: So it's just an informational piece?
Mr. Rollason: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, we don't need to do anything?
Commissioner Sanchez: Why the 25th?
Mr. Vilarello: That's the next Commission meeting.
Mr. Rollason: That's the next Commission meeting.
Commissioner Sanchez: Why can't we have it sooner than that? I mean, the more we delay this -- I
mean, I'm prepared to call a --
Mr. Rollason: It would take a special meeting to...
Commissioner Sanchez: -- special meeting to get this over with in the next five days.
Chairman Regalado: Well, we have an executive meeting on Monday. We can convene...
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but I'll be out of town.
Chairman Regalado: We can convene a public meeting immediately after the executive meeting.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm going to be out -- I get back Thursday.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We got only three members.
Commissioner Sanchez: And, Thursday, we have a press conference here.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think, as I stated in the first item that y'all going to bring up -- everybody
knows where I stand on this quite clearly.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, you'll be here Thursday?
Vice Chairman Winton: Which Thursday?
100 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: If we have a special meeting on Thursday, you'll be here?
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to understand from the Raceworks people if this is so urgent that it -
- this piece needs to be passed in a special meeting before the next meeting on the 25`h. I don't want to
come to another Commission meeting. I've got plenty of things to do. So, if it was crucial for moving all
of the parts forward for the race, then I would consider doing it, but I want to hear from them that that's
crucial.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Bermello, he's asking you -- could you --
Mr. Bermello: Vice Chairman Winton, it is crucial because of the timing, even though the race in October
seems to be an eternity away, the amount of work that has to be done with CART, with their teams, with
their sponsors, with the media, is an incredible challenge, and every week is a week that we won't have
later on. Having the permit and the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) allows us to finalize all of
our races with CART and to move on with our work and if this Commission can meet next week, it would
be a real help to us.
Commissioner Sanchez: And if I may, the quicker we get the MOU, the quicker we could assure in
writing that we're going to have protection for the City because (inaudible) it's a liability that I'm
concerned with.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, how long will it take to get the MOU done?
Mr. Rollason: We're just about finished with that document to bring to you and we're working on the
issues dealing with the permit now, and by Tuesday or Wednesday of next week, we would have final
documents and we'd be able probably to get them to you by Monday so that you have them ahead of time
or possibly Friday.
Vice Chairman Winton: Tomorrow's Friday?
Mr. Rollason: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, it's that far along. You could be done either tomorrow by Friday, Monday at
the latest?
Mr. Rollason: Yes. It's pretty much done. Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is the Commission available at 1:30 on Thursday?
Chairman Regalado: Make it two, so anybody...
Commissioner Teele: Two o'clock.
Chairman Regalado: Two o'clock.
Commissioner Sanchez: Two o'clock is my conference.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. I am not going to come here and spend all damn afternoon, period. I'm not
going to do it. If there's a commitment -- afternoon is my time to do my business and I'm not going to get
here at two o'clock and spend all afternoon here. If there's some commitment that we're going to take as a
101 April 11, 2002
Commission, no more than thirty minutes to do this, I'll come any time you want. But if we're going to
get here and, you know, everybody's -- we've got all kinds of things to talk about and everything, I'm not
going to do that.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Johnny, let me ask this to the City Attorney. Mr. City Attorney, of course this
will be a public hearing. So, we cannot guarantee, Johnny, that this will take half an hour.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, as the Chairman, you have the absolute right to limit how much time
people speak from the public hearing --
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. If I have the direction...
Vice Chairman Winton: -- to control what they're talking about and to control this Commission.
Chairman Regalado: If I have the direction of the community, I have the -- the Commission, I can be
firm, rude, and even nasty. So, if --
Vice Chairman Winton: I will vote for you being all of those.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second it.
Chairman Regalado: Then it's half an hour. The administration...
Vice Chairman Winton: Fine. I will come.
Chairman Regalado: The administration will have.
Commissioner Teele: What day you're talking about?
Commissioner Sanchez: Thursday. Thursday at two o'clock.
Chairman Regalado: Thursday. Next Thursday...
Commissioner Sanchez: At 1:30.
Chairman Regalado: 1:30?
Commissioner Sanchez: 1:30.
Vice Chairman Winton: What, this Thursday at 1:30?
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no. Next Thursday.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. But what time?
Chairman Regalado: 1:30.
Commissioner Sanchez: The 18`", 1:30.
102 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Fine.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fine.
Chairman Regalado: Let me just make sure. You're going to have this ready, not for Wednesday night,
right?
Mr. Rollason: Not on Wednesday night. I'm...
Chairman Regalado: You're going to have it on the Commissioners' office by early Tuesday or...
Vice Chairman Winton: I thought you said Friday or Monday. Tomorrow or Monday.
Chairman Regalado: Or Friday or Monday.
Mr. Rollason: Yes. I think...
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Lopez will have a copy same time we do?
Mr. Gimenez: No later than Monday, sir.
Chairman Regalado: No later than Monday. If we don't have it no later than Monday, then we're going to
have a problem here. So, the Manager has committed to have this no later than Monday. So, the
members of the Commission will have plenty of time to go over and come back here. We don't need to
ask that many questions. This will be a public hearing, but we will limit...
Commissioner Sanchez: On the 181h
Chairman Regalado: On the 18`h. It will limit...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I would move that a special meeting to take up this matter, pursuant to a public
hearing, be held at 1:30 on April the 18`h, in the City Commission chambers.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: This is a motion and a second. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
103 April 11, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-380
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION (PENDING)
(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: 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: Madam City Clerk, see that this is properly noticed as a special Commission
meeting. OK. Commissioner Teele, anything you want to add on this matter?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the attorney -- I have a matter, as you know, that
invites the International Speedway Corporation, Homestead and any other entity in the nation or, quite
candidly, any other entity world wide involved in motor racing, to submit an unsolicited offer or proposal
for a race or motor sports event in the downtown Miami area. Is there anything -- is there any reason why
we should not go forward with this, Mr. Attorney?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to ask if Mr. -- Ms. Lucia Dougherty, I guess, is there any reason why we
should not go forward with this resolution that is a world wide solicitation for anyone?
Lucia Dougherty: We have no objection to that.
Commissioner Teele: Then, Mr. Graham, is there -- would this be helpful to you and maybe convincing
104 April 11, 2002
your board that this is something -- a good thing for you all to do?
Mr. Graham: Well, may I ask a question or two about it?
Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh.
Chairman Regalado: You're recognized.
Vice Chairman Winton: This isn't a public hearing.
Chairman Regalado: I promised -- no. This is a public hearing.
Vice Chairman Winton: This is not a public hearing.
Chairman Regalado: On this matter?
Vice Chairman Winton: It is not a public -- we don't even have -- is this a public hearing?
Mr. Vilarello: This is a public meeting.
Commissioner Teele: I think we ought to -- out of deference and courtesy...
Mr. Vilarello: This is a resolution to be considered by the City Commission. If you wish to take
comments from the public, it is your discretion to do so.
Commissioner Teele: I'd just like to hear the gentleman's concerns, Commissioner.
Mr. Graham: I have a copy of the resolution, proposed resolution. Thank you for that. The first question
is, is this an invitation to submit a proposal, a competing proposal, for the race under consideration or for
a different race?
Commissioner Teele: It is an open and unsolicited invitation for which, I would assume, you should take
note of the fact of our actions today and our pending action on the 18th, but what I think you should do is
just take note of it.
Mr. Vilarello: The resolution itself, Commissioner, calls for the Manager to publish it and he should take
into consideration the comments by the Manager in that publication and he should be advised to act
accordingly.
Mr. Graham: Is it the intent of the resolution to allow us to make a competing proposal for the race in
question?
Commissioner Teele: It is my intent to open the door very wide to you and your organization to make
any proposal that you'd like to make.
Mr. Graham: All right. The proposed date -- Section 4 of the proposed resolution, the proposed date for
motor sports race event should not conflict...
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, the question's been answered several times. He's
105 April 11, 2002
going to keep asking it until he gets the answer that he wants, which assists them in connection with the
ongoing litigation. The resolution speaks for itself. My suggestion is that you consider that item at your
discretion.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move the item.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: Public hearing is closed. So, there is a motion and a second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor state by saying "aye."
Vice Chairman Winton: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. I did not vote on it
and I do want to make a comment.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead. Public hearing is closed. Commissioners' comments.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think that, frankly, I'm not sure that, as a body, that our Law Department
shouldn't be looking to the justice department for a restraint of trade issue tied to Homestead Motor
Speedway. It seems to me that at every step, their entire intent has been to block this race for their own
monopolistic purposes. They have never come to us once, ever; have not been to us yet, looking to really
run a race in downtown Miami. Their management has been here, by their own admission, two or three
years, have not once come to the City of Miami, not until someone else decided that they wanted to hold a
race, which could be appropriate on the streets of the City of Miami that we hear from anyone from
Homestead. I think these are monopolistic practices where they're trying to corner a market for
themselves, and I think we are missing the boat if we don't pursue, from a legal standpoint, that very issue
about restraint of trade. And I, for one, because of their particular actions, because, as far as I'm
concerned, they haven't acted in good faith, I would be very reluctant to enter into any kind of an
agreement with the people from Homestead because of their actions. So, my vote is not going to be in
favor. I will invite and be willing to invite, by this motion, any sanctioning body that exists out there that
wants to run a race in the City of Miami, but I, as my vote, will not enter into or be in favor of trying to do
business with the folks from Homestead Motor Speedway.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: Let's call the question. All in favor state by saying "aye."
Vice Chairman Winton: No.
Chairman Regalado: One no. For three ayes. OK.
106 April 11, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-381
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY COMMISSION MANAGER
TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM, BETWEEN RACEWORKS, LLC ("LICENSEE"), CITY OF MIAMI
AND BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST ("TRUST") FOR
RACE/MOTORSPORTS EVENTS IN DOWNTOWN MIAMI, FOR AN
INITIAL PERIOD OF FIFTEEN YEARS, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND
THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT FOR A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS,
SUBJECT TO LICENSEE PROVIDING THE CITY AND THE TRUST
WRITTEN NOTICE OF ITS INTENTION TO EXERCISE ITS OPTION AT
LEAST SIXTY DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THE
AGREEMENT, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH OTHER TERMS AND
CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT, SUBJECT TO THE
LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA, DATED AUGUST 8, 1990, AND SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL
OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS PRIOR TO THE CITY OF MIAMI EXECUTING THE
AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER AGREEMENT WITH ARMY CORPS IF
ARMY CORPS PROPERTY IS UTILIZED.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, just for the record. Mr. Lopez, I reviewed the minutes, sir, and
we all remember that meeting, the one that we were called brainless and heartless by Commissioner
Sweeney, and the only thing -- the only statement -- and it was all based on not being a good deal, Bob
Graham, your statement. This is not a good deal for Miami or its citizens and I could back that up with
facts, and the closest word to competition -- the closest word that got to competition -- and I marked it
down here somewhere -- oh, the closest word to competition that I found was "I said it in corn -- I said it
in competition," which competition could mean anything from holding the race and deluding ours. That's
the only statement as close as I could get to in competitive bidding on the first meeting. So, at never in
that meeting -- and I went through it all -- that you ever used the words, "Hey, we weren't involved in the
process in competitive bidding."
Commissioner Teele: The record will also show that they indicated that they did not favor races because
they were unsafe; that they -- that these street races were inherently unsafe, and other such language. But
107 April 11, 2002
I want to say on the record --
Commissioner Sanchez: And the failures of others.
Commissioner Teele: And the failures of others. I want to say on the record, I deeply respect -- and I
think everyone in this City knows that I have a great personal respect and professional respect for my
colleague Vice Chairman Winton, but I don't agree with his statement or he's certainly not speaking for
me in the context that I will give -- and I'm certain that this Commission will give you a more than fair
hearing, even though we don't agree with the matter and even though we're all frustrated at being called
heartless and stupid and brainless and all the kinds of things. We know that those utterances are out of
frustration. Our role here, as Commissioners, is to enforce the constitution, the right of due process and
equal protection, and we take that oath very seriously, and I could assure you that the management and
the attorneys will give you more than a fair hearing if you were to apply for a race. Obviously, we have
differences of opinion on the dais, just like we just had a three to one vote. That's part of democracy. But
I don't want you to leave here, Mr. Graham, as you get in your Learjet, or is it a Sabreliner? I don't want
you to think for one minute that you won't have a fair and open forum to come before us. Thank you.
Mr. Lopez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I also found out one thing after reading these
Chairman Regalado: Come on.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, really, just one. Art, you talk a lot, Art.
Chairman Regalado: OK. OK. We've done this.
108 April 11, 2002
18. AGENDA ITEM 24 -- AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT TO THE
INTERLOCAL AND LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA) FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CHARTER SCHOOL.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton, you have, I think, an item that you want to deal with, and we have
some people in the audience. Let's try, let's try to follow, you know, the number of people that were here, and then
we'll go back to the regular agenda. I think, Johnny that you have the charter school issue.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK, yes. So we can go to that issue?
Chairman Regalado: I don't know what item it was.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not sure, either, which item it is.
Chairman Regalado: You asked to be heard --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Regalado: -- around 5:00, 5:30.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): 24.
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we have the folks here for downtown charter school issue?
Ms. Thompson: Item 24, the charter school.
Chairman Regalado: OK, we're going to do that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is the answer "yes" or "no"?
Chairman Regalado: OK. Johnny, if I may -- OK. You said that this would be three minutes, more or less?
Vice Chairman Winton: Should not be more than three or four minutes.
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): If even that.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Immediately after that, we'll take that, immediately.
Vice Chairman Winton: Who's going to do the presentation, Mr. Manager? Lori is?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Lori is.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, she is. OK.
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): Commissioners, I just distributed a revised resolution to you. The
resolution is to amend the interlocal agreement between the City and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority)
for the development of a charter school. This was approved by the Commission back in December. And the
purpose of this amendment is to delete the requirement that the DDA caused the sub -lessee to pay, a payment in lieu
109 April 11, 2002
of tax. This reso is different from that which is in your package in that we have deleted the issue regarding the
relocation of the parking. We have come to an agreement that the City would have the ability to relocate the
parking, subject to meeting certain conditions. And that would include providing a reasonable setback of the
training facility, providing that the school would still have adequate access and have a drop-off, and that the
alternative parking will be in a location reasonably close and at a reasonable cost.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Do we need to hear from --
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we need -- We need a resolution. We need a motion. Or is there a
Ms. Billberry: Yes, you do.
Chairman Regalado: We need a motion to approve the waiver.
Vice Chairman Winton: To accept the --
Chairman Regalado: To accept the modification of the agreement. That's all we need.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. So move.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion to accept the amendment to the agreement approved by the City Commission last
December, you said?
Ms. Billberry: That's correct.
Chairman Regalado: Last December. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I second for discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Second. Go ahead, Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Chief?
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yes, sir, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I understand that you had identified the site to have your training center; is that correct?
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. We approved at the City Commission to use a portion of this lot for the charter
school. And I understand that the rest of the lot was going to be used for the training center. Now, what we are
proposing here now is that the training center isn't going to be --
Vice Chairman Winton: No, no, just the opposite.
Chief Martinez: No, Commissioner. We had a meeting today with DDA, Mr. Avino, and others where, you know,
we came in agreement that if they relocate the parking, we feel right now, without having the whole design of the
building, there should be enough land there for us to have the training center next to the charter school.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. All right. That was only -- that was only my concern.
110 April 11, 2002
Chief Martinez: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: To make sure that if they're going to use the entire land, then we have already identified
another site for the training center.
Chief Martinez: No, sir. We worked this out earlier.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We'll close the public hearing. There is a motion 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 for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-382
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING THE PROPOSED INTERLOCAL AND
LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ("DDA") FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF A CHARTER SCHOOL, TO BE LOCATED AT 305
NORTHWEST 3RD AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, APPROVED BY THE
CITY COMMISSION ON DECEMBER 13, 2001, TO DELETE THE
REQUIREMENT THAT THE DDA CAUSE THE SUBLESSEE TO PAY A
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAX; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT, AS AMENDED, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM.
(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: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
111 April 11, 2002
19. (A) COMMISSION RECOGNIZES VISITING GUESTS FROM HOLLAND -- KLM DUTCH
AIRLINES.
(B) PRESENTATION BY SOLID WASTE COMMITTEE.
Chairman Regalado: Now we go to the presentation by the Solid Waste Committee on the one-armed bandit. You
got to be -- I'll tell you about the one-armed bandit. We had so many calls in my office, and people can be very
passionate about that kind of change. Some people resist change. You want to --
(INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, well, we'd rather hear from -- yeah, let's -- How long is that, Mr. Patterson?
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: May I inquire as to -- We appear to have some visiting guests in the back, and I was
curious if anyone wanted to just say hello and welcome them, whoever they may be.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner Winton, apparently, they're from Holland.
Chairman Regalado: And who are they?
Vice Chairman Winton: From Holland?
Ms. Thompson: They're from Holland, and they came out just to visit the site, because they knew -- someone told
them it used to be an airport.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ah.
Chairman Regalado: From Holland?
Commissioner Sanchez: We thought you guys were the new group, rock and roll group.
Ms. Thompson: They're spokesmen.
Chairman Regalado: Are you from.
(INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Sanchez: Welcome. Welcome to Miami.
Chairman Regalado: Amsterdam or the Hague?
(INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: You have in the Hague a beautiful boardwalk. Beautiful seaside. The hotel, the castle over
there, and the little places where you eat the fish with bread, like that, the herring. Great. I've been there, man.
Love that country. OK.
112 April 11, 2002
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Regalado --
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Patterson.
(INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: Oh, you want to --
(INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: Oh. Well, that's great. Before we go on, let's hear from the gentleman. He's accompanying
the visitors, and they're here for a very special occasion. KLM, the Dutch Airlines.
Capt. George J. Price: They'll pronounce that for you, some of them will. But it's a very difficult airline, KLM, to
say the words, themselves. But incidentally, my name is George Price. I'm a former Pan Am pilot, used to fly out
of Dinner Key. And these ten people have come from Holland, and they have an office here. And there's a meeting
of the KLM, some of the executive KLM here in Miami now, which is quite a good thing to have. And the first
thing they wanted to see was the old Pan Am buildings here. And they're here in the back. Those are all the young
guys. They're all from KLM. They're all from Holland. And they're from around the world now. Some of them
live in Singapore, some in other places in the world. But they really wanted to see all this old Pan Am operation.
And we want to thank you very much for letting us introduce them.
Vice Chairman Winton: You're welcome.
Chairman Regalado: Well, you're welcome. And welcome to Miami City Hall. I assure you that maybe during the
Pan Am years, when they traveled to Cuba from here, this was a very busy terminal. But maybe it was a little
boring. But now, this City Hall is not boring, as you can see. We have some very passionate discussions. And we
love this building, and it's very historic. And we feel -- we don't get paid as much as we hope someday we will, but
we enjoy the building, and we enjoy the visitors like you. So thank you very much. Thank you.
Capt. Price: Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. One-armed bandit. You know, they broke a tree in front of my house the other day.
Commissioner Teele: You've been having hard luck with this government stuff.
Chairman Regalado: Hey, man, I -- with that and the police, I'm out of luck, you know.
Commissioner Teele: No. I think it's Public Works' time next. I guarantee, you're going to have a tack in your
tire.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Patterson, go ahead.
Clarence Patterson (Director, Solid Waste): Yes. Can we have the lights on this side out? No, not that one. Mr.
Chairman, members of the Commission, I'm ready to go.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Your name?
Mr. Patterson: My name is Clarence Patterson. I'm Director of the Solid Waste Department, City of Miami. Just
for the benefit of the new Commission and the Mayor, I want to take this opportunity to explain a little bit about
how this program got started, and why, and so forth. As you know, this Commission directed this administration to
113 April 11, 2002
appoint a committee to look at ways and means to improve garbage collection service to the citizens of the City of
Miami and enhance the aesthetics of the community without any additional cost to our citizens. The Commission
asked the Manager to appoint a committee to do this, and that committee, of course, was appointed in September of
2000. The committee had several meetings and looked at various ways and means of improving the City's garbage
collection and trash collection services throughout the City. And that committee took approximately six months
looking at different methods of collection around the country. And, of course, subsequently made a report to you on
its findings and its recommendations. You further authorized the Manager by resolution to go ahead and spend the
necessary resources to develop the recommendation of the committee. And the committee -- the Department, of
course, went ahead and started to develop a program. The committee, of course, was appointed, and as you're
looking up there on the board now that we now have our PowerPoint going, the various people that were on that
committee -- and each Commissioner's district had a homeowners association appointed, a head of that association
appointed from each Commissioners' district. And a part of this included all of the known homeowner's
associations within the City of Miami at a final meetinat the Upper Eastside. And, of course, this finalized in a
report to you that was submitted to you on March 26` of 2000 -- 2001, I should say. And you authorized the
administration to go ahead and proceed with the program. One of the --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me.
Mr. Patterson: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: When you say we authorized the administration to proceed with the program, you mean the
pilot program.
Mr. Patterson: That is correct.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Patterson: Yes, sir. That was done by resolution of this Commission. Some of the things that became
necessary for us to do in order to get the program going was to develop an educational program to educate citizens
as to how this new program was going to work. And I think you had that brochure passed out to you up there. That
was mailed out to about 26,000 residents in the pilot program. And we got started with the first deliveries to -- this
is all a part of that educational brochure. There's some five pages of it, so keep going. That's one of our employees
there. And your Commissioner -- in your district, Commissioner Regalado. Those are some of the do's and don'ts.
You have that in front of you there. Keep going. Keep going.
Chairman Regalado: Clarence, I have a question.
Mr. Patterson: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Why -- Is there a way that they don't have to go back and forth on the same street?
Mr. Patterson: It goes down one side of the street and down the opposite side because it only picks up from one
side. It has to cover the same street twice. The additional educational material that you're looking at is in the
container, the lid, the lid of the container, which is the do's and don'ts, as it informs citizens what materials should
be placed in the container and what should not be placed in the container. That's all a part of that brochure that you
have in front of you. But this is for the customers' immediate attention that they can see that they're not supposed
to put certain materials in the container. Additionally, we have developed the white brochure that you have where
we are now actually involved in trying to educate citizens to the use of that container after they've received it at
their homes. We've blitzed the communities to work with them again in terms of showing them what they should
do and what should not do, in order to make the program work successfully. This that you're looking at now is a
map of the City of Miami. The green, the light green areas are the pilot routes that we now have the system in. The
114 April 11, 2002
light pink looking color there are the ones that are still on the manual collection system. There's a total of 46 routes
within the City of Miami. That yellow line that you see divides the north from the south. There's half of those on
the north and half in the south. We started our first pilot route on March -- I mean February 6`h. That would be
Route 101. And if I can get this little -- that's this route here. And as of March 30`h, we finished up with this route
right here, which is in Coconut Grove here. All of that green area is now fully equipped with the study program.
And the program is moving along successfully at this time. You asked us to look at what kind of complaints that we
were getting from the program. We did not start categorizing the complaints initially, but we have logged 1,700
complaints throughout this entire program. And most of them was complaints that dealt with how to use the
containers and when would --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. You said, Terrance, Point 33 stolen containers?
Mr. Patterson: Yes. But we didn't start that at the initial. We started that about three or four weeks into --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): It's a comma, comma, 33.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, I know. Oh, you mean 33 containers have been stolen?
Mr. Patterson: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Or .033?
Mr. Patterson: Since we -- 33.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Twenty-five requested additional containers? Why would they do that?
Mr. Patterson: They want additional ones because they have large families, and they generate more waste than it
takes -- that one container would hold.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I have a comment on the additional containers. We have to be very careful with the
additional containers, because people that have illegal units may be requesting an additional container to have their
illegal unit garbage picked up. I have noticed driving around my district, I have seen places where they are placing
the regular container that we're providing to the residents f the City of Miami, and next to it, I have seen the older
type of container that the people used to have before. So we have to be very, very careful. And I suggest that if
we're going to provide a second container that we go out and inspect the property. Have Code Enforcement go out
and inspect the property where we're going to assign the second container, because right now, we're going to be
seeing more and more illegal -- identifying. We're going to be identifying more illegal units in the City of Miami,
due to this process. Thank you.
Mr. Patterson: Thank you, Commissioner. And for your information, we already are doing that. But these requests
are coming from single-family homes. Most of them are from Coconut Grove or the Upper Eastside, where you
have large properties, single-family homes, not the three and four -unit, you know, buildings. We are --
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-five -- excuse me. Twenty-five from properties with private service? What would
they do then?
Mr. Patterson: I'm sorry?
115 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-five requested the container, and they have private service?
Mr. Patterson: Yes. We're finding that using our ARPS system that we are not billing some properties that we find.
We're finding some people that either don't have private service, nor City service. So when we find that, we are
saying that if you are a four -unit, five -unit building, you have to have the services of a private hauler, one of the
certified haulers that do business in the City of Miami. If they are single families and they're not on the tax roll,
then we are working that out to get that onto the tax roll so that these people start paying the proper waste fee to the
City.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You have distributed 26,000 containers. How much in percentage of the City have you
done?
Mr. Patterson: That represents 20 of the 46 total routes that we have in the City of Miami. And that covers all of
the various ethnic areas of the City, as well as the high-density, low-density, lower economic income areas, as well
as the more affluent areas throughout the City. 65, 66 --
Mr. Gimenez: You have sixty-five, sixty-six thousand accounts. So it's 26,000 of the 66,000 we have.
Chairman Regalado: Has the trash pickup diminished in the areas that you have delivered those containers?
Mr. Patterson: The trash pickup has decreased, because the people are using the containers to put the trash in, rather
than putting it in the hole out front, as they had been doing in the past. And one of the things that are not shown
here that I should say to you, that we have started a program filling those holes and utilizing the compost that we do
at Virginia Key, along with the fill material, so that grass will grow over those holes and we won't have those holes
out there be so unsightly, as we've had in the past.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, let me add that in my district, I have noticed that ever since we started
using this system, the neighborhoods are looking cleaner, and the streets are looking cleaner than what it was
before. So it seems to be having, you know, a good effect on the neighborhood.
Chairman Regalado: The only complaints that I have are from elderly residents, who cannot, by themselves, push
the containers. I have brought to the administration four cases already. And I have responses on two. I don't know
about the other two. I've done that about three weeks or four weeks ago. I don't know what happened to the other
two. I know that you went to one of them, and the woman, the lady said that, you know, she was OK. But she had
no way of getting the container on the back, on the backside of the house through the side. But --
Mr. Patterson: Commissioner, I went to visit with her personally and took someone with me, of course, who could
translate. She has a place that she can put it. She just didn't realize she could put it there. It's away from the street
and it's not seen from the street, and she's happy to go ahead and use the container. You -- the response should be
on the way to you on that one.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Patterson: Also, the question arose about how many accidents we've had since we've gone to this, as far as
waste collectors are concerned. We're the -- how many injuries we've had, rather. The bar chart that you're
looking at on the wall there shows you the first quarter of 2001 versus the first quarter of 2002. And over to the
extreme right in the automated system, there have been zero injuries since we went to the automated system. The
difference between the other two bars represents the remainder of the department. And there's a total of -- there's a
total of 59 accidents in the first quarter of 2001, and there's a total of 43 accidents in 2002. That would represent a
percentage reduction in accidents of 27 percent. And the automated collection, of course, has had zero injuries.
116 April 11, 2002
Now, that's a quick comparison, based on what we've been able to tabulate so far. If that continues, that will be a
substantial reduction in our workmen's compensation costs in the year to come.
Commissioner Sanchez: Less cases in workmen's comp.
Mr. Patterson: Yes. Should we keep going? That's a quick snapshot of what you saw prior to the containers being
out there. Many times, dogs got into the bags, and stuff was scattered all over the place and what have you. It was
kind of a dull day, and we had a ham camera that took this -- I mean -- a ham camera -- a ham operator that took
these pictures. That was me. That's what it looked like when you're looking down the street and seeing different
kinds of cans, and cans turned over, et cetera, et cetera. Now, this is what you see when you look down the same
streets, of course, with the one-armed bandit. They're standing out there like little soldiers waiting to go to war.
And most of the people that we've talked to enjoy them. It is true that it's different. It's something different that
people haven't had before. People are asking different questions, so on. But one of the big questions that we're
having right now, Commissioners, is -- and Mr. Chairman -- is, "When am I going to get my cans? When are you
going to finish up the rest of the City?" And we're having to tell citizens that as soon as we finish with this test
areas, then, of course, if resources become available, we'll go ahead and do the rest of the City, if the Commission
approves it. I have here today with us some of the members who served on this committee. Where are we?
Chairman Regalado: We have Rick Ruiz, Albena, Hattie.
Mr. Patterson: I would just like for -- some of them happen to live in the area. Step over to the mike over there.
Some of them happen to live in the areas where some of these containers are. So not only did they work so
diligently with us to help us develop this program, but if you have a few words that you would like to comment on,
please do so at this time.
Commissioner Sanchez: And let me just say the difference --
Mr. Patterson: With your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: The difference is day and night.
Mr. Patterson: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the only accident that we had so far was the tree in front of Commissioner Regalado,
but he has not been having too much luck lately.
Mr. Patterson: And that wasn't the one-armed bandit.
Chairman Regalado: That's true. That's true. And it almost -- it almost fell on my car. Rick Ruiz.
Rick Ruiz: Thank you. Commissioner, it's been great to work with other citizens --
Chairman Regalado: Name and address, please.
Mr. Ruiz: Rick Ruiz, 3150 Southwest 15`h Street. It's been great to be on this task force. It's different from a lot of
things I've ever done to review these type of things. But it was great to work with other citizens who are also
interested in the aesthetics of our community. And I think this is great. My area doesn't have it yet. But we are --
we could see the change. It's a great improvement, and we feel that -- A lot of my neighbors are also saying,
"Yeah, when are we going to have it?" So we see that the way they put it across and the way the people have been
working it, it's been great for us. And we appreciate all the help we've gotten from the department.
117 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Albena.
Albena Sumner: Albena Sumner, 1360 Northwest 37`h Street, Miami, Florida. I was here last year when we made
the first presentation, and Commissioner Teele said, "You know you're going to have a problem with this pilot
program, because people are going to want to know why they don't have cans, why some people have cans and
other people don't." And that was the first thing that came about. One of the good things about it is how
cooperative everybody has been. I mean, I'm really surprised, because, for one thing, we will not have garbage
that's put out on Friday that sits out there Saturday, Sunday, until the garbage people come on Monday, and have
the dogs and the cats, and everything. And everybody is very proud about this. They don't have to buy the garbage
cans, and that these will be replaceable. And I think it's a very good thing for the City. It's something that's been
implemented across the State prior to this. And it will cut down tremendously on workmen's comp. Thank you.
Hattie Willis: My name is Hattie Willis, and I'm the President of Communities United. And my address is 5510
Northwest V Avenue. The first time I came before this Commission almost five years ago was about this same
issue, trash. Our association went out and picked up over 500 tons of trash. I got to know Mr. Patterson real well.
So I'm pretty sure that when he started to do this, my name rung a bell. That is just -- that picture doesn't even
describe what's going on in the City right now. I want to piggyback on what the Mayor said yesterday. We need to
clean up the City. And that's the bottom line. It's an embarrassment to us as citizens that live here when people
come from other cities to come to our City, and it looks like this. And this is a tourist industry town. Now, I don't
know how much it's going to cost to finish this, but what I'm saying is, Mr. Manager, we need to do it right away.
If you come down my street, I want you to come and see the difference. The kids and I got out and went to the
neighbors and explained to the people how to put the trashcans out, because the first day it was -- it didn't work,
because they just came and dropped off the trashcans. So the people didn't understand. But what we tried to do
when we first went out and bought trashcans to give to the people was that -- in my community, it's so blighted that
people couldn't afford the trashcans. Now, they're so proud to have the trashcans and put the trash in the trashcans,
we rarely have to fight with anybody about anything. So I'm piggybacking on the Mayor. The Mayor made a
promise yesterday. He said he wants to clean up the City. He's not here. Mr. Manager, get the money, to give Mr.
Patterson the rest of his money to fix this, because it's awesome. And whoever -- and we said -- they said it was
one Commissioner that was having a problem. We need to talk to the Commissioner. I think it was your
community that was having a problem, some of the people. The only problem that we're having right now is the
people saying, "When are we going to get our trashcans?" So I hope that, you know, you're with us, because this is
working. OK?
Chairman Regalado: I am. I am with you. And I -- see, we were told that this would lower the number of
employees needed, and decrease the trash pickup. I don't know about that, but I know most of the people, it not the
-- almost -- it's almost a majority of the people like this system. The only problem that we have, and especially in
my district is elderly people that live alone. And they are so fragile that they cannot move the container. As I said,
we have resolved some of the cases, and if need be, we are going to pressure for a special pickup inside their homes.
But other than that, I agree. I agree.
Ms. Willis: Well, I just want to address that issue. When we were out in Miami Springs, when Mr. Patterson took
us out to see the areas that had the trashcan, some of the elderly that lived in Miami Springs, they could not take
their trashcans out. And what Miami Springs does is has a gentleman that goes out to their homes and pull them
from the back to the front for the elderly, and then they pick them up. Now, since we have additional manpower,
because we don't have two or three guys on a truck, Mr. Patterson had talked about with us -- because one of the
things that we didn't want to do is displace people's jobs -- he talked about using another additional person in order
to do some of those things. So if that's the problem that you're having with the elderly, then that's something that
Mr. Patterson has addressed, and he put inside the proposal when he gave it to you, because we want to make sure
that the elderly are taken care of, and also, we want to make sure that no one is displaced from their jobs. OK?
118 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. The other thing, the other thing is that I think, Mr. Manager, that now that, you know,
people are getting to know these containers, we should prepare some kind of information, one of those -- not a --
what we got on the mail, but just a regular piece of paper that is able to be pasted or it will stick to the container,
telling the people when is trash pickup, because the problem that we keep getting is people bringing out the trash
three, four, five days in advance. You know, in my area, it's a Thursday pickup. And yet, on Sunday, there are
people that are placing the trash in the street. And it really looks bad. And I think that we need to make another last
effort before we enforce the code and punish those people. And I think it's very visible, and it's -- it doesn't take
the time of the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) offices or any other employee if you have in your trucks
some kind of plain piece of paper, you know, that you just paste on the container, advising in English, and Spanish
and Creole, in this area, trash pickup is on Thursday, trash pickup is on Tuesday or Friday. And it probably will
work. If it doesn't work, then we have to go to the next level, which will be code enforcement. But it's important
that we try.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Like a bumper sticker? Like a --
Chairman Regalado: Like a bumper sticker.
Mr. Gimenez: Stick it on. OK.
Chairman Regalado: Like a bumper sticker. It says: Your trash pickup is on this area on Thursday. Remember to
put your trash the day before. That's it.
Mr. Patterson: Commissioner, we're doing that right now. It's actually a doorknob hanger that you could hang
onto the door, and it's in Spanish, English and Creole. This about concludes our presentation, Mr. Chairman. We
thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. Do we need any action from the Commission, Mr. Manager?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir. I guess in the future, in the near future, we'll be coming to you and
giving you the final results, and then asking for your approval to either go with the system or not go with the
system, all the way.
Ms. Sumner: So we still really don't have an answer as to when. What are we -- what are -- As committee
members, especially, what are we to tell our --
Chairman Regalado: Well, what do we tell the neighbors?
Ms. Sumner: Yeah. The pilot program is supposed to last, and then the Commission is going to decide whether or
not we're going to go forward with the program? I'm sorry.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You will get an answer. We will have an answer for you precisely on the meeting of the
25th. Is that -- by then, they would have figured out how much and the areas. Mr. Manager --
Ms. Sumner: Mr. Patterson?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: On the 25`h, on the 25`h, you will have an answer, or an update for the Commission when and
where the next step of the pilot program, or if we're going to go Citywide, when and where we're going to start
going Citywide.
119 April 11, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. We can give you a schedule and, you know, how it's going to be implemented on a
Citywide basis.
Chairman Regalado: And on that, would you be able to attend, Albena?
Ms. Sumner: That is the meeting --
Chairman Regalado: That is the meeting of the 251h
Ms. Sumner: Of this month?
Chairman Regalado: The 25`h of this month.
Ms. Sumner: OK. Yes.
Chairman Regalado: You can be here at 9, and probably by midnight, you'll be out.
Ms. Sumner: We appreciate it. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Ms. Sumner: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I think that we should thank the committee for the work and for their effort to help the
City in this situation.
Ms. Sumner: You're welcome. It's our pleasure.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you very much.
Ms. Sumner: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you.
120 April 11, 2002
20. ROCKA MALIK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF BALERE, INC., A LOCAL NON-PROFIT
ORGANIZATION, ADDRESSES THE COMMISSION CONCERNING A FEE WAIVER FOR THE SECOND
LANGUAGE FAIR ON MAY 18, 2002 AT ARMBRISTER PARK.
Chairman Regalado: We need to do something for somebody who has been here since nine o'clock. This is a
personal appearance. It's Rocka Malik, Executive Director of Balere, Inc., a not-for-profit organization. This is a
fee waiver for the Second Annual Language Fair on May 18 in Armbrister Park. And we have a recommendation
from the administration. I'm sorry, I know that you have to pick up your child, but you know.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): What item is that, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: It's Item 5 on personal appearances. And go ahead, ma'am. Your name, address.
Rocka Malik: Rocka Malik, 11371 Southwest 176`h Street.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Ms. Malik: We've having a language fair in Ethel Mae Armbrister Park, 236 Grand Avenue, on Saturday, May
18`h, and we're requesting a fee waiver for the park usage and for the show mobile stage.
Chairman Regalado: OK. The administration, please. Hello?
Christina Abrams (Director, Public Facilities): Christina Abrams, Director of Public Facilities. We recommend
that the City Commission approve an allocation of funds from the Special Events account in the amount of three
thousand, seventy-four dollars and ten cents for the costs concerning this event, which would include Police, Fire,
Solid Waste and the Parks and Recreation fees.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Any comments from the members of the Commission? Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been seconded. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes. Thank you.
121 April 11, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-383
A MOTION GRANTING THE REQUEST OF ROCKA MALIK, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF BALERE, INC., A LOCAL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION,
CONCERNING FEE WAIVER FOR THE SECOND ANNUAL LANGUAGE
FAIR ON MAY 18, 2002 AT ARMBRISTER PARK; ALLOCATING $3,074.10
FROM THE SPECIAL EVENT FUND FOR POLICE, FIRE, SOLID WASTE
AND PARKS AND RECREATION FEES.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, 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
122 April 11, 2002
21. ACCEPT BID OF WEATHERTROL MAINTENANCE CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-020, FOR ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF AIR
CONDITIONING AIR HANDLERS AND AIR-COOLED CONDENSING UNITS FOR
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $160,980; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS (See #3.3).
Chairman Regalado: It's 5:56 and --
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I have -- there were two CA (Consent Agenda) items that were -- that we --
Chairman Regalado: Deferred.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- deferred until the evening. That's CA -3 and CA -6.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I've got the questions answered that I wanted and would like to move CA -3
and 6.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion to approve CA -3. It's air conditioning, right? CA -3.
Vice Chairman Winton: CA -3 is air conditioning, and CA -6 is —
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Two motions.
Vice Chairman Winton: --authorize groundwater, surface water and soil contamination clean up.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. City Attorney, can he -- can we do this both or we have to do it separately?
Mr. Vilarello: CA -3 --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I believe we got to do separately.
Vice Chairman Winton: And 6.
Mr. Vilarello: The motion -- and the motion should be for CA -3 and then --
Vice Chairman Winton: CA -6 separately.
Mr. Vilarello: -- CA -6.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Motion for -- to approve CA -3 on the consent agenda was pulled this
morning. It's been moved and second. All in favor, say "aye."
123 April 11, 2002
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-384
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE BID OF
WEATHERTROL MAINTENANCE CORPORATION, THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE
AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-
020, DATED JANUARY 28, 2002, FOR THE ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION
OF AIR CONDITIONING AIR HANDLERS AND AIR-COOLED CONDENSING
UNITS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$160,980; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS,
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 312025.299301.6.830.
(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: It passes.
124 April 11, 2002
22. APPROVE ACQUISITION OF GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER AND SOIL
CONTAMINATION CLEANUP SERVICES FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
CONTRACT NO. DBD PROJECT NO. E98-DERM-01, $1,406,100; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. (See #3.6)
Vice Chairman Winton: So move CA -6.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: CA -6 has been moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been second by Commissioner Gonzalez. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-385
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
APPROVING THE ACQUISITION OF GROUNDWATER, SURFACE WATER AND
SOIL CONTAMINATION CLEANUP SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, AS
MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN "EXHIBIT A", ATTACHED AND
INCORPORATED, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CONTRACT NO.
DBD PROJECT NO. E98-DERM-01, EFFECTIVE THROUGH JULY 17, 2003, AND
ANY EXTENSIONS, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND BY MUTUAL WRITTEN
CONSENT OF THE PARTIES FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN
A TOTAL ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,406,100; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 311700.429301.6.340,
SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.
(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.
125 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
126 April 11, 2002
23. DIRECT MANAGER TO PROVIDE AT FIRST COMMISSION MEETING OF EVERY MONTH,
MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT OF CIVIL SERVICE BOARD MEETINGS; MANAGER TO
PROVIDE REPORT DETAILING ALL DIRECTIONS GIVEN TO ADMINISTRATION WITH TIME
FRAMES; MANAGER TO ACCEPT IN-KIND DONATION, $10,000, FROM COCONUT GROVE
TIMES, BRICKELL POST AND SOUTH MIAMI TIMES FOR CITY'S "KEEP THE SUN SHINING
CAMPAIGN".
Chairman Regalado: We're done now with CA items. We have -- remember, that we have the Mayor is
coming here with some visitors from the State. And then we have the item of AT&T (American
Telephone & Telegraph). However, we have still some Commissioners' items. I still have mine, but we'll
defer that.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I have one also.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead. So, we'll wait to 6 o'clock.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mine should be very brief. It's really a request of the City Manager and it
relates to -- the first request relates to Civil Service Board. I would like to get a report, monthly, at the
first Commission meeting at each -- the first Commission meeting each month, and I would like an
activity report of the Civil Service Board, that identifies the number of actions that -- Civil Service Board
meets monthly? Every two weeks.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Every two weeks.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, fine. So, the first meeting of -- Commission meeting of each month, where
we're provided with a report that shows the number of items that are taken before the Civil Service Board.
And in some sort of ranking, the disposition of each of those items. As an example, if the management is
coming with a recommendation to discipline some employee and the recommendation is approved or
disapproved by the Civil Service Board, that's the kind of report that I would like to see monthly and I
want to see the columns that show current month and year-to-date so it could be -- in addition to the
current month's activities can be cumulative. So, that's one issue.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: The other report that I would like to get monthly -- again, it could be the first
Commission meeting of each month. This Commission passes at every single meeting some action item
that gives the management the responsibility to go do something by some time frame. And I think -- and
I can't keep up with all these things. And I would like an ongoing report that shows the action taken by
the Commission, the directive given to the management, what that action was, the date by which that
action is to be completed, and a showing whether that action has been -- is still open or whether it's past
the date. The stuff that's been accomplished can fall off the report, but the stuff -- any of the open items is
what I'm really looking for. And that's all -- and then, Commissioner Regalado, the last thing relates to
the meeting -- I mean, the resolution we passed accepting -- this is on the J. Walter Thompson thing?
Chairman Regalado: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: I had a note sent tome from Elena Carpenter, who would like to commit to that
project, from the Coconut Grove Times, the Brickell Post, and the South Miami Times, an in-kind amount
up to ten thousand dollars to become a part of that project. So --
127 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. We need to add that to the resolution that was approved. So, if the Manager
will note that, and the City Clerk will make that in the record. CA -21 that was amended. Now has ten
thousand dollars more in donation from Elena Carpenter, publisher of Coconut Grove Times and Brickell
Times --
Vice Chairman Winton: Brickell -- Coconut Grove Times, Brickell Post and South Miami Times.
Chairman Regalado: Brickell Post and South Miami Times. That would be a donation to the City in
space worth ten thousand dollars. Oh, thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's all I have.
128 April 11, 2002
24. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CORAL
STATION AT BRICKELL PROJECT TO COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED
FOR MAY 9, 2002 AT 6 P.M.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's 6:02. Let's start dealing with some of the PZ (Planning & Zoning) items.
And there is an item, Item Number 1. It's about a Major Special Permit for the Coral Station at Brickell
Projects. Since the last meeting, I'm sure that the Commissioner from the area, Commissioner Sanchez,
has been getting a lot of emails regarding the hearing time and the date. I have to -- some of the people
related to this, Mr. City Attorney, did send several communications, asking for a deferral on this for the
25th. I always ask -- I always respond by saying that we were committed to a public hearing that would
be long and controversial on Camillus House on the 25th. So, the 25th was out of the question, that I
would look to the Commissioner of the area and the residents and the developers to decide if we want to
hear this now, today or defer this to some other time. But for your information, the 25th is, I think, out of
the question because it will be unfair to you and to the members of the Commission. We're going to have
a lot of people on this public hearing and we don't want to do this to you, to have you wait for hours and
hours and hours, so --
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): We would recommend May 9th for a
continuance on PZ -1.
Commissioner Teele: So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to hear from the public.
Chairman Regalado: Yes. This is a public hearing. And we need to hear from members of the public.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I just want to hear from them on the deferral request.
Chairman Regalado: On the deferral, yes, absolutely. That is what we expect. Anybody on the deferral
proposal? Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Colin Veater: Good afternoon. Colin Veater at 41 Southwest 18th Terrace. I'm here as president of the
South Miami Avenue Homeowners' Association, and together with the Miami Roads Neighborhood Civic
Association, we would like this item before you to be heard today. It's been properly advertised. We
have a group of people that are going to be coming 6:15, 6:30 for this item. And we're somewhat just
confused as to the process here, because we were told that it was on the 11th. We later heard from the
attorney of the applicant that they were going to -- there was some confusion. They were going to ask for
a request. Then we got notice from the Chairman's office that this item was going to be heard today, so --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman --
Chairman Regalado: No, I didn't say --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my request for a deferral.
129 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: No, I didn't say that it was going to be heard. I said that I -- I'm planning -- I am
ready to hear this matter, but I would look to the Commissioner of the area and I told everyone that the
25th we have committed almost the evening. So it would not be -- and that was responding to some of
the correspondence --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: -- from people asking about a deferral or asking if this has been deferred to the
15th.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Under the Jennings Rule, as you are aware, we're not allowed to discussion the
issue with either party or communicate through emails. Although, I have received emails, I have not
opened them up. I understand their concern. This is a very controversial issue.
Chairman Regalado: No. Excuse me. Joe, I did consult with the City Attorney. The City Attorney said
that on the matter of a scheduling, we can communicate with --
Commissioner Sanchez: No. I understand.
Chairman Regalado: -- the people.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm not saying—
Commissioner Teele: You know what, Mr. Chairman, I'm confused. I made a motion to defer. The first
thing the gentleman gets up and says, this thing was previously discussed -- scheduled for the 11th. They
came -- now they're here --
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, could you yield, please?
Commissioner Teele: I'll be happy to.
Commissioner Sanchez: The only concern and it's a valid concern on the residents is that they do not
want to be misguided or miscommunicated or there's a -- you know how the games work around here.
And then they don't have an opportunity to come here. I assure you that my office will make sure that
you are fully aware. The City will do everything they can to make sure you're properly notified of every
meeting that's going on. Now, this is a very controversial meeting. We have yet to open up one single
item on our agenda. It will be a midnight agenda today again. And what I think is in the best interest of
everyone here is that we go ahead and defer the item to the 9th. I understand that the 25th is going to be
also a voluminous agenda. I guarantee you that you will not be side broaded (sic) on this one. You will
know when we're going to meet and you'll have proper notice.
Commissioner Teele: I just want the record to be clear. I withdraw my motion. So, if somebody wants to
move it --
Commissioner Sanchez: I make the motion to defer to May the 9th.
Ms. Slazyk: Continued.
130 April 11, 2002
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Continue to May 9th.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry. Continue to May 9th.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second your motion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second, for discussion. Go ahead. You want to --
Mr. Veater: No. I mean, the only comment is, I think it's somewhat presumptuous that we were told that
it was the 11th. We have come. We heard that there are all these issues going back and forth that it might
not happen. Obviously, the applicant has not even chosen to come. We thought you, as the board are the
only ones to make that decision. You've made it and we'll accept it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Colin?
Mr. Veater: I heard. I've heard.
Commissioner Sanchez: Please accept it. With all due respect --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. Excuse me.
Mr. Veater: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: The item was on the agenda for the 11th. That is -- it is, or was, if we vote to
continue. Is on the agenda. That's what I kept telling the people, that it's on the schedule and everybody
that asked about the 25th, I said 25th is out of the question. If the area Commissioner and the people
wanted to hear -- the area Commissioner has just made a motion and we will hear from -- he's saying you
represent—
Judith Burke: Yes. May I address the Commission on this issue?
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Ms. Burke: My name is Judith Burke, practicing law with Shultz & Bowen, 201 Biscayne Boulevard in
Miami. And I represent the applicant on agenda Item Number 1, Coral Station Limited. And I would like
to explain to the Commission what happened. When we were originally setting these down for the
hearing, there was going to be a hearing that was originally set in March, which was going to fall out in
the second night of Passover, and we had asked that it not be scheduled on that agenda, and that we --
asked the public hearings section when they would want to schedule it. And they told us that they would
like to schedule it on April 25th. So we said that was fine with us. We got our consultants ready and we
were going to be ready on the 25th. When I contacted the office to find out when I could get a copy of
the agenda, I found out that even though we had confirmed in writing to the City that we were going to be
scheduled on the 25th, the person we confirmed it to unfortunately was out ill for three weeks and
someone -- when you did eventually cancel the meeting you had scheduled for the second night of
Passover-- had not made the notation and it was scheduled for the 1 Ith. This happened on April the 1st. I
called all of our team to see if we could get everybody available on that date, instead of the 25th. And,
unfortunately, some people had scheduling conflicts. They'd already made other hearings or
appointments. So, we were unable to do so. So, I called the City and they said, not to worry. We're the
ones who -- it was an inadvertent error. It's our fault. What we will do is, we will ask for a continuance
at the hearing. You don't even need to come to the the hearing. I confirmed that in writing, with a letter
131 April 11, 2002
that was signed by the City. But I was very concerned because there has been a lot of neighbors-- who
both for and against the project who have come to other hearings, and I wanted to make sure that they
were not inconvenienced. So, on April 3rd, I wrote a letter to Linda Koenigsberg, to Colin Veater, and to
Tory Jacobs of the Brickell Avenue Association to tell all of them that it was not going to be heard this
evening. And I attached a copy of the letter from the City, City saying we're going to ask for a
continuance because there is a mistake. And at that time, we were hoping to be on the 25th. Since that
time, the City called us and said that that agenda was full. They'd like to make it the 9th. We said fine.
So, this is what happened. We would have love -- we want to present it as soon as possible. We have
recommendations of approval from your staff. We want to go forward. This is a mistake. It happens.
Chairman Regalado: Ms. Burke, you know, the City apparently -- the staff made two mistake. One
mistake of placing this in the 11th. We didn't know anything about it. The residents didn't know
anything about it. The second mistake is to give you assurances that this will not be a problem.
Ms. Burke: No. They -- they said that they would ask for the -- I know --
Chairman Regalado: Because they don't vote.
Ms. Burke: I know that it is at your discretion to grant the continuance. They said that they would be the
one requesting it. And --
Commissioner Sanchez: Can we have an assurance that on May the 9th we're going to hear this item on
your side?
Ms. Burke: Oh, absolutely.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. That's it.
Ms. Burke: We would have-- any time you wanted it, we would have been ready.
Commissioner Sanchez: Miscommunication. Let's not dwell on the past. Call the question.
Mr. Veater: Could we ask --
Commissioner Teele: What time are you asking for (INAUDIBLE).
Chairman Regalado: What time --
Commissioner Sanchez: What time would you like time certain?
Chairman Regalado: What time --
Mr. Veater: Could we request that this be two things: That it be a time certain.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Veater: And to acknowledge we have about 35 neighbors here.
Commissioner Sanchez: What time?
Chairman Regalado: What time do you want?
132 April 11, 2002
Mr. Veater: Six.
Commissioner Sanchez: Six o'clock.
Chairman Regalado: Six?
Commissioner Sanchez: And what else?
Chairman Regalado: It will be six.
Mr. Veater: And to acknowledge the fact that we have about 35 to 40 neighbors --
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Veater: -- that are here not in support of this project. And that we'll have to make sure that they come
down. Obviously, we've asked that 6:15, 6:30 for them to come.
Commissioner Sanchez: How many are in opposition to this?
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner, could I suggest that you not do that, sir?
Commissioner Sanchez: None. I don't see any hands.
Chairman Regalado: You should have asked how many want to speak on this matter?
Commissioner Sanchez: Never mind. I don't see any. All right. Let's just defer the item to the 9th. I
mean, I apologize but we have a voluminous agenda. You'll probably be home tonight going to bed and
we'll still be here.
Chairman Regalado: So --
Commissioner Sanchez: I know, not you, Joe. You'll be watching us.
Chairman Regalado: -- So, May 9th, 6 p.m. We'll try to be ready at 6:01. So, no problem. I mean, is any
-- other than the people coming here, but --
Mr. Veater: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: We apologize.
Commissioner Teele: Next -- you want to call the question?
Chairman Regalado: We need to close on this.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor for the continuance, say "aye."
133 April 11, 2002
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-386
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE CORAL STATION AT BRICKELL PROJECT
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 104 S.W. 13 STREET, 101 S.W. 15 ROAD AND
1420 S.W. 1 COURT TO ALLOW A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 204 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 186 HOTEL UNITS, 201,400 SQUARE
FEET OF OFFICE USE, 62,333 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/RESTAURANT USE,
ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL USES AND 1,267 PARKING SPACES, TO THE
COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MAY 9, 2002 AT 6
P.M.
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.
134 April 11, 2002
25. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PRESERVATION BOARD DECISION WHICH APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL WITH
CONDITIONS FOR REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF TREES FOR INSTALLATION OF
PLAYING FIELDS FOR PROPERTY AT 2015 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE (RANSOM
EVERGLADES SCHOOL), TO COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR MAY
9, 2002.
Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -12.
Tucker Gibbs: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gibbs: You were asking for a deferral.
Commissioner Sanchez: Which item?
Mr. Gibbs: Item 12. Thirty days. This is the last time we'll be asking for a deferral.
Commissioner Teele: So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ-- wait. To a date certain.
Mr. Gibbs: Yes.
Ms. Slazyk: After what we just heard about April 25th, I -- I guess -- I don't know if I would --
Commissioner Sanchez: Ninth. You want it on the 9th?
Ms. Slazyk: May 9`h
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Mr. Gibbs: That's fine.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fine? On the 9th, OK. The 9th.
Chairman Regalado: The 9th. How many people are you going to bring?
Mr. Gibbs: We may not even have anybody here. We're hoping to have this over with, in terms of settled
out.
Chairman Regalado: And if you don't?
Mr. Gibbs: And if we don't --
Vice Chairman Winton: Hundreds.
135 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: How many people you—
Mr. Gibbs: Thank you, Commissioner.
Vice Chairman Winton: Hundreds.
Mr. Gibbs: With a little bit of-- well, from my perspective, we'll have the place filled.
Vice Chairman Winton: It'll be deferred again.
Mr. Gibbs: But I don't know.
Commissioner Sanchez: If they don't, we'll defer it again.
Mr. Gibbs: Yes.
Unidentified Speaker: And we will feel it also.
Chairman Regalado: Don't blame me.
Mr. Gibbs: Both sides. Both sides will feel it.
Chairman Regalado: Don't blame me.
Unidentified Speaker: Send them—come over to the Knight Center.
Chairman Regalado: Guys --
Mr. Gibbs: Mr. Chairman, both sides—
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Mr. Gibbs: -- will have it filled.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor of continuance on Item PZ -12, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Mr. Maxwell: This is continued to a date certain, as well, Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: May 9th, no time certain. No time certain.
Mr. Maxwell: Date certain. May 9th.
Chairman Regalado: Date certain. We didn't say time certain. Just for the record.
136 April 11, 2002
26. GRANT APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION, WHICH DENIED VARIANCES FROM
ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 605.8, MINIMUM YARDS,
SETBACKS, OPEN SPACE, THROUGH BLOCK CONNECTIONS, WATERFRONT WALKWAYS,
TO ALLOW FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 5'-0" (20'-0" REQUIRED FRONT YARD) AND ALLOW
SIDE YARD SETBACK 4'-6" (EAST SIDE) (15'-0" REQUIRED).AT 170-180 SE 14TH STREET.
(Applicant(s): Renzo Renzi on behalf of The Sail, LLC).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -2.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -2 is an appeal on variances for a project at
170 to 180 Southeast 14th Street in the Brickell Avenue area. This project went before the Zoning Board
for variances. The Department had recommended approval on two of the four variance requests. The
Zoning Board concurred. And this is an appeal on the denial of the other variances. The Department had
found that there is sufficient hardship on the property to support a variance, but four was extreme. One of
the criteria in the zoning ordinance for the variances is that it be the minimum variance necessary to get
reasonable use of the property. Two of the four were not having any kind of adverse affect on the area
and were necessary to get reasonable use -- reasonable parking template on the property, but the other two
were not found to be necessary for reasonable use of the property. So, we had recommended denial.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Lucia. Go ahead. Why don't you use this one? It's much better.
Lucia Dougherty: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the Commission, my name is
Lucia Dougherty with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. Here today on behalf of the owner and the
applicant. Joining me this evening is Renzo Renzi. He has purchased this property. So this is not a
speculative venture on his part. Also with me is Ramon Gollado, who is his architect. This is an appeal
of the Zoning Board decision to deny two of the requested four variances. And let me just show you
where they are. One variance is the alley here, which is the exact same variance that the Fortune House
was granted when they sought their variances for the parking garage. Also, there's a variance that was
granted adjacent to the Fortune House garage over here. We are also seeking a variance to the east side --
that one was on the west side-- to the east side which is adjacent to a project being considered and
actually permitted by Key Realty. We are asking for a variance on this side for 4.6 feet. Just by the way,
Key Realty got a variance for the exact same place for four feet about four years ago. We are seeking
also a variance on the ground level here for an arcade that would be sitting five feet from the property
line. The building itself would actually be sitting 18 feet back or we would be asking for a two -foot
variance in the front for the tower setback itself. Now, we think that this is a justified variance for several
reasons, and I'm going to ask Ramon to show you what could be built if we complied with all the
variances? In other words, this is the only area-- if we complied with the setbacks, excuse me-- that you
could actually park cars. You'd need this for circulation and you'd need this area for a core. So, literally,
we would have to go up another two floors for our parking garage if we were not granted these variances.
Again, I --
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry. Two floors?
Ms. Dougherty: Two additional floors, if we weren't granted these variances. This property is across the
street from a project that is being proposed by Tibor Hollo and right here. And this one is going to be
seeking and hasn't been before you yet -- but it's asking for a 25 percent FAR (Floor Area Ratio) bonus.
It is adjacent to or catty -corner also from the 257 story towers. It is diagonal again from the Espiritu
Santo and the Millennium Tower, all of which got variances on the ground floor pedestal for exactly the
same reason. It is very inefficient to have a parking garage that complies with the variance. Literally,
every single one of these buildings, the Fortune House, the Millennium, the Espiritu Santo and -- those
137 April 11, 2002
are the ones that I know of that have been granted the exact same variances that we're requesting today.
Not to grant these variances makes this garage an incredibly inefficient garage and, again, requires
another additional two floors of garage on the floor -- on the parking. Now, we have 152 units with an
average square footage of 900 square feet that at -- with the smallest being approximately 700 square foot
studio units, which are two floors in height. We have 1100 square feet is our largest units. We have 205
parking spaces. This is a condominium, not a rental project. So, we have 105 parking spaces, as
required, and we're actually providing 105 additional parking spaces than otherwise would be required.
We are seeking the variances today, not so that we can increase anything, but the footprint of the building.
Now, I just want to show you one thing also. The one that shows where the variance would be on that
side. OK. Ramon's going to describe the building in a minute, but I just want to show you that this area
on the west is the only area that we're seeking the variance. In other words, this allows us to have a
frontage that is much more open than otherwise if we've complied. In other words, if we could not have
this variance, the building could sit all the way up to this line and go all the way down to the front in here.
So, this area here would be completely blocked in with garage and this area here would be completely
blocked in with garage. So, in fact, this arrangement where we are seeking a little variance on one
particular corner is actually a better fit for the neighborhood, and speaking of which, we have the support
of the Point View Association, as well as the Brickell Homeowners' Association in this application. So,
again, this is a footprint of the building next door that was granted a building permit. This building is
literally sitting four feet from the property line and we are seeking a setback of actually four point six.
So, it's a larger setback on this side than it is on this side. One of the good things about the siding of these
two buildings in juxtaposition of each other is that on this one is the parking podium. However, the tower
is set as far to the west -- excuse me -- to the east as possible. This one is the parking podium, but our
tower is sitting as far to the west as possible. So, there is actually about a 300 foot distance in between
the two towers. Excuse me. OK. With that, I'd like Ramon to describe to you the building that he's
proposed.
Ramon Gollado: Members of the Commission, my name is Ramon Gollado, the architectural firm
Gollado Molina. I'm the architect for this building. As an architect, OK, I always try to work within
zoning regulations and things like that and work with, you know, Planning and Zoning Board, and this is
the first time that I come to ask for a variance. It's the first time, that, in working with the Renzi, I've
come to ask for a variance, and appeal a decision made by the Zoning Board. In looking at the building, I
look at it and try to design something that "A," works as far as functionality and is aesthetically pleasing.
And I truly believe that letting us do the curve here and encroaching this little piece into the setback is a
much more aesthetically pleasing solution than bringing the building broadside all the way to here and
then coming straight down and creating a podium the shape of the property. I'm trying to create a podium
that has a front, that has a side, that has a soft side to it between the other building, OK, and thus giving
the neighborhood more open area in the front here and a little more green space here than if I follow the
setback line there. That's as far as the side is concerned. As far as the front is concerned, the reason we
asked for the variance in the front was to provide a covered walkway right in front of the sidewalk, and
that is the only portion of the building that would come up to the five feet in the front. As you see here,
then once the building starts climbing, it retreats back. So, this really --what we were creating was if you
want to call it, was a front porch for the building, which compared to what's around us, which is the
service area of this building and I think the service area for the new up and coming building, I really
thought that a front porch would be something that would make the street a nicer place to walk in, OK,
instead of coming straight down.
Vice Chairman Winton: If the front porch weren't there, would the variance still be required on that
side?
Mr. Gollado: Not the five feet. It would be-- we would require an 18 -foot setback.
138 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: A two -foot variance for the building.
Mr. Gollado: Yes, correct, correct.
Vice Chairman Winton: And how far does the front porch come out?
Mr. Gollado: It comes out to five feet from the property line.
Vice Chairman Winton: Its furthest point -- its closest point to the road is five feet from the property
line?
Mr. Gollado: Five feet to the property line, right.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the front of the building is how far from the property line?
Mr. Gollado: Eighteen feet.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the Code -- OK. I understand.
Mr. Gollado: Should be 20.
Ms. Dougherty: I think that one of the things that the Zoning Department and the Planning Department
has been responding to is, they are not satisfied with the architecture yet. However, we're only seeking
variances, and the variances are going to let us know how -- where the footprint of the building is. We
still have to go through a Class II permit, in which they have all the right to critique the design and the
architecture of the building. And if they're unhappy with what we come up with, they can appeal it to
you. And if we're unhappy, we can appeal it to you. But right now the only issue before you is their
request for variance. And is there a hardship that is peculiar -- about this piece of property. And I think
you could see how "A," small it is in context of the rest of the surrounding properties and how unusual the
shape is. So, that alone would, I think, justify their request for variance and we are seeking the variance
but not as per plans on file. Because we still have to go through the Class 11 permit and I think that at that
point, the City staff can exact their pound of flesh in terms of architecture from us. Because, again, Mr.
Renzi owns this piece of property. He's not going away. He's got -- he's ready and willing and able to
develop it. It's going to be a condo. We are not seeking -- we are seeking a Class II permit for an FAR
bonus, but not for the purpose of adding additional units, because, in fact, we can have about 118 more
units in the same square footage without the bonus. So, we're not seeking these bonuses for additional
units, but instead to make larger units, but still affordable in this neighborhood.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Any comments from the public on this item? OK.
Nelly Zamora: (INAUDIBLE) Brickell Bay Drive. You want me to repeat that or you all got it?
Chairman Regalado: We got it.
Ms. Zamora: I am the president of the Point View Association and we are the closest neighbors to the
particular project in question. We have -- as a matter of record, there have been a number of people, a
number of developers coming to our area, such as the Millennium and so forth, the Jade, and now it's
under construction. We have worked very closely with every developer that has come into our area. We
believe in development, contrary to perhaps other people. We believe it's good for the City. We need to
move out of this poverty issue that we have. And in the same token, we've worked with this developer.
We have been able to move this particular parcel from a medical office building to a rental to a condo,
139 April 11, 2002
and to us that's very important because it's a commitment to the City and to us as a neighborhood. We
have looked at this project and we agree that it's a difficult parcel. It's not huge to develop. But I think
anything that sits next to the Millennium, next to the Espiritu Santo, across the street from the Jade has to
be a good looking building. It cannot be a pitiful piece of square concrete sitting there. We like what he
has designed. We have seen the options otherwise, if you remove the variances, and we don't approve of
it. So, we endorse the project and we encourage you to grant the variances so we can move on and
finalize the development of our area. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Anybody else from the public? Anybody else? Go ahead, sir. Name
and address.
Mark Steinberg: Yes. Mark Steinberg on behalf of Fortune House, 185 Southeast 14th Terrace, Miami,
33131. Quite basically, if this variance is permitted, the building will be on top of the Fortune House. It
will be matter of two feet from the pool and the garage. There will be a garage adjacent to the existing
condominium swimming pool, which will tower over it. And reduce any -- the property values of the
units that are already in existence.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Anybody else? Name and address, please.
Christiano Soares: My name is Christiano Soares. I live in Fortune House. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. It's all right. It's just ironic —
Mr. Soares: I mean, if I—
Commissioner Sanchez: --that they got the same variance.
Mr. Soares: Yeah, exactly. But I mean, I'm a realtor and I live on the side of the building who face north.
Actually is the -- as a matter of fact all one bedrooms and all the value going to drop. As soon as we have
-- I don't know exactly the height of this building, but definitely the value of the property is going to go
down. I mean, going to be almost impossible to set a value once you have a tower right in front of --
blocking the view. I mean, everything you have -- I'm sorry for my English. Three years in the United
States.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. It's not your English.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you very much, too.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Anybody else from the public? Anybody from the public? Now we
close the public hearing. Members of the Commission. Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, first of all, I'd like to comment on the Fortune House issue relative to two
points. Frankly --
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, if you excuse just a second. I forgot to swear the people that spoke, so I
need for the people that have already spoken, or those who plan to on a zoning matter to please raise your
hand and the City Clerk -- stand up and the City Clerk will swear you in.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): If you're testifying on any P& Z (Planning and Zoning) items on the
agenda, will you please stand and raise you're right hand?
140 April 11, 2002
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: Sorry, Johnny, go ahead.
Vice Chairman Winton: The Fortune House wouldn't be nearly as close to this particular property if it
hadn't sought the same variances, so there's a little bit of irony in that. And secondly, from a public policy
standpoint, our policy should never be when you're in high-rise sites to block someone else's future
opportunity to develop when there's land that is zoned in appropriate high rise land that sits between you
and wherever the water is. If you build your property back here and there's two guys in front of you,
some day those sites are going to get developed and that's just the nature of the beast. I think that the
comment that Nelly made from Point View Association about the quality of the architecture is absolutely
crucial here, and I share the same concern that she articulated as well about the past history of that site
and what we could have ended up with, which would have really been not good for our neighborhood.
And I think you have paid particular attention to and it created, at least in my view, have created -- When
I first saw this, I wrote no exclamation point, exclamation point. But that's before I had an opportunity to
both look at the project and understand what these variances are all about. Because I was concerned that
these variances were moving the whole building right straight up to the property line and I even wrote this
isn't Hialeah Gardens. But that isn't what's happening here. This design is paying careful attention to the
kind of details that's going to allow us to get, as far as I'm concerned, better green space on that site that
may not be there if we didn't allow those variances. So --
Ms. Slazyk: Yes and no. On the front, the front porch that they've created has, you know -- because of
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), I mean, not of their own doing, there's blank walls
behind it. It's a covered walkway with blank walls that goes from nowhere to nowhere and to request this
kind of a variance on the front to pull the building closer to the street when there's nothing there and it --
you know, they took advantage of another bonus that's built into the ordinance for having ground floor
retail. Well, they put this in there, you know, to kind of, you know, push an FAR increase, but their
ground floor retail is up one level because of FEMA. Again, it's not their doing, but at this time doesn't
have to be design pushing it all out to the street to cover a walkway that's got a blank wall and goes
nowhere. And that was our concern with that front setback. On the side setback, the side toward the
Brickell premiere project --
Vice Chairman Winton: Which direction is that?
Ms. Slazyk: The one with the curve. The one with the curve.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is that east or --?
Ms. Slazyk: East.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: OK. That one, our recommendation of denial on that one was based on -- you know, that
setback -- you know, just because they curved it and provided some green doesn't justify the setback.
Their garage going -- you know, height is not an issue in this district. They can go as tall as they want.
They've got Millennium right behind them. To do another level or two on the parking garage is not a big
Vice Chairman Winton: Right. I was going to bring that up.
141 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: --is not a big deal to us because they can go up higher on their parking. It's not -- height isn't
the issue. It's the design. And the way this one's designed, we wanted to increase the light and air flow
between buildings and even to bring a piece of a curve out is not necessarily --
Commissioner Sanchez: But, Johnny --
Ms. Slazyk: --justify the hardship. So --
Vice Chairman Winton: Let me ask you. If we grant the variances, can you still get at the issues you're
talking about?
Ms. Slazyk: Through the Class II, yes. There's -- they still have a Class II special permit, which will deal
-- we have some serious design concerns. You know, the parking pedestal looks like a parking pedestal.
They haven't addressed a lot of the design issues that we had and what we wanted -- we needed to
bifurcate the Class II from the variance in order to deal with one issue first and then the other.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it is -- but this is a -- it's an irregularly shaped lot and it's not that large.
Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly.
Ms. Slazyk: That's why we recommended approval of the other two variances. Remember, they're asking
for four.
Vice Chairman Winton: I understand. What I'm trying to understand here is if we grant all the
variances, do you have the tools that you need to get us the product we want? If we grant the variances,
we've given them --
Ms. Slazyk: A footprint.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- a footprint, which should give them additional tools to respond to what we
want.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely.
Ms. Slazyk: That's true.
Vice Chairman Winton: And, so, it seems to me that there's an opportunity here for a quid pro quo that
ends up with everybody being able to win. They get the footprint they need, we get all the other things
that we want.
Ms. Slazyk: Through the design.
Vice Chairman Winton: Can we do that?
Ms. Slazyk: That is possible. Yes. If you approve this -- the variances as to the amount of variance on
each of the four sides, but not per plans on file, then through the Class II special permit we will sit with
them to redesign the project.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Johnny.
142 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: She has some --
Ms. Zamora: I just need to clarify something that Lourdes said.
Mr. Maxwell: Your name, please.
Vice Chairman Winton: That who said?
Ms. Zamora: That Lourdes stated.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Your name and address, please, again.
Ms. Zamora: Again?
Chairman Regalado: For the record.
Ms. Zamora: Nelly Zamora, 1408 Brickell Bay Drive. While it might not be an issue for planning, the
height, it is an issue for us. The pedestal, if you remove the variance, the pedestal goes up in height two,
three floors. To us that's an issue because now you're blocking -- the tower in itself blocks in a way, but
when you put a pedestal and you start adding floors, now you're really blocking the view of a lot of
people.
Vice Chairman Winton: Because the parking is bigger.
Ms. Zamora: It's bigger. So --
Commissioner Sanchez: But they have -- density is not a problem here.
Ms. Zamora: Well, that might not be. But if you start endorsing that variance and they need to go up on
the pedestal in order to meet their requirements of parking, now you're imposing a penalty on us that have
to deal with a pedestal of the building. So, to us that's an issue. The height is an issue of the pedestal.
Ms. Slazyk: In other words, she's supporting the variance so that the pedestal can stay. The pedestal
stays lower but we're saying, if the pedestal goes higher and meets setback, then it isn't a bigger pedestal
going higher.
Vice Chairman Winton: It'll be smaller.
Ms. Slazyk: It's a smaller pedestal going higher.
Ms. Dougherty: But recognize that what you're sitting next to is another parking garage. That's what
you're protecting against. That's what you're protecting against.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I just want to make sure though that you can -- that -- I think there is a
quid pro quo to be had here. If you have all the tools, Lourdes, that you need to force the design
standards that we're looking for that protects everybody in that neighborhood, then I'm not sure,
particularly in an area -- a very high density area like this that we're giving anything away.
143 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: Right. As long as it's clear that it's not per plans on file and that through the Class II, we'll
continue to do design review. We are happy with that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Then I guess that said, I'm prepared to make a motion, unless y'all have
questions you want to ask?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. I'm just --
Chairman Regalado: I don't have any questions.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would move --
Ms. Slazyk: Approval of the appeal.
Chairman Regalado: To accept the --
Commissioner Sanchez: To reverse --
Mr. Maxwell: You want a reversion.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: To accept the appeal?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Isn't it --
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, Lourdes.
Chairman Regalado: Yes?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I second.
Mr. Maxwell: Accept the appeal and reverse the decision of the Zoning Board. You have two motions.
You need two separate motions.
Chairman Regalado: OK. First motion is to accept the appeal.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, that's what I'm --
Mr. Maxwell: You're approving -- you're reversing the decision.
Chairman Regalado: And reverse --
Commissioner Sanchez: And approve the five foot setback.
Vice Chairman Winton: So that's what I've moved?
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah.
144 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a 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. 02-388
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
GRANTING THE APPEAL, AND REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING
BOARD, THEREBY GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000,
AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE
6, SECTION 605.8, MINIMUM YARDS, SETBACKS, OPEN SPACE, THROUGH
BLOCK CONNECTIONS, WATERFRONT WALKWAYS, TO ALLOW A FRONT
YARD SETBACK OF 5' 0" (20' 0" REQUIRED FRONT YARD) FOR THE
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 170-180 SOUTHEAST 14
STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON ATTACHED "EXHIBIT
A," CONDITIONED UPON 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 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
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman Regalado: It passes 4 to 0. Second motion is to accept the variances.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Mr. Maxwell: No. Same thing --
Commissioner Sanchez: Reverse --
Mr. Maxwell: You're reversing -- you have two requests.
Commissioner Sanchez: The Zoning Board approved the variance for four point six feet setback.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
145 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: So, what's the second motion?
Mr. Maxwell: You have two motions. You have two variances in front of you. One is five feet front
yard and one is a four point six feet setback.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, we've passed a five foot front yard.
Mr. Maxwell: Set—side yard. Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: Now we're passing a four point six side yard?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-389
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
GRANTING THE APPEAL, AND REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING
BOARD, THEREBY GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000,
AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE
6, SECTION 605.8, MINIMUM YARDS, SETBACKS, OPEN SPACE, THROUGH
BLOCK CONNECTIONS, WATERFRONT WALKWAYS, TO ALLOW A SIDE
YARD SETBACK OF 4'6" (EASTSIDE) (15' REQUIRED) FOR THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 170-180 SOUTHEAST 14 STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A,"
CONDITIONED UPON 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 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.
146 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes 4 to 0.
Commissioner Sanchez: Just after the fact, Lourdes, on the curb -- and I'll make it very brief-- if you
take away -- and we did approve it -- on that setback on the arch that goes around, I mean, that looks
much better than anything else that I've been imagining, like -- I mean, I can't find anything else that's
going to make the building attractive.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. If it wasn't there --
Vice Chairman Winton: I trust --
Ms. Slazyk: -- at all and the whole thing was pushed back -- that was our point in the variance.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: But now through the Class II, we will proceed with design review.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving right along.
Chairman Regalado: Anymore motions, Mr. City Attorney on this matter?
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Mr. Maxwell: No, sir.
Chairman Regalado: We're done.
147 April 11, 2002
27. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE NO.
11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, 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 (2.0 F.A.R.) AT 4101 NW 11TH STREET,
1135-1187 AND 1145-1147 NW 41sT AVENUE (Applicant(s): Pell/Cruz Investments, Inc.).
Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -3. Thank you very much. Congratulations. PZ -3.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -3 is --
Chairman Regalado: It's a second reading ordinance. It's in your district, Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. And I move it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a public hearing. It's a motion and a second. Anybody from the public
who wish to speak on PZ -3? It's 4101 Northwest 11 Street. And 1135, 1187 --
Vice Chairman Winton: We got all that.
Chairman Regalado: -- 1145, 1147 Northwest 41st Avenue. Being none in the public, we close the
public hearing. It's an ordinance. Read the ordinance, please.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Is there a motion, sir?
Chairman Regalado: We do have a motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, we have a motion and second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I did make a motion.
Mr. Maxwell: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: I seconded.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
148 April 11, 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 i l 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 passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12204.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
149 April 11, 2002
28. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "MAJOR
INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL
COMMERCIAL" AT 5590 NW 7TH STREET AND 5594 NW 6TH STREET (Applicant(s): Planning and
Zoning Department).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -4, a second reading ordinance.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. It's a public hearing. It's 5590 Northwest 7th Street,
5594 Northwest 6th Street. Anybody from the public who wish to speak on this PZ (Planning & Zoning)
item? It's a second reading ordinance. No one from the public. I close the public hearing. Mr. City
Attorney, read the ordinance. Roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE
10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5590
NORTHWEST 7`h STREET AND 5594 NORTHWEST 6`h STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES,
TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES" TO "GENERAL COMMERCIAL"; MAKING
FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was 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 Vice
Chairman Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12205.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
150 April 11, 2002
29. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000,
CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY
CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-3 "MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL" TO R-3 "MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" WITH AN "SD -
19" DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY OF 1.00 AT 1245-1271 NW 2ND STREET, ETC. (Applicant(s):
Planning and Zoning Department).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -5 is a second reading ordinance.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: It was moved by --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- Commissioner Sanchez. This is Sanchez district. He is not here. It has been
moved and second. It's a public hearing. Anybody from the public wish to speak on PZ -5? 1245, 1271
Northwest 2nd Street, 420 Northwest 12th Avenue, several addresses and SD -19, FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
overlay of 1.00. Read the ordinance. Could you repeat those numbers? Roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PAGE NO. 35 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION
FROM "R-3 MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "R-3
MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH AN SD -19
DESIGNATED F.A.R. OVERLAY DISTRICT WITH AN F.A.R. OF 1.0," FOR THE
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 1245-1271 NORTHWEST 2ND
STREET, 1227, 1231, 1232, 1244, 1251, 1252, 1257, 1258, 1267, 1268 AND 1276
NORTHWEST 3RD STREET, 1228, 1229, 1230, 1234, 1235, 1259, 1260, 1267, 1268
AND 1269 NORTHWEST 4TH STREET, 1228, 1229, 1236, 1244, 1245, 1252, 1253,
1268 AND 1269 NORTHWEST 5TH STREET, 1228, 1236, 1246, 1254, 1258 AND
1274 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, 420 NORTHWEST 12TH AVENUE, AND 219,
227, 303, 321, 327, 335, 421, 429, 443, 519 AND 527 NORTHWEST 13TH AVENUE,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, MAKING FINDINGS; 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 March 27, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
151 April 11, 2002
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12206.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
152 April 11, 2002
30. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 10-22 OF CITY CODE 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
LOCATED WITHIN DISTRICT. (Applicant(s): City of Miami).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -6 is a second reading ordinance.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): This is to rename the Omni Area Media
District to the Fire Station Number 2, Motion Picture District.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor --
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): It's an ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: It's a public hearing.
Commissioner Teele: Just tell me again what we're doing.
Ms. Slazyk: This is for the Fire Station Number 2, Motion Picture District.
Commissioner Teele: This just does the name?
Ms. Slazyk: This is the name.
Commissioner Teele: So the district is already in place as it exists now and we're designating it in honor
of the most prominent landmark. That's all we're doing, right?
Ms. Slazyk: That's all this is.
Commissioner Teele: All right. OK.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a public hearing. Anybody from the public? Being none, we close the
public hearing. Read the ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. I thought the name was going to be Fire Station 2,
Motion Picture and Media District. What's the current name?
Ms. Slazyk: Right now it's the Omni Area, Media District.
Commissioner Teele: Media district. And I thought the name was being changed to be the Fire Station --
Ms. Slazyk: Fire Station Number 2, Motion Picture District.
Commissioner Teele: And Media District.
153 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: Can we add "and Media?"
Mr. Maxwell: Yes.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes.
Ms. Slazyk: All right. We can add the words "and Media."
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK, is it on record? PZ -- oh. I'm sorry. Roll call.
An ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING THE MIAMI
CITY CODE, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 10, SECTION 10-22 TO
MODIFY DEFINITIONS TO RENAME THE "OMNI AREA MEDIA DISTRICT" TO
"FIRE STATION NO. 2 MOTION PICTURE AND MEDIA DISTRICT," IN
RECOGNITION OF THE HISTORIC FIRE STATION NO. 2 WHICH IS LOCATED
WITHIN THE DISTRICT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISIONS, A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 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
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12207.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
154 April 11, 2002
31. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMENDING ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING
ORDINANCE BY AMENDING SECTION 1102 NONCONFORMING LOTS, TO PROHIBIT
DIVISION OF CONTIGUOUS NONCONFORMING LOTS UNDER SAME OWNERSHIP.
(APPLICANT(S): PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT)
Chairman Regalado: PZ -7 is a second reading ordinance. Lourdes.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes. PZ -7 is a second reading ordinance to
amend article 11 in order to prohibit the division of contiguous nonconforming lots under the same
ownership. Based on additional information between first reading and today, the Department would like
to recommend that an amendment be made to Page 2 of your ordinance to clarify that this is for R-1 and
R-2 zoning districts only. This was not intended to apply to commercial districts, and this had not
clarified that. This is for R-1 and R-2. It was also brought to our attention by Habitat for Humanity in the
R-3 scene R-4 districts that something like this would really, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: Wreak havoc.
Ms. Slazyk: -- kill the work that they're trying to do, which is go back to that single family character. So,
this was intended for R-1 and R-2 to protect character. And that's the neighborhoods where that exist.
So, we would recommend approval, with the amendment to Page 2 of the ordinance. And let me just read
it in the record. 1102.2, rules concerning combinations of contiguous lots in the same ownership and with
common frontage for R-1 and R-2 zoning districts.
Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public hearing. We ask, Commissioner Redford, that you comeback
to us. OK. So you don't want to --
Commissioner Teele: What number is that?
Chairman Regalado: That would be 9, PZ -9.
Commissioner Teele: I would move the item, as amended.
Chairman Regalado: Anybody -- this is a public hearing. Anybody from the public on PZ -7, as
amended?
Vice Chairman Winton: They're all going to be quiet.
Chairman Regalado: Nobody? OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: They're interested, but they want to pass.
Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance, please.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Just for the record, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission,
the clarification -- the change that was just made is a clarification, right?
155 April 11, 2002
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes. Yes. It is something -- it's not -- it's not
more restrictive than what was advertised --
Mr. Maxwell: All right. That's --
Ms. Slazyk: That's covered in the ad, though.
Mr. Maxwell: I just needed that on the record.
Chairman Regalado: Read the ordinance.
Mr. Maxwell: PZ -7 is amending it --
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 A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12208.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
(COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL:)
Chairman Regalado: PZ --
Vice Chairman Winton: One question. One point of clarification for probably the public. This ordinance
will go into effect when?
Ms. Slazyk: Thirty days, May 11th, I believe.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thirty days from today?
156 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
157 April 11, 2002
32. SECOND 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): Planning and Zoning Department).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -8, a second reading ordinance. Lourdes.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes. This is a second reading ordinance in
order to modify the regulations pertaining to planned unit developments in residential zoning districts.
Basically, this is to eliminate them from the R-1 single family residential zoning districts, unless it is for
the purpose of preservation of historic and/or environmental reasons. If there's a significant historic
structure and it's in order to preserve it or an environmental feature, then a PUD (Planned Unit
Development) would be considered. Otherwise it would be eliminating them from R-1.
Chairman Regalado: It's a public hearing. Do we have a motion and a second on this item?
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. A public hearing. Go ahead, sir. Name and number.
Name and address.
Jesus Roiz: Yes. Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Jesus Roiz, 358 Southwest 22nd Road. I
would like to call your attention to the fact that this particular amendment to the Zoning Ordinance has
been promoted by Coconut Grove residents and I'm going to argue the points on that. I believe that the
PVDs in Coconut Grove have not been very friendly to Coconut Grove. As a matter of fact, there is no
one from Coconut Grove, even those affected, who are in opposition to this ordinance. However, my
point is that the Coconut Grove problems could be solved at the Coconut Grove level, just by amending
the existing overlay district. The problems in Coconut Grove do not need to be also solved on
Commissioner Teele's district, for instance. If you eliminate the PUDs in R-1 districts, you're going to be
eliminating them in areas were security is an issue and where PUDs could be an appealing incentive to
develop. Like again, Commissioner Teele's district, there are several subdivisions that would benefit
from this. The intention of the Commissioner is to attract professionals into his district. A PUD in that
area would benefit that area. Now, a PUD in places like the Roads, for instance, is not feasible, because
what does a PUD do for you? It will allow to build nine homes per acre. To assemble one acre of land in
the Roads, you would have to buy seven houses, at an average of a quarter of a million dollars ($425,000)
each. So, you would be spending one and three quarter million dollars ($750,000) just for the land to buy
and to build nine houses. It is not feasible because the price per building site would come out about two
hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). It would make more sense in the Roads, if anybody wanted to
develop or redevelop, to build or redevelop the specific lots and keeping the same front as they have it
now. So, it is not feasible in neighborhoods like the Roads or Coral Gate. It can be addressed in Coconut
Grove with a revision of the overlay district in Coconut Grove. And it will be a benefit in the west end of
Commissioner Gonzalez's district and it definitely will be an asset in Commissioner Teele's district. So, I
would suggest to you do not pass this. And let the Planning Department go back and revise the overlay
district for Coconut Grove and fix the problem locally, not throughout the City. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, sir.
158 April 11, 2002
Robert McCabe: Robert McCabe, 1601 South Miami Avenue, and representing the Miami Homeowners'
Network. At least two of the associations asked me to say that they're in favor but could not be here
today and that's the Allapattah Homeowners' Association and the community united in the Haitian area.
Bottom line is this: In this case, the PUD is a good idea in fairly large pieces of property. It is not a good
idea on small pieces of property. If you had -- you have a situation for example on South Miami area,
there are three or four properties along there that are big enough to put in nine units where single-family
homes are all the way throughout. Bottom line, the net impact of that -- the idea is to get open space.
You can't on something that small. The impact is that someone makes money on selling the property and
all the homeowners pay by reduced value of their properties. We strongly support this and I would say
there's at least a dozen of the homeowners' associations throughout the City that are in support of this
change. Thank you.
Linda Koenigsberg: Good evening. Linda Koenigsberg, on behalf of the Miami Roads Neighborhood
Civic Association. My address is 144 Southwest 19th Road. And just going to be very simple. We
support the ordinance. We believe it will do justice to the communities that we intend to preserve and I
think that's what the tone of this should be and what this Commission should be looking towards.
Colin Veater: Good afternoon, Colin Veater, 41 Southwest 18 Terrace. I'm here as a president of the
South Miami Avenue Homeowners Association and we are in support of the City's proposal on the PUDs,
obviously to enhance the neighborhood aspects of the City. Thank you.
Tucker Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs. I have offices at 215 Grand Avenue in Coconut Grove. I
represent the Natoma Manors Homeowners' Association. And I wanted to talk about two issues when
dealing with PUDs. As Dr. McCabe said, you're dealing -- when you deal with a PUD, you deal with a
large piece of property, a big piece of property, and that's what you're talking about. When we're talking
about the typical single-family neighborhood in the City of Miami, you're talking about lots of five
thousand square feet that are already developed. This is a proposal looking to the future. A future
wherein you may find that neighborhoods will become destroyed by people buying up these properties,
assembling the parcels and building these PUDs. Remember, planned unit developments are like walled
enclaves. They're not neighborhood friendly. They do nothing to bring people together. And that's a real
concern. I think that's one of the main reasons why this ordinance is important, not only to Coconut
Grove. I think it's more important to the rest of the City of Miami, for that reason. Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. Where is he?
Commissioner Gonzalez: The Chairman isn't here.
Commissioner Sanchez: I see. Oh, OK.
Doris Scheer: Doris Scheer, resident of Coral Gables, 40 some odd years. I'm here to support this item.
Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir.
John de Olazarra: I'm John de Olazarra. I live at 1689 South Bayshore Lane. I'm in support of this. I
think we need to preserve our single-family neighborhoods and try to eliminate upzoning and increasing
the density in these traditional single-family neighborhoods. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Lourdes, you have any -- Oh, we have one more.
Stephen Hagen: Might as well.
159 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. I'm not surprised.
Mr. Hagen: Stephen --
Vice Chairman Winton: No, you don't -- Stephen, you don't have to "might as well." You don't have to
come up, but you're welcomed.
Mr. Hagen: 725 Northeast 73rd Street, Steve Hagen. As everybody's said, a Planned Unit Development
for a larger parcel of land is one thing, but when you're doing it on a small parcel, it just doesn't make any
sense. The only way I could see it making any sense at all is if there was no walls involved with the unit,
and even then the units would be so jammed together, that I think it would be awful for-- to put that into
any kind of single-family neighborhood.
Vice Chairman Winton: Lourdes, do you have anything you want to add?
Ms. Slazyk: Just one additional thing, and I guess it goes to one of the comments that was made. The
PUDs in R-1 -- the reason that it's so important for all the R -I neighborhoods is because R -Is are
detached single-family homes. The PUDs allow attached single-family homes. So, a PUD could come in
and bring town houses, which are beautiful in R-2, R-3 and other districts, but in a single-family
neighborhood, right in the middle, someone assembles a whole block and puts in town houses, you really
did change the character. So --
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we have a motion?
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Who made the motion?
Ms. Thompson: There's a motion on the floor, made by Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: By me.
Ms. Thompson: And second by Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. So, we have a motion on PZ -8 and a second -- Oh, anyone else from the
public want to comment? We'll close the public hearing. We have a motion and a second on PZ -8. Any
further discussion? Being none --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's an ordinance.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ordinance. Read the ordinance, please. Call the roll, please.
160 April 11, 2002
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 passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12209.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
161 April 11, 2002
33. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING
ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING 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) Planning and Zoning Department).
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, sorry. I'm running the meeting, I guess. PZ -9.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -9 is a second reading ordinance related to
creating a new Article 8 to be entitled "Neighborhood Conservation Districts," in order to introduce
provisions related to the creation of Neighborhood Conservation Districts. The important thing to
remember on this item is we are not actually designating any Neighborhood Conservation Districts.
That's probably the biggest question we get. People want to know what this means to their property. At
this point, nothing. This is creating a mechanism so that we can begin to designate individual
Neighborhood Conservation Districts based on the features that should be conserved. They could be
anything from landscape to height to some semi -historic character. They'll all be very district, and each
one will come before you individually as they're designated. This is very similar to our special districts,
like we have SD -1, SD -2, but these are going to be created with a whole different goal in mind, to
conserve and preserve areas of the City. So, this is not designating anybody's property right now. It's just
creating the tool so that we can begin to designate Neighborhood Conservation Districts.
Vice Chairman Winton: This is a public hearing. We'll do -- Have we sworn in everybody that's going
to --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Yes.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have?
Ms. Thompson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: This is public hearing. Would like to open up the hearing for the public. Yes,
sir. Your name and address, please.
Jesus Roiz: Jesus Roiz, 358 Southwest 22nd Road.
Vice Chairman Winton: What is your profession?
Mr. Roiz: I'm an electrical engineer.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Go ahead.
Mr. Roiz: There is a hell of a movement to protect neighborhoods right now. When the neighborhoods
are being more successful, where the good neighborhoods are having a lot of investments. And this type
of ordinance would only lead to forestall that type of improvement in the existing neighborhoods.
Whenever there is a property -- and I have examples that I could show you -- whenever there is a property
in a good neighborhood that deserves preservation as it is, it has been just fixed up and resold with the
existing character. However, I can also show you examples where homes that have been featured less,
162 April 11, 2002
have been replaced with substantial investments. If you approve this ordinance, what is going to happen
is that a bunch of neighborhood homeowners' association, which are a dozen, a handful of people
organized to determine what happens in the entire neighborhood, where other people do not get involved,
do not even know what is happening, they will come in and decide what the rest of the neighborhood can
do with their property. And projects like, for instance, the Utopia construction project on Southwest 22nd
Road, where this fellow came in and took out one single home that was occupying three lots. It was a
good home, but it was feature less. It was just a contemporary home with any special values. And in that
same piece of property, this company invested about one point two million dollars in materials and labor
to build a two million dollar project, which is coming in to help improve the tax base of this City.
Obviously, if you create a district like a Historic Preservation District, the property values will go up. As
soon as the properties change hand, there will be a new tax assessment and the City will get some
revenues from it. But the revenues -- the increase in value would be like what happened also on
Southwest 22nd Road, where a home that sold on February of 2001 for a hundred and twenty-five
thousand dollars was fixed up in its own characteristic style, original architecture design. It was fixed up.
Whatever had to be repaired was repaired, updated. And then it resold for three hundred and thirty-nine
thousand dollars. Now, in a transaction like that, the value of that piece of land for tax bases went up to
three hundred thousand dollars. However, on this other project, where a new construction came in, each
particular lot is going to be assessed at around seven hundred thousand dollars. So, the City would
benefit for this increase in tax base if there is an improvement, redevelopment of marginal areas of
properties that do not really have a characteristic that is worth preserving or the condition is not that good.
On top of that, not only the City's going to benefit from this additional assessment, but also to reach this
high assessment, the investor would have to put a lot of money in labor, and in materials, and that is going
to help the economy. So, an ordinance like this can only have one purpose when the neighborhoods are
being successful, and it is to stop redevelopment. Now, R -I zoning is protecting all residential
neighborhoods from high-rise development. So, you are not protecting a neighborhood from high-rise
development with this neighborhood. All you're doing is providing the tools to the individual
homeowners associations to prevent redevelopment. So, there might be some constitutional issues with
this and I am pretty sure that, Mr. Redford, are you going to address the legal items on this?
Vice Chairman Winton: You're just addressing us, so you need to wrap up --
Mr. Roiz: Well, I don't want to spend the time on what he's going to spend the time on. So that is what I
have. If I could come back later, I would appreciate it. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Next.
Robert McCabe: Robert McCabe, 1601 South Miami Avenue, and representing the City of Miami
Homeowners' Associations network in this case and I list at least a dozen homeowners' associations,
including those in Allapattah and Little Haiti who want this ordinance passed. We have something
wonderful happening in Miami. And that is, that new people are moving in. People are fixing up homes.
People are getting interested in neighborhoods. They're trying to make it better. Nothing is more
important to us economically than having a sound base of families living in our neighborhoods. What
this does couldn't be more American. It's self-determination. You've given the people in the
neighborhoods the opportunities to decide for themselves what their neighborhood should be. It's nothing
more than that and people have to agree and they have to agree on what's important. These things -- this
combination of things is happening. The last (UNINTELLIGIBLE) are going to significantly improve the
economics of Miami. More homes will be fixed up. More places will be fixed. More people are going to
be involved and we're going to have that substantial base of families in our community that make a strong
Miami and that's what we need. This ordinance will make a big difference. And, remember, it's elective.
People in neighborhoods have to decide. And I'll make one other comment. One of the reasons -- one of
the primary reasons why you're having so many of these small cities pop up is because of zoning and
163 April 11, 2002
concerns about development, and people who want to get control of it themselves. That is nothing more
than this and in terms of the fact that there's regulations, we have regulations. Her zoning rules are
regulations. This is simply adding a possibility of a smaller scaled development, consistent with what the
people that live there want. Please pass this ordinance. Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman. Three comments. The gentleman says that he represents the
Allapattah Homeowners' Association. As a Commissioner of the Allapattah area, it happens that the
president of the homeowners' association has been here all day long and I'm sure that if this issue would
concern the Allapattah Homeowners' Association so much, she would have stayed here, and I'm talking
about Albina Sumners, who left this chambers two minutes ago.
Mr. McCabe: She told me she had a conflict.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, on self-determination, I don't see this as self-determination. I see this as
government dictating to the people how to live, how to build their homes, and what kind of design to use
on their properties. So, this is not self-determination. This may be a self-determination as the one that is
used in Cuba. You're talking about cities being separated. You know the reason why this is -- most cities
are being created? Because big governments have been killing the people with excessive taxes and
controls, and not providing them compensating services for the taxes that they're paying. That's the
reason why we have so many small communities becoming cities, because they know that they can run
their governments more efficient than bigger governments. So, those are my three points. And I'm ready
-- I'm ready to vote on this --
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a public hearing.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We have a public hearing. I know we have to listen to the rest of the people
that are going to speak on this issue. But one thing that I really hate, you know, a gentleman said here
before that there is a community that wants to control the entire City of Miami. You know -- and I
respect every community choose their destiny and they should decide how to live and we should respect
each community. If they don't want development, that's fine. If they rather have parks, beautiful. You
know, we should learn how to respect each other. But imposing rules in every community because one
segment of the community wants a house to be build in a certain way, to impose that on the rest of the
City that may not agree with that is, to me-- I don't agree with that. I simply don't agree with that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Does this -- In answer to that question, these neighborhood conservation -- the
Neighborhood Conservation District, is it one district across the City?
Ms. Slazyk: Absolutely not. The whole idea is that each one be completely different and tailored to --
and there may be dozens of neighborhoods throughout the City that will not even get a Neighborhood
Conservation District.
Commissioner Gonzalez: They may be completely different, but your department will be the one to tell
them how they will be, right?
Vice Chairman Winton: No.
Ms. Slazyk: No. There will be criteria.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. It's voted.
Ms. Slazyk: There will be criteria established for each Neighborhood Conservation District.
164 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: By the neighborhood.
Commissioner Sanchez: And voted by the homeowners' association.
Ms. Slazyk: Well, it's going to be voted by you. You will decide whether to designate or not designate --
Vice Chairman Winton: But it gets crafted by the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, it gets crafted at the homeowners.
Ms. Slazyk: It's going to be crafted by the Planning and Zoning Department through meetings with the
neighborhood groups and with professional consultants that are going to be studying the characters -- You
may find one of these that all it does is preserve environmental features, trees, you know.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Let me ask you. Let's say that there is a neighborhood that has -- there is
an area that has a neighborhood association.
Vice Chairman Winton: Pick one of the neighborhoods.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And the area -- I'm going to talk about Allapattah, for example. We have
38,000 residents in the Allapattah area, OK. And I have attended every single meeting of the
homeowners' association. You know how many members they have? Twenty. So you're telling me that
20 people are going to decide for 38,000 residents?
Ms. Slazyk: No. You decide. The City Commission is the only one that can designate any kind of
special zoning district overlay. They will help us in crafting it, but they don't make the decisions. And
you can't -- I don't think either you or the Planning and Zoning Department can delegate that
responsibility to a neighborhood association. I'm not even sure that's legal. We will be doing the review.
We have architects, planners and urban designers, landscape architects on staff. We will do the review
according to a criteria that's going to be approved by you, the City Commission. If your neighborhood
groups and your neighborhood associations come out in favor or against something, that will give you a
clear idea as to whether we're on the right track or the wrong track about something.
Commissioner Gonzalez: But you just told us that it will be up to the homeowners' association.
Ms. Slazyk: No. No. They will help us in crafting something, but the decisions to approve or deny
something cannot be given to a homeowners association. And I think that's the thing that everybody is
misunderstanding about this. This is not the homeowners associations who are going to approve or deny
permits. They're going to help us in crafting what the district should be. Then criteria is going to be
written. This district should be -- building should be no taller than 20 feet high, front yards, you know,
should be -- not be 20 feet setback with a driveway in the front. Maybe the house needs to be moved up
front with a porch and the garage in the back -- they're all different. Some could just be preserving trees.
I mean, we could find a pocket in Coconut Grove where there are 500 -year-old trees that need to be
preserved and that might be the only intent of that district that the trees have to stay no matter what.
Vice Chairman Winton: But it could also be that in Allapattah there is no conservation district.
Ms. Slazyk: It could be that there is none.
Vice Chairman Winton: With no criteria at all.
165 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: It could be that one --
Vice Chairman Winton: Because that's what the neighborhood wants.
Ms. Slazyk: -- would will never get designated or you could find them 10 years from now a little pocket
in Allapattah has buildings that are all over 50 years old. They have a certain character of architecture
and you want to preserve it. Mr. Roiz just a second talked about somebody coming in and taking a
hundred and twenty-five thousand dollar home, making improvements to it and selling it for three
hundred thousand dollars. OK. Something like this isn't going to stop somebody from doing that. What
it will do is protect it. Because now what if the guy next to him paints his house pink with purple polka
dots?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me tell you, we just passed a resolution here --
Ms. Slazyk: They can't.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- about unifying lots. Let me tell you my experience, OK. There was seven
lots at the corner of 17th Avenue and 38th Street. They used to be warehouses. Across the street from a
high school. You know what was happening in that building? Drugs were being sold to the kids from the
school, prostitution was being conducted there. All kinds of illegal activities were conducted in that
building. That building was there for over eight years and nothing was happening to that building. And
nobody wanted to invest in that building, and nobody wanted to do any projects or anything in that
building. The City had to give that -- those pieces of land to a community-based organization to develop
it. The solution was to unify all those lots and build an affordable home ownership housing project to
make that piece of land prosper and feasible in order to start improving that neighborhood. That
development has been going on for four years. Nothing else has been done in that neighborhood. So,
because nobody is going to go and invest to build a single home in that area. If we -- we've got to be
careful. We have many, many serious problems in the City of Miami with the housing, OK. I refer to the
illegal units earlier this afternoon and that is a problem that it didn't happen just yesterday, OK. That's a
problem that was around in this City many years ago. We were not here. Neither one of us was here,
OK. And now we're confronted with a problem that we have in residential areas. We have three and four
illegal units and there is no remedy at this point. There's nothing actually that we can do at this point.
Because if we decide to do what we suppose to do, is eliminate them. But we're going to have to put
about 40,000 families in the middle of the street and we don't have housing to accommodate them.
Vice Chairman Winton: But I don't think that the Neighborhood Conservation District necessarily does
one thing one way or the other relative to that, because the districts are going to be crafted according --
from a geographical standpoint, you know, we're going to help make the decisions about each of those
zones and there could be 50 of them in the City. And like Lourdes said, there could be big chunks of the
City that don't have anything because there aren't any criteria that we want changed. So, there's huge
flexibility in this, and that's just a point that I wanted to make sure that you understood. OK. Back to the
public hearing. Next.
Linda Koenigsberg: Linda Koenigsberg, 144 Southwest 19 Road. I'm also president of the Miami Roads
Neighborhood Civic Association. There are many things that the City has done over the lifetime that I've
lived here, which I have applauded. Unfortunately, because of certain things that have gone on with the
City in the past, I've been ashamed of them. This is one of the areas where I applaud the City and I
applaud the City staff in coming forth with this type of idea. Sarah Eaton is all in favor, and she speaks
highly of it, as does the City staff. It will benefit our neighborhoods. It will help bolster our belief in the
administration. I believe it's a wonderful idea to say or to have us believe that a very small set of people
166 April 11, 2002
rule the neighborhood. I would reflect that there's one president of the United States. There are just a few
Commissioners. What this does, it allows people to form a unit to review what's going on and then
present it to you. It's simply one more level. I think if you don't believe in your neighborhood, and you
either don't believe in preserving it the way it is or believe that it would be better in some other way and
you don't come forth and make that statement, you don't believe -- you shouldn't be heard. Most of the
people, I believe, in this City and the whole United States the whole world probably live in their own
houses without ever coming out and saying things. Yet, they're represented by people who do and who
understand what's going on. And I believe that the City Commission should vote in favor of this. It's a
wonderful idea. It will help neighborhoods come together. They will speak with one voice. It will help
beautiful neighborhoods remain beautiful. It will help blighted neighborhoods become better. It will, I
believe, allow the tax base to increase and I believe you should vote in favor of it. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, ma'am.
Jo Lee: Thank you. Jo Lee, 1736 Espanola Drive. I speak strongly in favor of this ordinance. For one
reason among others, because I think it gives some hope to some of the neighborhoods in our City, which
are being changed very rapidly and we see a lack of preservation of architectural integrity on say a
particular block. You know, you have houses that are all setback and then you have new ones that are
being built, which are practically on top of the sidewalk and that sort of thing, so that what you do
essentially when you do that is you destroy the reason why most of the people who bought there
originally bought there; you know, the character of the neighborhood, the oak trees, the setbacks, the
feeling of the country land in the middle of the City. There are various other reasons, though, why people
would wish to have a certain conservation area. But that's all. I just wanted to say I'm very much in favor
of this ordinance. It gives people a vehicle in which they may try to preserve that which they wish to be
preserved. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
Graciela Balanzategui Garrido: Good evening. Graciela Balanzategui Garrido, 3620 Southwest 20th
Street. I am the secretary for the Coral Gate Homeowners' Association and I am hopeful that you will
remember that we have been fighting to preserve our neighborhood for as long as my son has been around
and that's 14 years now. I came to my first meeting when I was pregnant with him. We are hopeful that
you will support this ordinance and that coral gate will be the first community to come before you to ask
for preservation. As you know, we've had to fight a lot of battles. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Joe Wilkins: Hi. Joe Wilkins, 228 Southwest 23rd Road. There's a couple of points I'd like to make.
First off, I attended the workshop where this was presented to the Planning Advisory Board and one of
this things I was impressed was -- I'm sorry Commissioner Gonzalez isn't here -- was the fact that this
does come-- these initiatives, if you adopt it, will come from the communities to the government, not
from the government imposed on the communities. I think that's a very important point. By way of
illustrating that, the example that was given earlier about the property on 22nd Road, where there was one
house on three lots and now there's a huge house on three lots. The property owner, I'm sure, did very
well by that. But our association, while it represents only our members, we communicate with
everybody. Our newsletter goes to every house and our hot line is available to every neighbor. And
when that project was being initiated -- when the neighbors heard what was going down there, the uproar
was incredible. That -- our hot line rang literally off the hook. People in the area did not want that scale
of development in the neighborhood. I'm sure the property owner did. But the people surrounding him, I
167 April 11, 2002
can speak with certainty, did not. And, again, this is kind of a case where if the community is able to
speak and able to set the standards for their communities, I think the communities will benefit. Thank
you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Ron.
Ron Nelson: Ron Nelson, 2535 Inagua Avenue. I'm here to speak for myself and behalf of our Coconut
Grove Park Homeowners' Association, which I'm an officer on the board. Our homeowners' association
also is very active, as the gentleman who just spoke. We do have a website that keeps our neighbors
informed. It's -- people do go to the website, get information. We have several meetings a year. We --
when these issues came up, we felt it was important enough to have meetings. Our association met and
the homeowners are also for this. They want to preserve their neighborhood. We have a lovely
neighborhood. We don't want people to come in and start tearing down and changing the character of the
neighborhood. And we're one of those neighborhoods that would like to see this. As you said, there may
be other neighborhoods that don't want this in their neighborhood and that's the wonderful thing about the
way this is proposed, is that it's not going to be a blanket policy for everybody in the City. And so we're
entirely for it and hope to see you pass it. Thank you.
Colin Veater: Good evening, once again. Colin Veater, 41 Southwest 18 Terrace. Again, I'm here as the
president of the South Miami Avenue Homeowners' Association. And as in the PUDs, we are supportive
of the City on this measure. Just to echo the comments made by the Mayor at his state -of -the -City
address, we are very encouraged, as well as several of the Commissioners that have asked folks to get
more involved and to help the City improve its neighborhoods. The fact that this is just a start in a long
process is obvious and we just want to get it started and ask your support. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Commissioner.
Commissioner James Redford: I'm just representing myself.
Vice Chairman Winton: Your name and address, please.
Commissioner Redford: My name is Redford, J.L, 3975 Little Avenue, 33133. I think my -- First of all,
let me say I'm all for the intent of this ordinance and perhaps my presentation is more questions. For
example, what about this article in March 22 this year about the three panel -- three judge -- three panel
judges throwing out a very similar ordinance in the County? And there's now, I understand, under appeal
to the Supreme Court. If you haven't read it, I'll just (INAUDIBLE) just a touch of it. It says, "Miami -
Dade County officials are scrambling to overturn an appeal's court decision that rejects a key portion of
the County Zoning Code, a ruling developers claim could paralyze the industry by leaving future projects
vulnerable to legal challenges."
Vice Chairman Winton: Could I interrupt you for a second? You want an answer for that question?
Commissioner Redford: Well, I want to --
Vice Chairman Winton: There is a question. Do you want to just --
Commissioner Redford: -- know where it is. It was in appellate court. It was a three-judge panel.
Vice Chairman Winton: But what you really want to know is if there -- what this --
Commissioner Redford: Well, where's it going now? And does it have affect on --
168 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Are these both the same? Mr. City Attorney, could you answer the question?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): The case that the Commissioner is speaking about, I believe is
Miami -Dade County versus Omni Point Holdings. The Third District Court Of Appeals ruled on that
case on March the 6th, Commissioner. That is now up -- in fact, the City of Miami fled an amicus brief
in that case in support of the County's position. We don't -- right now the case is not final. It's being
appealed to the Supreme Court. We are also looking at that holding to see how it affects all the City's
ordinances, including this one. But we've signed off on this one, we believe this one is properly before
you.
Commissioner Redford: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Next question.
Commissioner Redford: There seems to be a feeling -- and maybe because I haven't got the right papers
or something -- that this ordinance sets it all up so that the citizens are going to have a good deal to say
here. And they may be. I understand that the Planning Department has promised this and I'm sure they'll
give it to us, but there's nothing that I have seen in the ordinances I've seen that says that the
neighborhood people will be called in at all. They're not called in for the establishment of the district.
They're not called in for the specifics of the plan. Now, I'm sure they would allow us to talk. They would
have us in to talk. But there's nothing in the ordinance that says they're compelled to do so. Now, there
may be another ordinance that I have not seen --
Vice Chairman Winton: So, let's see if we can answer that. Lourdes.
Ms. Slazyk: This ordinance can't give a power or authority to a neighborhood group. That's not legal.
The --
Commissioner Sanchez: It cannot.
Ms. Slazyk: No, it can't.
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, OK.
Ms. Slazyk: You can't give your power or the Planning Director's power to a neighborhood group to
approve or deny anything. What this will do is it will set up districts. Now, as any district will get
designated, let's say we identify a pocket of three blocks in Coconut Grove for an environmental district.
Each and every one of those residents whose property is going to be designated will get a notice and if
they come to this hearing --
Vice Chairman Winton: How do we know that?
Ms. Slazyk: You have --
Vice Chairman Winton: But his question is, how do we know that?
Ms. Slazyk: OK. A notice must be given in order to rezone a piece of property. What these
Neighborhood Conservation Districts are going to be --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me.
169 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: -- are zoning overlays.
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me, Lourdes. But Commissioner Winton has asked a question and
Commissioner Redford has -- and I'm really troubled because what you say that you cannot give away the
power of the Planning Department to the residents, nor our powers. We are giving our power to you in
the Planning Department to look for three blocks of -- you decide what is historic or not and then you say
that the these people will be notified and if they come to City Hall during the public hearing, it's a very
complicated process. And in essence, what we're doing here -- and I'm in favor of this, but what we're
doing here is we're giving up all the power of the City Commission to decide what the City should like --
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: -- be like.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think—
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: If I may. Ms. Slazyk is correct in that you cannot delegate -- improperly delegate your
authority, your police power, of which zoning is one, to anyone without doing so in the proper way.
When you --
Chairman Regalado: So, what are we doing here? What are we doing here?
Mr. Maxwell: Well --
Vice Chairman Winton: Sorry. What did you ask?
Chairman Regalado: What are we doing here?
Mr. Maxwell: You're establishing criteria.
Chairman Regalado: No, we are not, because we don't know --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no. The criteria --
Chairman Regalado: We don't know who's going to decide that criteria. That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Sanchez: The criteria will be determined by the --
Chairman Regalado: By the facts.
Commissioner Sanchez: The residents.
Mr. Maxwell: No, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
170 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Ultimately --
Mr. Maxwell: Every decision that's made ultimately comes to you and you have to use set criteria to
make that decision. That's, in fact, what the Commissioner was just talking about. And that was one of
the pivotal issues in the Omni Point case, whether or not the criteria in there was proper, whether or not it
was constitutional or not. So --
Commissioner Sanchez: But the key issue here -- the key issue to me so far -- and I believe I
comprehend the concept. The key issue here to me is the criteria that are going to come to us. You're
talking about setback. You're talking about --
Vice Chairman Winton: Those haven't been developed yet.
Commissioner Redford: No. I haven't got to --
Commissioner Sanchez: No. But there's -- that's where you're going to have a lot of input and a lot --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's the point. And huge debate.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's all coming.
Commissioner Redford: Well, my point is, there's two acts. One is to designate an area as a Conservation
District. The second act is what are you going to make the requirements in that particular district? And
in the ordinance-- And the Attorney has said you can't do it-- but in the ordinance no place does it say the
people in that district are -- have to have a part in that. Now, I'm sure that the Planning Department will
give it to us. But it does not say in the ordinance anywhere that they have to. Now, that's one point.
Chairman Regalado: And that's the key.
Commissioner Redford: So, the other thing is, too, I mentioned this the last time I spoke to you, and I've
counted since. There's over a dozen houses in our subdivision of about 30 houses that are pre -code, pre -
setback, pre everything. They're set up on bricks.
Commissioner Sanchez: Those would have to be grandfathered in, correct?
Commissioner Redford: Well, the thing is, you have a council of acceptance or whatever you're going to
call it and before you could demolish any one of those houses, you would have to go and get the approval
of them. Now, when you go before a board asking for approval, you also have to make the assumption
you can get approval or you can get non approval or else they wouldn't have a board at all. Why have a
board when the decisions can only go one way? So, the point is, you can go to a board with a house. You
want to tear it down. They say no, for whatever reason. Now, this all of a sudden, we're sitting with 12
houses. Mine was built in 1919. There's one there called the Little House. It was built by the man who
the Little Avenue was named after, way before World War I, all wood. You have a dozen of these kind of
things. They're wood, they're frame stucco, but they're up on no foundation. I'm up on blocks, a 3200
square foot house on blocks. Can you imagine? All wood. Frame stucco. Now, that isn't going to last
forever. What if I go before the board, says "No, you cannot tear it down"? What if I go before the board
and they say, "Well, fix it up"? Fix it up. Over 51 percent of the house -- cost of the house would have to
be expended. And so, I couldn't do it. I couldn't build a house if I tore the house down, I couldn't build
another one. If I came up to code because there might be one tree that they wouldn't allow me to cut
171 April 11, 2002
down. My point is, I'm not against the intent of this. I would like to have the things clarified a little
more, and some of the true problems that we have are made a little clearer to us, because as I said, I'm all
for the intent. But this is a rough one.
Vice Chairman Winton: And it always is the devil's into details and we don't have all those details. So,
do you have any other questions or comments?
Commissioner Redford: Well, those are the major questions. And let me just reiterate for about the third
time. I approve of the intent. The intent is fine. But I'm mystified when I stand in the middle of my
subdivision and I look around and I'm just mystified at how you're going to be able to do it. You can see
now -- you've got land there that's going for six hundred thousand dollars a lot.
Vice Chairman Winton: We understand that. So --
Commissioner Redford: But you've got enough money in there so you could get a lawsuit. You could get
several lawsuits because there's a enough money in there to sue.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Sorry. You're back.
Robert Krulik: Yes. My name is Robert Krulik, 2481 Trapp Avenue. I've lived there for 10 years and
I'm a Coconut Grove Village Councilman. Now, people buy into a neighborhood because they like the
character of the neighborhood and this overlay is just a tool to help us preserve the character of the
neighborhood. It's not right to the homeowner who bought in because of what they have to have it change
out from under them. And to be able to preserve it is to have a system by which we may be able to
preserve what we like about a neighborhood. It's only fair to the homeowners. And I've spoken to many
people in my neighborhood and I've yet to come across anybody who disagrees with this. If something
needs to be updated and changed and rebuilt, it should still be done within the character of the
neighborhood. It's a process to have a unique area and then all of a sudden have zero lot lines, these two
and three-story big mansion built and it just throws off -- it just throws all the whole character. The
whole idea of living in a neighborhood is because you like it. And to have somebody come and just start
changing that, it's just not fair to the homeowner. And I don't think I -- I've yet to meet anybody who
disagrees with that in my neighborhood. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Arva Parks: My name is Arva Parks, and I think most of you-- live at 1601 South Miami Avenue-- and I
think most of you know me as a preservationist, and the first thing I believe that I can say is that this is
really not a preservation ordinance. And I think it's a very unique ordinance. And I was thrilled. It was
totally new to me. I did not -- I've never heard of this before in any other cities that I know of. And what
is very special about this is that it's really -- it is not something where there is any control. It's an enabling
ordinance. And I'm reminding of about 20 year -- it was really 20 years ago. I checked the date -- when I
stood before a different Commission arguing for the preservation ordinance. And some of the very same
questions I'm hearing today came up, and the issue was it's not mandating that the Planning Department
or anyone else is going to go around and say, you are this, you are this, you are this. It's been very much -
- and we know 20 years later, we have very little few pockets of this that have been -- and they have been
initiated by citizens in a neighborhood who want it. I see the big similarity to me, is in the overlay
districts that you already have. And I think about the Latin Quarter District that requires certain types of
172 April 11, 2002
architecture on new buildings because the people wanted it that. I think it's just a marvelous opportunity
for people in a neighborhood to come up with things that make their neighborhood -- it makes them kind
of define it. It makes them make a list. We all have this kind of tree, or we don't have sidewalks, or we
do have sidewalks, or all our homes have setbacks of this much or all our homes have -- but it's a
neighborhood that comes up with the idea. But the big issue is --the biggest issue is, you're the one that
decides whether the idea is a good idea or rather the criteria is a good criteria. So, it's really the
Commission that makes the decision. And I think it would empower neighborhoods to do better.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. I have a -- I support this, but I still don't -- no, we're going
to (INAUDIBLE) -- but I wish that someone from the staff will tell me -- or the City Attorney -- what
guarantee we have that the neighbors, the homeowners, the residents will have a direct involvement in
this process?
Mr. Maxwell: That's easy, sir. You're asking me, Commissioner?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, I'm asking you.
Mr. Maxwell: It's the public hearing process.
Chairman Regalado: That's it. The public hearing process. So, if they don't show up here, they cannot
participate.
Vice Chairman Winton: You're their Commissioner. You could decide you don't want any Conservation
Districts anywhere in your district.
Chairman Regalado: But it's not about that. The thing is, Johnny, that we're --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, what's it about?
Chairman Regalado: We're giving the impression that this is about the decision making process by the
residents, and it -- What you say is the right thing and what the City Attorney -- I knew that he was going
to say that, but -- so, don't tell us that this is about each resident. It's the same process that we're having
here, and that is what really worries me in terms of creating high expectations for the residents. And my
other concern is how can we get everyone to participate if they want to do that? So, I have -- Mr. City
Attorney, how can we strengthen the people's participation in this process?
Ms. Slazyk: May I make a recommendation?
Chairman Regalado: Question.
Chairman Regalado: No. Let the City Attorney respond first.
Mr. Maxwell: That would go through the notice process, sir. If you -- There are three ways that we
notice people under our ordinances. We advertise in newspapers. We post at the property around the
area. I forgot the other one.
Ms. Slazyk: The mail. The mail.
Mr. Maxwell: That's right. And we send mail to everyone within now 500 feet of the area. Senior
moment. But anyway that's the way you do it. And also there are courtesy notices. You can strengthen
anyway you like. But now 500 feet around the area, newspaper publication. You may remember that
173 April 11, 2002
there was an item before you regarding the community newspapers that go directly into the area, affected
areas, as opposed to the general circulation. So, you have an arsenal of ways to communicate to the
neighbors and let them know. In addition to that, you have NET 9 -- you have cable television now, the
City's cable television that also communicates that information.
Chairman Regalado: And I was hoping that you said that because I was waiting that would be the
answer. And the reason I want you to answer that is because what this does is that gives a lot of input, as
it should be, to the people that are very active in their communities. Now, Commissioner Sanchez and
myself, we had a hearing in Coral Way and several people showed up, and the people from the Roads and
the people from Coral Gate and the people from Bryan Park, they participated. The people from Coral
Gate were able to right there in one hearing design the way that the traffic flow will be done in 36
Avenue. So, what I'm saying here is that it goes back to the same thing that we're having now. Whoever
shows up, whoever is interested -- and this does not reach the majority of the people in the City. That's
what I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: Are we supposed to drag them in? I mean, I don't get it. I don't even
understand your point.
Chairman Regalado: We are not supposed to -- Johnny, what we are not supposed to do --
Vice Chairman Winton: People that don't want to participate don't participate.
Chairman Regalado: But what we are not supposed to do --
Vice Chairman Winton: And so what are you trying --
Chairman Regalado: --is to make believe --
Vice Chairman Winton: No one's making believe anything.
Chairman Regalado: -- that we are giving the whole power to the --
Vice Chairman Winton: No, we're not.
Chairman Regalado: That's my whole concern. I'm supporting this.
Vice Chairman Winton: No, we're not.
Chairman Regalado: I'm supporting this.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's your interpretation. It isn't mine.
Chairman Regalado: No, it's not.
Vice Chairman Winton: And that isn't what I've heard, at all.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right, let's go. Come on. It's been a long day.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: We've got a long agenda. My concern is the devil's in the details --
174 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a public hearing. They're still here.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry.
Ginger Jackson: My name is Ginger --
Chairman Regalado: I am not in a hurry.
Ms. Jackson: Well, I am, but my name is Ginger Jackson. I'm the homeowners-- president of the
homeowners association in Ye Little Wood in South Grove. Jim Redford -- Commissioner Redford lives
in our neighborhood and I share a lot of his concerns. However, I also applaud the City for what they're
trying to do. We're noticing the canopy being taken down. We're fighting to save a kapok tree in our own
neighborhood.
Commissioner Sanchez: Good for you.
Ms. Jackson: But one thing that we're doing that if we're doing it wrong or if this isn't going to work, I
hope somebody will tell me. The City has been working with us. Maria Nardy came and spoke to a
committee that we have in our neighborhood. The committee -- we asked her lots of tough questions.
The committee recommended that we have a meeting of the whole neighborhood, have her back, and let
them quiz her and then we'll decide, as a neighborhood, if we want to participate in this. Am I wrong? Is
that the way this is going to work?
Chairman Regalado: Well -- well, that is a question that I was — on my mind, too. That's one of the
things I'm saying. You know, if there is a choice, if -- who decides what? And that is my point.
Ms. Jackson: Well, I think -- it's our understanding from what the Planning Department told us that we
will decide the way we want to run our neighborhood, and we will work with people that the City is
hiring to set up the criteria that we want, whether it be changing setbacks, regardless what it is. Now, if
I'm wrong, I hope somebody will tell me, because I'm for what you're doing.
Ms. Slazyk: The answer's yes.
Ms. Jackson: OK. All right. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the fact—I'm sorry. Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is, these
Neighborhood Conservation Districts are going to be the ones that get set up are going to be set up
because the neighbors who are active and want something preserved in their neighborhood that currently
isn't being preserved because they don't have the tools to do it are going to be where those Conservation
Districts go. In those neighborhoods where there's no activism, where nobody care what's going on,
where people can do whatever they want to do within the code, there suspect going to be district set up.
So, it's going to be -- these districts are going to come from the neighborhoods and the folks who live in
those neighborhoods who want to protect something, whatever that something is.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right.
Vice Chairman Winton: It isn't and it isn't going to go anywhere else.
175 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: Even if it's the trees. Even if it's the trees.
Commissioner Sanchez: Lourdes, the only concern that I have are the small details. Maybe somebody
has a naked statute of a -- and somebody complains, or -- there's nothing wrong with that. I would have
to remove mine. Only kidding. But, you know --
Ms. Slazyk: The details will come to you for adoption, OK. So, as -- If we pick -- not we. If a
neighborhood comes to us --
Chairman Regalado: You keep saying "we." And that's my --
Ms. Slazyk: All right.
Chairman Regalado: Twice -- See, I raise --
Ms. Slazyk: We have to write it.
Chairman Regalado: Lourdes, that's why --
Ms. Slazyk: We're writing it. That's why I say "we" because we have to write it and bring it to you. But
if a neighbor comes to us because they want to preserve their tree --
Chairman Regalado: OK. But my concern is that you keep saying "we" in the Planning Department and
not the neighbors --
Commissioner Sanchez: We're not going to be --
Chairman Regalado: --is what I'm saying.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're not going to be removing any saints from front yards, right?
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, ma'am. Go ahead.
Joan Morris: My name is Joan Morris. I live at 3803 Little Avenue in Coconut Grove. I also live in Ye
Little Wood, home of the infamous kapok tree. As I understand it, we will go to you. We will not be told
anything. We will bring our wants and desires to the Planning Commission, who will then make
arrangements for us to come before the Commission. I don't know about other neighborhoods. You've
just met Ginger Jackson, our association president. Any meeting that we have, every single person in our
community gets a notice in their mail box that there will be a meeting, so and so. There is no way in our
community that anyone will not know what's going on. Now, I don't know about other communities. I
feel that there's a misunderstanding about development. We are not against development. That would be
really pretty stupid. We are for development, but not the kind of development that is going up in our
neighborhood right now. And that's why you have three people from Ye Little Wood, a community of 30
some homes, and you'd have more if they weren't out of town. We are not against development. Please
understand that. We want the development to conform to the characteristics of our neighborhood. We
are a historic neighborhood. We had the first casino. As you all know, Coconut Grove was the original
downtown Miami. We had the first casino and the first whorehouse in Ye Little Wood.
Commissioner Sanchez: I didn't know that.
Ms. Morris: Well, you know it now. And those two homes are still standing.
176 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Are they still used?
Ms. Morris: No hard questions. I'm wrapping it up. I realize I'm used my time, but I just wanted you to
know that we in Ye Little Wood hope that you will vote for this ordinance. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Tucker.
Tucker Gibbs: My name is Tucker Gibbs, offices at 215 Grand Avenue in Coconut Grove, and I wanted
to talk about a couple of things. One, this is an enabling ordinance. That's all it is. It gives you the
power to either adopt and not adopt Neighborhood Conservation Districts that will come to you, and what
that means, it just gives you the authority to do this. What it gives the people out here and neighborhoods
is the power and the ability to come to the Planning Department, come to you, come to the Planning
Advisory Board and ask for a district, and talk to you all about what they want in that district, but the
ultimate decision is going to be yours, and the ultimate process that is created for each district may be
different, but you all are going to have the final say on the process, on the conditions, on the standards,
and your City Attorney's Office is going to make sure they all pass legal mustard. I want to give you all
an example. I sat on the Planning Advisory Board and had the privilege of being Chairman of that board
and I sat on that board for about eight years and sat on the Zoning Board for another two years. And I
want to tell you a story about something that came to the Zoning Board in Overtown. Overtown's historic
character of streets involves houses that are right on the street. That's historic Overtown. And a
development came in to the Zoning Board and for an Overtown development -- Elizabeth Plater Zyberk,
world-renowned architect, was the designer of it. She couldn't build a project that fit within the historic
fabric of Overtown, and you know why? Because the City of Miami requires a 20 -foot setback in front
yards and in Overtown, historically, they didn't have 20 -foot setbacks. So, she had to come in for a
zoning variance. Mr. Maxwell will tell you, you don't get a zoning variance without a hardship, and a
hardship, as Mr. Redford tell you from the Omni Point case, is one of the hardest things you can get. It's
almost impossible if you have a regularly square or rectangle shape piece of property. The Zoning Board
did vote for it, but if somebody challenged it, it may have been defeated in court. What I'm trying to say
is, the people of Overtown could come to you and say, we have a historic fabric in our neighborhood, and
that involves houses that are close to the street than your City code allows. We, as neighbors, are coming
to you and asking you for a Conservation District that will conserve the historic fabric of Overtown, and
one of those items that we want in there is a setback that is -- whatever it was -- 15 feet, 10 fee, and you
all would be able to do it. That wouldn't apply to Allapattah, and it wouldn't apply to Flagami, or
Morningside, or Coconut Grove, but it would apply to that district. And what makes it really important --
because I see it all the time, where developers come in and propose ordinance changes for their projects --
I won't mention the Mutiny -- but they come in for special ordinances and they get them. They have that
entree. They can do that. They get paid -- they have lawyers that get a lot of money to spend a lot of time
at the City and they prepare these things and they eventually see it your way. But there are people out
here who, there are people who work a nine to five job and they care about their community. How do
they deal with that? This is a mechanism where it levels the playing field. It allows neighborhoods to
say, "Here's what we want. This is our entree." But at the end of the day, you Commissioners have the
last word on it. And that's the protection you have. This is about the most democratic thing I can think of
in a community, where individuals, where community associations get together and say, we need
something for our community and they come to you, their elected officials, and either you do it or you
don't, and that's your job. We just want to be able to come to you and that's what this is all about. Thank
you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
177 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Jesus Roiz: Thank you. Thank you for giving me a chance to rebut some of these issues. This is Jesus
Roiz, 358 Southwest 22nd Road. We have Regalado sugarcoating in here and you have also been misled.
You were told that this legislation was required to prevent people from coming in and painting a house
polka dot. So, that is not happening and you're being asked to use your police power to stop a crime that
is not being committed. There is something that has not been mentioned here. With this legislation,
people who want to do remodeling of their houses will have major remodeling, will have to pull a Class II
Special Permit.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Hold on. I want --
Unidentified Speaker: That's not true.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I want -- see, that's the concern that I have. Wait a minute. That's a
concern that I have. If you're able to answer -- because what I don't want to do is add a layer of
bureaucracy. If you're able to answer that and you will --
Ms. Slazyk: What was the question?
Commissioner Sanchez: Sir.
Mr. Roiz: Anybody who wants to make major remodeling that does not comply -- does not qualify for the
Certificate of Compliance, that the leading or active neighbors in the neighborhood have determined for
that particular area would require a Class II Special Permit if they want to remodel their houses.
Commissioner Sanchez: Lourdes, is that true?
Ms. Slazyk: We don't have a Certificate of Compliance for Class II in residential --
Mr. Roiz: I can -- I have the law in here; I can read it here.
Ms. Slazyk: Can I finish my answer, please?
Ms. Roiz: Yes. OK.
Ms. Slazyk: Certificate of Compliance in lieu of Class II exists in the City but for residential, we haven't
created any guidelines for certificate of a compliance in lieu of Class II.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. It's settled. You've answered my question.
Ms. Slazyk: That has --
Mr. Roiz: No, no, wait a minute. Wait a minute.
Ms. Slazyk: That's not --
Mr. Roiz: This has to be handled here.
Chairman Regalado: Lourdes, excuse me. Excuse me.
178 April 11, 2002
Mr. Roiz: If someone wants to come into one of these districts and does not -- is not able to get a
Certificate of Compliance, based on the existing regulations, that person will require a Class II Special
Permit. Will have to go through all kinds of hearings and all kind of delay for their project --
Ms. Slazyk: A Class II Special Permit does not require hearings and -- I'm not understanding, I guess,
what the question is.
Chairman Regalado: What he's saying -- look, Lourdes, maybe -- his concern is that some of the
neighbors may decide something. Now, one of the neighbors may want to do something to his or her
house that may not be conforming to what the neighborhood has decided. Then what happens to that
person?
Ms. Slazyk: OK. In each individual district, if you want to build exceptions into the district, that
somebody could request a variance because they have some particular circumstance, then that person
would be able to seek a variance for it, and get a case by case individual review.
Chairman Regalado: So that person would have to go through the Planning and --
Ms. Slazyk: There would be some sort of recourse --
Chairman Regalado: -- Zoning Board and the City Commission?
Ms. Slazyk: Well, just the Zoning Board for a variance. And if it's appealed, then you, but it's no
different than they do now if they can't conform to some other code. If you don't meet -- You looked at a
setback variance earlier today. That was a person that felt there was a sufficient hardship on the property
that they needed to request a modification to the zoning requirement by asking for a variance. And if
there is a particular circumstance, they would be able to seek a variance. But the general guides and
standards are no different than what the zoning laws are today.
Mr. Roiz: Can I read off the law of the proposed law?
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead, and -- please, you have two minutes.
Mr. Roiz: The requirements concerning special approvals. The regulations may require special review of
development plans by a Department of Planning and Zoning, City boards, the City Commission, and
other officials or agencies of the City. In other words, anybody who wants to depart from the specific
guidelines will have to go through all of this, would even have to come before you, just because they want
to add, instead of adding 20 square feet to the house, they want to add 200, they will have to come even to
you. This is all designed to prevent improvement, and let me tell you something else. In reference to
illegal home usage and illegal subdivision of homes, the only hope the City of Miami has to get rid of all
the illegal uses in the City is if you attract new investments. If you pass a law that will prevent
investment and redevelopment, you're going to be conserving the illegal uses as well as you're going to be
conserving the pretty features that they want to preserve. This is all a bunch of sugar coating.
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me all right. Excuse me.
Mr. Roiz: This is just an ordinance to stop redevelopment of the City. That's all there is to it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Are you a developer?
179 April 11, 2002
Mr. Roiz: No, I am not. I am just someone who is pro development because we need development in the
City. OK. Right now --
Vice Chairman Winton: Your profession is what? Excuse me. I'm -- your profession is what again?
Mr. Roiz: Electrical engineer.
Vice Chairman Winton: And that's what you -- that's what you do for a living. You work as an electrical
engineer and you do not develop?
Mr. Roiz: I do not develop. Let me tell you this. Just right now you gave all the unions a 12 percent pay
raise based on the parking surcharge, which was intended for capital. You're supposed -- the City
Commission is supposed to increase the tax base so that all pay raises to the staff comes from ad valorem
taxes and you -- the City does not have the money to pay the four percent increase with ad -valorem taxes
and you're considering a law that is going to stop development of the City. This is against the whole
purpose.
Vice Chairman Winton: This does not stop development, at all. End of story. This does not stop
development.
Mr. Roiz: It does.
Vice Chairman Winton: It does not stop development.
Mr. Roiz: It does. Every --
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me.
Mr. Roiz: I'm sorry. Let -- go ahead and finish.
Vice Chairman Winton: There are communities all over the country. There are communities within
Miami -Dade County that have different -- and we're not trying to turn this into Coral Gables at all, but I'll
use Coral Gables as a classic example. There has not been one iota of reduced value, nor reduced
development in Coral Gables because of the stricter guidelines for development and redevelopment and
rehab that they have in Coral Gables, sir.
Mr. Roiz: Can I answer that, please?
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. I'm not going to debate with you. This is not --
Chairman Regalado: OK. But look, look, look, look.
Mr. Roiz: It is happening in the Latin Quarter.
Vice Chairman Winton: This is not --
Chairman Regalado: We cannot debate here.
Mr. Roiz: The Latin Quarter is a perfect example.
180 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman --
Mr. Roiz: -- where the regulations are --
Chairman Regalado: We're not debating it.
Mr. Roiz: --forestalling the development of Latin Quarter. The incentives --
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: I hear you. Look, we're not debating here. We are not getting into debate here. I
think that you have stated your position.
Mr. Roiz: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: We need -- you have not spoken. The other gentleman did already. Tucker has
already spoken. So, you're going to be the last one.
Anthony Asbury: Thirty seconds, please.
Chairman Regalado: And I'm going to close the public hearing. That's it. No more.
Mr. Asbury: OK. My name is Tony Asbury, 2645 Halissee Street, president of the Natoma Manor
Homeowners' Association. I just want to remind the Commissioners that the people that get involved in
homeowners associations are the ones that care about their City. People here --
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Asbury: -- that come down and want to preserve, they care about their City. They care about their
neighborhood. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. OK. Public hearing is closed. Members of the Commission, is
there a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second. It's a second reading ordinance. I wish that the
administration will be so kind and do the favor to the elected officials to give us some more details about
this. Because, frankly, I was never given the courtesy of an explanation of this ordinance and this is what
happens when you do not get the right information from the staff. You get paid for that and you're
supposed to come to us and give us the details so we can deal with things like the ones that have been set
here. So, having said that, I hope that, you know, in the future, you have the courtesy of informing the
elected officials of all the details and the consequences and the alternative and the different scenarios.
Because had we had all this information, we would not have all these questions answered because we
could have make a decision by answering those questions. So --
Commissioner Sanchez: Lourdes, take it into consideration that one -shoe -doesn't -fit -all.
181 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: That's absolutely true.
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Sanchez: Take it into consideration that one foot doesn't fit all -- one shoe doesn't fit all.
Chairman Regalado: Well, I don't know about that. But -- OK. There is a motion and a second. Read
the ordinance. 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.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez.
ABSENT: None.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12210.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): That's a 411 vote.
(APPLAUSE)
182 April 11, 2002
34. UPDATE REPORT REGARDING PROGRESS ON RESOLUTION OF OUTSTANDING FINES
AND ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH AT&T-COMCAST MERGER.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Mayor, don't -- Mr. Mayor, when do you want to do the AT&T (American
Telephone & Telegraph)?
Mayor Manny Diaz: Right now.
Chairman Regalado: Right now. So, now that we have the happy times of big check -- no. Correction:
He thinks that I'm going to address the issue of what happened to me at the Riverside Center at
Disneyland, but I'm not.
Commissioner Sanchez: If he's going to address the issue...
Chairman Regalado: Not just yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, not yet.
Chairman Regalado: Not just yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: You let me know, OK, so I can (inaudible).
Chairman Regalado: I will. Look, if I'm not...
Commissioner Sanchez: Because I'm stuck in the middle of the crossfire.
Chairman Regalado: If I'm not sleepy by nine, I'll be pepped up by, you know -- I can last until two. So,
I don't have any problem. Mr. Mayor, the AT&T -- there are two things you promised a report to the
Commission on your talks with AT&T regarding the fine. We need to hear from the Manager on the
survey and I guess that we have also counsel for the City, Matt Leibowitz. So, whenever you want, Mr.
Mayor.
Mayor Diaz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We've had several meetings with AT&T representatives since I
appeared last before you to discuss this item. We have identified essentially the amount that we're
estimating as of June 1, to be five hundred and forty-six thousand. The survey that you referred to has
been started. We have also talked and will be discussing with you, individually, the idea of holding
public hearings in each of your districts to get input from the public, in addition to the customer surveys
that we're doing. Legally, Matt will talk to you about a number of issues because we've actually
expanded the list of issues that we want to deal with and he's going to get into that with you. We're going
to meet with them again. What I'd like to do at this point is, I think we've gone far enough in the meetings
that we need to have. I now need to meet with each of you individually, particularly in terms of the
direction that we're going to give specifically. I have some ideas in terms of the dollars that we're talking
about. But I think we've made significant progress with them. They've been very cooperative and I think
now, as we finish the survey and get the public hearings underway and deal with some of the issues that
Mr. Leibowitz will talk to you about, I think we're in good shape. In the meantime, obviously our lawyers
will also tell you that that we've done everything that we need to do, from a legal perspective, to protect
our rights and to toll the 120 -day period, but they'll get into more details about that.
Matthew Leibowitz: Mayor, members of the Commission, I believe you've all received a one-page outline
of the outstanding issues for consideration presumably they were distributed to your offices.
183 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: I didn't.
Mr. Leibowitz: OK. Well, in that case, let me just review them because most of them have already been
known and discussed to you. The first one is the completion of the rebuild. As you'll recall, under the
renewal process, AT&T was required to complete a rebuild of the existing plan and upgrade the system.
And they were supposed to have it 90 percent completed by date certain. They have not done that and
that is the basis of the outstanding notice of violation and the fines that are running on to date. They have
been making progress on a regular basis. They project a June completion of that 90 percent figure and the
Mayor referred to an estimated fine at that point of about five hundred and forty-six thousand dollars
($546,000). Having said that, the question then is, you only have a 90 percent system, so we still have to
address the remaining 10 percent and one of the issues we'll have to deal with in these discussions with
AT&T is getting that remaining 10 percent complete, establishing a true definition so we know what it is,
in fact, completed, and set up a structure that, in the event that they don't make that date, how -- what are
the consequences going to be and have a very viable and quick enforcement mechanism in place.
The second point -- and we've discussed this before -- is that one of the alternative that's we were looking
for from AT&T is additional access points for the government Channel. As you're aware, right now we
only have two existing points where Channel 9 plugs in. This chamber -- and in the Fire College. This
Commission has expressed over a number of different meetings, a desire to have additional points of
access. AT&T has actually started to construct the Miami Police Department, the Miami Riverside
Center and the Manuel Artime Center, even though we have some ironing out to do of the precise cost
estimates that were provided, but those were close enough that they're underway. The fourth location,
which was Bayfront Park, has been sidetracked for the moment. Primarily because the cost estimate by
AT&T that was provided was almost a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000) and we took issue with that
-- we got an estimate by an independent engineer of only sixty-eight thousand dollars ($68,000), but we
now understand -- actually, Commissioner, that the Parks Department doesn't want the construction in
that manner, so we're going to have to -- if you deem that location important, we're going to have to go
back and look at another engineering route so you can find a medium somewhere between the sixty-eight
thousand and the two hundred and fifty. But the question then is what other points of access do you want
us to consider in these discussions? And then we need to build in a procedure for future points of access
so that, in two years, three years -- remember, this is a 10 -year agreement -- is if we want additional
points, we can have a system in place where we can immediately implement them or in a fast track it. In
terms of the peg process itself, as you know, we already have a funding mechanism in place. It's part of
the renewal. But we need some technical assistance. We want to make sure it operates, and we want to
be able to have a higher quality programming. We want to have some equipment provided and financial
support of that equipment, and then given the fact that the City is now doing more programming, we want
people to know about it so we want to be included in the programming guides, we want some mailings
and some publicity for Channel 9 and any other future programming that this City may want to start with.
Obviously, the critical issue -- I probably should have started with -- is this customer service. You know,
we've all been plagued with complaints about customer service. We have the customer service survey in
place. It will be back in about a week. And my suggestion is, that gives us a snapshot, which we should
compare with two other points. One, we can develop a historical point based on data that the County and
the City already has and then we should have a future point and that is after the construction, and see what
the trend is over the period of time. But we need to focus on and tighten up what standards they're
supposed to conform to, which we know they're not, and review the standards of enforcement and
expedite that enforcement process even further so, if we do run into a problem in the future, we have a
bigger stick, if you will, to enforce the process. Part of this, we have to look at the issue of -- which is a
very sticky issue and undefined in the law today -- as when they start providing the Internet -- cable
Internet modem service, do we want to get into customer service on that issue? That's a very difficult
legal question, but we're going to delve into it and explore it with AT&T. The final substantive issue is
the INET (Institutional Network). As you may recall, during the renewal process, we considered as part
184 April 11, 2002
of the cable franchise, a requirement that the cable company provide the City with an institutional
network. Essentially, what this is is a system -- a separate cable or separate fiber strands which would
interconnect just government buildings. So, essentially would provide an intergovernmental closed
circuit system. What it does, it provides security for the system. It also cuts down on a lot of the ongoing
expense items that you have in your budget today on telecommunications. For a number of reasons, the
City elected not to go forward during the renewal at that time, but we want to bring it back up on the
discussion here, but on a much more limited basis. At one point and during the renewal, we were talking
about as many as 84 locations. Now we're talking about potentially connecting the Fire College, MPD
(Miami Police Department), the Riverside and City Hall. So, those are the five substantive manners that
the Mayor's Office and we have met with and discussed. In terms of process, we'll have the customer
service study back in about a week. We're going to organize the public hearings in each one of your
districts. From all that, we will sit down and have an ultimate negotiation with AT&T. You have the
transfer process ongoing. The transfer application is before you and under the federal law, you have a
120 -day period, plus some extensions that -- so, the clock is ticking. What we're going to shoot for is
bringing back this whole package with proposed resolutions to you on your June 13`h Commission
meeting. If we don't make that, we're going to -- we're certainly going to try to make your July schedule
because we don't want to lose the time of your recess and we certainly don't want to bring it to you in
September because of your budget process, plus we know AT&T is going to be pushing very hard to get
as close as possible to that 120 days.
Chairman Regalado: Matthew, question. I thought that if there is a merger -- and apparently there is a
merger with Comcast, Comcast and AT&T.
Mr. Leibowitz: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Is it 30 days for us to challenge ...
Mr. Leibowitz: The 30 -day process was -- what happened is, they filed an application with us and we had
a 30 -day window to issue a letter raising our initial concerns. That letter went out. And...
Chairman Regalado: That letter went out.
Mr. Leibowitz: On time, and my guess, from what I hear from AT&T, we'll be getting a response early
next week to that letter.
Chairman Regalado: A letter it's incomplete. Who sent that letter?
Mr. Leibowitz: We sent -- I sent that letter under -- from our office, after consultation with the staff and
raised these type of issues, but the letter is drafted in a manner that we can, you know, bring up additional
topics during these negotiations. It was based upon the violations that we knew about, such as customer
service and these other issues. But it was broadly written. So, I don't think we have any difficulty
bringing in, particularly any other violations that might have occurred or are occurring under the
franchise.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I don't know if I can call these violations, but certainly are things that AT&T
is doing and is not honoring the -- probably not the letter or the contract, but the spirit of the contract. For
instance, AT&T agreed, during the contract negotiations -- you remember -- that they will not raise the
fees of residents in public housing buildings in the City of Miami; that for the basic services, they would
not raise the fees. But what they've done is, they have gone through the back door. They have taken
optional Spanish TV (Television) stations, two of them; off the basic system and place it on the
broadband, and now, the people that complain to them is asked to pay a higher fee if they want access to
185 April 11, 2002
those two stations. I think that is something that is really wrong because sixty to seventy percent of the
residents of those HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) buildings are only Spanish
speaking and they are denying those people of the possibility of having options, other than the two major
networks in Spanish. So, in a way, in a way, they have faulted or defaulted in the spirit of the contract that
they did. The other thing is that -- and this Public Works and the Manager have been involved, is that
they cannot seem to finish a job on one of our neighborhoods in the right way. They come in, break and
dig and then they break a fence, they break a sidewalk, and they just leave. And they can do that because
I have tried to follow those crews contracted by AT&T and if you see the tags on their trucks are from
Mississippi or Georgia or they're not locals. I don't know why. But they're not locals. So, I'm really
troubled because I think that if we do not state what we really want, I think that AT&T is attacking
diversity in the City of Miami by taking Spanish TV station off the people that cannot afford to pay thirty-
eight to forty-eight dollars ($48) on the broadband and that's a shame.
That is a shame because they said that they would do that, and they are not complying. So, I would really
like to include that, if possible. And, mind you, this is notable programming. This is about options. This
is about free speech. Commissioner Sanchez, yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: I just have a question. How many local minority companies do they have
employed? Maybe the young lady could answer that question. Just out of curiosity because I, too, have
seen a lot of these out-of-state tags.
Susan Bisno: Hi. I'm Susan Bisno with AT&T. Hi. Whenever I start, everybody tells me to say my
address, so 600 North Pine Island, Plantation. I don't know the answer but I will find out. I know that we
have very committed to hiring locally. We're very committed to being friendly to minorities of all types,
and certainly -- especially -- frankly to Hispanic -- the Hispanic community here clearly there's a need.
Commissioner Sanchez: Could you find out -- two questions for me and get back. One is how many
minority contractors do you have and the other one that I want to find out is, how many have their offices
in the City of Miami? Just out of curiosity because I know in your agreement, it stated that you would try
to do as much business as possible with local companies. And, you know, I don't need to get into the
unemployment numbers here in the City but you know we have to look out for our residents.
Susan Bisno: Right. Absolutely. I can respect that. I'll find out.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. I do have the same concern as Commissioner Sanchez. I also would like
to know how many companies are City of Miami based, how many companies are out of Dade County,
how many companies are out of Florida, out of the State of Florida? And we're not -- at least I'm not
referring just to Hispanics. When I said, I would like to see --
Commissioner Sanchez: Minorities.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- minorities, I'm talking about minorities in general.
Commissioner Sanchez: Hispanic, Afro-Americans.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
186 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Matt thank you very much for being here and we appreciate the manner in which
you've approached this. I'd like to, I guess, ask the Manager -- because I'm never certain of this
technology terminology, so I'm almost afraid to ask a question for fear I'll say something really
profoundly ignorant. But the INET, as distinguished from the downlinks or the uplinks, help me
understand the difference. Because one of the things that bothers me is that this City needs to be able to
deploy the technology or transmit geographically from the north, the south, the east and the west, and it
just -- I mean, you know, I understand the Miami -Dade Police Department -- I mean, the Miami Police
Department and Riverside, and I can understand operationally, hurricanes. I guess we have an operational
center in the Police Department and we've got accessibility, you know, but we're talking now about all of
four blocks from each other, six blocks and, yet, it seems to me that there seems to be nothing in the north
end of the City, whether it be upper east side or the northern police headquarters up there, but
traditionally, when we've had the breaking news, we've had the problem in the north end of the City. So,
I just want to understand the rationale as to -- you know, the Fire College sounds good, but what's the
breaking news there? I mean, it sounds like something nice to have. Where is the Fire College physically
located?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): The Fire College is in the Southwest Grove. It's on Jefferson Street. I
guess the rationale behind those facilities is that that -- the vast majority of telecom communications
happens between those facilities. The Fire College is not one of the ones that really generate a lot of
information, but it is where the EOC (Emergency Operation Center) will be in the future, the Emergency
Operation Center. There's a lot of communication that's happens between the MRC (Miami Riverside
Center) and the Police Department building. We have -- we spent a lot of money in hooking those
facilities together. I guess what happens with this INET is that you would not have to spend the money
for T-1 lines, et cetera, between the Miami Police Department building, which really houses our main
frames ...
Commissioner Teele: I'm sure there's a great justification for every building. I'm more concerned ability
the buildings that are not here. What is the northern most location?
Mr. Leibowitz: Can I interrupt just for a second so -- because you're correct, there's a confusion here. The
public access...
Commissioner Teele: Corrected, that I was profoundly misinformed.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, no, no. You were very close, but there's a slight difference here. The Public
Educational Government channels, the peg channels, which we have Channel 9, is the Channels that we
use -- this City uses for broadcasting to the community, OK. Our use of it right now is Channel 9. So,
the idea is to have other facilities other than, for instance, this room, where City officials can...
Unidentified speaker: (Inaudible)
Mr. Leibowitz: No, no. I know. I want to make the distinction -- can broadcast on Channel 9 or other
government channels to the cable subscribers. That's the peg channels. The institutional network is
something different.
Commissioner Teele: Wait, wait, wait, wait. How many peg channels are we talking about? How many
peg locations we're talking about?
187 April 11, 2002
Mr. Leibowitz: Well, we're talking -- right now we have peg locations two. We have the Fire College and
City Hall. These other points that we talked about are for broadcasting essentially, at this point, Channel
9, or any other of the peg channels that we make future -- create under the franchise. Remember, you
have a right up to five channels based upon usage. Now, the institutional network is totally different. The
institutional network is a closed network...
Chairman Regalado: Matt, Matt, Matt, just to clarify it because I think that maybe we could be under the
impression that we could use five channels. Actually, we're using now three channels of the five, right?
Commissioner Teele: One.
Chairman Regalado: No.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, we're using...
Commissioner Teele: And we barely meet the minimum requirement...
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, but -- then we include the School Board and the County?
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no.
Mr. Leibowitz: We have a right to five independent channels for the City.
Commissioner Teele: The City of Miami.
Chairman Regalado: The City has -- OK.
Commissioner Teele: But -- but it's conditioned on original --
Chairman Regalado: Live.
Commissioner Teele: -- authentic, live programming for which we barely meet the threshold to hold on
to the one we've got.
Mr. Leibowitz: Well, we have an absolute right to one.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but ...
Mr. Leibowitz: But before we can go to the second, we have a use formula that we have to fulfill and
we're not even close to it.
Commissioner Teele: Anywhere near that right now.
Mr. Leibowitz: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: One of the things that I would hope that the communications director and all of
that, you know, would do -- would be to address that. But I want to get back to emanating live
broadcasting because one of the things that the Mayor has said repeatedly -- and I don't want to take
exception with the Mayor, but I do want to make a different point than the Mayor has made in the past on
the issue of so-called fine money. If there's going to be fines -- and I want to just say on the record, I'm
willing to fine anybody who is notorious, who is disrespectful, egregious and all of that, but I really think,
188 April 11, 2002
in this business we're in, we need to work with the industry and help them comply and encourage them to
make a substantial voluntary contribution, and there's a big reason here. If we fine them, it's a really,
really bad -- it really could hurt them in ways we don't understand or ways that we don't really mean, and
if our issue is to get recover the revenue, I would much rather -- as one Commissioner send the message
that I'm going to be looking for a very large voluntary donation to the City of Miami, that is somewhere
proximate and equal to what a fine would be, but my last choice would be to impose a fine. However, I
do believe that in the context of the services that we're talking about, we need to look globally at what is
available. And I'm really of the opinion, Mr. Manager -- Mr. Mayor, if I could -- Frank -- if I could on
the Mayor, if I could just make two points for the Mayor's benefit. I'm strongly of the opinion that this
City -- that the Mayor's Office at this City Hall, available generally to the public, should have a first class
broadcast facility somewhere in this building that is capable of carrying the President of the United States
message when he's in Miami or the President of Venezuela or any other country that may be in route or
here for whatever reason. And I think, you know, we, as a City that best represents this hemisphere,
would be much better off channeling our AT&T -- let's use the word fines for a minute -- but those AT&T
dollars toward enhancing and upgrading our communications infrastructure, creating a briefing room or a
press room that is second -to -none in this nation, as opposed to using money to clean up the streets. Now,
I'm one hundred percent, Mr. Mayor, for coming up with seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars
($750,000) to clean up the streets, but I think that's something we can engage AT&T, as a partner with us,
and have them bring their Madison Avenue, you know, London-based consultants to come down here and
help us design a room or a set, if you will -- we're talking now about a set, a media set that is reflective of
this City as a first class way. And, so, I want to be very, very clear that I think we need to have these
facilities were we could go live right on net and they're not going to be cheap, but we don't have to ask the
taxpayers to pay one dollar for these guys or facilities. These are facilities that AT&T because of their
slow -- for whatever reason, because of their slowness -- I don't want to say failure yet -- in meeting our
requirements, that we can engage them sort of as a partner in doing that, and I think there needs to be that
kind of facility and wherever we're going to have our Emergency Operation Center, and whether we have
our police headquarters and, candidly, you know, we need something on the north end, whether it be in
Morningside, in Commissioner Winton's district or whether it be in Little Haiti, or whether it be in Model
Cities, we need something north of 36`h Street that is a -- that kind of facility, and, so I'm just asking the
Mayor and the Manager to consider that point of view as well. I strongly believe, Mr. Mayor that we need
to engage AT&T in a partnership. They've got a real problem. And they're going to have to pay some
money, whether it's a fine or a volunteer or whether they're going to be cleaning our windows for us.
They're going to have to do something, you know, to get out of this place. Sort of like when you don't
have your money when you go to the restaurant. That's the position they're in right now. But I think
we're much better off in engaging them to use their tremendous networks and resources to help us better
position this City in the context of our technology than to take the money and put it in some other areas
because, you know, there's no linkage in that regard. The final point, Mr. Manager, is this: I think a lot of
what we've got is what the Mayor talked about yesterday, the efficiency issue and the organizational
review, et cetera. The one thing that is very clear to me is that we need a full-time dedicated person that
does nothing but manage this contract for AT&T. We have the same problem as you know, with Florida
Power & Light sometimes on these things. We have these big contracts out there that literally control
tens of millions of dollars over years, but there's nobody full-time really (inaudible). As a result, you
know, the contractor sort of gets away with as little as possible and I really do think that that person that's
doing this should organizationally be reviewed as to whether they should be an ITD (Information
Technology Department) or communications. Clearly, it's an ITD function, but I really do think that
there's a communications issues, and I think we need to make sure that some of these dollars that we're
bringing in support a full-time staff process to do this and that's certainly, Elaine, no reflection at all on
you, but I know you do a lot more than this and I know you know -- if you did just this, you'd be more
than busy, and, so, I don't want to speak for you but I certainly don't mean to imply criticism. To the
contrary, I think you're doing an outstanding job. And, so, I would just like to make sure that whatever
dollars we do, we put those dollars in a way to protect our assets and protect the public and I'm very
189 April 11, 2002
comfortable in following the Mayor's recommendations in terms of how we proceed with AT&T.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, one of the things about -- you were talking about these, for lack of a better
term, is drops, and you can do it one or two ways. You can either have a lot of these drops or you can
actually plug in and do live TV or you can do drops in those areas where you're going to have a lot of live
broadcasting, but you could also get a portable -- a truck, which -- with microwave that you can do live
broadcasting from anywhere in the City.
Commissioner Teele: Obviously, we need a truck and, I mean -- you know, and that's -- what I'm saying
is, we're going to use that money -- we're going to use that money as a partnership with AT&T. Now, the
last time we did the partnership, they charged us two hundred and thirty thousand and somebody else was
willing to charge us sixty, but it would be my thought -- if we were going to bid a truck and it was going
to cost four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000), they ought to be able to get it for say two hundred
thousand, because I'm sure they do the trucks in more volume and dah, dah, dah, dah. But that's the kind
of partnership, Brian, guys, that we're talking about, not the other kind. You know, the kind where we're
saving money, not tossing money.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I still think that somehow we are focusing in immediately -- the need, and I
fully support the Mayor on his talks with AT&T, but I think there's more to it. There's going to be a
merger and, you know, we elected officials are going to get stuck with the complaints about the service.
Service is now one of the issues that we are not focusing and this will be for years and years and years to
come. The daily problem that the people of Miami is going to jump at us with it. The service that
AT&T's offering now is terrible, terrible, and you know, if we don't get our things together and decide,
you know, this is what we're going to set in the contract when we approve the merger with Comcast, we're
dead. Because we may get all the money in the world. We can clean the City but let me tell you, for a lot
of people have been a nightmare, some of these changes and especially the response time. The response
time on the service is, I believe, a written violation of the contract, and so, I don't know, Matt, what you
recommend, but I think that within the frameworks of those talks, that we should discuss the service. I
don't know how the survey is being done, but I hope that there was an emphasis on service because that is
the first complaint of the people of Miami and -- yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, just very brief. I do remember from previous conversations on
this -- and I'm open-minded. Whatever recommendation comes to me, but I do remember there was some
talk about possibly making some donations to local parks. There was some talk about of course putting
some money towards the Net 9 and, of course, the clean up. I would like to somehow see all three of
those somehow accomplished. I mean, we could talk about how the money's going to go and I'm very
open minded on it, but I think that was a commitment long time ago and I don't want to deviate from that
because it's very important for our parks, it's very important for our community clean up and, of course,
the Mayor gave a great speech yesterday. We were all there. But if you see it on Channel 9 -- I mean,
Channel 9 has made significant improvements, but still it's poor quality TV and I think that we need to
put a little bit more resources in there so people at home get to see a better quality. Because after all, the
perception how you view it at your house is -- you know, if it's a bad reception and it's a bad showing,
you know, you tend to judge the City of Miami being cheap because that's the way it's shown on Channel
9. So, just keep in mind those three things that originally have always been discussed by this legislative
body, the Mayor, and AT&T.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on the point that you raised, the AT&T made a commitment of
certain reductions or certain discounts, people in public housing, that -- I would like to take the position
the Chairman's taking, is that we really should spend some of the time focused on providing better and
190 April 11, 2002
more economical services to our constituents. I would request, Matt that you get AT&T to renew that
commitment that they had previously made. I'm not asking that they make a new commitment, but they
reissue that commitment because I think it expired like after 90 days or something.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, no, no. I think what you're thinking about is one of the offers of settlement on these
fines was a rate freeze. But what you're referring to is an ongoing commitment for...
Commissioner Teele: There's an ongoing commitment ...
Mr. Leibowitz: -- for the HUD housing.
Commissioner Teele: For HUD housing --
Mr. Leibowitz: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: -- which really benefits the County. I mean, it benefits our residents that live there
but you know, it's a County deal. I mean, it's another one of these lack of payment in lieu of taxes. I
mean...
Chairman Regalado: No. Because the people have to pay of their own pocket.
Commissioner Teele: I understand that they are citizens -- resident of the citizens. But I feel a lot better
if it were Section 8 housing that the City is managing. But in any event, does that apply to Section 8
housing?
Chairman Regalado: No, it doesn't.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, it does not. But what I will do is I will go back and look at the requirements within
franchise...
Commissioner Teele: Would you ask them, in a letter, to update that so we can re -disseminate that to our
constituents?
Mr. Leibowitz: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: You know, sort of immediately, so that we can at least make people aware in how
they can apply. Because there was some confusion also about how to apply and who to apply to, if you fit
within that category.
Mr. Leibowitz: Absolutely.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but what they're doing is they're circumventing the contract.
Mr. Leibowitz: What I will do, Commissioner, based on your information is, I'm going to go back, look at
the language, understand what we actually wanted and revisit the whole issue with AT&T and see if we
can clarify what -- and make sure that the language meets what our intent was.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, because they -- you know, they're going to tell you; we have not raised the
rates for the standard -- the basic service. But what they've done is that they've taken channels that are
popular in those specially those household with elderly Hispanics and then they have move on -- they
have moved those channels to the broadband, which cost more and, as a result, if they want to see it,
191 April 11, 2002
they've got to pay it. And I think that that's wrong. That is so wrong. And I don't understand how
AT&T, which is big in public relations, is attacking the weakest and the poorest of their clients and, I just
don't -- cannot understand that. And, you know, sooner or later, sooner or later, it's going to be a protest
and you know, it could be right in the middle of the talks for a merger. And it could come from this City
Commission.
Mr. Leibowitz: I hear you loud and clear. I will add that and I will emphasize -- we've discussed over and
over again the customer service and the problems and their new policy, which violates our franchise
agreement. We will zero in on these issues and negotiate hard on your behalf.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Albio Castillo: Thank you. My name is Albio Castillo. I live in 2386. I'd like to ask this question: How
much is the City going to pay in attorney's fees? I don't want to pay another bundle with this merger.
Another thing is, when is AT&T going to improve your customer service? Like I have to get eight
hundred -- you know, hello, is there a human in there? And I'd also like to know is, I still (inaudible)
payment and my cable went out at 12 o'clock midnight, watching ESPN (Entertainment and Sports
Programming Network), and I tried to call the eight hundred and I couldn't reach a human. I also in
February, ESPN went out. Now, I'd like to know when is AT&T going to pay me? And I also like to
know is, when the merger is, how much is the taxpayers of the City of Miami going to pay on attorneys?
Commissioner Sanchez: Sir, sir, I believe AT&T owes you a rebate.
Mr. Castillo: They do. They also owe me a few other things.
Chairman Regalado: And besides, they have to pay for the attorney's fees, so don't worry about it.
Mr. Castillo: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Don't report I worry about it.
Mr. Castillo: Well, that's what I want to know.
Chairman Regalado: You worry about the service, which is really bad.
Mr. Castillo: Yeah. Hello. Humans. (Inaudible) humans. You know. I understand that customer
service, I know you deal a lot because I work in a Publix so I know —how it is customer service and it's
very difficult, but I also understand I need a human to answer the phone on a eight hundred. That's why
it's there for. I think. And the little slip you get for payments, thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Your welcome. OK. Matthew, do we need anything from you in terms of
legislation? Do we want anything -- Mayor, do you want make any final statement on this?
Mayor Diaz: Commissioner, Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I've heard everyone's priorities tonight and
we're going to go back and work on those and then follow up with each of you individually.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK. Thank you very much.
192 April 11, 2002
35. UPDATE REPORT REGARDING PROGRESS ON RESOLUTION OF OUTSTANDING FINES
AND ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH AT&T-COMCAST MERGER.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Mayor, don't -- Mr. Mayor, when do you want to do the AT&T
(American Telephone & Telegraph)? Right now. So now that we have the happy times of big check --
no. Correction. He thinks that I'm going to address the issue of what happened to me at the Riverside
Center at Disney Land, but I'm not.
Commissioner Sanchez: If he's going to address the issue --
Chairman Regalado: Not just yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, not yet? OK.
Chairman Regalado: Not just yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: You let me know, OK, so I can wear the helmet.
Chairman Regalado: I will. Look, if I'm not --
Commissioner Sanchez: Because I'm stuck in the middle of the cross fire.
Chairman Regalado: If I'm not sleepy by nine, I'll be pepped up by -- you know, I can last until two. So,
I don't have any problem. Mr. Mayor, the AT&T -- there are two things you promised report to the
Commission on your talks with AT&T regarding the fine. We need to hear from the Manager on the
survey and I guess that we have also counsel for the City, Matt Liebowitz. So, whenever you want, Mr.
Mayor.
Mayor Diaz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We've had several meetings with AT&T representatives since I
appeared last before you to discuss this item. We have identified essentially the amount that we're
estimating, as of June 1, to be five hundred and forty-six thousand. The survey that you referred to, it has
been started. We have also talked and will be discussing with you, individually, the idea of having --
holding public hearings in each of your districts to get input from the public, in addition to the customer
surveys that we're doing. Legally, Matt will talk to you about a number of issues, because we've actually
expanded the list of issues that we want to deal with. And he's going to get into that with you. We're
going to meet with him again. What I'd like to do at this point is, I think we've gone far enough in the
meetings that we need to have. I now need to meet with each of you individually, particularly in terms of
the direction that we're going to give specifically. I have some ideas in terms of the dollars that we're
talking about, but I think we've made significant progress with them. They've been very cooperative, and
I think now as we finish the survey, and get the public hearings underway and deal with some of the
issues that Mr. Leibowitz will talk to you about, I think we're in good shape. In the meantime, obviously,
our lawyers will also tell you that we've done everything that we need to do, from a legal perspective, to
protect our rights and to toll the 120 -day period. But they'll get into more detail about that.
Matthew Leibowitz: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, I believe you've all received a one-page
outline of the outstanding issues for consideration. Presumably, they were distributed to your offices.
Chairman Regalado: I didn't.
193 April 11, 2001
Mr. Leibowitz: OK. Well, in that case, let me just review them because most of them have already --
known and discussed to you. The first one is the completion of the rebuild. As you recall, under the
renewal process, AT&T was required to complete a rebuild of the existing plant and upgrade the system,
and they were suppose to have it 90 percent completed by a date certain. They have not done that, and
that is the basis of the outstanding notice of violation and the fines that are running on to date. They have
been making progress on a regular basis. They project a June completion of that 90 percent figure, and
the Mayor referred to an estimated fine at that point of about five hundred and forty-six thousand dollars.
Having said that, the question then is, you only have a 90 percent system. So, which still have to address
the remaining 10 percent. And one of the issues we'll have to deal with in these discussions with AT&T
is getting that remaining 10 percent complete, establishing a true definition so we know it is, in fact,
completed, and set up in a structure that, in the event that they don't make that date, how will -- what are
the consequences going to be and have a very viable and quick enforce -- mechanism in place. The
second point -- and we've discussed this before -- is that one of the alternatives is that we were looking for
from AT&T is additional access points for the government channel. As you're aware, right now we only
have two existing points, where channel 9 plugs in, this chamber and in the fire college. This
Commission has expressed over a number of different meetings a desire to have additional points of
access. AT&T has actually started to construct the Miami Police Department, the Miami Riverside
Center and the Manuel Artime Center. Even though we have some ironing out to do of the precise cost
estimates that were provided, but those were close enough that they were underway. The fourth location,
which was Bayfront Park, has been sidetracked for a moment, primarily because the cost estimate by
AT&T that was provided was almost a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000), and we took issue with
that. We got an estimate by an independent engineer of only sixty-eight thousand dollars ($68,000), but
we now understand -- actually, Commissioner, that the Parks Department doesn't want the construction in
that manner, so, we're going to have to -- if you deem that new location important, we're going to have to
go back and look at another engineering route so we can find a medium between the sixty-eight thousand
and the two hundred and fifty. But the question then is, what other points of access do you want us to
consider in these discussions? And then we need to build in a procedure for future points of access, so
that in two years, three years -- remember, this is a 10 -year agreement -- is if we want additional points,
we can have a system in place where we can immediately implement them or in a fast track it. In terms of
the peg process itself, as you know, we already have a funding mechanism in place, as part of the
renewal, but we need some technical assistance. We want to make sure it operates, and we want to be
able to have a higher quality programming. We want to have some equipment provided and financial
support of that equipment. And then given the fact that the City is now doing more programming, we
want people to know about it, so, we want to be included in the programming guides. We want some
mailings and some publicity for channel 9 and any other future programming that the City may want to
start with. Obviously, the critical issue is -- I probably should have started with -- is this customer
service. You know, we've all been plagued with complaints about customer service. We have the
customer service survey in place. It will be back in about a week, and my suggestion is that gives us a
snapshot, which we should compare with two other points. One, we can develop a historical point based
on data that the County and the City already has, and then we should have a future point, and that is, after
the construction, and see what the trend is over the period of time, but we need to focus on and tighten up
what standards they're suppose to conform to, which we know they're not, and we view the standards of
enforcement and expedite that enforcement process even further so if we do run into a problem in the
future, we have a bigger stick, if you will, to enforce the process. Part of this, we have to look at the issue
of -- which is a very sticky issue and undefined in the law today -- as when they start providing cable
Internet modem service, do we want to get into customer service on that issue? That's a very difficult
legal question, but we're going to delve into it and explore it with AT&T. The final substantive issue is
the INET. As you may recall, during the renewal process, we considered as part of the cable franchise, a
requirement that the cable company provide the City with an Institutional Network. Essentially, what this
is is a system -- a separate cable or separate fiber strands, which would interconnect just government
buildings, so, essentially, would provide an intergovernmental closed circuit system. What it does, it
194 April 11, 2001
provides security for the system. It also cuts down on a lot of the ongoing expense items that's you have
in your budget today on telecommunications. For a number of reasons, the City elected not to go forward
during the renewal at that time, but we want to bring it back up on the discussion here, but on a much
more limited basis. At one point, and during the renewal, we were talking about as many as 84 locations.
Now, we're talking about potentially connecting the fire college, MPZ, the Riverside and City Hall, so
those are the five substantive matters that the Mayor's office and we have met with and discussed. In
terms of process, we'll have the customer service study back in about a week. We're going to organize the
public hearings in each one of your districts. From all that, we will sit down and have an ultimate
negotiation with AT&T. You will -- you have the transfer process ongoing. The transfer application is
before you. Under federal law, you have a 120 -day period, plus some extensions, so the clock is ticking.
What we're going to shoot for is bringing back on this whole package, with proposed resolutions to you,
on your June 13th Commission meeting. If we don't make that, we're going to -- we're certainly going to
try to make your July schedule, because we don't want to lose the time of your recess, and we certainly
don't want to bring it to you in September because of your budget process. Plus, we know AT&T is going
to be pushing very hard to get as close as possible to that 120 days.
Chairman Regalado: Matthew, question. I thought that if there is a merger -- and apparently there is
merger with Comcast -- Comcast and AT&T.
Mr. Leibowitz: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Is it 30 days for us to challenge --
Mr. Leibowitz: The 30 -day process was-- what happened is, they filed an application with us and we had
a 30 -day window to issue a letter raising our initial concerns.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Leibowitz: That letter went out.
Chairman Regalado: That letter went out.
Mr. Leibowitz: On the time, and my -- from what I hear from AT&T, we'll be getting a response early
next week to that letter.
Chairman Regalado: But the letter is incomplete. Who sent that letter?
Mr. Leibowitz: We sent -- I sent that letter, from our office, after consultation with the staff and raised
these types of issuesc but the letter is drafted in a manner that we can, you know, bring up additional
topics during these negotiations. It was based upon the violations that we knew about, such as customer
service and these other issues, but it was broadly written, so, I don't think we have any difficulty bringing
in, particularly, any other violations that might have occurred or are occurring under the franchise.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I don't know if I can call these violations but certainly are things that AT&T
is doing and is not honoring the -- probably not the letter of the contract, but the spirit of the contract. For
instance, AT&T agree during the contract negotiations -- you remember -- that they will not raise the fees
of residents in public housing buildings in the City of Miami; that for the basic services, they will not
raise the fees, but what they've done is, they have gone through the back door. They have taken optional
Spanish TV stations, two of them, off the basic system and place it on the Broadband, and -- now, the
people that complained to them is asked to pay a higher fee, if they want access to those two stations. I
think that is something that is really wrong, because 60 to 70 percent of the residents of those HUD
195 April 11, 2001
(Department of Housing and Urban Development) buildings are only Spanish speaking and they are
denying those people of the possibility of having options, other than the two major networks in Spanish,
so in a way, they have faulted or defaulted in the spirit of the contract that they did. The other thing is
that -- and this -- Public Works and the Manager have been involved -- is that they cannot seem to finish a
job under one of our neighborhoods in the right way. They come in, break and dig and then they break a
fence, they break a sidewalk, and they just leave, and they can do that because I have tried to follow those
crews contracted by AT&T and if you see the tags in their trucks are from Mississippi or Georgia or
they're not local -- I don't know why, but they're not local, so I'm really troubled, because I think that if
we do not state what we really want, I think that AT&T is attacking diversity in the City of Miami by
taking Spanish TV station off the people that cannot afford to pay thirty-eight to forty-eight dollars on the
Broadband, and that's a shame. That is a shame because they said that they would do that and they are not
complying, so I would really like to include that, if possible, and, mind you, this is not about
programming. This is about options. This is about free speech. Commissioner Sanchez, yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: I just have a question. How many local minority companies do they have
employed? Maybe the young lady can answer that question. Just out of curiosity. Because I, too, have
seen a lot of these out-of-state tags.
Susan Bisno: Hi. I'm Susan Bisno with AT&T.
Commissioner Sanchez: How are you, Susan?
Ms. Bisno: Hi. Whenever I start, everybody tells me to state my address, so 600 North Pine Island,
Plantation. I don't know the answer, but I will find out. I know that we are very committed to hiring
locally. We're very committed to being friendly to minorities of all types, and certainly -- especially,
frankly, to Hispanic -- the Hispanic community here. Clearly, there's a need.
Commissioner Sanchez: Could you find out two questions for me --
Ms. Bisno: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- when you get back? One is, how many minority companies -- contractors do
you have? And the other one I want to find out is, how many have their offices in the City of Miami, just
out of curiosity? Because I know that in your agreement, it stated that you would try to do as much
business as possible with local companies, and, you know, I don't need to get into the unemployment
numbers here in the City, but you know --
Ms. Bisno: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- we have to look out for our residents.
Ms. Bisno: Absolutely. I can respect that. I'll find out.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah. I do have the same concern as Commissioner Sanchez. I also would
like to know how many companies are City of Miami based? How many companies out of Dade County?
196 April 11, 2001
How many companies are out of Florida-- out of the state of Florida? And we're not -- at least I'm not
referring just to Hispanics. When I say, I would like to see --
Commissioner Sanchez: Minorities.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- minorities, I'm talking about minorities in general.
Commissioner Sanchez: Hispanic, Afro-Americans.
Commissioner Gonzdlez: Exactly.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Matt --
Mr. Leibowitz: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you very much for being here, and we appreciate the manner in which you've
approached us. I'd like to I guess ask the Manager -- because I'm never certain of this technology
terminology, so I'm almost afraid to ask a question for fear I'll say something really profoundly ignorant,
but the INET, as distinguished from the --
Mr. Leibowitz: Peg channels.
Commissioner Teele: -- down links or the up links, help me understand the difference. Because one of
the things that bothers me is that this City needs to be able to deploy the technology or transmit
geographically from the north, the south, the east and the west, and it just -- I mean, you know, I
understand the Miami -Dade Police Department -- I mean, the Miami Police Department and Riverside
and I can understand operationally hurricanes -- I guess we have an operational center in the Police
Department and we've got accessibility, you know, but we're talking now about all of four blocks from
each other, six blocks, and yet, it seems to me that there seems to be nothing in the north end of the City,
whether it be Upper Eastside or the northern police headquarters up there, but traditionally, when we've
had the breaking news, we've had the problem in the north end of the City, and so, I just want to
understand the rationale as to, you know -- the Fire College sounds good, but what's the breaking news
there? I mean, it sounds like something nice to have. Where's the Fire College physically located?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): The Fire College is in the Southwest Grove. It's on Jefferson Street. I
guess the rationale behind those facilities is that that vast majority of telecom communications happens
between those facilities. The Fire College is not one of the ones that really generates a lot of information,
but it is where the EOC will be in the future, the Emergency Operation Center. There's a lot of
communications that happens between the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) and the Police Department
buildings. We have -- we spend a lot of money in hooking those facilities together. I guess what happens
with this INET is that you would not have to spend the money for T1 lines, et cetera, between the Miami
Police Department building, which really houses our mainframes --
Commissioner Teele: I'm sure there's a great justification to every building. I'm more concerned about
the buildings that are not here. What is the northern most location --
197 April 11, 2001
Mr. Leibowitz: Can I interrupt just for a second? So -- because you're correct, there's a confusion here.
The public access --
Commissioner Teele: I'm correct that I was profoundly misinformed --
Mr. Leibowitz: No, no. You were very close, but there's a slight difference here. The public educational
government channels, the peg channels, which we have channel 9, is the channels that we use -- this City
uses for broadcasting to the community. OK. Our use of it right now is channel 9, so the idea is to have
other facilities other than, for instance, this room, where City officials can -- no, no. I know. I want to
make the distinction -- can broadcast on channel 9 or other government channels to the cable subscribers.
That's the peg channels. The Institutional Network is something different.
Commissioner Teele: Wait, wait, wait. How many peg channels are we talking about? How many peg
locations are we talking about?
Mr. Leibowitz: Well, we're talking -- right now, we have peg locations, 2. We have the Fire College and
City Hall. These other points that we talked about are for broadcasting essentially, at this point, channel
9, or any other of the peg channels that we may future and create under the franchise. Remember, you
have a right to up to five channels based upon usage. Now, the Institutional Network is totally different.
The Institutional Network is a closed network.
Chairman Regalado: Matt, Matt, Matt. Just to clarify, because I think that maybe we could be under the
impression that we could use five channels. Actually, we're using now three channels of the five, right?
Commissioner Teele: One.
Mr. Leibowitz: No. We're using --
Commissioner Teele: And we barely meet the minimum --
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, but didn't we include the School Board and the County?
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no.
Mr. Leibowitz: We have a right to five independent channels.
Commissioner Teele: The City of Miami.
Chairman Regalado: The City has -- OK. (INAUDIBLE) clarification.
Commissioner Teele: But it's conditioned on original --
Chairman Regalado: Live.
Commissioner Teele: -- live programming for which we barely meet the threshold to hold on to the one
we've got.
Mr. Leibowitz: Well, we have an absolute right to one, but before we can go to the second, we have a use
formula that we have to fulfill and we're not even close to it.
Commissioner Teele: Anywhere near that right now.
198 April 11, 2001
Mr. Leibowitz: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: And one of the things that I would hope that the Communications director and all of
that, you know, would do would be to address that, but I want to get back to emanating live broadcasting
because one of the things that the Mayor has said repeatedly -- and I don't want to take exception with the
Mayor, but I do want to make a different point than the Mayor has made in the past on the uses of the so-
called fine money. If there's going to be fines — and I want to just say on the record, I'm willing to fine
anybody who is notorious, who is disrespectful, egregious and all of that, but I really think in this
business we're in, we need to work with the industry and help them comply and encourage them to make
a substantial voluntary contribution, and there's a big reason here. If we fine them, it's a really, really bad
-- it really could hurt them in ways we don't understand or ways that we don't really mean, and if our issue
is to get -- recover the revenue, I would much rather, as one Commissioner, send the message that I'm
going to be looking for a very large voluntary donation to the City of Miami that is somewhere proximate
and equal to what a fine would be, but my last choice would be to impose a fine. However, I do believe
that in the context of the services that we're talking about, we need to look globally at what is available,
and I'm really of the opinion, Mr. Manager -- Mr. Mayor, if I could -- Frank, if I could, on the Mayor -- if
I could just make two points for the Mayor's benefit. I'm strongly of the opinion that this City, that the
Mayor's office, at this City Hall, available generally to the public, should have a first-class broadcast
facility somewhere in this building that is capable of carrying the President of the United States' message
when he's in Miami or the President of Venezuela, or any other country that may be in route or here, or
for whatever reason, and I think, you know, we, as a City that best represents this hemisphere, would be
much better off channeling our AT&T -- let's use the word "fines" for a minute -- but those AT&T dollars
toward enhancing and upgrading our communications infrastructure, creating a briefing room or a press
room that is second to none in this nation, as opposed to using money to clean up the streets. Now, I'm
100 percent, Mr. Mayor, for coming up with seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) to clean
up the streets, but I think that's something we could engage AT&T as a partner with us and have them
bring their mad son Avenue, you know, London base consultants to come down here and help us design a
room or a set, if you will -- we're talking now about a set -- a media set that is reflective of this City, as a
first class way, and, so I want to be very, very clear that I think we need to have these facilities where we
can go live right on NET 9 -- and they're not going to be cheap -- but we don't have to ask the taxpayers to
pay one dollar for these kinds of facilities. These are facilities that AT&T, because of their slow -- for
whatever reason, because of their slowness -- I don't want to say failure yet -- in meeting our
requirements, that we could engage them sort of as a partner in doing that, and I think there needs to be
that kind of facility, at wherever we're going to have our emergency operations center, and whether we
have our police headquarters, and candidly, you know, we need something on the north end, whether it be
in Morningside, in Commissioner Winton's district, or whether it be in Little Haiti or whether it be in
Model Cities, we need something north of 36th Street that is that kind of facility, and, so, I'm just asking
the Mayor and the Manager to consider that point of view as well. I strongly believe, Mr. Mayor, that we
need to engage AT&T in a partnership. They've got a real problem and they're going to have to pay some
money, whether it's a fine or a volunteer or whether they're going to be cleaning our windows for us.
They're going to have to do something, you know, to -- you know, to get out of this place. Sort of like
when you don't have your money when you go to the restaurant. That's the position they're in right now,
but I think we're much better off engaging them to use their tremendous network and resources to help us
better position this City in the context of our technology than to take the money and put it in some other
areas. Because, you know, there's no linkage in that regard. The final point, and, Mr. Manager, is this, I
think a lot of what we've got is what the Mayor talked about yesterday, the efficiency issue and the
organizational review, et cetera. The one thing that is very clear to me is that we need a full-time
dedicated person that does nothing but manage this contract for AT&T. We have the same problem, as
you know, with Florida Power & Light sometimes on these things. We have these big contracts out there
that literally control tens of millions of dollars over years, but there's nobody full-time really managing it.
199 April 11, 2001
As a result, you know, the contractor sort of gets away with as little as possible, and I really do think that
that person that's doing this should organizationally be reviewed as to whether they should be in ITD
(Information Technology Department) or Communications. Clearly, it's an ITD function, but I really do
think that there's a communications issue, and I think we need to make sure that some of these dollars that
we're bringing in support a full-time staff process to do this, and that's certainly, Elaine, no reflection at
all on you, but I know you do a lot more than this, and I know you know -- if you did just this, you'd be
more than busy, and so, I don't want to speak for you, but I certainly don't mean to imply a criticism. To
the contrary, I think you're doing an outstanding job, and, so, I would just like to make sure that whatever
dollars we do, we put those dollars in a way to protect our assets and protect the public and I'm very
comfortable in following the Mayor's recommendations in terms of how we proceed with AT&T.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, one of the things about -- that you were talking about, these -- for lack of a
better terms -- is drops. We can do one or two ways. You can either have a lot of these drops or you can
actually plug in plug in and do live TV or you can do drops in those areas where you're going to have a lot
of live broadcasting, but you can also get a portable -- a truck which -- with microwave that you can do
live broadcasting from anywhere in the City.
Commissioner Teele: Obviously, we need a truck, and, I mean -- you know -- and that's -- what I'm
saying is, if we're going to use that money, we ought to use that money as a partnership with AT&T.
Now, the last time we did the partnership, they charged us two hundred and thirty thousand and
somebody else was willing to charge us sixty, but it would be my thought that if -- if we were going to
build the truck and it was going to cost four hundred thousand dollars, they ought to be able to get it for,
say, two hundred thousand because I'm sure they do the trucks in more volume and have dah, dah, dah,
dah, dah, but that's the kind of partnership, Brian, guys, that we're talking about. Not the other kind. You
know, the kind where we're saving money, not costing money.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I still think that somehow we're focusing in the immediate need, which -- and
I fully support the Mayor on his talks with AT&T. But I think that there's more to it -- there's going to be
a merger and, you know, we elected officials are going to get stuck with the complaints about the service.
Service is now one of the issues that we are not focusing and this will be for years and years and years to
come. The daily problem that the people of Miami is going to jump at us with it. The service that AT&T
is offering now is terrible, terrible, and, you know, if we don't get our things together and decide, you
know, this is what we're going to set in the contract when we approve the merger with Comcast, we're
dead. Because we may get all the money in the world. We can clean the City but, let me tell you, for a
lot of people have been a nightmare, some of these changes and especially, the response time. The
response time and the service is, I believe, a rampant violation of the contract, and so I don't know, Matt,
what you recommend, but I think that within the framework of those talks, that we should discuss the
service. I don't know how the survey is being done, but I hope that there was an emphasis on service,
because that is the first complaint of the people of Miami and -- yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, just very brief. I do remember from previous conversations on
this -- and I'm open-minded, whatever recommendation comes to me, but I do remember there was some
talk about possibly making some donations to local parks. There was some talk about, of course, putting
some money towards NET 9 and of course, the clean up. I would like to, somehow, see all three of those
somehow accomplished. I mean, we could talk about how the money's going to go and I'm very open-
minded on it, but I think that's a commitment that was made a long time and I don't want to deviate from
that, because it's very important for our parks. It's very important for our community clean up and, of
course, the Mayor gave a great speech yesterday. We were all there, but if you see it on channel 9 -- I
mean channel 9 has made significant improvements, but still, it's poor quality TV, and I think that we
need to put a little bit more resources in there so people at home get to see a better quality. Because, after
all, the perception how you're reviewed at your house is -- you know, if it's a bad reception, and it's a bad
200 April 11, 2001
showing, you know, you tend to judge the City of Miami as being cheap because that's the way it's shown
on channel 9, so just keep in mind those three things that originally have always been discussed by this
legislative body, the Mayor, and AT&T.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on the point that you raised. The-- AT&T made a commitment of
certain reductions or certain discounts; people in public housing or -- I would like to take the position the
Chairman's taken, is that we really should spend some of the time focused on providing better and more
economical services to our constituents. I would request, Matt, that you get AT&T to renew that
commitment that they had previously made. I'm not asking that they make a new commitment, but they
reissue that commitment because I think it expired after like 90 days or something.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, no, no. I think what you're thinking about is one of the offers of settlement on these
fines was a rate freeze. But what you're referring to is an ongoing commitment --
Commissioner Teele: There's an ongoing commitment --
Mr. Leibowitz: -- for the HUD housing.
Commissioner Teele: -- for HUD housing --
Mr. Leibowitz: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: -- which really benefits the County. I mean, it really -- it benefits our residents that
live there, but, I mean, you know, it's a County deal. I mean, it's another one of these lack of payment in
lieu of taxes. I mean, --
Chairman Regalado: No, because the people have to pay out their own pockets.
Commissioner Teele: I understand, and they are citizens -- residents of the City, but I'd feel a lot better if
it were Section 8 housing that the City is managing, but in any event, does that apply to Section 8
housing?
Chairman Regalado: No, it doesn't.
Mr. Leibowitz: No, it does not, but what I will do is, I will go back and look at the requirements in the
franchise --
Commissioner Teele: Would you ask them, in a letter, to update that so we can redisseminate that to our
constituents?
Mr. Leibowitz: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: You know, sort of immediately, so that we can at least make people aware and how
they can apply because there was some confusion also about how to apply and who to apply to, if you fit
within that category.
Mr. Leibowitz: Absolutely.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. But what they're doing is, they're circumventing the contract.
201 April 11, 2001
Mr. Leibowitz: What I will do, Commissioner, based on your information, is I'm going to go back, look
at the language, understand what we actually wanted and revisit the whole issue with AT&T and see if we
can clarify what -- and make sure that the language meets what our intent was.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Because they -- you know, they're going to tell you, we have not raised the
rates for the standard, the basic service. What they've done is that they've taken channels that are popular
in those especially those households with elderly Hispanics and then they have moved on -- they have
moved those channels to the Broadband, which cost more, and what -- as a result, if they want to see it,
they've got to pay it.
Mr. Leibowitz: I understand.
Chairman Regalado: And I think that that's wrong. That is so wrong, and I don't understand how AT&T,
which is big in public relations, is attacking the weakest and the poorest of their clients, and I just don't --
cannot understand that. And, you know, sooner or later, sooner or later, there's going to be a protest, and,
you know, and it could be -- it could be right in the middle of the talks for a merger, and it could come
from this City Commission.
Mr. Leibowitz: I hear you loud and clear. I will add that and I will emphasize. We've discussed over and
over again the customer service and the problems, and their new policy, which violates our franchise
agreement. We will zero in on these issues and negotiate hard on your behalf.
Chairman Regalado: Sir. Thank you.
Albio Castillo: Thank you. My name is Albio Castillo. I live in 2386. I'd like to ask this question: How
much is the City going to pay in attorney's fees? I don't want to pay another bundle of money with this
merger. Another thing is, when is AT&T going to improve your customer service? Like I have to get the
800 and it's, "Hello, is there a human in there?" And I'd also like to know is, I still -- they owe me for
payment, and my cable went out at 12 o'clock midnight, watching ESPN (Entertainment and Sports
Programming Network) and I tried to call the 800. I couldn't reach a human. Also, in February, ESPN
went out. Now, I'd like to know when is AT&T going to pay me? I'd also like to know is, when the
merger, how much is the taxpayers of the City of Miami going to pay on attorneys?
Commissioner Sanchez: Sir, sir, I believe AT&T owes you a rebate.
Mr. Castillo: They do. They also owe me a few other things.
Chairman Regalado: And, besides, they have to pay for the attorney's fees.
Mr. Castillo: Yes. But I'd like --
Chairman Regalado: So, don't worry about it.
Mr. Castillo: Oh, well. That's why I want to know.
Chairman Regalado: You worry about the service, which is really bad.
Mr. Castillo: Yeah. Hello. Humans, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) humans, you know. I understand that in
customer service, I know you deal a lot because I work in a Publix, so I know how it is, customer service,
202 April 11, 2001
and it's very difficult, but I also understand, I need a human to answer the phone on a 800. That's what it's
there for, I think, and the little slip you take for payments. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. OK. Matthew, do we need anything from you in terms of
legislation? Do we want anything -- Mayor, do you want to make any final statement on this?
Mayor Diaz: Well, Commissioner -- Mr. Chairman, I just want to say I've heard everyone's priorities
tonight and we're going do go back and work on those and then follow up with each one of you
individually.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK. Thank you very much. That's true. Mayor, did you hear what he
said? He said what a difference.
203 April 11, 2001
36. DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO HAVE FIRE DEPARTMENT TAKE PICTURES OF ALL OUT OF
STATE CARS UNDER 395 OF CONSTRUCTION WORKERS WORKING ON PERFORMING ARTS
CENTER AND ASE KEEP IN MIND THAT THERE ARE MANY UNEMPLOYED CONSTRUCTION
WORKERS IN CITY OF MIAMI. (See #38 and #39).
Chairman Regalado: OK. We still have --
Commissioner Teele: I move the balance of the agenda.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second that.
Chairman Regalado: One pound. One full pound. What all you want to do? Oh, we have the
presentation of the Community Relations Board. We have the chairperson and two of the members of the
Community Relations Board. They have been here all afternoon.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: And (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: And with your permission, after the Community Relations Board, could we hear
from the staff regarding the situation at the Performing Arts Center and the -- I know Mr. Houston's been
here all day, and we're talking about out-of-state workers, and it's the same issue. You drive by there,
look at the license plates, Tennessee, Texas, Georgia, Mississippi.
Chairman Regalado: Hey, let me tell you. Arthur, you know why -- You know why those people that
broke sidewalks and fences don't care? Because they go back to Mississippi, you know.
Commissioner Teele: You know, Mr. Manager, just take -- get the Fire Department. They've got a great
camera crew, and just go down there tomorrow and take pictures of all of the cars up under 395 and work
it all around there at the Omni, at the Performing Arts Center. They've got every right to be here, and I'm
not against that, but you know, we've got unemployment in this town higher than in any city in America,
and yet we're all, you know, shuffling paper and got excuses, and so, I just would like for Mr. Houston
and those folks who got a bunch of people sitting in the labor union all wanting to work and can't find a
job.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
204 April 11, 2002
37. ORAL PRESENTATION BY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD.
Chairman Regalado: Community Relations Board, and then we'll hear from the Performing Arts Center.
You -- the report from the Community Relations Board. I know it's going to be brief.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, on these reports, the Health Facilities Advisory Board, on Item Number 35
is requesting to be deferred until the next meeting. The chair is unable to be present, and also on the
Cultural and Fine Arts Board chairperson is absent, due to illness and requested it be deferred until the
next meeting.
Chairman Regalado: Well, the Culture and Fine Arts Board doesn't exist anymore. It's now Culture and
Entertainment Board, and we have to make all new appointments to that board, because the Mayor has
appointment. As a matter of fact, it's here somewhere, the new appointments. It's on today. The new
board is already functioning, because it's a two reading ordinance. The Mayor signed the legislation
about five or 10 days ago or something like that.
Mr. Gimenez: This is a report on the previous year.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK. Go ahead, ma'am.
Aida Rojas: Good evening. My name is Aida Rojas. I reside at 370 Tamiami Canal Road, Miami,
Florida, I am the current chairperson of the City of Miami Community Relations Board and I'm here to
give our annual report. Dear Honorable City Commissioners, as you all know, the Community Relations
Board is composed of 12 members; each Commissioner can appoint two members and the Mayor can
appoint two. Currently, we have one vacancy that needs to be filled. In March of 1999 through the vision
and needs of the City, the City of Miami Community Relations Board was enacted -- the board was
established by authority of the City Ordinance 11742 and City Code Section 2-883. Our mission
statement says it all. To foster mutual understanding, tolerance and respect upon all economic, social,
religious and ethnic groups in the City of Miami. Our board duties and functions are very clearly defined
in Article 3 of our by laws, in which I have provided a copy for all of you to review. The Community
Relations Board has long recognized the harmonious community relations required before understanding
requires the full understanding of all facets of our community. Given that we are multi-ethnic and multi-
cultural community, the dynamics are right for serious legitimate debate involving significant sectors of
our community. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) suggest a period of time where the potential for increased tensions
within our community is quite likely. The challenges facing our community are no less than any other
time in our history. We have residue problems, which have been categorized as perpetual evidence of
discrimination and racism. There are numerous other organizations and boards that seek to benefit the
position of a particular interest group, but only the City of Miami Community Relations Board holds itself
as the organization which seeks to foster mutual understanding to all (UNINTELLIGIBLE) of our
society. City of Miami needs the Community Relations Board now more than ever in order to carry out a
mandate of the City Commission under our ordinance and able to accomplish all of the duties previously
mentioned, while still maintaining the ability to react to all unexpected crisis. The CRB (Community
Relations Board) needs to be properly funded and staffed by a diverse group of professionals in the field
of human and inter -group relations fully committed to the mission and objectives of this board. More
than two decades ago, this community's problems, they were no less divisive, but solutions
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) economic (UNINTELLIGIBLE), immigration (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
205 April 11, 2002
homelessness. The CRB should be fully involved in these issues that involve the community fully, issues
that no racial or ethnic parameters. I have a prepared proposal for the creation of an Office of Community
Relations and its purpose and its structures. I have enclosed a copy for all of you to read. In the past
here, the City of Miami Community Relation Board have been asked to become involved in issues and
incidents that greatly have affected their relations between different ethnic groups and increase racial
tensions in several segments of our community. These activities are all clearly outlined through our
annual report. All of the dedicated members of the CRB have assumed their duties and responsibilities
and their total dedication to the needs of this community. The CRB board members have also been
involved in all types of training designed to improve the ability to address the multifaceted problems
confronting our diverse community. They have been both the trainee and the trainer. We have received
training in conflict resolution, police Community Relations, crowd control, et cetera. Our trainers have
been Dr. Don Addy (phonetic) from One Community, Many Voices, and our own City of Miami Police
Department's training department. The success of this board during this past two years can be attributed
to the leadership of its volunteer members. All of these individuals can even be seen as great heroes who
provide leadership to the board and to the community. We're also fortunate to have several great intimate,
loving, caring individuals who have served this board in one capacity or another. Starting with our
current CRB liaison, Jessica Rodriguez, who does an outstanding job on behalf of the board on a weekly
basis. Excuse me. Rhonda Vangates, Special Assistant to the City Manager, without her professional
assistance to this board and vital recommendations we cannot do without. Our City Manager, Carlos
Gimenez, who never hesitates to respond to our many needs of the board in the community. To our
wonderful and dedicated Chief of Police, in which this board has worked hand-in-hand to continue to
recommend, mediate and disseminate critical information to this community is a need to know from this
department. To all the wonderful dedicated and hard working City Commissioners that continue to
support the CRB and assist the efforts of the CRB, and most of all, we thank the newly elected Mayor of
Miami, Mr. Manny Diaz, through his campaign, he reminded us all and pledged that it was his intent to
bring all communities together. What the Mayor proposed to do with its different ethnic communities is
not an easy task, but it's not impossible either. The City of Miami CRB can make it happen for him and
the community. As a resident of this wonderful diverse City, it is our obligation to uphold that sacred
promise, particularly in our day-to-day dealing with our neighbors. This is a great community and we
must honor the differences that make us special. We must respect each other's unique qualities; yet, we
share the same blessings. We live in a nation that is built on the premise of equal justice and equal
opportunity. May not always work, but -- and this is very important -- there is under law, the mandate to
do the right thing. We represent every major religion in the world and each of us is permitted to worship
God in a very special and personal way. It is this mixture of social flavors and custom that gives a
community a singular style. I thank you all this evening for taking the time to listen to my report. Thank
you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Teele -- thank you very much, Ms. Rojas.
206 April 11, 2002
38. (a) TABLED: DISCUSSION CONCERNING FIRST SOURCE HIRING AGREEMENT
RELATING TO PERFORMING ARTS CENTER (See #36 and 39)
(b) BRIEF STATEMENTS BY COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ ON APPOINTMENTS TO
WORKING GROUP TO PROVIDE ANNUAL EVENT ON DECEMBER 31sT TO CONTINUE THE
TRADITION OF THE ORANGE BOWL PARADE. (See #41).
Chairman Regalado: We have several items -- OK. Commissioner Teele. You want to do the
Performing Arts --
Commissioner Teele: What's the item number on the agenda, Madam Director?
Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Gwendolyn Warren, Director of Community
Development. It's Number 37, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Thirty-seven.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Discussion concerning the First Source Hiring Agreement relating to the
Performing Arts Center. Before you, we did 36. Discussion concerning the new one arm automated
Solid Waste collection system. We have the appointment of individuals to working group to provide the
December 31, to continue the tradition of the Orange Bowl Parade. That is important, so, we need to do
that. Just remember that we need to do that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may, and I'll be very, very brief. We did have our first
meeting, as the Chairman and I think that it's prudent that you appoint people that could bring something
to the table. For instance, we've talked about, Carnaval Miami -- individuals from Carnaval Miami, the
Kiwanis, any organization that could come to the table and bring something -- because time is of an issue
here.
Chairman Regalado: Let's do this first and then we'll move on.
207 April 11, 2002
39. DIRECT MANAGER TO WRITE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER OF PERFORMING CENTER
TRUST TO EXPRESS CITY'S CONCERNS REGARDING FIRST SOURCE HIRING AND TO
REQUEST COPY OF LIST OF EMPLOYEES THAT ARE WORKING FOR SUBCONTRACTORS
ON PERFORMING ARTS CENTER. (See #36 and 38).
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members -- item 37. Mr. Manager, I just -- there's a
lot of work here, but I just would like to understand, how did we get into the business of working with the
Performing Arts Center and let's -- I would very much like to document what I see everyday that I drive
by there, which are all of these out-of-state tags, and I have no objection. This is a free flow of commerce
under our interstate commerce clause and everybody's got a right to be here, but how do we figure out
how to really deal with the unemployment problem in the City of Miami? And, you know, everybody
wants half cents for transit. They want this and they want that, but if the jobs are going to continue to not
get into the City of Miami, you know, we -- so, help me, Ms. Warren. What do we need to do? Is it your
assessment that this program is working for the City of Miami residents?
Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): No, sir. Just a summary. As you know, the --
we have enter -- First Source Hiring Agreement for performing arts, based on the information that we
provided you. The projections was that there would be 400 new jobs created, assuming that a lot of the
construction companies would come with their own employees. At this point in time, based on their own
schedule, there should have been at least 40 new jobs created in the City. They have currently listed ten
with us for referral. We placed ten individuals, but there's some 200, almost 300 employees that are on-
site, but there's only been ten new jobs. All of the jobs appear to -- of the individuals that are working
there are individuals who are working on the previous assignment with the subcontractors or contractors,
so, in effect, what's occurring is that people are bringing their crews with them and new jobs are not being
created for the City, at least at this time period. The agreement calls for us to assist to refer residents to
newly created job, but, again, of the approximate 300 people are there, the new job that's have been listed
are 10. We filled all 10, but the other ones, again, are filled by people who came from previous jobs with
the subcontractor. Unless we come up with some percentage assignment for all of the jobs that would be
created and provided to City residents, I don't see how we're going to be able to actually say that this
project is creating new jobs for City residents in when, in fact, the crews are coming from other counties
as they fill -- complete projects.
Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren, do you have --
Ms. Warren: So, that's the problem --
Commissioner Teele: Do you have the hiring records of all of the contractors and subcontractors on the
site?
Ms. Warren: We have every contractor and which positions they propose would be new and --
Commissioner Teele: That's not my question.
Ms. Warren: OK. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: My question is, do you have a list of the employees that are working for the
subcontractors on site?
208 April 11, 2002
Ms. Warren: No, I do not.
Commissioner Teele: Under our First Source Hiring Agreement, aren't you entitled to that information?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Why don't we have it?
Ms. Warren: I'll let Joni Harris speak to that. She's coordinating the project.
Joni Harris: Joni Harris, Assistant Director for Community Development. We had been coordinating with
the Performing Arts Center builders, which we call Pak B Office, and we have requested those records.
They've indicated to us that they have not yet received -- they're supposed to be getting certified payrolls
from each of the subcontractors and they're supposed to have provisions to hold the payments of
subcontractors who don't provide adequate records, but, to date, they have not received complete records
themselves.
Commissioner Teele: Has the Manager -- Mr. Manager, have you requested that information from the
Manager? I mean, this is a government --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: --job. OK.
Mr. Gimenez: No, sir, I have not.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I really think that, you know, we pay a lot of lip service around here about
helping our citizens. We do a lot to improve neighborhoods, but, you know, when it gets down to really
getting people to work and changing the fundamental economics of this town, we've got to do a better job,
I think, and, Mr. Manager, I would respectfully urge you to write the Manager and express our concern
that we want this information. First of all, it's a public document, so, if we've got to file a freedom of
information or a public records request, then, you know -- but that's not -- you know, government
shouldn't do that to government. That information ought to be free flowing. It's a part of their agreement
that they signed with us. We're entitled to it, and I think, you know, the reason it's not coming is -- if it
were good news, they'd turn it over right away, and they have crews working out there, Mr. Manager,
literally, as you probably know, 18 to 24 hours a day. I mean, at night. This is a beautiful thing. People
are working. Problem is, it ain't us, and it's our tax dollars; and remember, folks -- you know, I don't
mean to be narrow-minded about this, but the City of Miami, through its CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency) agreement, forks over a million dollars a year for this project, so, this isn't like
we're just running behind trying to get a little piece of the action. We're paying for the action, and so, I
would like to hear from Mr. Houston, who's continued to follow this thing; but I think we've got our own
work to do, and I think the matter needs to be escalated up to the Manager, at least to make those requests.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, that letter will be out tomorrow.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Houston.
Al Houston: Thank you, Commissioner, and to all the Commissioners. My name is At Houston. I
represent the labors union. Our business is located at 799 Northwest 62nd Street.
Commissioner Teele: In the heart of the City.
209 April 11, 2002
Mr. Houston: In the heart of Liberty City. We originally started on 2nd Avenue and right down the street,
on 2nd Avenue, across from the Longshoremen.
Commissioner Teele: In Overtown.
Mr. Houston: In Overtown. On 8th Street, so we have a history of working in Overtown. The majority of
our membership lives in Overtown, Liberty City, Little Haiti, Little Havana, Wynwood, and all of the
areas that each of you represent, and I listen to the Commissioner speak a minute ago, when he said that
with AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph), he noticed the trucks from Mississippi and Alabama.
Well, I've been noticing some trucks down at the Performing Arts Center from Mississippi and Alabama,
and we have a hall full of people that lives and pay taxes in the City of Miami that are unemployed. A
hall full of them. We were one of the unions that put the money together to try to get this job to be a
prevailing wage job, so that when a worker go there, he could have a decent wage rate. In addition, he
could have -- or she could have insurance, fringe benefit. We talk about insurance and we talk about
Johnny can't read and those type of things, but we don't have anyone trying to enforce that issue to make
sure that those contractors are out there doing the intent of that ordinance, which says that you will pay
the wage rate if you're using taxpayers' dollars and you will pay the fringe benefit package. Well, I'll ask
and I'll challenge any one of you to go there, Commissioners, to see if one of those contractors are paying
that insurance.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Houston, this is very important because you're saying insurance and there's all
kinds of insurance, car insurance, life insurance. Do your members have health insurance?
Mr. Houston: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: If your members get sick, and go to Jackson hospital, does the public have to pay
for it, or does their health insurance pay for it?
Mr. Houston: Not at all. We pay -- we pay -- we take care of our --
Commissioner Teele: But the people that are working there, if one of them get hurt, or their children are
here visiting and they get sick, they're going to go to public health trust, Jackson, and we're going to pay
for it, and that's the difference between paying the prevailing wage, where a worker is given the kinds of
normal benefits that you want and I want and the next person wants, and somebody who's just coming
through here getting a cheap wage, and got a job, and, yet, all of the social responsibilities, if something
goes wrong, is back on the taxpayers again, and it's very unfair, Johnny. It's very unfair, Commissioners,
so the other point I want to make is this -- and I've never said this publicly. I'm going to say it today.
When we got ready to build the NAP (Network Access Point), you came to me and said, you wanted an
agreement with the -- through the -- what's this program called?
Unidentified Speaker: First Source.
Ms. Harris: First Source Hiring Agreement.
Commissioner Teele: And I told you then and I'll say it now, our First Source Hiring Agreement isn't
worth the papers it's written on, and I said to you, Al, if you will trust me, I will get everybody in your
union hall working on the NAP, which is two blocks away, and we sat and we met with Manny Medina,
and we said, Mr. Medina, we want your contractors to hire people and tell those subcontractors they've
got to empty out that union hall, and what happened for the NAP? Was your union hall emptied?
210 April 11, 2002
Mr. Houston: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: It works. It works if there is a commitment at the top. Say again?
Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: Because, on the NAP, we had a little bit of control. We were giving them a whole
lot of things. In other words, they wanted to construct THE building on a fast track. The first thing we
did is, we gave them the right to construct until 11 o'clock at night. Well, you know, you asked for that.
I'm saying, hire our people. You don't hire our people, you don't get -- you use the same thing. I would
assume, the way they're building all around the night, they've got some kind of provision to do
construction in nonconforming hours, I would assume. They don't?
Mr. Gimenez: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Well, how are they doing all that construction in the middle of the night?
Mr. Gimenez: We'll find out.
Commissioner Teele: But, you know, I --
Vice Chairman Winton: But I think you're on the right track. I think we do need to figure out tonight
who should go meet with them and -- because it's not anywhere near too late. It just started, so, let's fix
the problem right now, as opposed to waiting till later. We can fix it. At least we ought to do everything
in our power to try to fix it, and I think we ought to figure out who --
Commissioner Teele: Johnny, it's in your district. It's a quote "chamber," you know, downtown. I would
respectfully appeal to you, as the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) Chairman and the person
who's interacting with Parker Thompson and all these people, to please intercede --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll be glad to.
Commissioner Teele: -- to try to get this thing -- because if we don't, you know, those guys are going to
do what they need to do.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to set up a meeting -- Mr. Manager, you, me, and Mr. Houston, I'd like
to invite you to that meeting, as well.
Mr. Houston: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: And Mr. Manager, maybe you can help me get the meeting set up. We need to
figure out who the -- you know, whether it's -- what's her name?
Commissioner Teele: It's Gail --
Ms. Harris: Gail Thompson.
Vice Chairman Winton: Gail --
Commissioner Teele: Who does Gail report to, Bill Johnson?
211 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Who does Gail --
Ms. Warren: The County Manager.
Commissioner Teele: No. She reports to an assistant. She probably reports to Bill Johnson or the
Manager.
Mr. Gimenez: Alina Hudak.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, Alina Hudak?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, let's figure out who the --
Commissioner Teele: The Assistant Manager, Alina Hudak. She's very good. She was the Parks --
Vice Chairman Winton: So, let's figure out who the three key people are over there and we'll have three
of them and three or four of us, and let's go meet with them.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: And you know what is -- the bigger problem here, Arthur, is that -- and, you know,
sometimes -- I spoke to people from the Census Bureau because I was very curious about, you know,
Miami being the poorest and -- and I realized by their information what is happening. What is happening
is that we have many workers in East Little Havana, in Allapattah, who have out of town relatives,
Nicaragua and El Salvador, and they remit half of the salary every week --
Commissioner Teele: And Haiti.
Chairman Regalado: And Haiti --
Commissioner Sanchez: And Cuba.
Chairman Regalado: And Cuba, but Cuba, you have a more steady -- I mean, people with more income,
but -- and what is -- and they don't declare -- they don't declare what they send as income. I guess that
that's in their mind, what they -- and this is why we have this pockets of power of poverty in the City of
Miami, and what is happening there is that these people have to remit some of the money to the relatives
there and that's why they have to have this low standard of living and, you know, living six in one room
and all that, and that is also social problem for the City, so, you know, Johnny, it's something that we have
to convey to them that -- you know, we have these problems because of migratory workers or people who
do live here and have to remit a lot of money. Only to Cuba. The Cubans (UNINTELLIGIBLE) send
eight hundred million dollars a year, and this is taken off the economy mostly from South Florida. If you
-- if you add the Nicaraguans and the Salvadorians and the Haitians, and the Columbians, it's huge, and
then we have this situation of people coming from, you know, Appalachia, and Alabama, the Deep South,
and we have a problem here. That's why we are like we are, and -- you know -- so, it's something that
you must convey to these people.
212 April 11, 2002
40. ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED FINGER COMPANY PLAT.
Chairman Regalado:
Anyway, we have PZ (Planning & Zoning) items -- you do?
Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Mine is 25, regular agenda.
Chairman Regalado:
Yours is what?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo:
Twenty-five, regular agenda.
Chairman Regalado:
Can we --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo:
Finger plat.
Chairman Regalado:
What do you mean, 25?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo:
Item 25 on the regular agenda.
Chairman Regalado:
Oh, on the regular agenda.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo:
Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Let's do that and then --
Ms. Garcia Toledo: Twenty-five, the Finger plat.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Department of Public Works, resolution Public Works, item 25. Let's try to
do this so we can --
Commissioner Gonzalez: We're back on Planning and Zoning?
Chairman Regalado: No, we're back on the regular agenda. Item 25 of the regular agenda. Mr. Public
Works Director.
John Jackson (Acting Director, Public Works): Yes. John Jackson, Director of Public Works. This is
acceptance of the Finger Company plat. I believe that the attorney has the resolution for conditional
acceptance of this plat.
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): I do have a resolution. I'm trying to locate it. It is a different
resolution than that which is in your packet. The resolution accepts the plat with certain conditions.
Chairman Regalado: Where is that plat located, just for the benefit of --
Ms. Chiaro: We're at Item 25.
Chairman Regalado: No, no. I know.
Vice Chairman Winton: Between 19`h and 20. East of Biscayne Boulevard.
Chairman Regalado: That's your district?
213 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: So, it's Johnny Winton's district. What do you want to do, Commissioner?
Vice Chairman Winton: As soon as they're ready, I'm going to move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Read it into the record, please, Mr. City Attorney.
Vice Chairman Winton: They can't find it.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: The City Attorney has a copy.
Note for the Record: At this time, the City Attorney read the resolution into the public record.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a resolution. A motion and a 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. 02-390
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED FINGER COMPANY PLAT, A SUBDIVISION
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PLAT
AND STREET COMMITTEE, AND FURTHER, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
(1) AN EXECUTED INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY; (2) A BOND
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY'S RISK MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION, AS
REQUIRED BY CITY OF MIAMI CODE SECTION 54-4; (3) AN OPINION OF
TITLE OR OTHER TITLE DOCUMENT(S) SATISFACTORY TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY AND THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS REGARDING TITLE TO
THE REMNANT PARCEL AS REQUIRED BY THE PLAT AND STREET
COMMITTEE; (4) LETTERS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS OF FIRE -RESCUE,
POLICE AND SOLID WASTE REGARDING SUITABLE ACCESS EASEMENTS AS
REQUIRED BY CITY CODE SECTION 54-4; AND (5) A FINAL LEGAL
DESCRIPTION AND AN OPINION OF TITLE SATISFACTORY TO THE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS; AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN
ON SAID PLAT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND
CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID PLAT AFTER SATISFACTORY COMPLETION
OF THE ABOVE -ENUMERATED CONDITIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE
RECORDATION OF SAID PLAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(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
214 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. Commissioner, if I just might. Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with offices at
2500 First Union Financial Center. First of all, I would like to thank you -- all of you, and particularly
Commissioner Winton, because this has been a lengthy process. You approved the Major Use Special
Permit back in September and the plat has taken actually 17 months to get done. All the conditions -- all
the documents are conditioned on that resolution have been delivered to the Public Works Department
and to the City Attorney, and I have to thank Frank Rollason, in particular, and your City Attorney, Mr.
Vilarello, for assisting me in getting this resolved, and they have given me their word we will meet
Monday or Tuesday to finalize this. It is critical because today, at 2:30, we had a meeting with your
Building Department. Your Building Department is ready to issue, within the next two weeks, the
building permit for this project. We hope to be in the ground by May 15th. However, we need to have a
final recorded plat before we can break ground, and what happens now is that once all of these documents
are approved, it goes back to Public Works, who has to transmit the entire packet to the County for the
County's review and recordation in the public record, so we still have a little bit of work to do, and I
would ask you to please, you know, continue to work with us so that we can get this done.
Vice Chairman Winton: What do we need to do to make sure that when it goes to the County, it just
doesn't fall in that giant County black hole?
Mr. Jackson: You need to go to the County and expedite it, just like it's being done here
Vice Chairman Winton: What do you mean "you?" Who -- what "you" needs to go do that?
Mr. Jackson: The applicant. The applicant needs to do that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Y'all can do that?
Mr. Jackson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Thank you.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We will do that, but, of course, it always helps if Mr. Rollason makes a phone call to
Tony Toledo over at the County.
Vice Chairman Winton: Great. You'll do that? Thank you.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Also, Commissioners, while I have your attention, I know you have a policy of
redevelopment especially the core areas of Miami. We have a lot of old plats from the 1920s and '40s.
Our plat procedure in the City has not been revamped since I was an assistant City Attorney back in the
'80s. I think, in keeping with your mission to redevelop Miami and specially the core areas, we need
and I would be happy to sit with staff and help in any way I can with -- you know, anything I can do
but I think this process need to be reviewed and expedited. Seventeen months is just too long.
215 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: I think you've volunteered and I think they're going to accept that. I saw heads
going like this, so thank you for volunteering. One other thing I would like to -- like for you to mention
to your clients, general contractor. You were sitting here when we were talking with the Performing Arts
Center?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I recognize this is a private deal on private land and private everything, but
City government has stepped to the plate to help make this work. I think we've done a lot to make it
work, and we do need jobs, and you heard Al Houston—
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- talking about the fact that he has plenty of people out of work. Would love it
if he would -- your client passed along to him -- love for him to have his general contractor call Al
Houston and try to get some additional City of Miami residents working on construction of that project.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Local general contractors are bidding right now on this job.
Vice Chairman Winton: Great.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: So, it will be a local job.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
216 April 11, 2002
41. APPOINT GRANT SHEEHAN, HILLARY BASS, JOSE MARBAN, CARL DECRUISE,
MARITZA GUTIERREZ AND FRANK COBO AS MEMBERS OF WORKING GROUP TO PROVIDE
ANNUAL EVENT ON DECEMBER 31 ST TO CONTINUE TRADITION OF ORANGE BOWL
PARADE. (See #38).
Chairman Regalado: OK. Listen, we really have to move in here. Commissioner Sanchez have to leave
in a few minutes, and Commissioner Winton will be following him and Commissioner Teele will be
following -- and then I'll --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm prepared to --
Chairman Regalado: Follow you.
Vice Chairman Winton: I came prepared to stay until 3 a.m.
Chairman Regalado: OK, so, do we have a quorum with two, you and me?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: Like to defer to May 9th, item number 8. Also like to pull item number 9.
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait a minute. Wait a minute.
Chairman Regalado: Eight is Mr. Pino. He couldn't be here with the children. He will be here on May
the 9th, right?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: And the other one is 9?
Mr. Gimenez: It's number 9.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Three million dollars?
Mr. Gimenez: We're pulling that off.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Gimenez: It's not necessary.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -13, the billboard. Second reading ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, could we take that up in five minutes? Let me get straight on this
one.
217 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Sure. OK. Does anybody have a pocket item? Commissioner Sanchez, you have a
Commissioner Sanchez: No. But if we could just do 39. It's just appointments to a work group to
provide an annual event on the 31s` --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, you're right. I'm sorry, 39.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's just to continue the traditions of the Orange Bowl Parade. Under your --
Chairman Regalado: Do we have --
Commissioner Sanchez: You nominated me and the Mayor to put together a group and all that we're
basically asking, we had our first meeting and --
Chairman Regalado: How many people are we appointing, one each Commissioner?
Commissioner Sanchez: I -- one or two per Commissioner, and I'll tell you what we want to accomplish
here. We're looking for somebody from the School Board, because we want to use their bands, local
bands to participate. The concept has not been defined yet, but it's what we agreed on, and also what
we're asking is to have people appoint people that could bring something to the table. Just, you know, a
member of the Kiwanis, a member of the Carnival Miami, or someone that you know that is in that
business of providing promotion or entertainment.
Vice Chairman Winton: Jason.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I'm ready to appoint.
Commissioner Sanchez: If you're not prepared to make an appointment today --
Chairman Regalado: I am prepared to make an appointment, so you can start the meeting.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK, but if you're not and you don't have one, you need to think about it and just
provide my office with a memo because we need to start having meetings as quickly as possible. As you
could see, we're already, you know, halfway through April.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Anybody has an appointment to that board or committee?
Commissioner Sanchez: I believe Commissioner Gonzalez does.
Chairman Regalado: Angel, you got appointments?
Vice Chairman Winton: I have someone.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Joe, Grant Sheehan, who used to be on the Orange Bowl Staging Committee,
then he got mad at the Orange Bowl Committee because they were messing up the parade. He was a
parade guy.
218 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Madam Clerk, can you please, for the record, write the individuals' names
and then provide me, please? OK.
Chairman Regalado: Joe --
Vice Chairman Winton: Grant Sheehan, S -H -E -E -H -A -N.
Chairman Regalado: Joe (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: Someone that we -- might need somebody from the school boards that could
help us with the bands, so, that's just a suggestion. If you have somebody -- I wouldn't -- my
appointment's going to be Hillary Bass. She works with the Orange Bowl Committee, so, she's coming
onboard to help us.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. I'd like to appoint Jose Marban.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele.
Chairman Regalado: He's from the Kiwanis.
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to appoint Carl --
Commissioner Sanchez: Having a senior moment?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. What's Carl's name?
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't know.
Commissioner Teele: Let me check with my staff.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Teele: John, what's Carl's name, the guy out there -- the Trinidadian gentleman out there
by the Miami -Dade College?
Commissioner Sanchez: This work group has already representation from DDA (Downtown
Development Authority), Bayfront Park. We're hoping to have at the next meeting representatives from
the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) to work together, and then we're probably going to have
weekly meetings until we formulate exactly what we're going to do. We're planning on almost -- I think
it's going to be a two-day event. There's going to be something in Flagler. There's going to be something
at Bayfront Park. There is going to be a parade with a carnival festival in downtown Miami, so, that is
what we're working towards, and I'll provide you, on a monthly report, on the update of what we're doing.
Chairman Regalado: I'll appoint Maritza Gutierrez.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Maritza Gutierrez.
Chairman Regalado: Right, and I would also request that the Commission ask Frank Cobo.
219 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: -- School Board member to participate. The reason is that Mr. Cobo was the one
that organized the Jose Marti Parade this year, and he's -- he has access to all the bands and schools
activities.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: But I mean, it would have to be a request from the whole Commission. I mean,
he's an elected official and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Whatever steps are necessary, we'll go ahead and do that.
Chairman Regalado: I just think that it cannot be just one appointment from me, but a request from the
whole Commission.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: At your request, I would move that the Commission resolve to ask Mr. Frank Cobo,
as a School Board member, to serve on this very distinguished committee.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. So, those are the appointments.
Commissioner Sanchez: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Sanchez: All opposed, having the same right, say "nay."
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-391
A MOTION APPOINTING THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF A
WORKING GROUP TO PROVIDE AN ANNUAL EVENT ON DECEMBER 31sT TO
CONTINUE THE TRADITION OF THE ORANGE BOWL PARADE:
GRANT SHEEHAN (nominated by Vice Chairman Winton)
HILLARY BASS (nominated by Commissioner Sanchez)
JOSE MARBAN (nominated by Commissioner Gonzalez)
CARL DECRUISE (nominated by Commissioner Teele)
MARITZA GUTIERREZ (nominated by Chairman Regalado)
FRANK COBO (appointed by Commission At -Large)
220 April 11, 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.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let me just say that it's so important that we focus on this event and provide
also a parade, because this parade has an effect on other parades in our community; has an effect on Jose
Marti. It has an effect on Three Kings Parade, and the other parades in our community; Martin Luther
King Parade and any other parades that we have, including the Orange Bowl Jr. Parade.
Chairman Regalado: OK, so, we're done with 39. Commissioner -- yes.
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner Teele, is it Carl --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, Carl.
Ms. Thompson: Carl.
Chairman Regalado: He'll send you a memo.
221 April 11, 2002
42. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE UPON ADOPTION
BY COMMISSION OF ORDINANCE NO. [AKA J-02-160] WHICH AMENDED ORDINANCE NO.
11000, ARTICLES 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 AND 25 OF CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO MODIFY
PROVISIONS REGARDING SIGN AND USE REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING BUSINESSES.
EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE UPON ADOPTION
BY COMMISSION OF ORDINANCE NO. [AKA J-02-148] ESTABLISHING TEMPORARY
MORATORIUM ON ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATIONS FOR OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS
REGULATED UNDER SECTION 926.15, ET. SEQ., OF CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE.
EMERGENCY 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 MODIFY USE REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING BUSINESSES; 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
(Applicant(s): Planning and Zoning Department).
Chairman Regalado: Are you ready for the billboards?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Item PZ -13. It's a second reading ordinance. Lourdes.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. Item PZ -13 is an ordinance
amending articles 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 25 of zoning ordinance 11000. What this ordnance, in effect does
is create a new sign ordinance for the City of Miami. One of the main things we tried to do in this
ordinance is to unify all the sign regulations into a single article. The way the sign ordinance is right now,
in the ordinance, it is dispersed throughout all these articles of the ordinance and that became something
that was difficult to administer because if you would go to any section of the ordinance to find out what
the sign regulations were for your zoning district, it would send you back to two or three other places to
try to really figure out what your sign requirements were, so, the most important thing this ordinance does
-- one of the most important is it unifies everything into a single article of the Code. This new ordinance
also includes expanded language regarding the intent and criteria for signage and site permits. That's
something that was very, very minimal in the ordinance the way it exists today. The revised sign code
makes no preference for commercial speech over non-commercial speech and is as content neutral as
reasonably and logically possible. This specifically pertains to the types of signs that can't really be
content neutral because they are for health and safety, you know, protect life and property issues, access
signs, street signs, that sort of thing. The other thing the Code does is, it doesn't alter the current state and
federal regulations against obscenity and pornography, which, when you talk about a content neutral
ordinance that was a common question that came up. Well, if they can put whatever they want on the
sign, what about obscenity and pornography? Those are governed by state and federal regulations. No
signs are permitted unless authorized or exempted by the Code; for example, governmental signs, flags, et
cetera. There are certain number of signs that are exempt from having to get sign permits, like the
governmental signs and flags, and they are listed in the ordinance. All lawful signs are either permanent
or temporary, with corresponding restrictions. Copy on temporary signs is event -driven and treated
similarly. For example, real estate signs must come down after the sell of the property and political signs
must come down after the election. The regulations include specifications as to when the temporary signs
must be removed. In addition, we added clarifying language to specify that real estate signs shall be
limited to one per residential unit for R-1 and R-2 properties, and one per street frontage for other zoning
districts. The Code just talked about the square footage. It didn't talk about quantity. We also added a
222 April 11, 2002
window sign not exceeding one square foot, which will be permitted for each dwelling unit year round.
No new amortization period was created for signs, which are currently nonconforming. They will have to
be removed in accordance with already granted amortization periods, and amortization periods are
allowed for signs that will become nonconforming as a result of the passage of this ordinance. Regarding
the outdoor advertising sign, billboards that become nonconforming as a result of the adoption of this
ordinance, the ordinance calls for their removal five years after the adoption of the ordinance. However,
they may be allowed to remain if they obtain a Class II special permit and pay required mitigation fees.
There are specific sign regulations for each district, which regulations relate logically to the needs and
design intent for that district. For example, in the special districts, the sign regulations in some of the
special districts are different than the general sign regulations for other districts, and they relate
specifically to the intents of those districts. One other important difference is the related to the billboard
industry is that we have defined outdoor advertising businesses as a land use, which generally states that
anyone paying or receiving income from an outdoor advertising sign is deemed by state law to be
engaged in an outdoor advertising business, and is required to have a state license. This revised sign
Code makes amendments related to governing outdoor advertising businesses as a land use, not as signs,
and the signs associated with them then become characteristics of use for such uses. The schedule of
district regulations in Article IV state where these uses may be permissible and the sign regulations in the
new article 10 regulate the size and location, among other criteria. Outdoor advertising signs are still
allowed in the City in the C-1 district as wall signs, not exceeding 32 square feet. The important
distinction here is that if a C -I business wants to put an outdoor advertising sign up, it has to be as an
accessory to another commercial use and the 32 square feet, which they're limited to, must come out of a
total aggregate sign area allowed for that commercial establishment, so it isn't an additional sign. The
commercial property owner would have to make a decision as to how they want to use their allotted
square footage, either for advertising their own business or for doing an outdoor advertising sign, but
there are limitations and special permits required. Also, we've included a variance provision for height of
billboards, if a government action, such as the construction of the sound barrier walls that we see along
the highway, render the billboard not visible from the roadway, that's something that would allow for
some sort of relief, if the reason for a sign to not be visible was caused by a government action. The
department is recommending approval of this amendment. This amendment has addressed the
constitutional issues that we found in the ordinance. We also think it is a very good clean up of the
ordinance, by putting everything into a single article. It's going to make it much easier for the public to
read and find what their regulations are and for us to administer.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a public hearing. Go ahead, sir.
Dusty Melton: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, my name, for the record, is Dusty Melton. I
reside at 3430 Poinciana Avenue in South Coconut Grove. With respect to the ordinance before you this
evening, I'd like to attempt briefly to establish a factual context for your consideration of the ordinance
and what I predict you're going to be requested to make certain modifications to the ordinance. I will tell
you that I'm -- as someone who's a careful student of sign regulations for the last 20 years in this
community, I'm quite impressed with the work product of your staff, and they've done an enormous job in
a very complicated area. I've condensed my tutorial significantly from earlier presentations, but I would
ask the chair for just a little bit of indulgence, and I would suggest the following two things: That this
ordinance before you tonight needs to be tested against, when the public hearing is closed and you all
decide what you're going to do, and the first thing the ordnance needs to be tested against is the existing
law governing signs in the City of Miami, and we're going to discuss that in a little detail, and the other
thing -- and the reason for these photographs -- is I'm going to suggest that you evaluate this proposed
ordinance against the practices of the industry, which, in a very helpful way, are real visible to anybody
that moves around town. Let's talk first about the governing law. There are two related ordinances that
lie the very foundation of sign regulations throughout Miami -Dade County, including the City of Miami.
Neither of these two laws is a part of the City Code. Each of these laws is a Dade County ordinance,
223 April 11, 2002
adopted in 1985, under the County's enormous Home Rule powers. The first ordinance governs only
expressway billboards, a very, very defined category of signs generally, such as I-95, I-395, I-195 in the
City of Miami. It was adopted on June 6, 1985. This is often called the great billboard compromise of
1985. In a compromise with the entire outdoor advertising industry in this County at that time --
represented, I might add, quite capably by three attorneys, Charlie Pappy III, who's a partner, my friend,
Luis Rojas is here tonight, former City Attorney George Knox, my neighbor and friend who's here
tonight, and the third attorney Arthur Teele, Jr., who's also here tonight-- these three fine attorneys
represented the billboard industry and I'm confident to have the same clarity of recall that I do about what
the law was then and what the law remains today. In the first of these two ordinances passed in the
summer of '85, the County Commission established what's called "protected zones." They used their
enormous Home Rule Power to reach into every City in the County and take zoning authority, total
zoning authority away from the cities for 600 feet out from the right-of-way along every single
expressway. Within this protected zone, no one, no one had even the right to petition the County, not
even the right to ask for a public hearing to put up a billboard in the protected zone, with one exception,
that in the City of Miami, tentatively done, all west of the I-95, with more spacing than normal and more
landscaping than normal. It's very important to remember that that law remains absolutely unaltered,
unchanged to this day. You can't even ask permission, much less put one up in the middle of the night.
The second ordinance was a general sign ordinance, and it affected signs everywhere else in the County
throughout the County, including the City of Miami. Another ordinance adopted under broad Home Rule
Powers and it was adopted on July 16, about a month later, and it's called the "Sign Code of Dade
County, and it puts limits on every single type, location, height, dimension, spacing, landscaping, from
the largest billboards to the smallest advertisements outdoors at mom and pop shops all over the County,
and it's that uniform restriction on signs everywhere. Forgotten over most of the years since then, but a
pivotal element in the first paragraph of the sign code of Dade County is that these restrictions in -- within
municipalities must be enforced by Code Enforcement, NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team)
officers, whatever they are, within each City. These two ordinances establish minimum restrictions.
Cities may pass tougher restrictions, if they want to, as the City of Miami did when it ordered the five
year amortization signs in the C-1 zoning district back in 1990, not that the industry paid any attention to
the City back then, as we all well know, but in all respects, the County Commission decreed in 1985, no
City sign code for any kind of sign anywhere as a matter of law, may be less restrictive than these two
documents, so, Commissioners, when the public hearing is closed, one thing you need to ascertain in this
ordinance for clarity sake, for sake of the law, for sake of us all knowing what the rules are, are there any
aspects of this ordinance that articulate standards that are less restrictive than either the great billboard
compromise of '85 or the Sign Code of Dade County, both of which remain on the books today and
govern the minimum restrictions on every sign in the City of Miami. Let's talk about compliance for just
a moment. Compliance has been virtually nonexistent and, candidly, it's because the code enforcement
officers in most of the municipalities in this County had been unaware since those ordinances were
passed, that they had an affirmative obligation to enforce a County law. Because they weren't down at
Steven P. Clark Center in 1985 when it was passed, and they've probably been traveling and enforcing
and doing a diligent job, but with the wrong code on their clipboard, not the relevant codes that were
passed by the County Commission and which governs signs in this City. Compliance has been non-
existent in neighborhoods all over the City in hundreds, probably thousands of ways. I will tell you this,
ladies and gentlemen, because I was at the table in '85, the industry has known what the law is for the last
17 years, and to the extent that they have violated it, they've known that they've been breaking the law.
As to expressway billboards, not a single one was built in this City from 1985 until just about two years
ago. Why? Because the entire billboard industry was at the table to reach the compromise in the summer
of '85, and they knew that no signs could be permitted because you weren't allowed to even ask per
permission. The entire local industry was part of the compromise, was part of the deal, the political
accommodation, whatever you will, that involved this City with its last 10 boards, and a go forward,
absolute, lifetime prohibition against anymore billboard expressways throughout the County, including in
this City. Now, when a company that has placed, as you can see, the name Carter on billboards came to
224 April 11, 2002
town, and their signs started sprouting east of 95, east of 95 on both sides of I-195, east of 95 on both
sides of I-395, it was dumbfounding, and I wouldn't expect Mr. Rojas, my friend, to speak for him, but if
Mr. Pappy, his law partner were here, he would tell you about the number of times that the State lawyers
had been in his office asking him to recall the circumstances in 1985, when this go -forward lifetime
prohibition was adopted, and which remains on the law books today, and which this City is charged with
enforcing. Mr. Pappy could tell you about the dossier that he took out to the Florida Department of
Transportation, asking why, why did they issue permits for signs that are illegal? And it's not tough to go
out there and get the FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) work product. They've got files and
files and files. They've come out. They've done their own measurements. They didn't rely on just Mr.
Pappy's engineering firm. They diagrammed all of these illegal signs, the file is enormous, should the
City decide its finally going to enforce the law that's been on the books since 1985, and I'll also point out
that Carter's not alone. It's well-known in the real world that there are at least several -- shall we call
them -- home-grown billboards in the protective zone following Carter's leads, constructed by people who
were at the table in 1985. As of the City of Miami's 1990 ordinance putting the world on notice that signs
in the C-1 zoning district had to come down in five years-- a perfectly legitimate time honored court
upheld amortization law-- the industries contempt for that law seven years later is nothing short of
breathtaking. A more public and visible flouting of City law I cannot point to anywhere in this City, other
than perhaps the billboards that sprang up two years ago on the east side of 95, but in many other ways,
perhaps not as egregious, the industry has been nothing short of sly with this City and I'd like to briefly
illustrate some of the more obvious examples of how they have flouted the laws of this County, which the
City is supposed to enforce for years and years and years, and I do this because against the County Code,
that the ordinance must be tested against, you also, I believe, have responsibility to test the industries'
dialogue with you, their negotiations with you, their request of you tonight and in the future against their
business practices, so, let's just run through a few examples real quickly. This is one of those Carter signs
that's less than two years old. It's on the north side of 195, and let's remember that the protected zone runs
600 feet. That's two football fields. It's a block and a half away. Shouldn't be built in the first place, and
especially not within the protected zone. Here's a -- we've come down south of 95, on the east of 95.
Two residential lots do not make two football fields. It's well within the 600 -foot protected zone. If
you're heading southbound on I-95 at about 20th Street, you see an add-on to one of the old original 10
legal billboards from '85. This is a programmable sign. The County Commission, since 1985, has passed
10 amendments to the countywide sign ordinance. One of them in 1994, set the standards, the very tough
standards for installing one of these signs anywhere in Dade County because it's a Countywide ordinance.
There are 10 tests to legally install one of these signs. This location violates five of them. This is not a
10 -acre site, for example. It does not advertise products-- only advertised products sold on sites. This is a
seafood restaurant. We're looking at a concert ad. This ought to be on -- this should have never gone in.
Should be unplugged tonight. You'll notice that the vertical dimension of this face is less than the vertical
dimension of that face, and this is the south side of this sign. You can see it a little bit better there. This
is what I call a super -sized billboard. In the Countywide sign ordinance, one of the increased restrictions
on the industry was that a billboard could not be more than 750 square feet. Now, the classic shape of a
billboard -- those classic dimensions, like 14 by -- 14 feet by 48 feet long — why is that, and why are so
many the same configuration? Because in the old days, if you went up to the Clear Channel, which is in
the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) facility on 58th Street and the Palmetto, they had a giant ship, and the
billboards were built at ground level on a billboard frame, and they were vertical metal panels, and they
were installed on a frame and it was actually original artwork, and when the paint dried, the panels were
unbolted and they were taken to the location and put on the same sized framework, and for these panels to
be interchangeable, they had to be uniformly there had to be uniformity of dimension, and so, 672 square
feet was the historic dimension, and the County Code permitted up to 750 because sometimes you have
some add-ons. Well, that's not good enough for the industry, apparently, because they've come along
increasingly and recently and allowed a six-foot high -- six foot by 48 super structure to get it up to 950
square feet. Now, what's wrong with another -- an extra 210 square feet? It's illegal. It exceeds the
maximum of 750 square feet, and who do you think knows it best of all? Some of the people in this
225 April 11, 2002
room. Right. Because now they stretch fabric. They don't have to have the classic locked in ancient
historic dimensions. They can build them to any dimension that they can get away with, because then
they just cut the fabric and stretch it over the frame regardless of the size, regardless of the law, regardless
of the non -enforcement. This is on the northwest corner of 95 and 395, as you head toward Jackson.
Here we see the back of another super -sized billboard. These two are two business lots away, and here's
another look. You can see how close these pulls are when they come out of the ground, but that old
countywide sign ordinance said that billboards had to be located 600 feet apart. This is not two football
fields. One of them probably is one of the original tenant is legal, but the second one should never have
been built this close, and the spacing violation, in a moment of true candor, they would admit, is probably
the single most -- is the most repeated -- knowing violation of the sign ordinance. This may not be a
politically correct example, but I did it anyway, with all due respect to the-- to both my City Mayor and
my County Mayor and these other three mayors, all of whom I consider friends. Signs on the side of
buildings are -- have to be point of sale signs and they're restricted to 10 percent of the face of the
building. You don't just go throw billboards up on a building because it's easy to attach the fabric or that
you -- or you're scared of getting caught if you throw a pole up on the wrong side of 95. You just can't
put up signs willy-nilly, no matter how noble the cause, no matter how wonder the school, no matter how
wonderful the politicians. This is not a point of sale sign. It's flat out illegal. I don't really get hung up
on this debate over nonconforming and illegal or whatever. I just kind of stick to the illegal. Particularly,
when the examples are so blatant, so obvious, and the industry has to know because it's so simple.
Spacing, dimensions, point of sale, electronics that don't meet the tests, this is very, very simple stuff to
enforce and they know -- they've learned many years ago in this City and in other cities, as well, and in
the County, as well, they simply do it. Nobody will challenge them and they get away with it. Briefly on
Tallahassee. I think the saddest aspect about this long running discussion, which I think has been
constructive and healthy here in the City of Miami, about outdoor advertising and the billboards, in
particular, is that the last time this Commission had a long conservation about billboards, we were talking
about what the industry did in Tallahassee. Only this year the Governor didn't veto it, but the sad
commentary is that talking about what just happened in Tallahassee measures a year, a year in which
these examples and dozens or hundreds or thousands throughout the City in every neighborhood in this
community that the open knowing flouting of the laws that you all are supposed to enforce has gone on
for 12 more long months. Nothing of any consequence has happened in the last year. Nothing has
happened since '85. They've just gone about their business, made their profits. Total disregard for this
community, and its residents and its neighborhoods, which is to say that, in Tallahassee, the industry has
been chronically up to its old tricks and that is to delay and delay in hope of snatching any regulatory
control from this City that they can another year, another session, or still just talking but not acting and
enforcing the laws. Sure, at the City Commission's instruction and the Manager's insistence a hearing was
held last November on a large number of very technical notices of violations, mostly about permitting and
landscaping and irrigation. Nothing of any real consequence. Another hearing was held at the end of
January. It was exquisitely brief. A third is now planned for later this month. NET produced this fine
volume -- it's not very thin -- of photographic evidence of cases like these and gave it to you last July.
And we can't get an enforcement hearing to get to the good stuff. It's mid-April and a lot of us are starting
to ask, notwithstanding the excellent work product on this rewrite of a very complicated sign ordinance,
when are the grotesquely illegal signs going to be dealt with in a meaningful way and the people who
have perpetrated this on our community going to suffer the consequences? I would make the following
respectful observation, as I wind up, Mr. Chairman -- and I appreciate the latitude for a few extra minutes.
The buck doesn't stop there. The buck stops here. It stops with you five gentlemen and the guy whose
office is upstairs, and if y'all are serious, really serious about cleaning up the urban blight in this City, if
you're serious about sending a message about white collar crime, which this is what it is, and if you're
serious about not being steam rolled or blindsided by huge, multi -hundred million dollar a year industry,
then maybe tonight is the night to send them a message, and I'm going to briefly close on a point of
personal privilege before I get accused of it, before I get accused of being a disgruntled ex -lobbyist for the
billboard industry. Almost from the day I was liberated from "The Miami Herald" in the fall of 1982, 1
226 April 11, 2002
have represented the outdoor advertising industry, and I've done so proudly, and I have been at the table
of every important political discussion and negotiation involving this industry more so than anybody else
in this room, so, I'm going to assert that I know what I'm talking about, and I sat until even later than this
last May-- having just been hired by Clear Channel-- because you all are were about to have this
conversation back then and they weren't ready and neither was the industry, and on behalf of my client
and its colleagues, I convinced this Commission because I believed it, that the industry realized the error
of its ways and that the industry was ready to come to the table and negotiate in good faith and mend its
ways, and three months later, for the first time in a 20 -year career, I quit a client, as a matter of
conscience, because I sat in their meetings, and I concluded in three short months that I had lied to this
Commission because my client had lied to me, and so, I quit, and I made it a point that when the moment
came and I've waited patiently for a year, that I would come and make my small civic contribution to the
public's understanding of what the laws are and how these guys operate. Thank you.
Don Deresz: Pretty hard to follow. My name is Don Deresz, 1852 Southwest 24th Street. I want to add
to Mr. Melton's mentioning about who passed what laws. There are residents of the City who stood right
here also in the early 80's with the City and passed those same -- the City of Miami laws that restricted
billboards to ten of them on the west side of the expressways. I have some questions about the new
ordinance, if I could? I want to make sure we're not giving away the store here, because if -- as Mr.
Melton mentioned, if this City had in fact done its job and enforced the laws, right now the billboard
companies owe over thirty-six million dollars to the City of Miami, and I just want to make sure we're not
giving away the store at a hundred and fifty dollars a day fine for illegal or nonconforming billboard per
day. First of all, I noticed on page 44 of what the document that I was given tonight. It mentions that a
media tower will be allowed with an illuminated billboard in the Overtown Southeast area. Why on
earth's name are we suddenly allowing a billboard in Overtown Southeast area? I mean, where is that
coming from?
Ms. Slazyk: Well, the Planning and Zoning Department is working on a master plan for the
Southeast/Overtown Park West to create something of a Time Square type district, so this is something
that would be allow indicated one place and one place only, as an attraction, a feature, similar to one in
Toronto, and much smaller scale of Time Square.
Mr. Desresz: Is that going to be in a residential area?
Ms. Slazyk: No, no. The master plan is still going on right now to determine the most appropriate
location within the area, but the definition was created already.
Mr. Desresz: I read over the bill that the Governor signed, which was CS House Bill 715, and there's
nothing in here that doesn't allow the City removing illegal or nonconforming billboards. Is there
anything in this document that the City is addressing tonight for the second reading that would prevent the
removal of illegal or nonconforming billboards, as of this date?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): No, there isn't. The only thing -- I'm not sure what your question
is, but right now, this still prohibits billboards -- it prohibits the erection of any new billboards.
Mr. Desresz: Right.
Mr. Maxwell: It also still has the provisions in it dealing with C-1 districts, which require them to be
removed in the past by 1995.
Mr. Desresz: Right.
227 April 11, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: It also in the C-2 districts requires removal within five years. It also utilizes the
amortization tool, which was addressed by the legislature. Now, the answer to your question is that it
does not restrict us from what previously existed but we may be restricted by what happened in
Tallahassee, but we have not changed our ordinance in relation --
Mr. Desresz: Has anybody from the City read the bill that was signed by the Governor?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, of course.
Mr. Desresz: Has anybody? I don't see anything in here that doesn't allow the City to go ahead -- all these
billboard that are built on the east side of I-95 to be removed tomorrow.
Mr. Maxwell: That's right. That statute that you have -- the bill that you have in your hand -- I take it
you have HB -715 in your hand.
Mr. Desresz: Yes, sir. Right here.
Mr. Maxwell: HB -715 talks about lawfully erected signs.
Mr. Desresz: None of these are --
Mr. Maxwell: If a sign does not meet -- first of all, even then, it does not -- if a sign is even lawfully
erected, it doesn't preclude the City from removing it.
Mr. Desresz: Right.
Mr. Maxwell: It just deals with compensation.
Mr. Desresz: Right.
Mr. Maxwell: So, if a sign is not lawfully erected, if it is an illegal sign, the City would not have to
compensate a person for it, so, if these signs are as Mr. Melton pointed out, if they are illegal signs, then
the City can proceed with its enforcement procedures without any concern of having to compensate the
owners for them.
Mr. Desresz: The City Code says only 10 signs allowed -- 10 billboard signs allowed in the entire City
limits only on the west side of I-95, period. That's what it says. I mean, it's pretty simple. All these
others have -- I'm standing up here for what, a year and a half now? I don't get it, so, nothing in this
ordinance will allow nonconforming signs to become legal?
Ms. Slazyk: What this ordinance does regarding the signs in C-2 in industrial districts, they have become
nonconformities on the passage of this ordinance.
Mr. Desresz: Right,
Ms. Slazyk: They will be. They have five years in which they must be removed and they would be
allowed to remain under stricter criteria by Class II special permit and payment to a mitigation trust fund,
which would be used for streetscape-like improvements to mitigate the effects of the billboard.
Mr. Desresz: Thank you, and the signs that are presently illegal or nonconforming, nothing in this -- in
these ordinances would make them conforming or legal?
228 April 11, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: No. If they're illegal --
Mr. Desresz: Even with -- even with paying mitigation fees --
Ms. Slazyk: No.
Mr. Desresz: --or seeking Class II Special Permits.
Ms. Slazyk: No.
Chairman Regalado: But you have to the state law, remember?
Ms. Slazyk: If they are illegal, they cannot come seek a Class II to get legal.
Mr. Desresz: OK. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: O.K. Don, thank you very much. Anybody else? Mr. Hagen.
Stephen Hagen: Steve Hagen, 725 Northeast 73rd Street, Miami. I sent you February 27th, about a 7 -
page letter. I'm speaking to 13, 14, and 15 because these things all -- the ordinance combines billboards
and other signs. All day today you've been talking about cleaning up the City and I'm in agreement that
the ordinance -- the three ordinances that you're considering are a good step in this direction. I basically
want to address the signs other than billboards, and when I was on the committee with Outdoor
Advertising Review Board with the billboard industry, I mean the one thing we did agree upon is they're
not the -- billboards are not the sole producers of visual clutter in our City; other on-site signs contributed
to that, so I've had the opportunity to speak with Ms. Slazyk and I'm in, you know, agreement with what
she's presenting. However, there are some recommendations that I've made that she's agreed to that ought
to probably be included as well, but in terms of timing, maybe this might have to be considered for a later
date, but in terms of the public knowing about these things, I'd like to go over those items at this time.
The main -- my main consideration are pole signs or ground signs. The new codes will allow pole signs
from 40 to 200 square foot to be erected 20 feet tall in many areas of the City, and I'm asking you to
please consider eliminating pole signs and replacing them with monument -style signs, which are placed
on the ground with a height of no more than six feet, with 32 square feet being allowed on two sides. I'm
just hitting the highlights of what I sent to you. Actually, I drove a couple weeks ago from Palm Beach --
drove US -1 all the way to Ft. Lauderdale and almost every town I went through has replaced pole signs
with monument -style signs. Monument -style signs are the type that are like a graveyard monument.
They're planted on the ground, perhaps no more than six or eight feet tall. It keeps the visual clutter down
at eye level instead of having three levels of visual clutter, you have an eye level -- you illuminate the 20 -
foot thing that's in the air and then you -- above that, of course, you have billboards, and there's really
only two towns that I saw that still had pole signs, and that was Hypoluxo and one other smaller city. All
the major towns along US -1 are eliminating pole signs. I included -- I went through the ordinance and
you have a page and a half schedule of where of itemized -- where pole signs would still be allowed under
this ordinance. There's many -- there's a few districts that would not allow pole signs at all, and there's
some districts that don't even allow monument signs. For instance, on the upper eastside, from 36 Street
all the way along Biscayne Boulevard to the City limits, either pole signs or monument signs would be
allowed, and so, I'm asking the Commission to look at this in terms of other areas of the City, so that we
have some sort of continuity across this City in terms of the pole signs and the monument signs.
Chairman Regalado: Sorry, Mr. Hagen. We've got -- we still have -- I mean, we're going to defer a lot of
things, but we want to do this. How long do you think you need?
229 April 11, 2002
Mr. Hagen: About five minutes. Three maximum.
Chairman Regalado: Please.
Mr. Hagen: I mean, do you want to hear arguments about pole signs and why they're needed? I submit
that large pole styled signs actually -- if they actually improve business by catching the attention of
drivers, who is not familiar with the area, then business located along the heaviest traveled roads, would
benefit most from such a sign. In fact, many new businesses are located along heavily traveled roads,
such as Biscayne Boulevard and Calle Ocho, neither of which allow pole signs, are doing very well with
signs only mounted on the sides of a building or having -- or a projecting sign. Retail businesses located
on less traveled roads, which is where a pole sign would be allowed under this plan -- in other words,
your -- the plan, as of now, would still allow a pole sign in less traveled roads. They would actually
benefit significantly from this type of pole sign or monument sign, because the fact is, these retail
businesses traditionally depend on local customers who know the area and are most likely to live in area.
In fact, retail businesses located in these areas traditionally market themselves through phone directory
advertising, local print media, direct mail and word of mouth, all aimed at bringing customers to their
business address, so they don't need them, but yet, that's where they would be allowed. Wholesale
businesses would not benefit significantly from pole or monument signs, as their customers live outside
the area. These businesses usually build their customer base through advertising and phone directories,
industry directories, and industry journals. They also use direct mail to their industry group and they
participate in trade shows, so, therefore, they're being allowed in those districts, but yet, they really would
be no benefit for the business there. The conditional accessory use that is talked about in terms of display
advertising on the sides of buildings, actually the measurement it should not be – the conversation we had
was that you wanted to allow the traditional -sized advertising to remain on some bili -- some properties.
I've just been informed that those ads are usually 5 by 10; eight sheets or 5 by 10 feet and not 32 square
feet.
Chairman Regalado: Steve, I've got to cut you off, because, you know, we need to go on. I'm sorry. I
know that you -- this is a very dear --
Mr. Hagen: Well, Mr. Chairman, you're talking about changing a sign ordinance, which affects the entire
City.
Chairman Regalado: I know, but, I mean, we have had so many public hearings and --
Mr. Hagen: It's not just billboards.
Chairman Regalado: But you've had your time. I am sorry. I have to cut you.
Mr. Hagen: Well, there are other -- all of you -- you should have all received this then because --
Chairman Regalado: I did.
Mr. Hagen: --there are—O.K. There are other miscellaneous --
Chairman Regalado: I did and I respond to you and I read it.
Mr. Hagen: The pole signs are the main – main thing.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Go ahead, Mr. Rojas.
230 April 11, 2002
Luis Rojas: Mr. Chairman, my name is Luis Rojas. I'm an attorney at the law office of Dwayne Morris
here in Miami, and I'll be brief, but I'll try also to be persuasive. I think Commissioner Winton said it
correctly, Mr. Melton made an impassioned plea, which was very good and hard to follow. However, I
think that what you need to look at is, how are you going to solve this problem? And that's what you
really need to look at, and when Mr. Melton got up here, and I think one of the things he told you -- and
he can correct me if I'm wrong -- that the great compromise was 10 signs. It was really 10 additional
signs than what was really there, and that compromise has been honored by Clear Channel, and I want to
tell you that went you talk about the industry, there are three -- basically, three players here. There is one
company who chose the route of suing you initially and immediately, who is actually not here tonight, I
don't believe, and there's one company who has chose to try to negotiate with the City, which is Clear
Channel, which comes before you today and says that it's still willing to negotiate with the City and
wants to negotiate with the City, and when Mr. Melton got up there and talked about all of these illegal
signs that are up, that sprung up in the last two years, not one time did he mention that they were Clear
Channel signs, and so, if you want to solve your problem, if you want to solve your problem, to take this
ordinance and adopt it today, does not solve your problem because state law has now changed, and the
Governor signed this bill and what the bill says is, number one, this issue of amortization, which the
courts went different ways on -- and amortization was basically the issue of a City passing an ordinance
and says, you can keep the sign there but in five years, you have to take it down, but now that's clarified
and it becomes, in essence, a property -- like property, and what the legislature said very clearly is, you
can -- if you, City, wanted to take that property and take it down, you have to give just compensation, and
they have -- and they have created a mechanism here on how to resolve this dispute, and says if you want
to relocate that sign, you send a notice. Then you have a period, and if you can't relocate it, you go to a
mediation period, and that's what the legislature did, and let me tell you. It's a very simple argument. My
grandfather went to Cuba when he was 40. He built a business, but Fidel Castro came and took it away,
and to me, the value of personal property of a government being able to take a property has hit in my
family, and that's what cities were doing. Cities were passing laws that said, "By the way, we don't like
that use. You can do it for five years and we're going to take it away from you and we're not going to
give you any money," and the legislature, on the merit, said, "Wait a minute. That is wrong. That is
inherently wrong," and the Governor signed the statute because the Governor believed it was inherently
wrong. In this country, in the first draft of the Declaration Of Independence was "life, liberty and the
pursuit of property," and then Jefferson changed that and put "pursuit of happiness," but property rights in
this country, especially in north Florida, Mr. Winton, are so sacred, and that's why this bill flew by last
year, and it was part of a bigger bill and got vetoed but there were other issues there and flew by the
legislature this year, and so, if you're going to pass this ordinance now, and all of a sudden you're going to
start paying for each one of these signs that have to come down, you're not going to be able to do that.
You're not going to be able to do that, so again, Clear Channel stands here telling you that we're ready to
bring down voluntarily, within the next 90 days, 451 faces. We want to work with your staff. We want to
help you solve your problem, and if you want -- if you're serious about that, we're serious about it, too. If
you pass this ordinance, all you're going to get is -- if -- the guy that filed the lawsuit won, because he
said, "You know what? Don't even deal with these people. Just sue them right off," and we believe that
is wrong, and we stand here in good faith to tell you that we still want to go to the negotiating table and
take down signs and help you solve your problem. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Melton: Mr. Chairman, very, very briefly, because Mr. Rojas invited --
Chairman Regalado: Come on.
Mr. Melton: Mr. Rojas invited me to --
231 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: You've got one minute, please.
Mr. Melton: I'll take less than one minute. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear that this Clear Channel sign,
with the electronic add-on is one of those illegal signs. This super -sized Clear Channel sign is one of
those illegal signs. Don't know which one of these was erected first. Clear Channel may be one of the
illegal signs, and I want to set one other thing very clear. When I said that my former client, Clear
Channel, had lied to me, it was neither Mr. Rojas, his partner, Mr. Pappy, or Steve Alexander, who's an
employee, and who's here tonight. Others in the organization induced me to lie to you last May, but I
want to make the record abundantly clear, it was not these guys here tonight.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. We are going to close the public hearing. Don.
Mr. Desresz: Mr. Chairman, I --
Chairman Regalado: Don.
Mr. Desresz: Thirty seconds.
Chairman Regalado: Don, come on.
Mr. Desresz: One thing I'm sorry I didn't mention, and that's about.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Go to the mic. Go to the mic.
Mr. Desresz: The sound barriers that are going up, your ordinance allows the billboard companies to
increase the height of their billboards above the new sound barriers so that when you're driving along,
you're going to see the sound barriers and then a billboard in the sky every six seconds. Well, this new
law that the Governor signed, there is no stipulation that allows the billboard companies to increase their
height. They can do that only with negotiation of the government entity, so, there's no reason you have to
allow the billboard companies to do that. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. OK. We close the public hearing.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Slazyk: The variance does have to go through a governmental approval process, which would be the
variance, and they have to go through the exact same variance process as anybody else. This is just being
recognized as a form of hardship.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele. Anything you want to add or — do we have a motion?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, I think what's happening now just sort of
underscores the dilemma that we've been confronted with now for the last two years. We have a problem,
a serious problem. I'd like to ask the law firm that we retained over a year ago, I guess now, to work on
this matter, at least to be introduced because we need to get ourselves in the right frame of mind, I think,
to deal with this matter, so, Mr. Attorney, would you introduce the outside counsel?
232 April 11, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, Commissioner. I'd like to introduce Ms. Carol Licko. She's one of the attorneys --
principal attorneys, the laboring oar, with the law firm of Hogan and Hartson, a partner with Parker
Thompson, and has ably represented the City in the litigation so far, sir.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Chairman, with your permission and indulgence of the Commission,
what we have is a series of five actions that we'd like to take tonight pursuant to these ordinances. I've
conferred in length with the City Attorney and the Manager and with special counsel. The first thing that
we're dealing with is the underlying ordinances, which -- I think it's fair to say that the Planning
Department, Ms. Slazyk and Ms. Licko, primarily, are the authors of the underlying ordinances, is that a
fair characterization, Madam Director?
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): Yes, it is.
Commissioner Teele: And, in fact, I understand Ms. Slazyk went off for about a month or two and
worked out of the office. I was there -- three months. Three weeks. I was there yesterday. It's one of the
finest office buildings, Johnny — it's that office building there where the Barkley's office building, where
you have your offices, and there's been a concerted effort. I think the public has raised a number of
points, and I would hope that the management would take very seriously all of the points that have been
raised and come back next month, in the next two weeks, with amendments to this ordinance, even though
it's a new ordinance. If you agree with the public comments, after you've met them and considered them,
I don't think we ought to keep a closed mind. I think the public has vested a lot in this, and I'm
particularly concerned with the comments of Mr. Melton, who clearly has some history and expertise in
this matter. One matter that I would like, even if it's a separate ordinance to be considered, is in the
context of the so-called Time Square. I would like to see -- and the County has got a very similar
ordinance that relates to people who protest bids or fail to pay the County or whatever. I want to see an
absolute prohibition on any entity or affiliated entity or entity that involves the same principals having
anything to do with Time Square. In other words, if we're going to build a Time Square, these
lawbreakers are not going to have anyway at all of being over there, OK, and, so, I think that's a very -- I
don't think it's in here to any satisfaction, but one thing we need to do is ensure that we talk about the
companies, the affiliated companies, companies that are associated with them, partners with them,
business entities and any form of combination so that if we ever build a Time Square, it's very clear that
all -- any company that has code violations or has been determined to have violated our ordinances, in the
past, at least for a 10 -year period of time, they may not participate in any type of activities and
opportunities that we may create. The challenge that we have right now, Mr. Chairman, members of the
Commission, is that the Governor signed a law. That law is in effect immediately with an effective date
of July 1 st. In other words, we're in a transition period right now, but that law has literally gone on the
books and so, now, we're in a transition. I don't like the terminology because as you talk about it legally
erected begins to have some different -- double connotations, but the fact of the matter is, the first thing
that we must do is adopt all of our ordinances, effective immediately, and to do that requires that we pass
two emergency ordinances, because normally, when we adopt an ordinance under a first reading and a
second reading, the effective date is 30 days from the date that the Mayor signs it or doesn't sign it or
vetoes it; is that correct?
Mr. Maxwell: Thirty days from adoption. It would be 30 days from --
Commissioner Teele: Well, 30 days from now, which means, if we're going to put in place a regulatory
scheme to be able to manage on July 1 the new legislative mandate, we've got -- we're in the transition
period right now, so, as we adopt this tonight, we need to move forward the effective date so that it's
immediate. I'm advised by both lawyers that the best way to do that is to adopt two emergency
ordinances that essentially say emergency -- emergency ordinances are effective immediately, but we
233 April 11, 2002
don't want to adopt our sign ordinances as an emergency because of the notice provisions, so what we --
it's been advised that we should adopt the ordinances that change the effective date as it relates to outdoor
advertising and the legislation that the Governor just put in place, and so, what I would like to do is, while
we're here and first in the second reading with the comments period closed, is bring up now for an
emergency adoption two ordinances that simply would make the effective date of whatever we pass
tonight to be effective immediately. Is that a fair characterization, Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Madam Attorney, do you agree?
Carol Licko (Special Counsel, Hogan & Hartson): Yes, sir.
Mr. Maxwell: On two of the ordinances.
Commissioner Teele: On the two emergency ordinances.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes. Well, the two emergency ordinances affect --
Commissioner Teele: The effective date. That's all they're doing, as I understand it. Is that correct?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: OK, so, would you read the first one for --
Chairman Regalado: We need a motion, Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move the first emergency ordinance.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. But do we need to vote first on PZ -13?
Commissioner Teele: No, no. We don't want to do that. We want to put into effect the effective date so
that when this is passed, it goes into effect immediately.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead.
Mr. Maxwell: An emergency—
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. Read the ordinance. OK. Madam City Clerk,
double roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled –
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO
ESTABLISH AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE UPON ADOPTION BY THE
MIAMI CITY COMMISSION OF ORDINANCE NO. 12213 WHICH AMENDED
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, ARTICLES 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11 AND 25 OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE TO MODIFY PROVISIONS REGARDING SIGN AND USE
REGULATIONS AS THEY PERTAIN TO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING
234 April 11, 2002
BUSINESSES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was introduced by Commissioner Teele and seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele and seconded by Vice Chairman Winton,
adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12211
Commissioner Teele: Now, would you read the -- I would move the second emergency ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: There is a motion and a second. Read the ordinance.
Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. Did you have before -- did you do two roll calls, Madam Clerk?
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Yes, I did.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, she did.
Mr. Maxwell: All right. I'm sorry. I didn't hear the other, and I wanted to make sure that happened.
O.K.
Chairman Regalado: No. She did do the two roll calls. OK. Two roll calls, Madam City Clerk.
An Ordinance Entitled —
235 April 11, 2002
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO
ESTABLISH AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE UPON ADOPTION BY THE
MIAMI CITY COMMISSION OF ORDINANCE NO. 12215 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; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was introduced by Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez
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. 12212
Commissioner Teele: Now, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take the --
Chairman Regalado: We need another roll call.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to take the underlying ordinances, the first one I would so
move.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -13.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
236 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Second reading ordinance. Read the ordinance. 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 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; 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 A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12213.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
237 April 11, 2002
43. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND CHAPTER 62, "ZONING AND PLANNING" OF
CITY CODE ENTITLED "ZONING AND PLANNING," BY ADDING NEW SECTIONS 62-300 TO
62-302 AND CREATING NEW ARTICLE X ENTITLED "STREETSCAPE MITIGATION TRUST
FUND"; PROVIDING FOR ADMINISTRATION, REGULATIONS, AND FEE SCHEDULE FOR
TRUST FUND PAYMENTS FROM "FREESTANDING OUTDOOR ADVERTISING SIGNS" TO
MITIGATE RELATED AND ASSOCIATED ADVERSE EFFECTS AND MAINTENANCE.
(Applicant(s): Planning and Zoning Department).
Chairman Regalado: PZ -14, second reading. It's a fee schedule for signs. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Roll call.
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 OFFSITE 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 passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner
Sanchez, 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. 12214.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
238 April 11, 2002
44. SECOND 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): Planning
and Zoning Department).
Commissioner Teele: Now, Mr. Chairman, there are three companion items. The three items essentially —
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): You have one more, Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: I'm sorry. I would so move item number --
Mr. Maxwell: That would be 15.
Commissioner Teele: -- 15.
Chairman Regalado: Fifteen.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Second reading ordinance. 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 passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman
Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12215.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
239 April 11, 2002
45. DIRECT MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO COMMUNICATE TO OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING INDUSTRY ALL ISSUES RELATED TO BILLBOARDS THROUGH SPECIAL
COUNSEL ONLY; TO PROCEED WITH ALL CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASES, USING
ALL AVAILABLE RESOURCES.
MANAGER, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2105.4 OF CITY'S ZONING CODE, TO SUSPEND
PROCESSING OF ALL PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR ERECTION AND CONSTRUCTION OF
OUTDOOR ADVERTISING STRUCTURES IN CITY FOR SEVENTY-FIVE DAYS IN LIGHT OF
ENACTMENT OF CHAPTER LAW 2002-13, LAWS OF FLORIDA ("BILLBOARD LAW").
Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we really have to do -- and I think
Mr. Melton said it best -- is we have to move from a peace time footing to a war time footing. And, so,
the next two resolutions basically will confirm the role of outside counsel to come in and take total
control over all matters relating to this and eventually, as we go into the executive session on Monday,
we'll hear from them and the City Attorney on this matter. This does not have any financial implications,
but what we're going to do is ask that they come back to us at the next meeting to resolve the financial
issues, so, this is a resolution entitled Pocket Item Number 7 of the City Commission, authorizing the
engagement or confirming -- because they've already been engaged -- the law firm of Hogan and Hartson,
LLP, as special counsel for the City Commission and --
Mr. Maxwell: I think you have the wrong one.
Commissioner Teele: The most recent one is a resolution of the City Commission directing that the City
Manager and the City Attorney to communicate to the outdoor advertising industry all issues related to
the billboards through special counsel only, and further directing that the City Manager and City Attorney
to proceed with all Code Enforcement cases using all of the available resources of the City, including
special counsel and multiple special masters. I would so move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: 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. 02-392
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO COMMUNICATE TO THE
OUTDOOR ADVERTISING INDUSTRY ALL ISSUES RELATED TO BILLBOARDS
THROUGH SPECIAL COUNSEL ONLY; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH ALL CODE
ENFORCEMENT BOARD CASES, USING ALL AVAILABLE RESOURCES,
INCLUDING SPECIAL COUNSEL AND MULTIPLE SPECIAL MASTERS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
240 April 11, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Regalado: It passes 5/0. Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: And the final matter is a resolution directing the City Manager, pursuant to Section
2105.4 of the zoning code to skin the processing of all permit applications for the erection and
construction of outdoor advertising structures in the City of Miami for a period of 75 days, in light of the
enactment of Chapter Law 2002-13 Laws of the Florida, entitled, "Billboard Law," and this is designed to
create a regulatory scheme so that we know what lawfully erected signs are and the whole issue of
requiring the billboard industry, when they pull permits, they have to give us what they consider to be the
evaluation to give us an appraisal of the entire regulatory scheme that the Manager must come up with,
based upon what the Governor has signed into law. I would so move.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-393
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2105.4 OF THE ZONING CODE, TO
SUSPEND THE PROCESSING OF ALL PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR THE
ERECTION AND CONSTRUCTION OF OUTDOOR ADVERTISING STRUCTURES
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR A PERIOD OF SEVENTY-FIVE (75) DAYS IN
LIGHT OF THE ENACTMENT OF CHAPTER LAW 2002-13, LAWS OF FLORIDA
("BILLBOARD LAW").
(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
241 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, one of the unique things that the Governor and the billboard
industry have done is they've created this huge presumption now that billboards are worth a lot of money,
or perhaps, we certainly got to pay a lot of money to take them down. One of the things that we think is
important is that when they pull a permit, we know exactly how much they're claiming this billboard to be
worth, and in fact, as special permits are being issued, that is the Class II permits that are being issued
routinely -- and they'll have to be issued each year, I would assume, is that correct? The special permits
for the nonconforming signs under the amortization period and all of that.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Right. They would be issued just once.
Commissioner Teele: Well, what we need to do is make sure that the regulatory scheme requires that
there be an appraisal or a certified estimate and an entire regulatory scheme as to what these billboards are
worth, and, so, what we're trying to do in this so-called suspension period is put together a scheme so that
the billboard industry can't have it both ways. On one hand, they go to the tax assessor and say, oh, this
billboard's only worth four thousand dollars ($4,000). On the other hand, they're going to come to us and
say, well, if you want to take it down --
Vice Chairman Winton: It's worth four hundred thousand.
Commissioner Teele: -- it's worth four million dollars, and you can't have it both ways, and we'll see you
with the tax appraiser and the tax assessor at the end of the year when you start putting in your money for
what this billboard is worth. Because if you're saying that it's worth four thousand dollars ($4,000) to the
tax assessor, then we're not going to let you say that it's worth four million dollars ($4,000,000) to the
taxpayers, and so, that's a part of the whole regulatory scheme that we've got to put in place, and I think
it's going to be very well for the industry because I also think very clearly that what this law may have
done is converted what they think to be a personal property right to be a real property right, and if it's a
real property right, then we're going to have a wonderful time collecting the taxes on all these wonderful
billboards; the nonconforming the illegal, and all of them. Because you can't on one hand say you've got
to pay us two million dollars or one million dollars to take it down without paying the taxes on that value
for the entire period that they're up, and, so those are the kinds of things that we're going to be asking
Hogan and Hartson to look at with us. The other thing is this. Every billboard that is up there now that
we believe to be nonconforming or illegal, we've got until July 1 to get them before Code Enforcement or
a special master. Now, to date, Mr. Attorney, how many cases have we completed at the Code
Enforcement, approximately? I'm not asking you to a unit of 10. I'll accept a range of 50. How many
billboards have we agreed are out there, roughly?
Mr. Maxwell: Out there? They're 300 and something.
Commissioner Teele: OK. There's 300 and some billboards out there and growing as they -- every night.
Mr. Maxwell: That figure is probably low.
242 April 11, 2002
Commissioner Teele: OK. That figure is probably low. Because, see, one thing is, is a billboard one sign
or is the billboard -- how many faces --
Mr. Melton: Yeah. There may be 300 or so sites with multiple faces.
Commissioner Teele: Three -- but some of them may have --
Mr. Maxwell: Multiple faces.
Commissioner Teele: -- multiple faces. As many as six and eight faces, you know. Two on each side,
three in a row, so, you know, we've got a real problem here, but the question reoccurs is approximately
after all of the talking, and all of the lawyering, and all of the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team),
how many of these billboards have we completed a code enforcement action on?
Mr. Maxwell: We've taken -- I understand we've taken 50 to the special master.
Commissioner Teele: So, we've gotten 10 completed.
Vice Chairman Winton: In what period of time?
Mr. Maxwell: Fifty to the special master, not necessarily completed.
Mr. Melton: Not completed.
Vice Chairman Winton: In what period of time?
Mr. Maxwell: Well, the special master --
Commissioner Teele: No, no. We --
Mr. Maxwell: -- met last August.
Commissioner Teele: We ordered you to do this over a year ago, so let's don't talk about the special
master. The special master is just one way to do it. Code Enforcement Board and special masters. This
Commission instructed the Manager and the Attorney over a year ago -- because we were before the
legislature to go into code enforcement and have hearings. Is that correct or is it not correct, Mr.
Maxwell?
Mr. Maxwell: The process has been going on for almost a year, sir. That's correct.
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- well -- but --
Mr. Maxwell: There were --
Commissioner Teele: That's an average of four months.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right. So, if we've got 400 to go and two months to do it, then --
Commissioner Teele: I would hope that that building, the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) building will
have three shifts of lawyers working six days a week, and if they don't do that, I am personally going to
be saying that we need to get a new City Attorney in this town. I'm going to say it right upfront. We
243 April 11, 2002
have got to get serious about this thing. And if we don't have the support from the Manager's office and
the NET Office and the Code Enforcement, then we need to deal with another Manager, but the matter is
this, folks, not to be intimidating. This industry has pushed us up against the wall, and everybody's got to
be on notice. As the Mayor said yesterday, this is no longer business as usual. This, Mr. Rojas and
industry, is personal, and we've got to act as if we are serious about this, and if this -- these law offices
and these NET Offices aren't working on Saturdays, getting these cases ready and up until midnight, then
something's wrong, and I can tell you this: If this were the private industry, nobody would even bat an
eye. Everybody would be happy to do it, and if we got to pay overtime, if we've got to pay comp time, if
we've got to pay bonuses, whatever it takes, let's get it done.
Vice Chairman Winton: If you have to hire outside resources.
Commissioner Teele: If you've got to hire outside resources, let's get it done, and that's why I wanted to
confirm Hogan and Hartson. As far as I'm concerned, if they need to bring in 10 law firms in here to
work with us, then let's get it done. I've asked repeatedly that we bring in an outside engineering firm to
go through and yet every one of those things that Mr. Melton was rolling out today, which he says that the
files on these things are this thick, which I've asked the DOT (Department of Transportation) and they
have confirmed to me that no one from the City has been down there working with their files on a routine
basis, and it's just business as usual, folks, and I don't mean to be unfair to the Manager or the Attorney. I
have confidence in both of them, and I think this City needs stability more than anything, but I've got to
also say this. This City cannot afford to let an industry take us over the way this industry has done, and
it's wrong.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Do we have a motion that we need to do, Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Maxwell: That was the last motion that I'm aware on the billboard issue.
Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Clerk, did we vote on the last one?
Ms. Thompson: On the last resolution, yes, we did.
Vice Chairman Winton: The last thing was a directive from Commissioner Teele, that I would certainly
echo.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: That gives the Manager and the City Attorney explicit instructions to win.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's 10:49.
Mr. Melton: And I'm available for free as a resource.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Circle the wagons.
Chairman Regalado: If -- we have a special meeting on Thursday, at 1:30, however, Commissioner
Sanchez, you have to leave at two?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no. At 2:30 or 2 o'clock, I'm having a press conference.
244 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Here?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: We can recess --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: -- if we need you? Johnny has to leave, so, we have many non -controversial items
that we can take, Johnny, in the afternoon, if we continue this item to next week, on the special meeting.
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner, I'm sorry. Did I --
Vice Chairman Winton: Where's the CIP (Civilian Investigative Panel) thing?
Chairman Regalado: The CIP thing.
Vice Chairman Winton: Which is agenda item or something rather in here.
Ms. Thompson: Number 30.
Vice Chairman Winton: When are we doing it? Did they get pulled?
Chairman Regalado: No.
Ms. Thompson: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner -- I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. You asked me was there another item. I said
that was the last item on -- regarding billboards.
Commissioner Teele: Billboards.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Mr. Maxwell: I believe you had two P and Z items that you didn't do.
Chairman Regalado: No, no. I know. No. We had many regular items on the agenda. We have
appointments and we have the CIP, but what I'm asking you is whether we can accommodate those items
next Thursday.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would request respectfully that Commissioner Winton be allowed
to move any item tonight that he would like to move and then we roll the balance of the agenda to
Thursday.
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Second.
245 April 11, 2002
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying. I'm saying that Johnny has to leave, so if he has anything
that needs to be done, let's go do it. Commissioner Sanchez, if he has to do a press conference, we'll
recess and we'll take it after his press conference and --
Vice Chairman Winton: I will --
Commissioner Sanchez: My press conference, we'll schedule it at 1 o'clock, so, don't worry about it.
Chairman Regalado: OK, so, no problem. It's only Johnny, and he doesn't have anything to do, so we'll
do it next week.
Vice Chairman Winton: We need to do that tonight, 10.
246 April 11, 2002
46. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING
ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION 918. OFFSITE PARKING, TO MODIFY PROVISIONS
RELATED TO OFFSITE PARKING REGULATIONS. (Applicant(s): Planning and Zoning
Department).
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move PZ -- number 8 -- is it 8 or 10?
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -10.
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to move PZ -10.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Ms. Slazyk: Second reading.
Commissioner Teele: Would you read PZ -10, please?
Vice Chairman Winton: And do 11 also.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, 11 is a clean up.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -10, it's a second reading ordinance on off-site parking requirements. Has been
moved and second. Read the ordinance. This is the last item. Read the ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton would like to take PZ -11, as well.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Just get them both done.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): OK. This is PZ -10.
Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Roll call.
Commissioner Teele: Is there anyone that desires to be heard on this item? Mr. Chairman, there's no one.
Could we call --
Chairman Regalado: No one. Read the ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: He just read it.
Mr. Maxwell: I've read it.
247 April 11, 2002
Ms. Thompson: He did.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the roll.
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry. 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 9, SECTION 918, OFFSITE PARKING, TO MODIFY
PROVISIONS RELATED TO OFFSITE PARKING REGULATIONS; 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 March 7, 2002, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner
Sanchez, 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. 12216.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
248 April 11, 2002
47. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN BY AMENDING FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR PROPERTY AT 621 BEACOM
BOULEVARD FROM "SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC
FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES". (Applicant(s): Planning and Zoning
Department).
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move PZ -1 l .
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Anybody from the public on this matter? Anybody?
Nobody speak on it. Read the ordinance, please. Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MIAMI
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 621 BEACON
BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO
MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND
UTILITIES; MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED
AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, and was passed on first
reading, by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel 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.
249 April 11, 2002
48. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 12128 BY REVISING PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND APPROPRIATING AND ACCEPTING
FUNDS $1,500,000, CONSISTING OF GRANT FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION.
Chairman Regalado: All of the other items -- all of them will be heard on next Thursday --
Vice Chairman Winton: Wait, wait, wait.
Chairman Regalado: -- starting -- you have something?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. Because I want to do the -- I want to get to the -- there's an appropriations
ordinance that I'm told --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: We need to get tonight, which is 10, which I would so move, and then I want to
do -- I want to talk about the CIP thing.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I also have a pocket item.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. I want to talk about process. We don't have to do appointments. I'm sorry.
I was talking -- I was answering Sanchez. I've moved 10.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Chairman Regalado: Item 10 has been moved and second. It's a resolution or --
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): No. It's an ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: It's an ordinance. Read the ordinance.
Mr. Rollason: It's an emergency ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Roll call. Second roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 12128, AS AMENDED, BY
REVISING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
AND APPROPRIATING AND ACCEPTING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF THE
$1,500,000, CONSISTING OF A GRANT FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, TO ACCEPT THE GRANT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
250 April 11, 2002
was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton 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 Vice Chairman Winton and 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. 12217.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into public record by title only.
251 April 11, 2002
49. COMMISSION TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS TO CIVILIAN INVESTIGATIVE PANEL
NOMINATING COMMITTEE IN TWO ROUNDS.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: On Civilian Investigative Panel Nominating Committee, I would like to
understand what my colleagues' thoughts are about how we're going to proceed with picking the 15. We
all have -- in all the discussions, we all felt that this was the most important step we could take because it
really is going to determine ultimately who the members of that panel are. So I wanted to know if
someone had some thoughts in terms of how we were going to move forward with picking the 15
members of the Nominating Committee.
Chairman Regalado: I think -- you know what. I think that we should -- it's an idea, and we should take
one member per Commission in one round. Then have another round, another one member per
Commissioner, and have the Mayor pick five, and that would be 15, if you like that. If not, I mean --
Vice Chairman Winton: That doesn't -- that's --
Chairman Regalado: Whatever you want to do.
Vice Chairman Winton: I might like that.
Commissioner Teele: But I would say this. I agree with that process, but I think we should pick them in
two separate meetings. In other words, pick the first round.
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying. One round, let the Mayor pick the -- so we know the
balance. You see, because the Mayor has to give us a citywide balance. So we know the balance, we
pick one round say next Thursday, if you are available. If not, we'll do --
Commissioner Teele: He could do it by memorandum.
Chairman Regalado: Or we can do it by memorandum. Well, no, he cannot. We cannot do it by
memorandum because, you know, we could --
Commissioner Teele: He could file a memo with the name of one person, which anybody could read into
the record, next Thursday.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yep.
Chairman Regalado: OK, because that way we don't repeat names, because we have a list of people. So
we do one round next week. If you are not here, you leave us a memo. It will be read into the record
what your --
Vice Chairman Winton: Next week, could we take this item up first?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So that I could stay for that, you know.
Chairman Regalado: It's you the one that has to leave. I don't have a problem.
252 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I've got to make money.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: No kidding.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm going broke.
Chairman Regalado: No. We do it for love.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So, actually, we're going to pick 10?
Chairman Regalado: One round. Yes. One round.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's going to be 10 from the Commission, and five from the Mayor's Office?
Chairman Regalado: Yes. One round next Thursday, one round on the 25`h, and then the Mayor needs to
do his before the 25"'.
Commissioner Teele: All right.
Vice Chairman Winton: And we do five more later.
Chairman Regalado: And then we do five more later. In that way --
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
253 April 11, 2002
50. WITHDRAW CONSIDERATION OF PROCEDURES USED FOR COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
BETWEEN CITY AND EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS FLORIDA PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL 79, AFSCME LOCAL 871.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify the record. I, by memorandum, withdrew the
discussion item regarding the Solid Waste at the request of the Manager. It's still showing up on the
agenda. I think it's Item Number 40, is it?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir, number 40.
Commissioner Teele: And I would like to move that the Item Number 40 be withdrawn from the agenda.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second to withdraw item 40.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-394
A MOTION TO WITHDRAW CONSIDERATION OF PROCEDURES USED FOR
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE
EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS THE FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES,
COUNCIL 79, AFSCME LOCAL 871.
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.
254 April 11, 2002
51. A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXPEDITE THE LAND
ACQUISITION PROCESS FOR ALL PROJECTS APPROVED IN THE $255 MILLION HOMELAND
DEFENSE/NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AGREEMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY WITH LAND ACQUISITION SPECIALISTS, AS APPLICABLE.
Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Chairman, in my blue sheets, what I didn't get -- that I didn't get to, I'd
like to read this into the record because I think it's important that Vice Chairman Winton and everyone
understand what we're saying. This is a resolution of the City Commission directing the City Manager to
expedite land acquisition process for all projects approved and identified specifically in the $255 Million
Homeland Defense and Neighborhood Improvement Bond Issue; and authorizing the City Manager to
negotiate and execute agreements in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, with land acquisition
specialists, as applicable. I would so move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor say "aye."
Vice Chairman Winton: I have a question about that. I don't know what all the land acquisition land
items are, so -- and it says "all." "All," I think that resolution said, didn't it?
Commissioner Teele: It says "all" and if you would like it amended to say "all" or some limit, but this is
the point. We're talking first and foremost about the police firing range and all that stuff that we
committed we're going to do as the number one item. We also have a series of fire stations that need to be
done, as well as several park improvements, including the Little Haiti Park, all of which is earmarked to a
dollar amount, so the dollar amounts are tagged into the bond issue. The problem is this; land is the one
thing that's not going to get any cheaper as we go along.
Vice Chairman Winton: No, it's not.
Commissioner Teele: And, so, the one thing that we're saying is not to buy anything, but at least to give
the Manager the green light to go out here, start hiring land acquisition people so that he can be in a
position to recommend to us something because right now, he can't do anything.
Vice Chairman Winton: I understand. So, this isn't authorizing him to buy anything? This is authorizing
him to put all the tools in place to figure out what we need to buy. That comes back?
Commissioner Teele: That comes back. All we're authorizing -- what we're authorizing him to do is to
go out here and hire a bunch of land acquisition exerts to develop a plan, do site stuff, maybe some
environmental, which would be unnecessary follow on, but he is not authorized, in this resolution, to buy
any land.
Vice Chairman Winton: Got it.
Commissioner Teele: You're ready to call the question?
Chairman Regalado: Call the question. All in favor...
Commissioner Teele: I think Ms. Bianchino has got ...
255 April 11, 2002
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): I just wanted to make sure that we're allowing the Manager to
proceed to do appraisals as necessary, surveys, environmental, all the stuff that...
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, correct.
Ms. Bianchino: OK. Good.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-395
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXPEDITE THE LAND ACQUISITION PROCESS
FOR PROJECTS APPROVED IN THE $255 MILLION HOMELAND
DEFENSEINEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT BOND ISSUE; AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE
AGREEMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY,
WITH LAND ACQUISITION SPECIALISTS, AS APPLICABLE.
(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: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Tomas Regalado
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
256 April 11, 2002
52. REQUEST MANAGER TO ANALYZE MELROSE HOUSING PROJECT PHASE III AND MAKE
RECOMMENDATION(S) TO LOAN COMMITTEE.
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion to adjourn?
Commissioner Gonzalez: No. I have a pocket item.
Commissioner Teele: Motion to move the balance of the --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I have a pocket item.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): To continue the meeting until a date -- a time certain next Thursday.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Gonzalez has one pocket item. He needs to do his time --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. Because this quite urgent. We have the Melreese Housing Project is
having some problems. This project is 98 percent completed, and what I'm requesting is that the
administration to take -- to analyze the Melrose Phase III and take recommendation to the Loan
Committee. This project is 98 percent completed and there are 46 families ready to move in, and time is
of essence. This project is going to generate forty-five thousand, six hundred and forty-three dollars
yearly in new taxes to the City of Miami, and if we're able to solve this situation, this project should be
finished in a couple of months and we will have these 46 people closing on their loans.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. There is a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-396
A MOTION REQUESTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ANALYZE THE MELROSE
HOUSING PROJECT PHASE III AND MAKE RECOMMENDATION(S) TO THE
LOAN COMMITTEE.
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
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
257 April 11, 2002
53. DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT DEPARTMENTS OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY AND CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, TO JOINTLY
WORK WITH MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. INSTITUTE FOR NON-VIOLENCE, TO
COORDINATE LOCAL INTERACTIVE BROADCAST OF SATELLITE CONFERENCE
"PREPARING FOR GLOBAL NONVIOLENCE EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN THE 21sT
CENTURY" SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE APRIL 23, 2002 THROUGH APRIL 26, 2002, IN
MEDELLIN, COLOMBIA.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: This is one that's very time sensitive. It does not move money. It's a resolution of
the City Commission instructing the Manager and the appropriate City departments, and specifically
including but not limited to the Department of Information and Technology and Conferences and
Conventions and Public Facilities to work jointly with the Florida Chapter of the Martin Luther King
Institute of Nonviolence to coordinate a local interactive broadcast of a satellite conference, preparing for
the global nonviolence education and training in the 21 st century, scheduled to take place from April 23rd
through April 26th in Medellin, Colombia, and this is sort after a thing where they've invited our Martin
Luther King Institute to come. Further requesting that the Manager to immediately meet with
representatives of local broadcast facilities, included but not limited to Miami -Dade Community College,
North Campus, and the broadcast television station and the Miami -Dade School Board Broadcasting
Station, WLRN, to request support as a host broadcast station for said conference, and further requesting
that AT&T (American Telephone & Telegraph) Broadband provide in-kind assistance and support
deemed to be appropriate as a community education project, and further requesting that the office of the
Mayor to be the primary point of contact for all planning an interface with the government of Colombia
and the local chapter of the Martin Luther King for Nonviolence. I would so move.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: 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. 02-397
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE APPROPRIATE CITY DEPARTMENTS,
INCLUDING THE DEPARTMENTS OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND
CONFERENCES, CONVENTIONS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES TO JOINTLY WORK
WITH THE FLORIDA CHAPTER OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
INSTITUTE FOR NON-VIOLENCE, TO COORDINATE A LOCAL INTERACTIVE
BROADCAST OF THE SATELLITE CONFERENCE "PREPARING FOR GLOBAL
NON-VIOLENCE EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN THE TWENTY-FIRST
CENTURY" ("CONFERENCE") SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE FROM APRIL 23,
2002 THROUGH APRIL 26, 2002, IN MEDELLIN, COLOMBIA; DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO IMMEDIATELY MEET WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF
LOCAL BROADCAST STATIONS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO MIAMI -
258 April 11, 2002
DADE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE - NORTH CAMPUS - BROADCASTING
TELEVISION STATION, AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD PUBLIC
BROADCASTING STATION (WLRN-TV) TO REQUEST SUPPORT AS HOST
BROADCAST STATIONS FOR SAID CONFERENCE; REQUESTING THAT AT&T
BROADBAND PROVIDE IN-KIND ASSISTANCE AND SUPPORT DEEMED
ESSENTIAL FOR THE SUCCESS OF THIS COMMUNITY/EDUCATION
CONFERENCE; AND REQUESTING THAT THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR SERVE
AS THE PRIMARY CONTACT FOR ALL PLANNING AND INTERFACING FOR
THIS CONFERENCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF COLUMBIA AND THE
FLORIDA CHAPTER OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. INSTITUTE FOR
NON-VIOLENCE.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Commissioner Teele: That's a lot of words for no money, but this is a MMAP (Metro Miami Action Plan)
initiative and it's being -- they've invited our Martin Luther King Institute to come down to Medellin,
Colombia and host an interactive conference between Colombia and Miami and we hope we can get it
done with in-kind support.
259 April 11, 2002
54. AUTHORIZE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION TO PURCHASE
FURNITURE FOR NEW ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK RECREATION BUILDING, FROM
BRANDRUD PRODUCTS, CARE OF DESIGNERS SERVICES BUREAU, INC. $12,774,
UTILIZING STATE CONTRACT NO. 420-660-01-1; WITH FUNDING AVAILABLE FROM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
Chairman Regalado: Next Thursday we'll do whatever is left on the agenda. Do we have a
motion to adjourn?
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. I got one more thing here that --
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- is a pocket item, and it is time sensitive, and it's authorization to
purchase twelve thousand, seven hundred and seventy-four dollars worth of furniture --
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: -- for opening Elizabeth Virrick Park,
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the reason it's time sensitive is we're trying to get the park --
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second.
Vice Chairman Winton: And this money is already allocated, budgeted and everything. This
isn't anything out of the -- It's just authorizing to spend it.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
260 April 11, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-398
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE OF BRANDRUD PRODUCTS FURNITURE BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION FROM DESIGNERS
SERVICES BUREAU, INC. FOR THE NEW ELIZABETH VIRRICK
BUILDING, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,774, UTILIZING
STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 420-660-01-1; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 331316 FOR SAID
PURCHASE.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Chairman Regalado: It passes, 4/0.
261 April 11, 2002
55. DIRECT MANAGER TO IMMEDIATELY TAKE ALL STEPS NECESSARY TO SCHEDULE
LEGISLATION TO AMEND RECENTLY ADOPTED ORDINANCES RELATED TO IMPROVED
SURFACE PARKING LOTS IN REDEVELOPMENT AREAS, DOWNTOWN AND SURROUNDING
AREAS BY PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE OF JANUARY 31, 2003.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And I've just been given this. It's a motion directing the City Manager to
immediately take all steps necessary to schedule legislation before the appropriate City boards and City
Commission to amend the recently adopted ordinances related to improved surface parking lots in the
redevelopment area in downtown and surrounded areas by providing for an effective date of the provision
of the ordinance of January 31, 2003 to be applied equally to all classes of property owners and operators
in a manner fully consistent with the letter and spirit of the applicable equal protection standards and
fundamental fairness to each such non-governmental person. I would so move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's a motion and a second.
Vice Chairman Winton: What does that mean, by the way?
Commissioner Teele: What it means is, in the code enforcement proceeding, we have two classes right
now of parking lot operators; one that we're forcing to comply right now and one that isn't, and what we're
saying is, as of now, everybody's going to have to comply equally effective January 30 -- effective
January 30, 2003. We're just saying six months everybody's going to transition, as opposed to one group
having to do it and somebody else doesn't.
Vice Chairman Winton: And does that include the County?
Commissioner Teele: I did not -- I said non-governmental persons. Because the City -- I don't want to get
into the City and the County. We've got to handle that, I think, separately.
Vice Chairman Winton: But interestingly, if you go -- and particular downtown, and go around the
Government Center, the worst parking lots we have are government damned owned and they're
principally the County.
Commissioner Teele: But, Johnny, how can we make them comply when our own MSEA (Miami Sports
& Exhibition Authority) lot looks like a third world parking lot?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we're going to be getting after MSEA, too.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I think we ought to deal with the non-governmental entities now. If you want
to deal with the governmental entities on the 25th, I'll be more than willing to do it.
Vice Chairman Winton: All right.
Commissioner Teele: But I think if we're going to do it to the County, we ought to do it to the State and
the City as well.
262 April 11, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I just think the County's been doing it to us.
Commissioner Teele: Well, the County's sure been doing it. I would move the item, and it's been moved
and second, and call the question.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-399
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO IMMEDIATELY TAKE ALL
STEPS NECESSARY TO SCHEDULE LEGISLATION BEFORE THE
APPROPRIATE CITY BOARDS AND THE CITY COMMISSION TO AMEND
RECENTLY ADOPTED ORDINANCES RELATED TO IMPROVED SURFACE
PARKING LOTS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS, AND DOWNTOWN AND
SURROUNDING AREAS BY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCES OF JANUARY 31, 2003 TO BE APPLIED
EQUALLY TO ALL CLASSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND OPERATORS IN A
MANNER FULLY CONSISTENT WITH THE LETTER AND SPIRIT OF THE
APPLICABLE EQUAL PROTECTION AND STANDARDS AND FUNDAMENTAL
FAIRNESS TO EACH SUCH NON-GOVERNMENTAL PERSONS.
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: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
263 April 11, 2002
56. CONTINUE AGENDA ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP TODAY TO APRIL 18, 2002 AT 1:30 P.M.
Chairman Regalado: Any other pocket items?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, Commissioner. Just to remind you that you need to continue
this meeting to a time certain.
Chairman Regalado: The meeting is being continued to a time certain of 1:30 in the afternoon of next
Thursday. That is April 18`h, and everything left on this agenda will be done hopefully on this special
meeting of the City Commission, so --
Mr. Vilarello: No, not the special meeting. It's a continuation of this meeting.
Chairman Regalado: It's a continuation of the meeting.
Mr. Vilarello: Which would commence at what time?
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion -- 1:30 in the afternoon. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Motion to adjourn.
Chairman Regalado: No. Motion to continue.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh. Motion to continue. I'm sorry.
Chairman Regalado: And we have a second by Commissioner Winton. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-400
A MOTION TO CONTINUE ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT TAKEN UP TODAY TO
APRIL 18, 2002 AT 1:30 P.M.
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: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Chairman Regalado: Good night.
264 April 11, 2002
Thereupon, the meeting was recessed at 11:08 p.m. and scheduled
to be reconvened on April 18, 2004 at 1: 30 p. m.
265 April 11, 2002