HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-07-25 MinutesCITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 25th day of July, 2002, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place
at City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular session.
The meeting was called to order at 9:44 a.m. by Chairman Tomas Regalado, with the
following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez (District 1)
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton (District 2)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Chairman Tomas Regalado (District 4)
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5) (10:04a.m.)
ALSO PRESENT:
Manuel Diaz, Mayor
Carlos Gimenez, City Manager
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Joel Maxwell, Deputy City Attorney
Pricilla A. Thompson, City Clerk
Sylvia S. Scheider, Assistant City Clerk
July 25, 2002
1. PRESENTATIONS & PROCLAMATIONS
1 PROCLAMATION TO COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO
2. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO HOMER WHITTAKER FOR OVERTOWN
ENHANCEMENTS.
3. SISTER CITIES EXCHANGE PROGRAM/KAGOSHIMA. DISTINGUISHED
VISITORS: MAYA IKEDA, RYO HORINOUCHI, NANA IWAMOTO, RIE KAKOI,
MIWA SONODA, TETSUSHI TATEYAMA, SHOGO TSURUDA, NATSUKO
MATSUBARA, YUKO MORIYAMA, CHIKAKO WATASE AND SOOICHI
FUJIMOTO (FLAG).
4. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO RAMON GUILLEN FOR LEADERSHIP IN
QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES IN ALLAPATTAH.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez will do the pledge of allegiance. We will take a
moment for silent prayer. If you all will stand, please. Thank you.
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Regalado, followed by Commissioner Gonzalez,
who led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Chairman Regalado: We have many distinguished visitors. We are going to start with our
Mayor, Manny Diaz, with presentations, and then we'll follow up. Mayor Diaz.
Presentations made.
Chairman Regalado: Anything else? I think we're done with the proclamations. I -- we have
several time certains, and first of all, I would like to welcome our colleague, Commissioner
Arthur Teele, Jr. He feels better. We miss him. On the Police Workshop, he was not feeling
well, and we're all very glad that you're here, Commissioner.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
ORDER OF DAY.
WITHDRAW: PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF CELLULAR TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT
AND SERVICES FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, UNDER
EXISTING STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 725-330-98-1, $138J78.
DEFER: PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS AGAINST CITY RELATED TO
IMPOSITION OF PARKING SURCHARGE ON TOWED VEHICLES, FOR CASE OF
ROBERT M. JASINSKI AND SUSAN M. MISAVAGE VS. CITY.
Chairman Regalado: We have several time certain items. In just a few minutes, we will be
doing a zoning -- a PZ (Planning & Zoning) item. This was advertised and it will be a public
hearing. In the afternoon, I'm going to present members of the Commission and the Mayor with
something that one of our employees did, but we have promised this time certain. Before we are
2 July 25, 2002
going to take the Consent Agenda, the administration had withdrawn items prior to distribution
of the agenda, Items CA -17, CA -18, CA -19. Mr. Manager, I would like to defer, for the next
meeting, Item C-16 [sic], C-16 [sic]. Anybody from the Commission who wants to withdraw,
pull any item from the Consent Agenda?
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, there's an additional withdrawal. There's
Item Number CA -5.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is it 5 or 7, Mr. City Manager?
Chairman Regalado: CA -5.
Mr. Gimenez: It's CA -5.
Commissioner Sanchez: If there's any -- if there's no other deferral, I'd like to move the
Consent Agenda.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And I second the Consent Agenda.
Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public hearing. Anybody who wishes to address the
Commission on the Consent Agenda is invited to do so. Being none, we close the public
hearing. The Consent Agenda has been moved by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by
Commissioner Gonzalez, with the withdrawal of Items CA -17, 181 191 16 and 5. All --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner -- I'm sorry, Commissioner. CA -20 and --
21? -- 21 are amended slightly, and we'd like for you to consider the amended sub -- the
amended resolution.
Chairman Regalado: 20 what?
Mr. Vilarello: CA -20 and CA -21.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are they amended on the agenda or are you going to amend them now?
Mr. Vilarello: We distributed a resolution.
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't have that resolution.
Chairman Regalado: Does the maker of the motion want to wait for --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't have an amendment either.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I --
3 July 25, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: Simply -- they're minor revisions. CA -20, it simply allows us to go against any
claims that we have against the service provider, and CA -21 makes the Department bring back
an agreement for your review -- makes the Manager bring back an agreement for your review,
instead of authorizing him to actually execute the agreement.
Vice Chairman Winton: So CA -21, an agreement would come back for our final approval?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. I have a question on 21. This is approving the findings of the
Evaluation Committee RFP (Request for Proposals) 1-021174R, consulting services for the
Police Resource Allocation Study. What are we talking about here, Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Gimenez: CA -21 is -- that's the allocation, the resources -- the Police Allocation Resource
Study that the Commission has asked us to pursue; get a consultant to look at the efficiency of
the operations of the Miami Police Department. An RFP was issued. There was a Selection
Committee. They've given a ranking of the firms, and this will allow me to negotiate with the
top ranked firm -- (UNINTELLIGIBLE) with a top ranked firm, and if I can't come to some kind
of terms with them, then I can go to the number two firm.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Whose -- who -- the Selecting Committee, how was it
composed?
Mr. Gimenez: We have the names of the Selection Committee.
Judy Carter: Ye, sir. First of all, it is our policy, Commissioners -- this is Judy Carter, Director
of Purchasing for the City -- that when we establish an evaluation committee, that the majority of
the members of that committee be outside of the City's workforce. We had five members who
provided those services to us. Are you interested in knowing who they are? But that is our
policy (UNINTELLIGIBLE) ---
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, I know -- I can recognize some of the names.
Ms. Carter: OK. But the most important thing to know is that the majority of those are outside
of the City's workforce, who have certain familiarity and experience in the area. All would have
some impact in -- as it relates to what is being provided for the community and the City.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And this committee has already selected one firm?
Ms. Carter: The committee --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Recommended?
4 July 25, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: There's a recommendation for you to give me the authority to negotiate with a top
ranked firm and, however, if we can't come to the terms with the top ranked firm, to be able to
go to the number two firm.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Is this going to come back to us after you have made a selection -
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- on who the firm is?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And we're going to be able to discuss this before it comes --
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- to the Commission, right?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. This is authorizing me to just go ahead and negotiate.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Ms. Carter: Exactly. The contract itself will be returned to you for a review; that you will then
have the opportunity to review the terms and conditions, as well as the costs thereof, but do
know that the Evaluation Committee members were responsible for evaluating based upon
factors that were provided for in the RFP. Each particular company was rated, and they were
given scores, and based upon the combined scoring, this is how the ranking fell with regards to
the one, two, and three, four, fifth ranked firm.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. Thank you. All right. I'm ready to -- are you ready to
move with amendments?
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: Hey, you're ready?
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
5 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Aye, as amended.
Chairman Regalado : As amended.
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 SANCHEZ AND
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ, THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WERE
PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
6 July 25, 2002
2. 1. ACCEPT BID OF TEMPTROL AIR CONDITIONING, INC., PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-127, FOR PROVISION OF AIR CONDITIONING
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES AT VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENT
FACILITIES, $46,840; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM POLICE GENERAL OPERATING
BUDGET.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-840
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
BID OF TEMPTROL AIR CONDITIONING, INC., THE LOWEST
RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION
FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-127, DATED JUNE 5, 20021 FOR THE PROVISION OF
AIR CONDITIONING MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR SERVICES AT
VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENT FACILITIES, ON AN AS -NEEDED
CONTRACT BASIS, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, WITH THE OPTION
TO EXTEND FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN
ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $46,840; ALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM THE POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE
NO. 001000.290201.6.670.
2.2. ACCEPT BID OF OK FEED STORE SOUTH, INC., PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR
BIDS NO. 01-02-138, FOR ACQUISITION OF HORSE FEED AND SUPPLEMENTS FOR
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $25,103.53; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM POLICE GENERAL
OPERATING BUDGET.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-841
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
BID OF OK FEED STORE SOUTH, INC., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-
02-13 8, DATED MAY 81 20021 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF HORSE FEED
AND SUPPLEMENTS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, ON A
CONTRACT BASIS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, WITH THE OPTION
TO EXTEND FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, IN AN
ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,103.53; ALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM THE POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE
NO. 001000.290201.6.710.
7 July 25, 2002
2.3. ACCEPT BIDS OF ALINA SPORTSWEAR, INC., CDA CREATIVE, MILTON A.
GOLDBERG, INC., ZIPP SPORTING GOODS, AND CSV USA CORP., PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-114 FOR PROCUREMENT OF T-SHIRTS, GOLF
SHIRTS AND WINDBREAKERS TO BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS;
ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM GENERAL OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS AT TIME OF NEED.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-842
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
BIDS OF ALINA SPORTSWEAR, INC., CDA CREATIVE, MILTON A.
GOLDBERG, INC., ZIPP SPORTING GOODS, AND CSV USA CORP., THE
LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDERS PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-02-114, DATED MAY 20, 2002, FOR THE
PROCUREMENT OF T-SHIRTS, GOLF SHIRTS AND WINDBREAKERS
WITH SILK-SCREENING AND EMBROIDERY, TO BE USED BY VARIOUS
CITY DEPARTMENTS, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR TWO
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM EACH
OF THE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS AT TIME OF NEED.
2.4. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE INDIVIDUAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENTS WITH EACH MEMBER OF USAR TEAM FOR PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE TO INCREASE
AMOUNT OF EACH AGREEMENT, $22,000, FROM $15,000 TO $37,000.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-843
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 01-3 3 0, ADOPTED APRIL 26, 2001, AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE INDIVIDUAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENTS WITH EACH MEMBER OF THE USAR TEAM FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF EACH
AGREEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $22,000, FROM $151000
TO $37,000 PER INCIDENT OR AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY THE
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY ("FEMA")
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND TO INCLUDE THE TERMS OF THE
AGREEMENTS
8 July 25, 2002
2.5. AUTHORIZE SOLICITATION OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS (RFP'S) FOR
PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING PRE -APPROVED LIST OF PROFESSIONAL
ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS TO BE ENGAGED FOR PUBLIC WORKS
CATEGORY "B" DESIGNATED FIRE STATION PROJECTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-844
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
SOLICITATION OF REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP'S") FOR
PURPOSES OF ESTABLISHING A PRE -APPROVED LIST OF
PROFESSIONAL ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS TO BE
ENGAGED FOR PUBLIC WORKS CATEGORY "B" DESIGNATED FIRE
STATION PROJECTS; APPOINTING AN INDIVIDUAL AS CHAIRPERSON
OF THE COMPETITIVE SELECTION COMMITTEE; AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO APPOINT A SIX -MEMBER COMPETITIVE
SELECTION COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE AND RANK IN ORDER THE
QUALIFIED CANDIDATES IN RANK ORDER AND TO PRESENT THE
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR
CONSIDERATION.
9 July 25, 2002
2.6. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH WARNER
PLACE, INC., FOR USE OF 1,358 SQUARE FEET OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 111
SOUTHWEST 5TH AVENUE TO PROVIDE OFFICE SPACE FOR EAST LITTLE HAVANA
NET OFFICE AT MONTHLY FEE OF $1,3 5 8 PLUS $162.96 PER MONTH.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-845
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTATCHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
A LEASE AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
WITH WARNER PLACE, INC., ("LESSOR"), FOR THE USE OF
APPROXIMATELY 11358 SQUARE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 111 SOUTHWEST 5TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO PROVIDE
OFFICE SPACE FOR THE EAST LITTLE HAVANA NET OFFICE AT A
MONTHLY FEE OF $1,3 5 8 PLUS $162.96 PER MONTH FOR ELECTRICITY
AND A SECURITY DEPOSIT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO. 145001.251113.6.620, WITH ALL
TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN
THE AGREEMENT.
10 July 25, 2002
2.7. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT WITH MIAMI ONE CENTRE
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR PURPOSE OF: (1) AGREE TO EXECUTE CLASS I
COASTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SCOUR
MATS BY ONE MIAMI; (2) GRANT PERPETUAL AND NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT
TO ONE MIAMI FOR RIGHT TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, REPAIR AND REPLACE SCOUR
MATS; AND (3) ACCEPT CONVEYANCE OF SCOUR MATS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
AFTER INSTALLATION.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-846
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY
THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH MIAMI ONE CENTRE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP ("ONE MIAMI") FOR THE PURPOSE OF: (1) AGREEING
TO EXECUTE A CLASS I COASTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SCOUR MATS BY ONE MIAMI;
(2) GRANTING A PERPETUAL AND NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT TO
ONE MIAMI FOR THE RIGHT TO INSTALL, MAINTAIN, REPAIR AND
REPLACE SCOUR MATS; AND (3) ACCEPTING THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE SCOUR MATS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS AFTER INSTALLATION, AND
WITH OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS MORE PARTICULARLY
SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT.
2.8. APPROVE ASSIGNMENT OF CHART HOUSE INC. SUBLEASE AGREEMENT TO
CHLN, INC.; AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE AND
RELATED INSTRUMENTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-847
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE CHART
HOUSE INC. ("ASSIGNOR") SUBLEASE AGREEMENT TO CHLN, INC.
("ASSIGNEE"); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF SUBLEASE AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN THE
ASSIGNMENT; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATE AND RELATED INSTRUMENTS.
11 July 25, 2002
2.9. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH MAXIMUS, UNDER STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT NO. 973-001-00-11
PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES FOR MANAGEMENT SKILLS FOR
PROVISION OF PROCESS ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR OFFICES OF MANAGER
AND CITY CLERK, $45,000; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-848
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 MAXIMUS, UNDER STATE OF FLORIDA
CONTRACT NO. 973-001-00-1. PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR MANAGEMENT SKILLS, FOR THE PROVISION OF PROCESS
ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR THE OFFICES OF THE CITY MANAGER
AND CITY CLERK, ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR A PERIOD NOT TO
EXCEED ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DAYS, IN AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $45,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 3110470, AS APPROPRIATED BY THE
ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
ORDINANCES; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT
THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER
FOR SAID SERVICES.
2.10. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE TERMS OF REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND SHAUNDA' S HAIR & NAIL STUDIO, INC.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-849
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE THE TERMS OF THE REVOCABLE LICENSE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND SHAUNDA' S HAIR
& NAIL STUDIO, INC.
12 July 25, 2002
2.11. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE TERMS OF REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO. FLORIDA FOR OCCUPANCY OF
PROPERTY ON VIRGINIA KEY.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-850
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE THE TERMS OF THE REVOCABLE LICENSE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND LANZO
CONSTRUCTION CO. FLORIDA FOR THE OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTY
ON VIRGINIA KEY, MIAMI, FLORIDA.
2.12. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE TERMS OF REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY AND UNITED CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR
OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTY ON VIRGINIA KEY.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-851
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY, INCLUDING
FILING SUIT, TO ENFORCE THE TERMS OF THE REVOCABLE LICENSE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND UNITED
CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR THE
OCCUPANCY OF PROPERTY ON VIRGINIA KEY, MIAMI, FLORIDA.
2.13. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO TERMINATE AGREEMENT WITH VENECON, INC.
FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER
MODIFICATIONS - SECOND BIDDING, B-3261."
RESOLUTION NO. 02-852
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO TERMINATE THE AGREEMENT WITH VENECON,
INC. FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE EMERGENCY
OPERATIONS CENTER MODIFICATIONS - SECOND BIDDING, 13-3261."
13 July 25, 2002
2.14 AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND OTHER
APPROPRIATE CIVIL ACTIONS, FOR PURPOSE OF REMOVING UNPERMITTED
WORK AT 1829 SOUTHWEST 22 TERRACE; SEEK ANY ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES
FOR PURPOSE OF REMOVING ILLEGAL UNITS; INITIATE FORECLOSURE ACTION
AGAINST PROPERTY FOR ANY OUTSTANDING LIENS RELATED TO CODE
ENFORCEMENT COSTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-853
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND/OR OTHER
APPROPRIATE CIVIL ACTIONS, FOR PURPOSE OF REMOVING
UNPERMITTED WORK AT 1829 SOUTHWEST 22 TERRACE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, SO LONG AS THERE EXIST INADEQUATE REMEDIES AT
LAW AND A LIKLIHOOD OF IRREEPARABLE INJURY IF THE
INJUNCTION IS NOT GRANTED; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ATTONEY TO SEEK ANY AND ALL ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES FOR
PURPOSE OF REMOVING ILLEGAL UNITS AT 1829 SOUTHWEST 22
TERRANCE; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY, IF
WARRANTED, TO INITIATE FORECLOSURE ACTION AGAINST THE
PROPERTY AT 1829 SOUTHWEST 22 TERRACE FOR ANY
OUTSTANDING LIENS RELATED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT COSTS AT
A TIME PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW.
14 July 25, 2002
2.15. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO REIMBURSE STATE OF FLORIDA,
ACTING THROUGH ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ON BEHALF OF AGENCY FOR
HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, $474,168.46, IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ALL
CLAIMS AGAINST CITY, FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF MEDICAID PAYMENTS MADE
TO CITY FOR AMBULANCE SERVICE PROVIDED TO MEDICAID PATIENTS.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-854
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO REIMBURSE THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
ACTING THROUGH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ON BEHALF OF
THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, THE SUM OF
$474,168.461 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, FOR
REIMBURSEMENT OF MEDICAID PAYMENTS MADE TO THE CITY OF
MIAMI FOR AMBULANCE SERVICE PROVIDED TO MEDICAID
PATIENTS, UPON THE EXECUTION OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER
OFFICERS, AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS
AND DEMANDS; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND,
ACCOUNT NO. 001000.000000.2223; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL REASONABLE AND NECESSARY ACTIONS,
INCLUDING FILING SUIT, TO OBTAIN RECOURSE FROM ANY THIRD
PARTIES DETERMINED TO BE LIABLE.
15 July 25, 2002
2.16. ACCEPT RECOMMENDATION OF MANAGER APPROVING FINDINGS OF
EVALUATION COMMITTEE, PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO.
01-02-174R, THAT MOST QUALIFIED FIRMS TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES
FOR POLICE RESOURCE ALLOCATION STUDY, FOR OFFICE OF MANAGER, ARE, IN
RANK ORDER: (1) MGT OF AMERICA, INC., AND (2) INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF CHIEFS OF POLICE; AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO D EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT, WITH MGT OF AMERICA, INC., AND WITH
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE (IACP), SECOND -RANKED
FIRM, IN EVENT NEGOTIATIONS FAIL WITH TOP RANKED FIRM.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-855
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY MANAGER APPROVING THE
FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE, PURSUANT TO
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. 01-02-174R, THAT THE MOST
QUALIFIED FIRMS TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES FOR A
POLICE RESOURCE ALLOCATION STUDY, FOR THE OFFICE OF THE
CITY MANAGER, ARE, IN RANK ORDER: (1) MGT OF AMERICA, INC.,
AND (2) INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, WITH MGT OF AMERICA,
INC., THE TOP-RANKED FIRM, FOR AN INITIAL PERIOD OF ONE YEAR,
WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR ONE ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS
OF POLICE (IACP), THE SECOND -RANKED FIRM, IN THE EVENT
NEGOTIATIONS FAIL WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM; AND DIRECTING
THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT TO
THE CITY COMMISSION FOR ITS CONSIDERATION.
16 July 25, 2002
2.17. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SELL FOUR SURPLUS CITY -OWNED 1994
CHEVROLET CAPRICE VEHICLES AT $2,000 PER VEHICLE, TO COLUMBIA
PICTURES, IND., FOR PURPOSE TO FACILITATE FILMING OF FEATURE MOVIE "BAD
BOYS II".
RESOLUTION NO. 02-856
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO SELL FOUR (4) SURPLUS CITY -OWNED 1994
CHEVROLET CAPRICE VEHICLES, AS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE PART
HEREOF, AT $2,000 PER VEHICLE, TO COLUMBIA PICTURES, IND., FOR
THE PURPOSE TO FACILITATE THE FILMING OF THE FEATURE MOVIE
"BAD BOYS II."
2.18. APPROVE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST'S SELECTION OF
TIMOTHY F. SCHMAND AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
RESOLUTION NO. 02-857
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE
BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST'S SELECTION OF TIMOTHY
F. SCHMAND AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
3. ORDER OF DAY.
Chairman Regalado : on the regular agenda, I'd like to defer 13-a. This is on the regular agenda.
Item 20 had been withdrawn during the agenda briefing. Anybody who wishes to withdraw any
items from the regular agenda? OK. We have several time certains. District 2, we have a time
certain at 5 p.m., and we have also several personal appearances. We will do this in the
afternoon. The Mayor has requested to do the AT&T (American Telephoned & Telegraph) item
in the morning, so what we're going to do, if you don't mind, members of the commission, we'll
proceed to the time certain PZ (Planning and Zoning) item at 10 a.m. It's Miami One. This was
advertised as a public hearing. It is a public hearing, and we --
Commissioner Sanchez: which PZ item is this?
Chairman Regalado: -- will proceed the administration and counsel for —
17 July 25, 2002
4. APPROVE SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 98-1151, MAJOR
USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 13.17 AND 22 OF CITY'S ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 110001 FOR ONE MIAMI PARCEL "A" PROJECT; DESIGNATE AS
PHASED DEVELOPMENT; BIFURCATING FROM RESOLUTION NO. 98-1151 BY
CEDING PORTIONS THEREOF; APPROVE SCOUR MAT AGREEMENT AT 205 SOUTH
BISCAYNE BOULEVARD (Applicant(s): The Related Group of Florida).
Chairman Regalado : Go ahead.
Lourdes Slazyk: Thank you. For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Department of Planning and
Zoning. PZ -1 is a substantial modification to Resolution 98-1151, which was a Major Use
Special Permit for the One Miami project. This particular modification is to approve the Major
Use Special Permit for Parcel A of the project. It will consist of 900 residential units, with
accessory recreational space; approximately 17,000 square feet of retail use; 28,000 square feet
of office use, and approximately 1,185 parking spaces. What this resolution looks to do is to
bifurcate this project from the original Master Development Order for One Miami, which
included four parcels in the Central Business District. This project -- this approval also includes
an authorization for the City Manager to execute a Scour Mat agreement for the project. The
Planning, Building and Zoning -- Planning and Zoning Department reviewed the project and
found that the proposed mixed use residential development project would benefit the downtown
area and, more particularly, the Central Business District, by creating new housing opportunities
on the north side of the Miami River within downtown, which we have not seen very much of. It
-- the subject property has convenient access to the Central Business District, the Miami River,
Biscayne Bay, Bayfront Park, and the People Mover System, which makes it ideally suited for
residential office and retail as a mixed use to serve the area. The project was reviewed by the
Large Scale Development Committee, by the Urban Development Review Board, and by the
Planning and Zoning Department. These reviews resulted in some design modifications, which
were then recommended for approval to the Planning and Zoning Director. Based on these
findings, we recommend approval of the project with the conditions that are enumerated in your
package. There are 18 conditions. The last condition requires something that's a little bit
different, in that we would like them to record a certified copy of the development order within
90 days of this approval instead of prior to their building permit, because it modifies a previous
development order that ran with the land. This ensures that it gets recorded in the -- since
they're bifurcating themselves from the original one. This ensures that it gets recorded and that
proper notice is in place for the approval of the project. We also ask that within one year after
the issuance of the building permit, the applicant apply for all required permits requesting
approval to construct and maintain a water taxi dock at the subject property. We believe that the
water taxi system is important to the downtown area, and that should be included. We also ask
the applicant to continue working with the Planning and Zoning Department to address the
comment regarding the location of the site, and the historical significance of the site, and its role
as a major gateway into the City of Miami and the Miami River. There are high expectations for
this project to contribute to the permanence of the City. The views of the project feature
prominently from downtown and from the water, and although the design of the towers have
gone through some reiterations, there's still an opportunity for the design of the project to
continue to evolve and reflect the significance of the site, and live up to its full potential as one
18 July 25, 2002
of the most significant architectural projects in the downtown area. With that, we recommend
approval.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
Lucia Dougherty: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Lucia Dougherty, with
offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of the owner of the property, which is
Related Group of Florida. With me or joining me this morning is Matt Gorson, my senior
partner, Adrienne Partner -- Adrienne Pardo, who is my partner, George Perez, who's the owner
and principal of the project; Cindy Meyer -Webb, who's the Project Manager, and Tony Albanez,
her colleague from Related. We are really excited about this project. It's the second time that
you have actually reviewed a project and this site for this developer. It is --
Chairman Regalado: Lucia, just one second, please.
Ms. Dougherty: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Before we continue, we need to swear those who will be addressing the
Commission on this PZ (Planning &Zoning) item, so the City Clerk -- anybody who -- anybody
here who will be addressing this board on this PZ item? Yes. OK.
The City Clerk administered oath required under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons
giving testimony on zoning issues.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. Go ahead, continue.
Ms. Dougherty: As we said, we are very excited about this project, as have been every board
that we -- before whom we have appeared. It's the first new building in downtown Miami in
over 20 years, and it's the first residential project outside of the redevelopment area that has ever
been in downtown Miami, so it's located at the confluence of the Miami River and Biscayne
Boulevard, and I -- like I said, this is the second time you have reviewed a project for this
developer at this location, but there are a lot of changes have been made and this is significantly
different in many ways from the first project. The first of those differences is Mr. Perez actually
owns this property now. The second one is that before it -- you may recall, it was an office
building and a residential project. Now, we only have one -- we actually have two residential
buildings. We also have neighbors that we have been working with very diligently. As you may
recall, we had opposition from both the Intercontinental, as well as Crescent, the office building,
and we had been working very diligently with them. We believe, and we have confidence, that
we will work out an amenity agreement with the Intercontinental, as well as some other
agreements with the Crescent office building. However, they are going to put on the record a
letter of objection, just in case we don't reach those agreements, and we don't have an objection
to them submitting that record -- those letters for the record. We have been through Internal
Design Review, Large -Scale Development Committee meeting, the Urban Development Review
Board, the Miami River Commission, the Planning Advisory Board, and again, everybody has
19 July 25, 2002
enthusiastically approved this project. It is 896 units, 1,185 parking spaces, 17,000 square feet of
restaurant, and 28,000 square feet of office, which will probably be the headquarters for the
Related Company. Joining me this morning is Bernardo Fort -Brescia, and his colleague Jackie
Gonzalez from Arquitectonica, as well as Dick Rogers, who's our Landscape Architect, and
Ramon Alvarez, who's the Traffic Engineer for the project. What I would like to do is have
Bernardo Fort -Brescia very briefly go through the project, but specifically dealing with the
Waterfront Charter amendment because -- or Waterfront Charter Waiver because that is the one
issue that nobody else has reviewed and it is, frankly, in your purview to do that. The waiver is
actually for only two percent of the building. Before, you may recall, we had approximately
2,400 square feet of waiver. We have reduced that down to 1,594 square feet of building that we
need to have waived pursuant to the Charter amendment, so with that I'd like Bernardo to
describe the project in detail.
Bernardo Fort -Brescia: Good morning. My name is Bernardo Fort -Brescia. I am a principal of
Arquitectonica, the architect for this project. Jackie will point out for you -- I'd like to point out
what is the shoreline issue that Lucia Dougherty has indicated to you. As you know, this is a
very irregular site. It has one site that is on the north/south orientation of the city, and there's
another site that follows the diagonal of the river. As a result of that, the two sites -- the two
edges of the site do not coincide, and due to that, because of the varying depth of the site, the line
that is the demarcation of the Charter amendment, which is -- which hollows a percentage of the
depth up to 50 feet, is very variable, and we have in this technical drawing that we've used with
all the review committees the line that we follow for that setback. What it means is that certain
portions are way set back in relation to the Charter amendment setback, and others are projecting
slightly inward. In fact, the average is, by far, more set back than what is actually required, if
one adds the pluses and minuses, but because of the needs of parking and the dimensional
requirements, we ended up having these minor projections, as shown here, that Lucia has
indicated, and the other aspect has to do with the position of the towers. Under the new design,
the towers are placed forward of the Biscayne Boulevard frontage, with a small office retail
building facing Biscayne Boulevard, which in fact, opens the view quarters out to the waterfront
rather prominently and it sets back the buildings from the street, and I think those are the two
main modifications from the previous approvals. You can see where the prior approval that you
endorsed was located; the two buildings, including one forward here on Biscayne Boulevard and
how that building has been moved back, and therefore, open up those vistas. I think that really
places the position of the building. With this drawing, you can see what happens on the ground
floor. Also, to the satisfaction of the boards that have been reviewing this, you can see that the
entire edge of the building is activated with restaurants and the lobbies and accesses to the
building, and the whole waterfront is developed with a pedestrian promenade with landscaping,
and that, in fact, the entire garage almost, in its entirety, is concealed by residential units so that
it -- there's very little evidence of a large garage in the building, and this shows you the position
of the building and what we mean by the portion of the building that projects beyond the line,
and the portions that are rather very set back in relation to that. The two images that you see at
the end show you the arrival and the view corridor that looks out to the water, and in the lower
one, the view out to the bay from the cafe that occurs in the -- at the edge of the building. I think
in this image you can see how the building actually descends all the way to the ground with retail
-- with residential units completely in the frontage of the building, with its small divider, which
conceals the garage in the center of the space. The two views that you see there, one is at the
20 July 25, 2002
entrance and one is on the waterfront. I think that summarizes the key elements of the design.
Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Ms. Dougherty: I just want to -- that concludes our presentation. I would just like to ask one
thing, though. There is a condition, and we agree with all the conditions, with the exception of
one, and that's the last one that Lourdes read. Because we have been through so many boards in
terms of the design, that we don't want to redesign the building, so this -- condition number 16,
where it says "The applicant shall continue to work with the Planning Department and address
the following comment," we believe we've been through design review. We were
enthusiastically approved by the Urban Development Review Board. We've been
enthusiastically approved by the Miami River Commission, and we don't want to go through
another design of the project. We want to go into full working drawings and pull a permit for
this project as quickly as possible, so we would ask that you don't require condition number 16.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's a public hearing. Anybody from the public who wishes to
address the board on this issue, then we will deal later with condition 16. Nobody? Go ahead,
sir.
Michael Bregman: Good afternoon -- good morning, sorry. Michael Bregman, 915 Northwest
1St Avenue, Apartment H-1214, resident of downtown Miami. This project does represent a
substantial improvement over the last ones that were submitted. I would actually encourage you
to continue to work with the City. There are a couple of aspects to the project, if I could point
out, that even though it is improved, there could afford some more improvements; that is, first of
all, where the vehicular entrance is to the project for private vehicles. If those could be -- that
entrance could be combined with these service entrance so you would route the driveway around
the commercial building towards Biscayne Boulevard, that way when the driveway emerges
from the -- from behind that building, you will open out onto a wide vista that would be a big
benefit to the residents of the project, and in addition, it'll allow -- it'll further enhance the
pedestrian experience on Biscayne Boulevard and not create a hazardous kind of condition, and
also, I'm kind of a little bit worried about the ramp as it goes up there, so that if you accelerate
up that ramp, if you lose control, you might actually go off the ramp. I have a little bit of
concern there. In addition, if you were to combine those two entrances, route the driveway
behind the commercial building, you'd be able to extend the retail component farther towards the
mouth of the river. Right now, there's a lot of distance between the two restaurants, so if you're
walking from -- if you're going to go from one to another, you know, pedestrian activity
encourage -- enhances safety on the promenade, do there's a -- it's a pretty long walk from one
to the other. If you -- if that's shortened, I think you're going to have a much safer environment.
In addition, if it's possible to include some sort of monument towards where Biscayne Boulevard
kind of comes directly south, there is some kind of monument at the end of that where you
terminate the vista, it would be a great enhancement to everyone in the City. Paris, of course, is
the prime example of a city that does that. When you're walking down a major boulevard in
Paris, you see the focal points ahead of you, and we have that opportunity here with Biscayne
Boulevard. There is -- I'm sure there's going to be a concern raised about that with Shoreline
Review because you're not supposed to block the shoreline, but it can be done. Aventura just
21 July 25, 2002
had to comply with that same kind of requirement, so they have a focal point at the end of, I
think, 199th Street, and --
Chairman Regalado : You've got 30 seconds.
Mr. Bregman: OK. I was hoping a colleague of mine, Carlos Baptista, could be here today, but I
guess he couldn't. We've been reviewing projects like this and this one, but I guess he's not
here, but in general, it is a substantial improvement, but if you could do this -- a little bit more
with it, then it'll be a great benefit to the City. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you very much. Go ahead, sir.
Thomas Julia: Tom Julia of Hutton & Williams, 1111 Brickell Avenue, on behalf of
Intercontinental Hotels. I'm just here to join in the objections that were submitted by Mr. Bass
on behalf of Crescent Miami Center, and all of those objections are in a letter dated July 25th, and
I don't want to reiterate anything there. We're just joining those objections for the record.
Lilian Butchart: Lilian Butchart on behalf of the Intercontinental Hotel, and I do want to say, we
are in dialogue with the Related Group and we hope to just have everything worked out shortly.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you. OK.
Ms. Dougherty: Yes. If you would like Bernardo Fort -Brescia to address the comments by this
gentleman, we -- he's available to do so.
Chairman Regalado : If he can do it briefly, I'd appreciate it.
Mr. Brescia: I appreciate the comments. Maybe it is not evident, but the ramp that -- that so-
called ramp is actually a two percent ramp. It's so shallow that it doesn't even require railings
for the disabled, because it's really an inclined street, so maybe by labeling ramp or appearing to
be a ramp there was a misinterpretation there. It's really a driveway that is very gently sloping
and, with respect to the access issues, they were very thoroughly reviewed with a traffic
consultant, and recommendations of the traffic engineers are what we incorporated into our
drawings in the way of distributing traffic and we followed those recommendations. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK, we're closing the public hearing. It's now --
Commissioner Winton, if -- Does the Board want to address condition 16? But we -- right, but
we need a motion on this item.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would move to support staff recommendation on this, including
leaving in paragraph 16. Now, staff may come back -- and I'll give them that opportunity to
come back and -- because I didn't talk to them, while we're going on here, about whether or not
they would object, but my view is -- and I don't have any problem if staff objects to my
comment here, but my view is that we've been very successful at quickly making additional,
appropriate changes to projects from this point to the next point, and I think we can do it quickly
without holding up this project, and sometimes there's a need for one last look at these things to
22 July 25, 2002
get it right, and 99 percent of the time, we really have gotten it right, and when you get it right, it
leads to a greater project for our city, and frankly, it leads to more profits for all the development
community because we do get it right, and I don't think that there's a history with our Planning
Department, certainly over the last two years, where they're unnecessarily holding up these
projects on that kind of review. Now, that's just my view.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK, we have a motion and --
Vice Chairman Winton: Do y' all agree or --
Chairman Regalado: -- second to approve with conditions. Comments.
Ms. Dougherty: If I could just get a clarification as to what the Planning Department is looking
for because as I read this, they're looking for a major redo of the project.
Ms. Slazyk: No, what this comment addresses is none of the site planning issues of the building
footprints or any of those issues; those were fine. It's the elevations of the building. This is a
very unique site and probably even more so unique because of the circle on the other -- where the
other mouth -- the other land where the mouth of the river meets the bay. It is a once-in-a-
lifetime site, and from an elevation standpoint, this is an opportunity to maybe go a little bit
further in the design of the elevations of the building to get, you know, something significant.
Vice Chairman Winton: And -- but from our standpoint -- I mean, from a public policy
standpoint, I think -- and staff has done a good job with this -- they can't overreach, you know.
This project will have a certain economic market that it's targeting and you can't get outside
those parameters, so their mission isn't going to be to redesign the fagade of the building so that
your costs go up dramatically and you can't hit the market, so --
Ms. Slazyk: With that caveat, we are comfortable.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Ms. Dougherty: With that very caveat, because that is precisely what our concern is. We have a
certain marked niche. We know what our market is. He is very successful in reaching that
market niche, and if we are driven to a cost point that is outside of that market, this project isn't
feasible.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think they understand that.
Chairman Regalado: You understand that? You understand what Commissioner Winton's
concern is?
Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Planning &Zoning): Yes. Yes, we do.
23 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado : OK. We have --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes sir.
Commissioner Teele: Then I think Commissioner Winton owes it to the record to modify
number 16, to limit it to the areas that you're talking about because -- you know, I'm giving great
deference to what you've tried to do at the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) and,
literally, we should all be giving any project that brings in housing in the downtown a standing
ovation. I mean, it's not really the fact that we're talking about 20 years of no major
construction, but we're talking about the total absence of significant livability in downtown
Miami, and I think much credit is owed to your leadership at the DDA in continuing to hammer
this out, and the developers' workshop that Commissioner Sanchez chaired has all been a part of
this cascading effect of trying to get people to focus on residential development, but I think
we've got a balancing here and I think the balancing is this: We have a developer who brought
us a project that was on the same site; that was substantially different from the project that we
have. Without regard to my personal opinion of the architect, the architect has gone back and
redesigned the project. That's a substantial cost, which, for the thinly capitalized developer,
would have meant the end of the project. I would assume that the developer -- the architect is
not doing this pro Bono, at this point. Mr. Perez is not even smiling. Everybody's laughing but
you, and so the signal that we've got to send, I think, to the development community, particularly
in downtown, is that we're not going to micromanage and over -design, through our own
administration, what is essentially a private function, and I was take -- I took -- I would have
supported eliminating 16, but I think that may send the wrong signal to the staff, but at the same
time, I think putting strict limitations on what can be reopened is an absolute necessity.
Otherwise, I think, it's not that Mr. Perez can't deal with it or fight it through -- and I've not met
with him or talked to him about this project at all, for the record, since the last project came up,
which I supported -- but I just think it sends a very mixed signal to the development community
in dealing with a very hard -to -get issue. This is a product, I think Ms. Dougherty has said, that
he understands; that he knows where the market is, and this is a shifting market, and I think a lot
has to be said for being able to get there, so my only request, Commissioner Winton, of you
would be to include as language what you and the staff have agreed on as limitations under Item
16, as opposed to this blanket review, because you would always get people feeling that they can
make it a little bit better that have no financial risk in the matter, so I -- I mean, I think having,
you know, the Intercontinental and Crescent, you know, sort of standing mute is a deafening -- I
mean, they're not standing mute; they're putting objections on the record with the understanding
that they're going to be addressed, but I think what we really should try to do is send a strong
message to the development community that we really do want to help expedite construction of
residential downtown, and my comment regarding the architect, just for the record, is I happen to
think that Arquitectonica is one of the world's foremost architectural firms that we should be
privileged to have in Miami. At least, I'm very proud of what they've done in New York in the
redevelopment of the Urban -- UDC, Urban Development Corporation of New York. They --
many people don't even know, but they were selected without lobbyists -- as Mr. Gargano
quickly points out in New York -- they were selected without lobbyists as the lead architect for
24 July 25, 2002
much of the area around Time Square and the Disney Development, and I think, you know, we
don't thank our local firms enough sometimes, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'd like to hear from George.
George Perez: Yeah. If I could address -- Mr. Commissioners, my name is George Perez. I'm
the Chairman of the Related Group of Florida. Item 16 is a killer for us. We've met with the
staff for now close to a year 20 times? We've gotten a world-class architectural firm. We've
changed this building over and over and over again. We've lowered parking garages. We've
hidden them. We've addressed every comment. We've been approved by every board without
comment. I have now, based on all those things -- because this is a great surprise to me, OK? --
spent millions of dollars in getting renderings, in getting model scale model plans for our sales
office that is going to be open tomorrow, OK, in which the brochures have been done, in which
Yabu, which is one of the finest designers in the world out of Toronto, which we've hired, has
already done all those things. The University of Miami's School of Architecture is already way,
way, way working into this design, and for now to come over and say that we need to sign this,
what are we going to do? Just send all the deposits back and say, "Whatever millions of dollars
you have, throw it away and start again?" and this is basically what we're saying, so I think it's -
- at this point, I'm sort of shocked because I felt, you know, spending the money that you have to
spend in cash upfront to buy the site and so forth, and thinking that you're working together with
the City in a public/private partnership and then having, after all these meetings, and after all the
unanimous approvals, having this, it's a surprise, to say the least.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I just have a -- How many times have you redrawn the
project? I mean, it's -- you probably lost count.
Mr. Perez: A hundred --
Chairman Regalado: OK, go ahead.
Vice Chairman Winton: Sorry.
Chairman Regalado: No. He just had a question, then he answered, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: Lourdes, I think that you ought to respond to George's commentary,
because I think an answer is in order.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. The language in number 16 is not a surprise to the development team because
it's been a consistent comment from the very beginning, and while a lot of changes were made to
the plans to widen the bay walk, to put some service access to the bay -- the river walk and the
bay walk so there could be tables and chairs out there, increase the activity on the water, the
landscape plans were upgraded. I mean, they have worked from the very beginning in trying to
make everything better in this project, but from the very beginning there was a conceptual
difference on the significance of this site and, you know, the Planning and Zoning Department
agree that the project has come a long way and that it is, you know, in many respects, superior to
the one that was previously approved for this site, but in elevation, there were some things that,
25 July 25, 2002
you know -- and we understand there's economics that made, you know, some of the decisions to
end up with the elevations the way they were, but it's an opportunity, as well, and I don't think
that this condition is something that we -- it was not intended to start from scratch and redesign
the whole building. It was -- you know, as a project goes from a conceptual phase to working
drawings, changes are made, always. I don't think any major use gets built 100 percent exactly
the way it was approved here because the Building Department gets involved, codes have to be
complied with, fire exits, you know, stairs, mechanical changes have to be made to plans. As
this goes through that process, there's an opportunity to re -look and re -think at some of these
elevation issues to do something that is more significant. It could very well be that when we're
done with that process within the economic target market of what they're trying to reach, that
nothing else can be done, but it's going to keep evolving throughout their building permit
process anyway, and this was a condition to keep that door open for modifications to make it
better.
Chairman Regalado: Can I?
Mr. Perez: If I could co -- sorry.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Go ahead.
Mr. Perez: If I could comment on that. Again, here we're talking about an expenditure of
$300,000,000. We have a marketing campaign coming up of probably $5,000,000. You know,
when we sell and we do that marketing campaign, we show a building. You've already seen the
building. We show that building. We can't later on go, if we are successful, to everybody and
saying, "Oops," you know. We have to show it right now; take the deposit back, you know, and
say we have a new building. We can't do that. Now, of course, when we're working with the
Planning Department, we're working with getting the building permit, you know what I'm
saying? Everything that doesn't work, we will be changing in order for it to work, but if
somebody comes right now -- and we're working very diligently now with two of the largest
construction companies in the world to try to get -- because it's very hard to get this building
built and getting bonding capacity to get this building built, you know, and they're going into
how much glass, how much this, how much so forth, and right now, to tell you the truth of the
price that we're trying to get at, we're having very, very difficult time in meeting those goals --
Chairman Regalado: Let me --
Mr. Perez: --you know.
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, can I -- I have two questions, Lourdes. First question is, why -- I
mean, I've known about this time certain for more than three or four weeks. They asked for a
time certain, explained -- we advertise. The administration said, "Yeah, we're ready. We are
going to bring it. Everybody agreed," and why is it that you couldn't realize that this was a
problem before bringing this to the Commission? That's one question. I mean, it seems to me
that that is a major, a major problem that these people are going to have if we approve that
condition as stated to you. The question is, if you were to look and change the plan, would that
change the brochures and the way that they're presenting the building? Because I'll tell you
26 July 25, 2002
something, I have a colleague, in one of the radio stations that I work, that had a brochure and he
said that he was going to buy one apartment there because he liked the building. Now, would
your changes change the brochure?
Ms. Slazyk: Let me answer the first one, the first question first. This condition 16 in this
language has been there all along. It was through the -- at the Planning Advisory Board and even
before that, through the Design Review phase. This isn't brand new. The reason that it's still
here --
Chairman Regalado : No, but I --
Ms. Slazyk: -- is because they --
Chairman Regalado : Excuse me, I didn't ask --
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, OK.
Chairman Regalado : -- if it was brand new.
Ms. Slazyk: OK.
Chairman Regalado: I asked why do you bring it to us if all the issues had not been resolved.
Ms. Slazyk: Right, because they opted to proceed with it because they felt comfortable that their
design was what was desired for the site. On the second one, it all depends what it is, the
changes in the elevation. If there is some fine-tuning, you know, lines or streamlining of things
within the elevation, it could -- you know, it might not be a big change for a brochure or
something like that, but it really all depends on what is changed. From a plan prospective, we
have no objections to the project, so you know, that wouldn't change. There might be some fine-
tuning in the elevations and that really depends on what it is.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I have a technical question. Everything keeps coming
back to one word -- elevation, elevation. Is that the issue, Commissioner Winton, the elevation,
or are there other issues? I'm --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think we have to rely on staff to answer that question in --
Commissioner Teele: But what I don't want to do, though, is get involved in an unlawful
delegation --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Commissioner Teele: -- Mr. Attorney. Because it seems to me that every time we say, you
know, it's up to us to approve it and then the staff gets to basically reapprove what we're
approving, we're basically doing delegation.
27 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, Commissioner Teele, if you don't mind? Because --
Commissioner Teele: And then --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: -- I don't mind, but I just need to understand from a
developer's/architect/engineering and staff point of view, what is the essence of elevation? I
mean, what's the flexibility of changing elevations -- I mean, this is a dumb question -- changing
elevations, not necessarily as it relates to the financial implication, but what does changing -- are
we saying that even if the elevation change, it's going to look like it looks now? Because if
we're not saying that, then what the hell are we approving?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, if I may.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Maxwell: One of the things that would restrict any changes would be the -- a limitation on
whether or not you would trigger substantial deviation or not, or a material change that would
force the item to have to come back, and of course, you could say that you don't want Planning
Department to suggest or require anything that would force it to come back to you under those
conditions. Basically -- I believe the architects could expound on this -- but when you're talking
about elevations, you're talking about the appearance of the building, basically.
Ms. Dougherty: You're talking about the design and the appearance of that building. Maybe -- I
have a suggestion, Mr. -- Commissioner Winton.
Chairman Regalado: Wait a minute. Commissioner Sanchez wanted to --
Commissioner Sanchez: No. I would like to hear the suggestion now.
Chairman Regalado: OK, go ahead.
Ms. Dougherty: I have a suggestion that if you would be willing to remove this condition 16, we
will voluntarily work with the Planning Department, and to the extent that we can solve these
issues from an elevation standpoint and still make it marketable and still have the same design,
fit in the same design, we'll do that.
Commissioner Teele: But Mr. Chairman --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: -- I think staff owes it to us, if not the developer --
Chairman Regalado: Precise.
28 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: -- put on the record --
Chairman Regalado: What they want.
Commissioner Teele: -- what the concerns are. I mean --
Chairman Regalado: What is the problem?
Commissioner Teele: You know, I don't want to, you know, in any way, diminish staff's
authority, but we're talking about a substantial project. We're talking about $300,000,000
project. Why bring it to us, if there's a whole bunch of issues that they need to vet out --
Chairman Regalado: That was my question.
Commissioner Teele: -- which just goes back to your point, which goes to the developer's point,
so you know, now is the time for the staff to put all of the issues related to elevation because I
still -- Johnny, I'm not a developer. I'm not a builder. I don't know what the elevation issues
are, so I'm asking, respectfully, of staff to put on the record what are the concerns, the elevation
concerns, and I mean, I might be willing to support you.
Ms. Slazyk: Right. The elevation concerns come to what is the image, you know -- again, this is
where the river meets the bay. It's the entrance. It's one of the key sites in the City of Miami,
and there is a certain level of prominence that comes with that position and this building, it's
very well designed. It's a beautiful building. I don't think we have anything against that, but the
experience of entering the river through the bay at that point was something that needs to be up -
played in a more significant way, and it could just very well be a corner treatment on the
building or a feature of some kind. You know, there was some discussion earlier by someone in
the public about, you know, some kind of feature. Something needs to be there other than just,
you know, the termination of a building.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez.
Ms. Dougherty: It's got -- This is the only opportunity.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez and Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Sanchez: You know, it's frustrating, not only for the administration, but also
frustrating for the developers and frustrating for us, the elected officials, that you know, are
working very hard to try to do whatever we can to make sure that we are not the poorest city in
this nation come the next couple of years. We talk about development in downtown. You read
the paper every day of how they're talking about bringing housing into downtown and focusing
on rebuilding downtown into the future. I mean, we're here today just on one issue, one issue --
condition, to decide whether we could do this project. It is so frustrating. You know, I worked
so hard on that development summit and I'm really to a point where, you know, did we learn
29 July 25, 2002
something from that development summit? I mean, did we actually focus on working with the
developers to try to create this? I mean, that piece of land right there, I mean, if this doesn't
happen, I mean, what's going to happen to that lot right there? It's just going to be empty. I
mean, it's a $300,000,000 project. It's going to bring tremendous revenues to this city. It's
going to provide employment for people, and here we are on one condition, which I am prepared
to have the maker of the motion withdraw that condition because, you know, we have to take the
steps, the leadership steps in this community to make this city a world-class city, and this project
has been changed so many times. You know, it's been in front of us twice. I mean, Miami One,
you say Miami One and just about everybody in the city knows who Miami One is, and still
we're here on one condition. What I think we need to resolve today, to try to get this project
going up as quickly as possible for the betterment of this city.
Chairman Regalado: OK. All right. Commissioner Winton. You still haven't respond to
Commissioner Teele's --
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: A number of things. One, I'm going to take Commissioner Sanchez'
words to heart about his real commitment to downtown and hope that we end up with some City
capital improvement money for infrastructure improvements downtown so that George's project
will be all the more successful and we will have many more like him. Secondly, I've had an
opportunity to hear both sides of this debate, and I would like to add that under probably most
any other circumstances, I would probably not change my mind on keeping this paragraph in
because the fact of the matter is -- and Commissioner Sanchez, since your development summit,
we've had hundreds of millions of dollars of development pour into particularly, Brickell and
Omni and other areas where this process, while I think it could be streamlined, has worked very,
very effectively, and under few circumstances did it go awry, and there are some of those and,
hopefully, we'll fix those, so I'm not so concerned about the process. However, this particular
project, as Commissioner Teele said at the beginning, is the first real development project we've
had in downtown Miami in almost 20 years, the first, and so from my view, I think that the signal
we need to send to this developer -- but I don't want to send the signal to everybody. I don't
want to remove this paragraph because this paragraph has worked over and over and over again,
but in this particular instance, since this project has been redone so many times, I'm willing to
accept Lucia's modification here and willing to modify my resolution to accept their offer of
removal of that paragraph with the condition that they work together on a volunteer basis,
because the fact of the matter is, staff may have some ideas that nobody else has thought about
that could make this project better, so that didn't hurt anything, and you all get to decide then if
you're going to make those improvements.
Commissioner Teele: Johnny, I think I would urge you to take it one step further, because I
think the staff makes a very good point, but the point that the staff makes is putting the burden on
the wrong party. The burden ought to be on the DDA and the City of Miami. If we want to
enhance this project for none -- if we want to enhance this project consistent with the statements
30 July 25, 2002
of staff, then it really should be a better signature; that we really should do more, whether it be,
as the gentleman who came up and talked about the statue or the --
Ms. Slazyk: Vista.
Commissioner Teele: -- vista, I mean, those are all good points, but you know what? That's the
role I think of the City. I don't think we should put on the developer. Because the developer has
picked out a prime spot of land, if we want to make it a greater signature, if we want the words
"Miami" emblazoned across in a rainbow from -- that goes all the way across the building, then
why don't we step up and be a part of -- through the DDA -- and again taking to heart what you
just said about Commissioner -- the Commissioners that don't represent the district, all four of
us, all four of us -- is that the City should be prepared to put resources in the infrastructure of this
project, and if it is as significant as staff is suggesting -- and I happen to believe, and I happen to
think staff is right -- I think staff is doing the right thing. I think the problem stet staff has is that
they're putting the responsibility on the wrong party. Instead of trying to put the responsibility
on the developer, that responsibility ought to be on the Commission and on the Economic
Development Office and on the DDA office.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm just waiting for the money --
Commissioner Teele: Well --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- and then it can be where it needs to be. I couldn't agree with you
more --
Commissioner Teele: You know --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- but unfortunately --
Commissioner Teele: -- I agree with what staff is saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: I agree with what staff is saying, but I'm very frustrated, Johnny, because
you don't kill the goose, you know, because the eggs aren't coming out faster; you know, you
fatten it up a little bit, and the way you do that is you feed it, and what this project needs is, this
project needs infrastructure dollars to create the kind of --
Vice Chairman Winton: Entryway.
Commissioner Teele: -- entryway, the kind of markings, the kinds of marquee, perhaps, that
were being described by some of the well thought-out comments of the public, and so I'm totally
in support of where staff is trying to go, but I think we've got to step up. We can't just tag
everything on top of the building saying we don't like -- you know, this is all coded language,
which is what I'm hearing. It's not elevation. It's --
31 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Well --
Commissioner Teele: -- granular or something. It's --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- unfortunately --
Commissioner Teele: -- magnificent or magnificence.
Vice Chairman Winton: But by the way, sometimes it is real elevations. Sometimes these
projects get here because the developer wants the projects to get here in a fast track basis and that
piece of the puzzle isn't worked out yet, and there are substantial differences between the
developer and staff over elevations and those get worked out, so I just want to make sure that
we're clear that, as a policy thing, this is a good thing to have. In this particular instance -- and I
guess I will move to modify my resolution to accept the proffer of the developer to pull 16;
they'll work together voluntarily, and I would be more than happy to accept whatever funding
we can provide, maybe out of the expanded bonding capacity that the Commission might want to
vote on; providing additional infrastructure improvements in downtown to make all these
developments more successful and more attractive. So moved.
Chairman Regalado : OK. Johnny, one --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I'll second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconder of the motion accepts the --
Mr. Maxwell: Well, Commissioners --
Chairman Regalado: Second.
Mr. Maxwell: -- may I suggest that any motions along that line be totally separate and distinct
from your motion on this item right here?
Chairman Regalado : No, no, because the motion that he did at the beginning was to accept the
project with all the recommendations of the administration, so what he's trying to do, he is --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Amending.
Chairman Regalado : -- amending the motion to have Item 16 removed. He's leaving all of
them, but item --
Mr. Maxwell: I know. I understand. It was his --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, but I made it -- I made a trailing --
Mr. Maxwell: - statements about --
32 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: -- statement in this about being perfectly willing to accept any money
that the City could come up with for infrastructure improvements. I -- that was kind of a trailing
piece of that. I'd have to remove that because it could --
Mr. Maxwell: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- put the project -- so, I removed that statement, and this is only about
16 --
Chairman Regalado: But --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- accepting.
Chairman Regalado: -- you know, I -- Johnny, I think --
Vice Chairman Winton: I could make it a separate motion, the City Clerk says.
Chairman Regalado: No, but Commissioner --
Commissioner Teele: I second the motion.
Chairman Regalado: -- Teele is so right. The number one natural gateway of the City of Miami
is that one. That's the signature gateway of the City of Miami. We have allocated money for
gateway, so what's the problem, you know? We can have a gateway in the area. That is the
gateway to the City of Miami, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll be glad to make that as a second -- as a separate motion.
Chairman Regalado: So we have a motion, as amended, to approve PZ -1. Roll call, Madam --
Commissioner Gonzalez: On a second, too? Second.
Chairman Regalado: No. This is on the motion to approve the project.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Mr. Maxwell: With conditions, except 16.
Chairman Regalado: With condition, except 16.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, for the record, let's clarify this. For the record, Johnny made
the motion, I seconded it.
Chairman Regalado: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're voting. All right.
33 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: And then I modified the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: And I accept it, so --
Commissioner Teele: And I'm asking a further modification, and I would like to formally move
a further modification to request the developer to continue to work with the City in developing or
in the design of the project, to be compatible with our gateway initiatives, so there is a
requirement -- I mean, I don't think -- See, I think where the staff was right, the staff was trying
to keep the door open to enhance the project. That's not what we want to do, is close the door on
enhancing the project. What we want to do is close the door on requiring that the developer be
required to change the project, but keep the door open to ask the developer to work with the City
-- Mr. Manager, do you follow what I'm saying? -- to work with the City in developing the
project or the design of the project as a gateway, to use the terminology, which embodies the
financial, but it doesn't talk about financial because gateway is about design, and that's where
the Planning Department, I think, does their best -- some of their best work, is in the design area
of the gateway.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Does --
Commissioner Teele: I won't make the motion. Let's just move forward.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: I think there's a statement (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
34 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-858
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A SUBSTANTIAL
MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 98-11511 A MAJOR USE SPECIAL
PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 13, 17 AND 22 OF ZONING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE ONE MIAMI PARCEL "A" PROJECT,
TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 205 SOUTH BISCAYNE
BOULEVARD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF A
RESIDENTIAL COMPLEX, WITH NOT MORE THAN 900 UNITS,
ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL SPACE, APPROXIMATELY 17,000
SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USE AND APPROXIMATELY 1,185 PARKING
SPACES; DESIGNATING AS A PHASED DEVELOPMENT;
BIEFURCATING FROM RESOLUTION NO. 98-1151 BY CEDING
PORTIONS THEREOF; APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER;
APPROVING A SCOUR MAT AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
ATTACHED FORM; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
SAID AGREEMENT; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THIS RESOLUTION;
MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;
PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Regalado: OK, it passes. Congratulations.
Mr. Perez: Thank you very much, and I give you my personal assurance, Mr. Commissioners,
that we will work very closely with the City in making this a real public/private partnership in
which we will -- things like the gentleman mentioned, fountains and sculptures and things like
that, to make particularly that walkway and that entranceway be something that will be better
than any city in the world. We -- it's -- those of you who know me, and I think all of you know
me very well, this is a very important job for us.
35 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Perez: Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: May I inquire of Mr. Perez. Mr. Perez, will you work with the City
Planning staff that does our gateways, which is a first step in terms of talking about the
public/private, in terms of the enhancements that may be a public/private kind of initiative
related to this project, to make this a more -- a significant gateway consistent with the concerns
that they kept talking about on the elevation, which really gets to --
Mr. Perez: We will do that immediately. We will focus with the City and the things that I think
you sought, the fountain and the plaza and so forth as you come in, and on Biscayne Boulevard
also as you come in from the job and as you come in from the water, and we'll be looking at
those features for the City immediately to see what we can do that's both to the benefit of this
job and for the City as a whole.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, finally, I didn't get this on the record, but I need -- who is
the traffic engineer consultant for this project, and was that submitted for the record?
Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir, the traffic report is in your package. It is David Plummer and
Associates, and Ramon Alvarez is here.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you for the patience.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you very much.
36 July 25, 2002
5. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 40-296 OF CITY CODE
ENTITLED "PERSONNEL/PENSION AND RETIREMENT PLAN/CITY OF MIAMI
ELECTED OFFICERS' RETIREMENT TRUST," TO PROVIDE DEATH BENEFITS FOR
ELECTED OFFICIALS AND CERTAIN BENEFITS FOR MAYOR. (See 47)
Chairman Regalado: We have several items from the Mayor. He has requested that we take the
AT&T (American Telegraph &Telephone) item in the afternoon; we will do that. He has two
items on his blue page. I don't know if they want to proceed
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: We have an item from the Mayor's. It's regarding the pension, personal
pension and retirement plan for the Mayor. This is Mayor Diaz bringing some amended version
of the Mayor's pension. This is a public hearing. It's been moved --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- and second. Anybody from the public who wishes to address on Item A?
Being no one, we close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. OK. Roll call.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been approved on first reading.
An Ordinance Entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 40/ARTICLE IV, DIVISION IV, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEL PENSION
AND RETIREMENT PLAN CITY OF MIAMI ELECTED OFFICERS
RETIREMENT TRUST" TO PROVIDE DEATH BENEFITS FOR ELECTED
OFFICIALS WITH CERTAIN BENEFITS FOR THE MAYOR; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 40-296 OF SAID CODE;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
37 July 25, 2002
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was passed on
first reading by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, there's no change all of that, so we don't require an actuary
report, correct?
Chairman Regalado : Right.
Mr. Vilarello: Then it's actually -- the benefit is being reduced.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I think it's important to put that on the record, so the public really
understands what's at work here, so I hope there's some more explanation.
Mr. Vilarello: Well, this will certainly come back on second reading, after it being advertised,
but the change is, essentially, provide that the pension benefits of the Mayor, once they vest --
once he vests, would be -- instead of as it currently stands, those dollars that he receives in his
W-2 Form, it would be limited simply to a percentage of his salary; that as a reduction of the
benefit currently provided.
Vice Chairman Winton: Unlike the calculation on our immediate past Mayor.
Commissioner Sanchez: And that's something that I think that needs to be corrected.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
6. DIRECT TRUSTEE OF ELECTED OFFICIALS' RETIREMENT TRUST TO
RECALCULATE PENSION BENEFITS FOR FORMER MAYOR JOE CAROLLO SO AS TO
EXCLUDE BACK PAY, BACK BENEFITS AND SALARY ADVANCES AS W2 WAGES
FOR PENSION PURPOSES.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to -- Now that we're discussing the Mayor's
pension, we, in three different Commission meetings, have discussed the previous Mayor's
pension, which has been very much criticized all over the city by the -- by all the press, in the
English press and the Hispanic press.
Chairman Regalado : Would you yield one second?
38 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: I have -- on my blue page, I have a resolution. Would you want me to do it
now?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Whenever you please, sir.
Chairman Regalado: No, no, because I was waiting till the end, until all the Commissioners -- it
is in my blue page, but if you want, I can read the resolution that I was about to introduce when
my turn was, but if you want to do something else, you know, whatever --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Your pleasure. I just wanted to know if we were going to discuss that
and get it over with because, you know, the comments continue to happen out there, and you
being a member of the press, you know that the comments are still out there.
Commissioner Sanchez: May I ask, what is -- is your intent to reside [sic] the ordinance -- to
repeal the ordinance? What is your intent?
Commissioner Gonzalez: The last ordinance, yes. To bring him to the same level that we're
bringing the option -- you know, to do something that is within the law.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, if you repeal that ordinance, then he loses that money and he goes
back to what he was getting; therefore, you don't need to present that ordinance, which is --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: No it's different.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: It's different.
Mr. Vilarello: I've prepared for Commissioner Regalado a resolution, which I think addresses it
within the legal constraints that we have. I don't recommend that you repeal the ordinance. It's
already been passed. However, I do recommend the resolution that Commissioner Regalado
intends to --
Vice Chairman Winton: Alex, that's fine, but you know what?
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK, yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: I question that, an ordinance. First of all, it had a financial impact. I
question the legality of it. It didn't have -- I guarantee you, if you would have brought a -- and
you were all here -- if you would have brought that ordinance and you would have had an
actuary report saying exactly how much money it was going to cost the taxpayers, how much
39 July 25, 2002
money it was going to cost the City, and what the Mayor was getting, I guarantee you that based
on the statements made by individuals that are sitting in this legislative body, we would have
never voted on it. I guarantee you that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly, exactly.
Commissioner Sanchez: So that's why I con -- I would consider that ordinance. I wouldn't even
question, legality -wise, what -- you know.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if that's --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- on a legal basis.
Mr. Vilarello: -- your desire, then what I can do is, I can prepare an ordinance and bring it back
at your next meeting and before that meeting, I could advise you on the legal issues and
implications of such an ordinance, but I prefer that you not bring that up as a pocket item today --
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK.
Mr. Vilarello: -- before I have an opportunity to brief you on the legal issues.
Commissioner Gonzalez: But, Mr. City Manager, I happen to concur with what Commissioner
Sanchez has just stated. I was not here at the time that this vote was taken. The comment out
there is that the Commissioners that were here at the time voted on that because they were not
certain that -- they didn't know exactly what they were voting on. Also, I have heard -- and I'm
new here. I'm not familiar -- I don't have the experience that my colleagues have in this
Commission, and I am not too familiar with the actuary reports and -- but I remember when we
were on the discussion of allowing all City employees to be able to retire and come back to the
City. I heard that actuary word more than 10 times in this City Commission. Now, they're --
now, I ask questions and I've been told that an actuary report was not done at the time that this
resolution was passed, and the thing is that it came out of this City Commission to the public that
the ex -Mayor was making the retirement that nobody else in this city would make as a Mayor
neither in the past or never in the future, so actually, we were extending a special privilege to the
Mayor, who, he did a great job for the City; he sacrificed himself, and so on and so on and so on,
and maybe we can build him a monument, you know, if that's what we all desire, but when
we're talking about money, and the citizens' money, then you know, I think we need to make
some corrections. I don't know how you're going to make the corrections. You're the attorney.
I'm not the City Attorney. I don't know the legal aspects of it, but we've got to do something
because if people out there -- yesterday, I was having dinner at a restaurant; two people
approached me and they asked me, "Have you done anything about the Mayor's pension?"
Chairman Regalado : Angel --
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, we haven't. We are working on it.
Chairman Regalado : Angel, can I --
40 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: I want to second the motion, providing the monument you're proposing is
in your district.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I know. I already found a spot in your district to put that monument.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Northwest 20th Street.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if you could yield, I'm prepared to make my argument,
and then I'm prepared to support your resolution. Let me just say that your concern on this
resolution is that by us resenting this ordinance, the Mayor would then be receiving only what,
Section 415 of the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) code allows him to get. In other words, once
we resent that ordinance, he would get the same thing that this Mayor's getting, which would be
the same amount, and then --
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner I absolutely understand the concerns that you're raising, that
Commissioner Gonzalez is raising, the rest of the Commissioners are raising. My con -- 415 is a
different issue. That's a limitation imposed by the IRS. This code provision, as it exists right
now, has -- it has an impact on the benefits that he's receiving --
Commissioner Sanchez: Alex --
Mr. Vilarello: -- which provide a windfall for him --
Commissioner Sanchez: Alex, fine, but you know what?
Mr. Vilarello: -- of over and above --
Commissioner Sanchez: It has impact of the lifespan of his retirement. It's going to cost the
taxpayers close to -- depends how long he lives. He could live to be 105 -- it's going to cost the
citizens of Miami millions, and you're looking at somewhere around two point something
million dollars. Whether your concern is whether he challenges in court, that's none of my
business. Whether he wants to do it or not, that's fine. I'm just saying that the easiest thing for
us to do here -- and I'm going to take your lead because I'm not an attorney on it, but I'll tell you
this much. To resent that ordinance -- and that's it -- he goes back to exactly what he was
getting, and that's the parameters that we could take on this.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner --
Commissioner Sanchez: If we cannot vote on that issue, then I would go with what you wrote --
of course, I'd have to review it because I don't know what it is -- I'm just making my arguments
because I've had the same concerns that Commissioner Gonzalez has had. I can't go get a cup of
coffee anywhere in my district with that being the topic of discussion.
41 July 25, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: Respectfully, Commissioner, the resolution that Commissioner Regalado is
presenting addresses the issue and addresses it immediately, and it's been prepared by my office
with regard to the legal issues that are presented in this particular case. My suggestion is that
you proceed with this course of action. If, at some later date, I'll be happy to prepare the
ordinance that you've requested, present it at the next meeting for you -- for your consideration,
and provide you legal guidance with specific regard to that ordinance rescinding the prior
ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well -- but that's an option that I'm putting on the table. I'm debating
it right now. I think that what we could do on this is open it for discussion. We have --
Commissioner Teele's here. We'll wait for Johnny to get back, and if we vote on repealing the
ordinance, fine. If we don't, then we could entertain Commissioner Regalado's motion. All he's
going to do is pay taxes on it, on the motion that he's going to represent. What I'm saying is,
take the money away from him --
Mr. Vilarello: No, no, no, no. This resolution -- and perhaps I can read it to you and tell you its
impact.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. It doesn't --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I (INAUDIBLE) the order of the day.
Commissioner Regalado: No. The order of the day is --
Commissioner Teele: We've got the Mayor here waiting. You know, this is not on the agenda
right now. We've got plenty of time to debate this (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, then, I would ask that it be put on the next agenda so we could
further discuss it.
Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, we have a long agenda and you're saying that's not the order of
the day, then I request that it be on the order of the day for the next meeting in September. It
doesn't make any difference to me.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, it's not the item we're discussing (INAUDIBLE)
the agenda, and --
Chairman Regalado: This item is on the agenda. Whether you want to do it now or wait for my
turn, it's up to you, so -- Could you Chair so I can introduce this resolution?
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Regalado is recognized. I ought to basically call for the
order of the day.
42 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: I was -- yeah, on the order of the day, this was on the blue page and I -- so
Commissioner Teele: You're recognized, sir.
Chairman Regalado: I'm moving a resolution of the Miami City Commission directing the
trustee of the Elected Officials Retirement Trust to recalculate the pension benefits for former
Mayor Joe Carollo, so as to exclude back pay, back benefits and salary advances as W-2 wages
for pension purposes; further directing the execution of all documents and to take all actions
necessary to accomplish set recalculation. This --
Commissioner Teele: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second for discussion.
Commissioner Teele: Discussion. Discussion now. Not a public hearing.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. Mr. City Attorney, Mr. City Attorney, all you're talking about
legal aspects and legal bumbo mumbo --
Mr. Vilarello: Well, it's not mumbo jumbo.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. It's mumbo mumbo that you understand and maybe our Mayor,
who's an attorney, understands that and your legal department understands that and
Commissioner Teele, who also is an attorney, may understand that, but the regular citizens of the
City of Miami that are not attorneys, OK, all they're concerned with is the dollar amount. All
they're complaining about -- you can give me 20 hours of legal argument and I'll tell you what?
I'll be -- after the 20 hours, I'll be as much confused as the first hour of your arguments because
I'm not attorney, OK? Commissioner Teele have the privilege of understanding your language
because he's an attorney, but I'm not an attorney. I'm speaking the language of the regular
citizens out there who know that they are going to be paying an excessive amount of retirement
to this ex -Mayor. Once again, he said that he was the best mayor of the City of Miami; that he
sacrificed his life, his family, his future, his whatever, OK? But that doesn't entitle him to
collect more pension than any other of the mayors that we have in this City and that we're going
to have in this City, and the residents of the -- the regular citizens that pay taxes in the City of
Miami, all they're concerned about is dollar amount; taxes that they have to pay, and they have
to pay a portion of these -- of the retirement that these ex -Mayors are going to be collecting for,
as Commissioner Sanchez says, maybe 110 years. Maybe he's lucky enough to live 150 years.
Who knows? OK. I won't have to suffer the consequences because I'm not going to live 120
years. I'm may to die -- I `m going to die much, much sooner than that, so I won't have to be
suffering that -- those consequences, but many of our citizens that are going to probably live 110
years are going to have to be paying the excess pension that this ex -Mayors was given by this
Commission, and like I say, there is a rumor out there, he came out of City Hall. He came out of
City Hall, out of City Hall; that this guy -- Well, I'm sorry -- that this mayor was getting more
pension than anybody else in the City of Miami and that, as a matter of fact, the word "illegal"
was said in this City Commission and it's on the record that that was something that was done,
43 July 25, 2002
that it was illegal, so you know, once we put that out there, it's all over the radio. It's all over the
newspapers and it's all over -- every time you stop some place, people are asking you, "Hey, is
the mayor still making $120? Is the Mayor -- $120,000? Is the Mayor still making 1407
Because each day that goes by, the people out there keeps raising the amount of pension that the
Mayor is supposed to get, and very soon the Mayor is going to be making $2,000,000 pension,
OK, so that is not my concern.
Mr. Vilarello: The -- Commissioner --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm speaking --
Mr. Vilarello: -- the number --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- for the regular citizens of the City of Miami who pay taxes and who
are not attorneys and do not understand all the terminology of the legal aspect of this
(UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: We have a motion, second. Further discussion. Mr. Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think it's clear to all of us that we made a terrible mistake. I mean,
"we" -- I certainly made a terrible mistake when I voted on this issue.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because you were not informed --
Vice Chairman Winton: I understand --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- of the report --
Vice Chairman Winton: I understand.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- or else you would have voted no. You stated on the record. I would
have done the same thing. If they would have shown me an actuary report of what it was going
to cost us, I guarantee you, I would have voted no. They failed to do that.
Commissioner Teele: Who is they?
Commissioner Sanchez: The administration.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Now that you ask, the administration.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
44 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: But I'm just -- Commissioner Winton has the floor.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. As I was saying, I voted on this. I made a mistake. I
didn't ask for an actuarial. I made a mistake. City Attorney didn't or somebody didn't provide
us accurate, thorough information that we should have had and I was not awake. I was asleep at
the wheel and didn't ask the right questions, and the horse is out of the barn now. That said,
however, I think I'm very nervous about passing this resolution, over the objection of the City
Attorney, because two --
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, no. Johnny, excuse me.
Commissioner Teele: Stand by. Mr. Attorney.
Vice Chairman Winton: I have --
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no, on the contrary.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney --
Chairman Regalado: He was objecting to some other thing. He wrote this resolution for me.
This -- he said that this is the simplest --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: -- easier way to do it.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. All right.
Commissioner Sanchez: He basically opposed a resent [sic] -- you know, rescinding the original
resolution.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right, OK.
Chairman Regalado: Ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: The ordinance, I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you for the correction, so I stand corrected here and -- so my
comments are irrelevant.
Commissioner Teele: Further discussion. Commissioner Regalado to close. Is there further
discussion? Commissioner Regalado to close.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Call the roll, Madam Clerk.
45 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait. There was a first and a second on the motion that I
presented to rescind the reso --
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- the ordinance. Yes, it was. He made the motion; I second it. It was
open for discussion. We could vote it down and then we could present your motion. Let's -- if
we're going to do it, let's do it right.
Commissioner Teele: Well -- OK. When --
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Teele: The Chairman asked me to preside. I --
Chairman Regalado: The City Clerk doesn't have a motion on your --
Ms. Thompson: I didn't record a motion. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gonzalez, did you make a motion on rescinding the
ordnance? I believe you made a motion; I second it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: On rescinding, no. I didn't make a motion. We discussed it and I said
that --
Commissioner Sanchez: Than I stand corrected.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- I wanted that to be my motion, not rescind the --
Commissioner Teele: Madam Clerk, call the roll, please.
Chairman Regalado: On this resolution, directing the Trustee of Elected Officials Retirement
Trust to recalculate the pension benefits for former mayor Joe Carollo.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Winton?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
46 July 25, 2002
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: This instructs the trustees to recalculate?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And the trustees are free to accept our advice or reject our advice?
Chairman Regalado: No.
Mr. Vilarello: The Trustee exercises discretion.
Commissioner Teele: Independent.
Mr. Vilarello: In this case -- however, in this case, the City Commission is giving the Trustee a
direction.
Chairman Regalado: The City Commission is giving the Trustee direction as to exclude back
pay, back benefits and salary advances.
Commissioner Teele: Are they free to reject our advice?
Mr. Vilarello: The Trustee will comply with its fiduciary responsibility by receiving this
direction.
Commissioner Teele: I vote yes.
Ms. Thompson: Chairman Regalado?
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved for its adoption.
RESOLUTION 02-859
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
TRUSTEE OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS' RETIREMENT TRUST TO
RECALCULATE THE PENSION BENEFITS FOR FORMER MAYOR JOE
CAROLLO SO AS TO EXCLUDE BACK PAY, BACK BENEFITS AND
SALARY ADVANCES AS W-2 WAGES FOR PENSION PURPOSES;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF ALL DOCUMENTS AND TO
TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ACCOMPLISH SAID
RECALCULATION.
47 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYE: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Teele: The chair is returned to you, Chairman Regalado. Mr. Chairman, we have
three things that I think we need to do before 12. We said -- you -- we brought the Mayor's
issues up and I'd like to take those items up next. I think the Mayor's still here and his staff.
Secondly, the -- we have public appearances we said we would try to do before noon, you know,
and I think we ought to try to do those.
Vice Chairman Winton: And two of my blue page issues have people from the public here, as
well, so --
Commissioner Teele: I have people here, and I was about to say, and I think those blue page
items that have people associated with them, we ought to try to do them. Otherwise, we destroy
the (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, do you have a time certain in your blue page of 5 p.m., 2F? That's
at 5 p.m. on your --
Vice Chairman Winton: Which one is that?
Chairman Regalado: It's the Peacock -- naming a section of Peacock Park.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, yeah, right, right.
Chairman Regalado: -- as Amy Billig.
Vice Chairman Winton: But the one on the Coconut Grove collaborative, there are people here
for that and the one on --
Chairman Regalado: On the charter school, you mean?
Vice Chairman Winton: -- on the park. No. That's going to be -- that one's going to fall to the
afternoon.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
48 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: The charter school issue, they're still working out details on that.
7. COMMENTS BY MAYOR DIAZ REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY
CODE RELATING TO BENEFITS OF ELECTED OFFICIALS. (See 45)
Chairman Regalado: So does the Mayor have -- Mayor, we already did the first reading on your
pension.
Mayor Diaz: I came down -- thank you, Chairman and Commissioners -- I came down to speak
to that, but I understand that you've already approved it so, at this point, what I have to say is
thank you. I think this was very important, particularly in light of the discussion that you were
having recently. What this does obviously is to modify the pension benefits; reduces the benefits
that the Mayor's office will have on a going forward basis, because what it does now is it
establishes the base rate of pay as opposed to W-2, which is part of the issue that you were
dealing with before. Obviously, when this was done some time ago, the Mayor was making the
same enormous salary that you all make, but since the Mayor -- since the change to an executive
Mayor and a really substantial increase in the Mayor's salary, I think this is only appropriate that
we do this and that's why we propose this, and I thank you all for approving it, and this is the
same kind of structure, by the way, that our employees are under as well, so conforms all of us
that make a real salary to the same standard.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Mayor, just for information of the members of the Commission,
you're coming back this afternoon with financial integrity and A&TT (American Telegraph &
Telephone)?
Commissioner Teele: Why don't we do financial integrity now?
Mayor Diaz: Commissioner, in -- out of deference to you, because Linda had not have an
opportunity --
Commissioner Teele: I thought we briefed -- she briefed me.
Mayor Diaz: She indicated to me that you were going to meet with her at 1:30, and we did not
want to bring it up until she had met --
Commissioner Teele: No. Out of deference to Linda -- and I do owe you an apology, Linda, the
last time you were here -- but out of deference to Ms. Haskins, I'd like to take it up because I
think it's been reworked and it's a much better -- it's --
Mayor Diaz: OK, fine.
Commissioner Teele: -- and there's clarity I think on the issue that I was concerned about, and --
Vice Chairman Winton: Is it fast?
49 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
8. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE IX/DIVISION 2
ENTITLED "FINANCIAL POLICIES" TO CLARIFY AND EXPAND FINANCIAL
INTEGRITY PRINCIPLES.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, Linda.
Linda Haskins (Financial Advisor) : Thank you, Commissioner. Linda Haskins, Financial
Advisor to the Mayor. The change in the financial integrity ordinance involves addressing the
fact that the existing ordinance severely restricts the ability of the City to use surplus funds
strategically. This sets new levels of designated and undesignated reserves; gives you the ability
to take surpluses and allocate them for the use within the City to the extent that we don't need
surpluses to continue to build reserves. We slightly increased the undesignated reserve level.
The designated reserve level is capped at 50 percent of our general long-term account group
liabilities for pension and -- for compensation benefits and risk reserves. There are also some
changes to institute best practices for debt issuance in the City, and we've also put in some
requirements for a regular review of grant and special revenue fundings by the Finance
Department to make sure that we prevent deficit balances. The last time that we were up here
discussing this was significant concerns regarding the Estimating Conference process, and what
we discussed is preparing, with your help and advice, a separate ordinance that would discuss the
Estimating Conference's responsibilities to make sure that we are doing a thorough review on an
ongoing basis of the revenue sources that the City gets, in particular, from the county and from
the state, to make sure those computations are done properly, so we will be bringing you back a
separate ordinance on the Estimating Conference and their responsibilities.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to move the item regarding the
financial integrity item.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and the second. All in favor, say "aye."
Ms. Haskins: It's an ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: It's an ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Read the ordinance. Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE IX/DIVISION 2 ENTITLED "FINANCIAL
POLICIES" TO CLARIFY AND EXPAND THE FINANCIAL INTEGRITY
PRINCIPLES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
50 July 25, 2002
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was passed on
first reading by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Ms. Haskins: Thank you very much.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Passed on first reading.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
9. STRONGLY URGING GOVERNMENT OF UNITED STATES, AND ANY OTHER
NATIONS OR AUTHORITIES RESPONSIBLE FOR STATUS OF TREATMENT OF
WOMEN, TO REVIEW "POSITION STATEMENT/PAPER" OF CITY'S COMMISSION ON
STATUS OF WOMEN CONDEMNING TREATMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN
AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez, your blue pages, or
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: -- If you want to yield to some of the visitors we have here in order to do
their items before lunch break. I just want to ask, when do you want to come back in the
afternoon? We really have a lot of things in the afternoon, so I -- can I suggest that we come
back at 2:30, if possible?
Vice Chairman Winton: I think I scheduled something at 2:30. I mean --
Chairman Regalado: OK. 3 o'clock?
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't mind -- you know, come back at 2:30; that'll allow me to speed
the meeting up that I have at 2:30, and if I miss a little part of it, I'll miss a little part.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, I know what it is.
51 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Good because we can --
Vice Chairman Winton: Is it -- do we have to -- Is the MPO (Metropolitan Planning
Organization) meeting today, Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I won't be here.
Commissioner Teele: That's the problem.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. I have a presentation at the MPO, I believe 2:15, so that means --
Chairman Regalado: Do you want to split the agenda and come back tomorrow, Commissioner
Sanchez is asking? We can do that --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'd rather work all night.
Chairman Regalado: -- because it had been advertised, so we have the personal appearances in
the afternoon, plus PZ (Planning & Zoning) item, plus the Park.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, we have a couple of items that involve a lot of the public
that's here this morning. Commissioner San -- I mean, Commissioner Winton said he had in his
blue pages and, Ms. Cartwright, what was your item number?
Karen Cartwright: 3-A.
Commissioner Teele: Item what? 3-A, which we sort of skipped over for some reason, I think.
Chairman Regalado: No, we haven't even started on the regular agenda. We're -- we did a PZ
item and then -- because it was noticed, and then we came back to the blue pages. It is, actually,
Commissioner Gonzalez' turn.
Commissioner Teele: But 3-A --
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: -- comes ahead of all the other items.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: Last Commission meeting, I think when you weren't here, the Commission
directed us to put the personal items before the blue pages, so actually the personal items come
52 July 25, 2002
before the blue pages. I think the people for -- that are here for Item Number 3 and 3-A are here.
I don't believe that the individual for Number 2 is here. I'd been led to believe or been told that,
at least for Item Number 3, they will not be able to come back in the afternoon, so if you could
take up Number 3 and 3 -A, they would appreciate it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I'm willing to deal my time so we can hear the public.
Chairman Regalado: OK, so Item 3 and Item 3-A are personal appearances. I am --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you weren't here, but I just want to say this. I think, if we
advise people in public that they're going to be here for a 10 o'clock meeting, for a public
appearance, we really ought to accommodate them --
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: -- before the lunch break.
Chairman Regalado: And that is why --
Commissioner Teele: As opposed to --
Chairman Regalado: That is --- one of the -- Item 2, the attorney asked whether they will be able
to speak in the morning and I said no, because we have this zoning, so they have to come in the
afternoon, so I told them that it will be in the afternoon. I didn't know of your decision to do it
in the morning. I really have to go, so it is the will of the Commission to come back at 2:30?
That's --
Commissioner Gonzalez: 2:30 is fine with me. If you want to make it at 3, it's fine with me,
too.
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to be late. I'm going to be at MPO, but it's fine.
Chairman Regalado: Huh?
Commissioner Teele: 2:30 is fine. I'm going to be --- Commissioner Winton and I probably are
going to be late at the MPO. I'm going to have to stay there for a little while, but --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, and I'll probably be late even for the 3, so you might as well start
at 2:30.
Chairman Regalado: But what -- if we have a quorum, we can do some items which are not
critical.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Regalado: And then we can alleviate the --
53 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Absolutely.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't have any objection to that, Mr. Chairman, but on the -- on your
personal appearance for the Maceo Park, I would like to have a full Commission.
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely. We'll do that. We'll wait for everybody to be here.
Vice Chairman Winton: So what item are we going to do? You're leaving now?
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, I --
Vice Chairman Winton: And did you just suggest which item we're going to do?
Chairman Regalado: I suggest to do --
Commissioner Gonzalez: 3 and 3-A.
Chairman Regalado: -- 3 and 3-A, which is --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: -- they're here. All of them are here, but I have to go.
Vice Chairman Winton: So could you bring -- What's 3?
Chairman Regalado: Item 3, Anita McGruder, chair, Miami Commission on the Status of
Women, to address the Commission concerning several issues of concern and may result in
legislation, so Ms. McGruder, I'm sorry. I have to go to work, doing what I do to get a salary
now, but I will, of course, as always, support the Commission on the Status of Women of the
City of Miami.
Vice Chairman Winton: And you're recognized ma'am.
Note for the Record: At this time, Chairman Regalado left the Commission Chambers at 11:39.
Anita McGruder: Thank you very much. My name is Anita McGruder. Do I need to state my
address?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, please.
Ms. McGruder: Yes. 90 Northeast 42nd Street, Miami, 33137. The members of the Miami
Commission on the Status of Women would first like to thank the Mayor, who has left, and the
Commissioners for their support of the issues brought before you by this advisory board. Today
we come before you with two issues for your consideration. The first item is one which was
rescheduled from the previous Commission meeting on July 9th regarding the support for the
54 July 25, 2002
Miami -Dade County Human Rights Ordinance, and the second, which will be introduced by Ms.
Warren and our special guest, Mrs. Bokhari, addresses the abominable treatment of women in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. I have a very brief statement to read regarding the Human Rights
Ordinance. It was 25 years ago, in 1977, when the Dade County Commissioner, Rue Shak,
introduced an equal rights ordinance barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In
1977, Miami -Dade County was on the cutting edge of U.S. (United States) cities to support equal
opportunity for all people within the community. Unfortunately, that particular ordinance was
immediately repealed, but certainly one of the values we have here in this very unique
community is respect for and appreciation of diversity. Living and working with individuals of
different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, physical abilities, and other personal attributes
enriches our community. This is why we believe in the Miami -Dade Human Rights Ordinance
and encourage your support for it. The ordinance sets a standard of fairness for community that
makes it clear that no one should be penalized because of a particular attribute. Our
communities must continue to support the principles of fairness and equal opportunity for all its
citizens. Discrimination must not be tolerated in any form. A few weeks ago, I had an
opportunity to attend the conference on diversity in our national parks in all places -- in a very
unique place, that is Stone Mountain, Georgia. I had the honor of attending a presentation by
Congressman John Lewis, a pioneer of the Civil Rights movement. In Congressman Lewis's
biography entitled, "Walking with the Wind," he writes about the path that his life took as he
matured into manhood. He describes choosing a path that extends beyond race, beyond class,
beyond gender, beyond age and beyond every other distinction that tends to separate us as human
beings rather than brings us together. Once again, we encourage the Commissioners to support
the Human Rights Ordinance; to walk with the winds that are here in the 20 Century, barring
discrimination -- barring discrimination period. Please join the City of Miami Beach, the City of
North Miami, the villages of El Portal and other municipalities in supporting this ordinance.
Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Did you have another -- Did you cover both issues, Anita?
Ms. McGruder: No, I only covered one issue.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Ms. McGruder: OK. Do you want to hear the second issue, and then decide on both?
Commissioner Sanchez: Please.
Ms. McGruder: OK. Ms. Warren.
Allyson Warren: Good afternoon. My name is Allyson Warren, 650 Northeast 82nd Terrace,
Miami. Mr. Teele asked us at the last meeting to bring back a resolution regarding the treatment
of women in Pakistan and Afghanistan. We have done so. You have a copy of our position
paper and a color booklet that is produced by a women's organization in Pakistan showing you
some extremely graphic pictures of the treatment of the women there. With me right here is a
lady who runs that particular organization. Her name is Shahnaz Bokhari and she would like to
address you, if you wouldn't mind.
55 July 25, 2002
Shahnaz Bokhari: Thank you very much. I appreciate the efforts of the Commission.
Vice Chairman Winton: Ma'am, could you put your name and address on the record, please?
Shahnaz Bokhari: I am Shahnaz Bokhari from Pakistan and I'm president of Progressive
Women's Association.
Vice Chairman Winton: And address.
Shahnaz Bokhari: This is -- 7221 Miami Lakes Drive, 33041 --
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Shahnaz Bokhari: -- Miami, Florida. Thank you. I appreciate the efforts of the Commission to
bring this ethnic issue of third world countries at this local level. I hope solidarity on this
sensitive issue can go a long way. I have been working since last two decades highlighting
domestic violence in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Asia. I am the recipient of the Weimar
International German Award, French International Human Rights Award, and Sitara-I-Imtiaz,
which is the highest civil award of Pakistan. My organization is running a first sheltered home in
Islamabad. I'm here on a special mission, to get support for a first burn center in Pakistan for the
women victims of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) crimes and those women who are burned by their
families for dowry or other petty reasons. National Geographic, CNN (Cable Network News)
and BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) have been highlighting my work on the -- and you
must be having my copies of my report. Our president, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is an enlightened
person. Such meetings like, which I'm attending today, can help him and support him to remove
the discriminatory laws against our women and to legislate against domestic and social violence
on women in our country and also implement them. I thank you to give me this opportunity to
be here today and speak here. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Ms. McGruder: Just for your information, the City Commission will be the first organization to
take any affirmative action in this regard, on a local basis.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Let me express my appreciation -- first, my apologies that we are so late
taking the item up today, and our appreciation that you all are here, and especially our special
guests. Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to move the resolution relating to the support for
women in Pakistan and Afghanistan in condemning the horrible practices that have exploited
and, in many ways, demeaned women in those areas based upon the issues of male honor and
such false and phony issues. I would so move. Would you read the resolution, Madam
Attorney, into the record, please, the title?
56 July 25, 2002
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): I don't think I have the resolution.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't have one here either.
Unidentified Speaker: It was submitted to the City Attorney's Office.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, she's -- you could get them.
Ms. Chiaro: We helped them prepare it, but we distribute it to them.
Unidentified Speaker: You have -- oh, I've got copies. I'm sorry. Hang on.
The resolution was read by title into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney.
Ms. Chiaro: And they are state and federal officials designated in the resolution.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second on the resolution. Any further
discussion? Being none, all in favor, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign, opposed. Motion carries.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-860
IT IS A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), STRONGLY URGING THE GOVERNMENT OF THE
UNITED STATES, AND ANY OTHER NATIONS OR AUTHORITIES
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATUS AND TREATMENT OF WOMEN, TO
REVIEW THE "POSITION STATEMENT/PAPER" OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN CONDEMNING THE
TREATMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN AFGHANISTAN AND
PAKISTAN; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A
COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE OFFICIALS DESIGNATED
HEREIN.
57 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Teele: And to the Status of Women, I'll be pleased to sponsor activities and
initiatives that you may want to take throughout the community. I think the best way to bring
this consciousness is to work with our Communications Department and with the public in
bringing greater recognition. There's no question this government is now prepared to spend tens
of billions of dollars in the region and, as you know, issues like family planning, issues in which
the U.S. government has tied support for F-15 s and F-16s to those kinds of issues, so I see
nothing wrong with tying support for further military support to Pakistan and Afghanistan,
conditioned upon a review and a change in the treatment to women, and I really think that it's
important that our congressional delegations receive a copy, Madam Clerk, including the
senators, and I would invite our honoree and the chairman of the Status of Women to make
yourselves available to our Mayor and to other City officials in contemplating what other actions
we could take. I also would ask that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to each consul
general's office that's based here in Miami for purposes of underscoring how grievous this
matter is. To the public, again, I know that this City has engaged, sometimes inappropriately, in
political activities multinational, but I think the cause of ensuring that women are not mutilated
and abused for the sake of male honor or the kinds of things that are going on that are part of a
culture, a very old culture, but a culture like the Internet and e-mail must evolve, and all that I'm
suggesting is that the City of Miami be among those cities and communities on record in
supporting that women be treated with the dignity that we would want our sisters or mothers or
daughters to be treated in this country, also, and I apologize again for the delay in bringing the
matter up and I commend the Status of Women for taking the initiative.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I may also -- I would like to, maybe through
awareness of education, if you have some PSA (Public Service Announcement) announcements
that you could find or if there's anything done for awareness that you provide the NET
(Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office -- Net -9 so they could also put it on Net -9 to educate
the residents of our City of what's going on with -- you know, the horrible things that are going
on throughout the world pertaining to women. Thank you.
Ms. Bokhari: Thank you very much for your {UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Vice Chairman Winton: Is there a similar ordinance on the --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, there is a resolution. I would be pleased --
58 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Resolution, sorry.
Commissioner Teele: -- to move it for discussion, but I do think that we should have a full
Commission on the matter relating to the --
Commissioner Sanchez: The discrimination ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: -- discrimination ordinance in Dade County. I personally support it. I'm
mindful -- I'm keenly mindful that my district is probably evenly split on the matter. I recognize
that a number of the members of the clergy in my district are adamantly opposed to it or, I guess,
in being opposed to it, you're voting yes, and it's all confusing on the ballot, to some extent, but
I am prepared to support the notion that we should provide for the protection for --
Commissioner Sanchez: For everyone.
Commissioner Teele: --everyone.
Vice Chairman Winton: So are you suggesting we bring that resolution back after the recess?
Commissioner Teele: I am suggesting that there be five members of the Commission because I
would hate --
Vice Chairman Winton: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: I don't know how Commissioner Regalado or Commissioner Sanchez
feel, and I'd hate --
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I cosigned it, so I sponsored it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, and I'm hugely in favor, so --
Commissioner Teele: I know our Mayor's in favor of it and he's in publication, so I would hope
that we could get unanimous support, but I do think that we should give the courtesy to our
colleagues to bring it up around 5 o'clock today, if possible, if that's all right? And I think, you
know, the fact that we don't have a female sitting on the Commission, the five of us have a
special duty of sensitivity to be mindful, so please pull our coats -- at least my coat -- if there is a
matter that we can be more sensitive on.
Ms. McGruder: Yes, we will.
Ms. Bokhari: Thank you very much.
Ms. McGruder: Thank you very much.
Ms. Warren: Thank you very much.
59 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you all very much.
10. DIRECT TO MANAGER TO MEET WITH MS. KAREN CARTWRIGHT TO SORT
THROUGH VARIOUS ISSUES REGARDING SERVICES IN OVERTOWN AND REPORT
BACK TO COMMISSION.
Commissioner Teele: Ms. Cartwright, 3-A.
Vice Chairman Winton: 3-A. Yes, ma'am. Well, you can use -- got it. You can use that one
also. You can have them both.
Karen Cartwright: OK. Yes. Good morning, gentlemen. My name is Karen Cartwright. My
address is 1770 Northwest 5th Avenue, Miami, Florida, 33136. I would like to thank all of the
employees of the City of Miami for their services. Through no fault of their own, some of them
are unable to perform their designated jobs; supervisors, who do not have goals or merely
lacking intestinal fortitude to ask for maximum effort, hamper them. Accepting poor
performance says that you do not like what you do; therefore, you have no investment, other than
to show up and collect a paycheck. Which department is responsible for notifying the employees
that they are hired, Human Resources or the department where the vacancy exists? There is a
lack of teamwork in the various departments in the City of Miami. Personally, I had to call the
Department of Parks and Recreation, reference the employment status of prospective employees
who, according to the Park Managers, was scheduled to attend orientation. I am asking that
when a person is hired, that they are informed of that fact, not left to guess. References and
backgrounds thoroughly checked, orientation prior to and not after the employee has started
working, that the employee be given a job description, the do's and don'ts. Confidentiality is a
word too few employees of the City are acquainted with. Discussing personal information is a
serious liability to the City and the employee. The contracts between the City and the union
seem to be lopsided. Employees who, when they become unionized or obtain civil service status,
assume that they have been given a blank check. It appears that only an act of God can rid the
City of an employee who belongs to either group. The Parks and Recreation Department's
supervisor of operations have, for three years, procrastinated when it came to maintaining the
parks in the Overtown area, especially Williams Park. Many telephone calls, e-mails, letters and
an appearance before this body a year later, results? Poor results. Williams Park should be
cleaned on a daily basis and not once a week. When one of the Managers requested the trees be
trimmed on his park, he was told he would be given the tree trimming equipment so that he could
trim the trees himself. There is also a need for three park Managers in the Overtown area. The
City of Miami employs a superintendent of recreation, whose responsibility it is to train and
ensure the parks are fully utilized. At present we have part-timers acting as park Managers but
not getting paid for their extra duties. The City has an established bad habit of asking for or
extorting services from employees, and then when it's convenient, they toss them aside in favor
of some relative or friend. Why pay for the cow when you can get the milk free? Years ago it
was called slavery. I have been told that people now in charge of the parks are not qualified. If
the person isn't qualified to do the job, why, may I ask, are the administration entrusting him
with it in the first place? Think gentlemen. How did you feel when someone used you to further
their own needs? The City has boards to hear complaints and make recommendations. It has
60 July 25, 2002
been my observation that the citizens and business people who sit on these boards are basically
ignored. Why, may I ask, did you ask for a board if you're not going to listen? The
administration implements its decisions, whether they enhance a community or not. What gives
the administration the authority to tell me what I need? In the future, can you ask? To my
knowledge, there are approximately twenty -plus plans to improve the Overtown community and
to date, not one has been implemented. Are inquiries made about the work history of a
contractor? Example, approximately two years ago, a landscaping contractor was hired to install
sod at Williams Park. Sod was again installed four months ago at the same park. Had the City
researched the contractor's previous job performance, maintenance should have been the only
expense. Instead, replacement is again needed. The statement "you get what you pay for" is
appropriate. It pays to do your homework. Williams Park is now scheduled for renovations
September 2002. Residents and contractors alike complain of the poor service and the
misinformation they receive from City employees. I agree that higher education is a goal
everyone should aspire to, but a degree doesn't guarantee that a party has common sense. When
I attempted to address this issue with an employee in the Manager's Office, the blame game
came into play. Teamwork is a concept that has not been embraced by the City, entire City,
although it alludes to it by having 13 NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) offices. I recall
asking this very room for uniformity. To me, it meant all NET offices would look and function
as a team. Where was I? Sleeping? I have seen my NET office transformed cosmetically, but
teamwork, no. NET cannot function without the full support services of Solid Waste, Code
Enforcement, community policing, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation. The persons
involved in these departments, along with the residents, can make an area. The only departments
that have embraced the teamwork concept -- and this is from my point of view -- are GSA
(General Services Administration) and Assistant City Manager, Frank Rollason's office. When
either office personnel are asked a question, I can be assured that I will get a response in an
efficient and timely manner. Commissioners, Mr. Manager, I'm not requesting a response from
the department heads. I'm asking you to direct the persons who are being paid to ensure the City
is maintained and managed to answer the citizens' complaints, and I added an addendum. This
request is made because there are employees in supervisory positions who do not follow
directors of their department heads. As previously stated, there are limited courses of action
open to the -- to correct the problem. I have addressed the supervisor of operations regarding his
neglect of the Overtown parks, but he has made it abundantly clear that he is not going to change
his behavior towards the residents of Overtown by not acknowledging that a problem exists. I
was told that Mr. Juan Pasqual is entitled to visit the parks, but what no one can explain to me is
why his visits seem to occur only at parks with baseball clubs. Did the City go into business
with Pasqual baseball club? If, in fact, the City has a baseball club, how is it that it only
functions west of 7th Avenue, or have I been misinformed again? My understanding is that the
City has a contract with the Heat and the Junior Nike Basketball League. To date, it has been
given little or no cooperation, and that's my -- again, my point of view. The City has a sports
coordinator. Why? Because we have an abundance of monies. The City has a -- why? Because
we have an abundance of monies? The programs in Overtown are minimal at the parks. I was
told that the park Managers have to design their own programs for their individual parks. Again
I ask, why do we have a superintendent of recognition and a sports coordinator? Mr. Manager --
and this is an addition here. This is a solution. Mr. Manager and Commissioners, the director
and the assistant director of parks need your help with funding to train mid-level staff and they
all -- they only have one assistant director for a seven-day a week department, so there -- a
61 July 25, 2002
solution would be to look for somebody that can help Mr. Griffin and Mr. Ruder. Which
department is responsible for maintaining the drains? The Department of Solid Waste's assistant
director told me in May of 2000 that his department had placed two trashcans on 8th Street and
Northwest 2nd Avenue as part of an experiment. Am I to believe that two years later, he's still
experimenting? In fairness to the director, he has been very responsive when asked to remove --
to have solid waste removed from the streets. Mr. Manager, there are a number of streets,
including the main thoroughfare, 3rd Avenue, that is badly in need of repair. The lights on 17th
Street and 19th Street, between 3rd Avenue and 5th Avenue, have not been working for the past
four months. It seems that even FP&L (Florida Power & Light) refuses to service the
community. The crosswalks in front of the schools are either not visible or nonexistent. There
have been a number of children hurt. Can you have a third party intervene before there is a
fatality? Hurricane season is here. Trees have not been trimmed away from the electrical
wiring. Not only is there a potential for a fire, a broken live wire can be costly in the terms of
life and property, and this was really amusing to me. Commissioners, I would like -- would also
like to add that I find it most amusing that the departments within the City spent manpower hours
attempting to inquire as to my reasons for appearing here today. Had they served my community
in a fair and just manner, there would not be any cause for concern. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Karen, have you met with the Manager on all these issues?
Ms. Cartwright: I have met with the Manager and he has sent down what they call the chief in
for (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and requests, and like I said, those two gentlemen, one in charge of
operations and one in charge of recreation, seem to think that the Manager and Mr. Ruder and
Mr. Rollason have a lot of ink and a lot of paper and a lot of air to waste.
Vice Chairman Winton: But what you're telling me though is that the details -- and there are
fine details in this letter that you just put on the record -- that you have had a discussion with the
Manager about all of these details.
Ms. Cartwright: Yes, yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Ms. Cartwright: And he -- and I've -- Because I received the letter from his office that he had
asked for these departments to answer this problem in -- when I was here in February, last -- or
two years ago.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Ms. Cartwright: This is two years later and I'm here again.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you. Mr. Manager.
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): Well, there were some things that we had discussed and
there are some new things that she's brought in that's new. This letter has some new things, too,
that I haven't, so, you know, if you can get a copy of the letter to me, again, I will follow up and
62 July 25, 2002
I will find out why things had not been followed up from the last time that she was here. It's
certainly not our intention. If people in the administration are not following up with the direction
that has been given by myself and the directors and the ACM (Assistant City Manager), we'll
follow up with that and see if -- and take corrective action.
Vice Chairman Winton: Are you going to meet with her personally?
Mr. Gimenez: I'll meet with her any time. We've met with her -- I met with her on a number of
occasions, so my door is open.
Vice Chairman Winton: But I think, at this juncture, because it's come to the Commission and
from my viewpoint, generally speaking, these things ought to be dealt with at a staff level and
not end up here, but it did come here because there's obviously a significant level of frustration,
so I think that the Manager does need to intercede and --
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- and meet with Karen to get all this stuff sorted through, and it would
be nice to get a report back in a couple of months from Karen, that lasts about two minutes, that
talks about how appropriately we've responded.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Ms. Cartwright: I'm usually very good about thanking people --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Ms. Cartwright: -- when they perform a service, but I don't appreciate being lied to, ignored, or
talked to like I'm two years old because I am not two years old.
Vice Chairman Winton: So he's going to call you and you guys are going to meet, the Manager.
Ms. Cartwright: We --yes, but what I'm --
Vice Chairman Winton: The Manager.
Ms. Cartwright: Commissioner Winton, I talked to the Manager, I talked to Mr. Rollason and I
talked to Mr. Ruder, and I talked to Mr. Griffin. I called Commissioner Teele's office. I mean,
how many other things do I have to do? In the interim, I can't expect the Commission to keep
running behind him. I can't expect the Manager -- they're getting paid a salary, too.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, apparently, the only thing you had left to do was come here.
Ms. Cartwright: Yes.
63 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: So we're now directing the Manager to meet directly with you and you
all will report back to us within a month or two.
Ms. Cartwright: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Ms. Cartwright: We'll have fun.
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Commissioner, one of the things that we are trying to address her concerns
with are the fact that, you know, I believe that Mr. Ruder and the assistant director there do need
help. That's one of the reasons why we're creating that CIP (Capital Improvements Program)
office, to get the projects off of the individual departments and let them focus in on programs,
which is what they really should be focusing in on, the operations of the parks.
Ms. Cartwright: Yes.
Mr. Gimenez: So despite doing that, that'll put more of a let -- give them some free time to
really start to look into the operation of the parks.
Ms. Cartwright: Yeah, because they --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I -- excuse me, Karen. I think that I would like you guys to --
because it's 12:07. We have other public appearances, you know. We've directed you all to get
directly together and you come back again, and I'd like to recognize Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and I do think that your request of
the Manager or his Assistant Manager, Frank Rollason, to meet with Ms. Cartwright is
important. I would just note for the record, the only bright comment that was made is that,
apparently, Mr. Rollason's response, so maybe, Mr. Rollason.
Mr. Gimenez: She also complemented the GSA.
Commissioner Teele: GSA. That was probably a mistake.
Ms. Cartwright: No, it wasn't. No, it wasn't.
Commissioner Teele: I'm only joking. No, no, no. And you know, I would only say this, that I
think, you know, the Parks Department and GSA are -- Frank, since you're talking to somebody
more important, I would -- I want you to hear this. I think that the parts department and GSA are
among the most responsive departments that I have had the pleasure of working with in the City
that are operational, that are under your operation -- under Mr. Rollason's operational control.
There's no disrespecting to any other departments, but they are extraordinarily responsive, but I
want to put a little bit different spin on this, as well. The county is very smart. They're very
64 July 25, 2002
bright. They have great institutional depth. They know what they're doing. They're a
professional. That's no disrespect to us. The county gave us Williams Park. You know why the
county gave us Williams Park? And we had gladly accepted it, because of everything that you're
reading about in here. Let me tell you, Williams Park and Gibson Park are within a spitball's
throw of each other, just so that everybody understands this. Williams Park has a swimming
pool; Gibson Park has a swimming pool, within two blocks of each other. Now, we are spending
more money in Overtown, with all due respect to everything that's on here, in parks, with Gibson
Park and Williams Park, two swimming pools. Nine thousand, eight hundred people in all of
Overtown. Little Haiti, how many swimming pools we have?
Ms. Cartwright: None.
Commissioner Teele: How many major parks do we have?
Ms. Cartwright: None.
Commissioner Teele: None. Zero, zero, OK?
Frank Rollason: None. Zero.
Commissioner Teele: So, you know, I'm here as the district Commissioner for Model Cities,
Liberty City, Lemon City, Little Haiti, a part of Allapattah, Overtown, and the fact of the matter
is, on a multiplier of probably three, there are more dollar resources going into Overtown than
into Little Haiti, OK, for parks, for parks, and it's not a function that folks in Overtown ought to
be happy that they've got crummy --
Ms. Cartwright: Parks.
Commissioner Teele: -- parks like Williams Park. The problem that we've got is, we need to do
a resource allocation issue, because I've got to tell you something. I went before -- I don't know
if it's, you know, the -- you know, the state is looking at parks countywide and all of that and,
you know, you've got different people looking at this in a formal basis and informal basis, but
one thing to me is very clear, Mr. Manager, we ought to look at somehow -- and this is the cycle
of poverty, the cycle of not having black -owned businesses, not having businesses in Overtown,
you know. You don't have anybody to step up and put jerseys on baseball teams or basketball
teams or soccer teams, so we wind up dealing with it through the community. It's a reoccurring
problem. The problem is this: We need to find some sponsor and some type of really aggressive
management agreement, Mr. Manager. That's part of the solution. Part of the solution is turning
some of our resources over that are duplicative. See, the county gave us the sucker punch and
we went for it. They gave us a park, a great idea. I like the park. Williams Park is a good park.
It is closer to housing than any other park, but the fact of the matter is, we cannot support two
swimming pools within two blocks of each other, where we've got miles of areas that have no
swimming pools, so it's not as simple as it's being presented, but the problems are as Ms.
Cartwright has outlined, and so all I'm saying, Mr. Manager, is I think a part of the solution is,
we ought to see if there is somebody out there -- I know that the St. Francis --
65 July 25, 2002
Ms. Cartwright: St. Francis is interested.
Commissioner Teele: St. Francis has had discussions.
Ms. Cartwright: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I asked them a year ago to enter into a cooperative agreement with us -- I
don't know where that is right now -- to maintain the field, the sod that she's talking about.
Ms. Cartwright: What, Commissioner --
Commissioner Teele: That they would have to maintain it, cut it and all of that, but maybe we
ought to look at this thing in a more progressive manner, ensuring that the park is available to the
community, and I don't want to debate it. I think the time to do it is between Ms. Cartwright and
the Manager, but I want the public to understand that this is a lot more complicated than it seems
to be, but Ms. Cartwright's comments are her comments and most of them I find are very valid.
Ms. Cartwright: The one thing that I have a problem with, and I -- Commissioner Teele is right -
- the one thing I have a problem with is because this -- I've lived in Overtown for nine years,
going on 10 years, and that park has been -- money has been poured into that and poured into
that and all because nobody seems to want to do it right the first time. They just want a job
and/or move on. Job and move on. You've got three different types of grass in there. You've
got weeds between the grass. Common sense says, do it right the first time and all you have to
do is maintain it, but if you want a patch here and patch there, you're going to look like
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) patches.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. We've been on this issue for about 20 minutes. We've got two
other public appearances we need to do, at least before the noon break, so -- and everybody has
their marching orders.
11. REPROGRAM $1001000 OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS
(CDBG) FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COCONUT GROVE PILOT PROJECTS TO
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE CENTER FOR URBAN AND
COMMUNITY DESIGN TO IMPLEMENT REVITALIZATION PROJECTS IN COCONUT
GROVE COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION DISTRICT WITH COCONUT GROVE
COLLABORATIVE, INC.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Winton, did you want to bring up an item? You want me
to preside for a minute, and you bring it up?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir, please. If you don't mind, would you chair the meeting? And
I'm going to -- I want to bring up my Item Number B first, and this is about something that
frankly is very, very exciting to me in the West Grove. I don't know where all the -- where is the
Collaborative Coconut Grove -- well, we've got two left.
Commissioner Teele: We've got a little bit more.
66 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Three. All right, good. Four. Like you all scattered. So this is
something very, very exciting that's going on in the West Grove, and what has happened is that,
principally through the leadership of some of the local community leaders and the University of
Miami School of Architecture, they've been able to create something called the Coconut Grove
Collaborative, and I won't read the whole mission statement of the Collaborative, but in essence,
it's to work as a catalyst to help protect and preserve the interests of existing residences and
businesses, attract new residents and businesses; formed to help the character, promote
affordability for residents, preserve identity of this community by moving forward immediately
with concerted community action for revitalization with an island theme, mixed income housing,
preservation of historic structures and mixed-use economic development along Grand Avenue,
and there's a couple other parts to this that I won't put into the public record, and so its mission
statement, I think, is well thought out, is very comprehensive, and the parties that have been able
to -- that have come to the table in this regard -- We have a number of funding partners for the
Collaborative and they include the City of Miami, obviously, Miami -Dade County, through
Commissioner Morales' office, the University of Miami School of Architecture, President Donna
Shalala has endorsed this project wholeheartedly, the Knight Foundation, the United States
Department of HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development), the City of Coral Gables
has come to the table, the Collin Center for Public Policy, and their effort is relatively large, but
it includes also their commitment to give technical assistance to the community land trust, and
LISC (Local Initiative Support Corporation) . Those are the major funding partners. We have,
in addition to the funding partners, the Coconut Grove Village West Homeowners and Tenants
Association, the Coconut Grove Village Council, the Ecumenical Network of Coconut Grove,
Coconut Grove Cares, the Gibson Memorial Foundation, GUTS, Coconut Grove Chamber of
Commerce, the Coconut Grove LDC, the Coconut Grove Crime Prevention Committee, West
Grove Investments, KTG Investments, and the Ministerial Alliance. All of these groups have
come together, which is very, very significant. I think -- I don't think. I've been in Miami a
little over 20 years. I think this is the first time in over 20 years where you have virtually all of
the key players, with a huge amount of external resources, that has come together in one
concerted, with one comprehensive plan to make the West Grove a neighborhood that is just
exactly -- just as successful as the rest of Coconut Grove. The difference simply being that this
part of the Grove is principally an African-American part of the Grove that deserves and will be
as successful with African-American families in that neighborhood as the rest of the Grove, and
I'm thrilled to death to have this group come together, and I have a resolution that I want to
speak to, but before I get to that, I would like to introduce Jhad Rashid, who has been elected the
President of the Collaborative, and I would also like to recognize Cecile Holloman, who is new
to our community; comes to us from the United States Department of HUD in New York, who is
going to be -- and Cecile, my apologies. I don't know if I have the title right because I've
forgotten -- the executive director, the head potentate or something of the -- she's the senior staff
person that's going to keep all of us organized and make this all thing -- this whole thing work.
Rashid.
Jhad Rashid: Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioners. It's an auspicious
beginning for the Coconut Grove Collaborative. It's a big tent initiative to bring that
revitalization. I can merely echo what you just said. We've gotten off to a great start and we're
here to urge the passage of that resolution, and this is the first salvo in which we envision as a
67 July 25, 2002
progressive and successful effort to bring about that permanent, sustainable change with brick
and mortar change that is what we're working under, and we've got off to a good start with the
help of Cecile Holloman. I have here also two of our members, part of my executive committee
member, secretary David Gil, who's well known as an activist and concerned citizen in Coconut
Grove, and Yvonne McDonald, who's the president of a Local Development Corporation. Our
other members had to leave because of time constraints, and they beg your pardon and apologies.
There's not much more that I can say, is that to be able to bring such a stellar group of people
with this one vision, one voice, and incorporate all the concerns in the Grove. This is not
nirvana, but it's unprecedented, and we haven't had this before and I've been at it for 17 years in
some form or fashion, and -- as we all have in different ways, but this one is going to work and
thanks to your confidence in us, and we're working tirelessly to make sure that your confidence
in us is well placed. This initiative that we have before us today will be the first installment that
will give us additional credibility where we can report back to our stakeholders. In fact, we want
to come back in September to give you a PowerPoint presentation of what we're trying to do.
We're operating without staff, so this is a total commitment of the people that are involved that
really want to make this work, except for some of the work that Ms. Holloman is going to make,
so not to draw this out, I'll come back, if necessary, to make any other comments, but I'd like
Ms. Holloman to take it and give some remarks about our efforts.
Cecile Holloman: Thank you, Jhad and thank you, Commissioner, gentlemen. It's a pleasure for
me to be a part of the community now, and I just want to thank you, Commissioner, and Jason
for sort of twisting my arm and encouraging me to make that transition. It's been a pleasure. It's
been, not a challenge, but it's been an opportunity, I think, for this community and I'm very, very
pleased at the progress. In fact, in working with collaboratives all over the country, I found this
to be a collaborative that has come together quicker and with more determination to work
together. The mission statement starts off with: "We will work together," and I think that that
was the very first obstacle that we had to get over, was the groups that were out there for years
and years that had not found a way to come together, and so the collaborative effort was to bring
them together and then all things are possible. There's just a few things I wanted to sort of
highlight is that we have now completed the comprehensive plan. We want to bring that to the
Commission, and like Jhad said, with a PowerPoint presentation. We are now seeking additional
funds to supplement some of the programs; workforce development, some cultural programs, so
that we can really highlight the legacy of the island district, and we're calling it the island
district, and I think it's very fitting. As I did my work across the country, I found that a small,
quaint community is very attractive to tourists, and very -- it's something that people are now
looking to invest in, so we're going to be bringing a lot of resources to the table. At the Collin
Center, they've made a commitment to support this community and to preserve the character of
this community and not displace the residents that are there while we're still attracting new
development, so I'm very encouraged. I feel that the right partners are at the table and we're just
very, very happy to have your complete support, Commissioner, and we look forward to really
exciting things in Coconut Grove, so I'd like to thank the Commission and we'd like to come
back and kind of showcase some of the things that we're doing. We are mailing now to 700 on
our mailing list every month and we -- in September, there will be a town paper that will be
devoted to the Coconut Grove Collaborative and that will be available to you, so we have
exciting things. The University of Miami, we do have Yvonne here representing the University
of Miami, and they've been a tremendous partner. In September, September the 4th, in fact,
68 July 25, 2002
we're going to have a -- sort of a celebration at Loew's Commission -- at Loew's auditorium,
and we'll make sure that you have that invitation and the information, but I think that this is
exciting and, when you look across the country, this can be a model for other communities like
it. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you, Cecile. Jhad, thank you very much and thank you everyone
else for coming today. My sincere apologies for making you all sit in the audience so long, and
too bad we lost people. I think Commissioner Teele said it best this morning. We've got a -- we
just sent -- we're going to do a little better job of getting people in public appearances that come
in the morning without having you wait all morning, but thank you. This is very exciting, and let
me introduce the resolution, if you don't mind.
Jhad Rashid: OK. Thank you, Commissioner.
At this time, Vice Chairman Winton read the resolution into the public record.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Moved and second by Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, again, I would urge you to look at a cooperative agreement,
which is the OMB circular recommended way to do it, not -- and community development -- to
look at the community -- look at the cooperative agreement format under OMB circular. I think
it's A-102, Attachment O. It expedites it and it's not a contract. It's a cooperative agreement
which is a unique contract agreed to by the federal government for federal funds, with
universities and research organizations, and that would expedite that, but again, it's just a
tremendous effort, and I can tell you first hand, you've got a tremendous advocate in
Commissioner Winton. I was there with the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization), where
he took on all comers, and there were plenty of them, about the sidewalks and basic things, but
you know, again, not to draw this out, government has a role, and our role, I repeat, is to provide
infrastructure, as well as financial support, where we can, but if we don't get the infrastructure
stuff straight, the Planning Department, the sidewalks, the roads, the lighting, the drainage, the
parking, the kinds of infrastructure amenities, it's just all for naught, and I commend
Commissioner Winton for being so steadfast in his resolve in fighting to get this area back to the
granular that it once had without displacing people. That's, I think, the key, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: And we look forward to inviting all the Commissioners to the
groundbreaking of Grand Avenue Streetscape program in, hopefully, January/February, so we
are --
Commissioner Teele: Moving it.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- this close. We're not there yet, but --
69 July 25, 2002
Mr. Rashid: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: All those in favor, signify by the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Those opposed have the same right. The item is unanimously adopted.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-861
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION REPROGRAMMING
$10000 OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS
(CDBG) FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COCONUT GROVE PILOT
PROJECTS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF
ARCHITECTURE CENTER FOR URBAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN TO
IMPLEMENT REVITALIZATION PROJECTS IN THE COCONUT GROVE
COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION DISTRICT WITH THE COCONUT
GROVE COLLABORATIVE, INC.; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SAID
ORGANIZATION, FOR SAID PURPOSE, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE CITY CODE
PROVISIONS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Mr. Rashid: Thank you, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Now, go win. My next --
Mr. Rashid: I didn't mention Jason. He's a tireless worker and I'm remiss not to utter his name
at this juncture. Thank you, too, Jason.
70 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: And thank you for recognizing Jason. He has really -- he -- I think this
is on his agenda every single day and he's in the -- he's there talking to somebody every single
day.
Mr. Rashid: All the time.
Vice Chairman Winton: So he's doing a heck of a job. Thank you.
12. DESIGNATE "CULTURAL PARK", KNOWN AS "MUSEUM PARK MIAMI", AS
OFFICIAL DESIGN VISION FOR BICENTENNIAL PARK; MANAGER TO OBTAIN
SERVICES OF SUCH PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS TO FINALIZE
COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR BICENTENNIAL PARK, MANAGER AND CITY
ATTORNEY TO COMMENCE E NEGOTIATIONS WITH MIAMI ART MUSEUM AND
MIAMI MUSEUM OF SCIENCE TO DEFINE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THEIR
TENANCY IN BICENTENNIAL PARK.
Commissioner Teele: You had another item?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir, and that's the bi --
Commissioner Teele: Are there any other public -- persons here from the public on any other
item, other than the one that Commissioner Winton is getting ready to bring up? What are you
here for, ma'am, and sir? De Hostos Senior Center. Who's the Commissioner there,
Commissioner Winton?
Vice Chairman Winton: Not me, so let me get to the Bicentennial Park, and there's two
resolutions here, and as you all know, we -- the City of Miami did an exhaustive -- sponsored an
exhaustive charrette to define what Bicentennial Park should ultimately look like. The plans
came back to this City Commission in April or May of last year. We said that there were three
models that were acceptable models, but we didn't choose a specific model. We were leaning
towards Museum Park as the model we all liked and we wanted to give the museum some time to
get themselves organized to determine whether or not we could get the kind of momentum we
needed to move clearly in that direction. September 11th happened; that turned everything upside
down for a period of time, so we've lost some time, but I've spent countless hours working with
all of the museum people since that time, and we're all ready now to move forward to that next
step, and what's going to happen through this process is that there will be a series of steps that
come before us. It isn't one big, you know, giant pronouncement. It's a series of steps that we
will take that will do a number of things. It will allow us to codify the steps that we want to take
and provide direction. It also sends a signal to the community that there's something going on
and there is a discussion about that something that's going on and the community can understand
that something's going on, as opposed to trying to set the whole framework all at once in this big
package and three years later, we come back and say, "Well, you know, how much of this have
we gotten done? So we're going to do this in bite -size steps, and here's the next step.
At this point, Vice Chairman Winton read the resolution into the public record.
71 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: So move.
Commissioner Teele: Moved and seconded. Is there objection? Discussion. All those in favor
of the item, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All opposed. Let the record reflect unanimous adoption.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-862
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING "A CULTURAL PARK", ALSO KNOWN
AS "MUSEUM PARK MIAMI", AS THE OFFICIAL DESIGN VISION FOR
BICENTENNIAL PARK; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF SUCH PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO FINALIZE A
COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR BICENTENNIAL PARK, SUBJECT
TO CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY ATTORNEY
JOINTLY TO COMMENCE IMMEDIATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
MIAMI ART MUSEUM AND THE MIAMI MUSEUM OF SCIENCE TO
DEFINE THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR EACH OF THEIR LONG-
TERM, WORLD-CLASS TENANCY IN BICENTENNIAL PARK, ALSO
SUBJECT TO CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
72 July 25, 2002
13. AUTHORIZE AND DIRECT MANAGER TO OBTAIN SERVICES OF PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANTS TO FINALIZE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR
BICENTENNIAL PARK; TO BEGIN RFP PROCESS TO OBTAIN SERVICES OF
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FIRM; MANAGER TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTUAL
AGREEMENTS WITH DOVER KOHL & PARTNERS AND ROBERT WEINREB TO
ASSIST CITY STAFF IN RFP AND CONTINUE CONSULTANTS DURING DESIGN
PROCESS.
Commissioner Teele: The next one.
Vice Chairman Winton: The second resolution, and there's a change to the one that's in your
packet. I hope that can be distributed to each of the Commissioners. There's some wording
changes. This next step is designed to -- is a directive to the City to hire an appropriate
consultant -- and we're calling it in here, I think, a landscape consultant -- I've got to read
through this again. That may be one of the things that changed, but anyhow, to get the design
consultant onboard with the City so that we can begin the more detailed design work for the
park, done in conjunction with some of the design work that the museums are going to be doing,
so that those things can link together, and we will have experts at the table on our side, not just
the experts at the table on the museum side, so that we can work together. Secondly, the -- and
probably the most important reason to bring that consultant on today is that, as I said in the last
resolution, we want to take bite -size steps at getting this park done. There's things we can do
tomorrow and the next day and the day after tomorrow that can begin to improve the park, make
the park more usable, and to show the public that we are taking steps to bring a world-class park
back to the City of Miami. We can't do that if we don't begin to create a design that we think is
going to work, so in this process we're going to be creating that design so that every time we
spend $10.00 on the park, it's $10.00 that's spent on a plan that's going to fit in terms of the
overall plan, rather than us just deciding tomorrow, "Well, let's go put in the bay walk," because
everybody knows we want the bay walk, so let's just go put it in, but it's got to be put in in the
context of what the rest of the park's going to be putting in, and if we don't have that kind of
expertise at the table, we'll make mistakes, so therefore, this next resolution is designed to
accomplish that objective.
At this time, Vice Chairman Winton read the resolution into the public record.
Vice Chairman Winton: And
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
73 July 25, 2002
RESOLUTION 02-863
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF
SUCH PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO
FINALIZE A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR BICENTENNIAL
PARK; SPECIFICALLY TO BEGIN THE RFP PROCESS TO OBTAIN THE
SERVICES OF A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FIRM SUBJECT TO CITY
COMMISSION APPROVAL; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER, TO ENTER INTO CONTRACTUAL
AGREEMENTS WITH DOVER KOHL & PARTNERS AND ROBERT
WEINREB TO ASSIST CITY STAFF IN THE RFP, SELECTION OF THE
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL FIRM AND CONTINUE AS
CONSULTANTS DURING THE DESIGN PROCESS, ALSO SUBJECT TO
CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Vice Chairman Winton: And this, also by the way -- this resolution was worked on by the
Planning Department, in conjunction with the City Attorney's Office, so that's how we got the
wording that we have.
Commissioner Teele: Moved and seconded. Is there further discussion? Commissioner, let me
tell you. I have some very real concerns. I'm in total agreement with everything that you've
said. I'm more concerned about what you haven't said. We don't need to -- we need to ensure
that there is an environmental consultant, Johnny. Johnny, we need to ensure that there is an
environmental consultant onboard ahead of all of this because it doesn't matter what the
landscape guy -- I mean, you know, this is a chicken and the egg kind of thing, and I understand
that everybody's got their view, but I'm just going to tell you my view. This is an environmental
unknown. The worst thing that you could do, in my judgment, Johnny, the worst thing you can
do, is get a landscape guy there who falls in love with his plan, and trust me, every architect in
the world falls in love with their plan, and then you wind up arguing about things that have to be
redesigned because of environmental issues that may or may not be there. Some environmental
issues may be where you put the parking garage. I mean, but you need -- as an example -- but
74 July 25, 2002
you need to have very clear markers out there on this. The number one, number two and number
three issues that have been identified in the safe neighborhood -- I'm sorry, in the $250,000,000
bond issue, again, for Bicentennial -- talk about environmental -- talk about the sea wall, and the
environmental issues -- and I would hope that you're tying this, although it's not clear, to the use
of the bond proceeds in designing this, which is what the resolution clearly should do, but this is
a three- or four-part tango and you've got to figure out which foot you move first, you know, in
this dance you're going to do. I vote, you know, just as one person, that you quantify and qualify
the environmental problems, and for some reason, this City has the absolute ostrich -in -the -sand
approach when it comes to environmental. This has gone on for 40 years in this City. Hope --
everybody says, "Oh, don't touch it, don't touch it. It's got an environmental problem." Well,
what does that mean? "Oh, well, we don't -- as long as we don't know, we can't" -- you know,
that's so stupid. I mean, it is absolutely the most ridiculous thing. If we're a private owner,
we'd all be out there with badges trying to arrest them for something, you know, if they had an
environmental problem that no one would quantify. What I'm saying to you, somehow we've
got to erase the bad practices of this City, which is to run away from environmental problems --
Vice Chairman Winton: And face them.
Commissioner Teele: -- and face them, and you're not going -- you know, it's sort of like the old
football coach, you know, teaching those of us in defense, don't watch his legs, watch his belly.
He could move his legs around, but he -- you know, if you're going to tackle him, you just focus
on the navel belly, and that's how you tackle people. You don't watch their legs or you'll be,
you know, looking like a fool out there, so we've got to basically focus in on the navel belly of
this park, which is environmental, if we're going to ever tackle it. That's my strong view on this.
I have no objections to where you're going. I have no objections to what you're doing. I'm
more concerned about what you're not doing. I'm going to offer one other gratuitous point. The
number one environmental problem on that park is a county problem. It's called an $80,000,000
pump station relocation. That park will never be a great park, unless and until we deal with that
issue, and I would hope that the next item that is coming along will be a resolution to instruct the
Manager, and request the Mayor, and request the attorneys to begin a dialogue with the county
on the relocation of the pump station, and to me, that's all a part of the overall entire
environmental issue, and whether or not Delta Oil or you know, Sony Oil or whoever was out
there, you know, when Mr. Flagler first got here and had the oil, you know, that's neither here
nor there, or whether it was a railroad problem, we've got some serious issues there, and I just --
I'm in favor of -- I'm going to support your resolution, but I think, Johnny, we've got to deal
with the environmental issues.
At this time, Commissioner Gonzalez enters the Commission Chambers at 12:38.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I tell you what I would like to do. I think, you know -- and,
frankly, it's a value of bringing these resolutions to the Commission. I mean, I always welcome
this kind of input. There's an error in this, as I read it. There was an error that was -- that I
thought was taking out -- taken out that wasn't taken out, and so I want to modify it anyhow, and
I would welcome the modifications that you're suggesting to this resolution, or introduce a
second one.
75 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: What I you ought to do is think about it over the summer and bring it back
in September --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Commissioner Teele: -- as a separate resolution, but all that I'm saying is, I don't think it's too
soon to move those processes.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think you're right. Right, right.
Commissioner Teele: But I just think getting a landscape guy on board, without knowing exactly
where the hotspots are, and the extent of them, and whether they're going to require removal or
remediation or something else is just really going to get a landscape architect frustrated at the
end of the day.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think that -- since we're asking them to move forward in this
regard, I think it's probably appropriate to modify this resolution to provide some sort of
direction to the Manager at this point in time to bring something to us. I don't know what that
something is yet, relative to the environmental, but I'm not -- I think it's appropriate right now to
put something in this resolution, and while you're thinking about that, let me make the
modification because there -- yes, please. I'd like the City Attorney to re -read the resolution that
takes out the part that was in error.
At this time, the resolution was read into the public record by the City Attorney.
Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commissioner Winton. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Discussion.
Commissioner Teele: By Commissioner Sanchez. Further discussion, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, let me just say that at least, you know, we made a commitment
and now people are seeing that we're starting to do with it. People have been asking me, "Hey,
where's the master plan for, you know, being (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- Bayfront Park and
Bicentennial" and they've all been asking about it, so it's a step in the right direction. I think
that, you know, by us only cutting the grass isn't going to do it. I mean, the only people that are
utilizing it right now are skaters, people that ride their bikes, or the ones that are just coming
through walk along, but I think it's not only commitment now. We're putting our money where
our mouth is to create a world-class park, and I commend you for it.
Commissioner Teele: Further discussion? All those in --
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner, do you have a suggestion on how we modify this
resolution (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: He modified it by saying "an environmental."
76 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, he did? I wasn't even listening. Thank you. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: All those in favor, signify by the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All opposed?
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-863
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO ISSUE AN RFP TO SOLICIT
FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHICTURAL SERVICES AND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTING SERVICES TO PREPARE THE COMPREHENSIVE MASTER
PLAN FOR BICENTENNIAL PARK; ALSO KNOWN AS "MUSEUM PARK
MIAMI" AND TO ESTABLISH A REVIEW COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE
EACH PROPOSAL, REPORT ITS FINDINGS TO THE CITY MANAGER
WHO SHALL PRESENT HIS FINDINGS AND NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT FOR SUCH SERVICES TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR
ITS CONSIDERATION.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Teele: Now, is there anybody else here on a public item that you were
advertising? What are you all here on, ma'am? Oh. What item is that?
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): December 8th.
Commissioner Teele: That's Number 8. That wasn't a public appearance, and you all, sir and
ma'am?
77 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: On what?
Commissioner Teele: De Hostos Senior Center?
Vice Chairman Winton: Catholic Charities.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is it a public appearance?
Commissioner Teele: No, that's a substantive item, if it's Number 8. That's the public services
CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) stuff? All right. Well, what we're going to
have to do, unfortunately, is continue this item until 2:30. I don't think it's going to come up
before 3:30 or 4 o'clock. Maybe we could do -- sort of agree now to do a time certain for the --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, say 4 o'clock so that that gives us time to probably get back.
Commissioner Sanchez: When will you get back from the (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Commissioner Teele: Who knows. 4 o'clock, Commissioner Sanchez -- I mean, Commissioner
Gonzalez, Commissioner Winton, would you all agree to bring that item up with the Chairman at
4 o'clock today?
Vice Chairman Winton: And that's item what? Item 8.
Commissioner Teele: Item Number 8.
Vice Chairman Winton: 4 o'clock, so you all know when to -- you can go back and get
something done. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Is there anybody else here on anything other than that item? All right,
then the meeting stands adjourned until 2:30, and with the understanding that Item Number 8
will come up at approximately 4 p.m. Meeting stands recessed.
THEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:42 PM AND
RECONVENED AT 3:00 PM, WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION
FOUND TO BE PRESENT, EXCEPTING COMMISSIONER ARTHUR E. TEELE AND VICE
CHAIRMAN JOHNNY L. WINTON.
14. COMMENTS REGARDING PROPOSED SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING IN
AUGUST TO DISCUSS AT&T CABLE ISSUE AND PROPOSED RESCHEDULING OF
COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 12, 2002.
Chairman Regalado: Good afternoon. We are back on the regular City Commission agenda, and
we need to decide on several issues here. We had announced the AT&T (American Telephone
& Telegraph) item was going to be heard in the afternoon. The Mayor, I think, had requested
time in the afternoon to come. So. I don't know if he is coming down. Linda, do you know if
the Mayor is coming down for the AT&T? Please. So, we are going to have the Mayor on the
78 July 25, 2002
AT&T item. And we'll discuss with the members of the Commission and the City Manager
some of the issues that we need, probably, to address on a Special Commission meeting, August
22nd So, I'm just asking to two of the members of the Commission here, if they are available on
August 22nd. You are. This is a Special Commission meeting that will be held in the Miami
Arena. As you all know, we cannot use this Chamber until -- past the 15th of September. And,
by the way, we need to also move, if we have a motion, the September -- the first City
Commission meeting in September, because the School Board meets on the same day that we
were supposed to meet, and that takes precedence on the City's budget. So, we need to move -- I
mean, we have two alternatives: To move the September meeting to 9/11, September 11th, or
Friday, the 13th. It's either September 11th or Friday, the 13th
Commissioner Gonzalez: Are we going to be discussing any retirements on that day?
Chairman Regalado: Well. I mean, you know, that's the only two days we can do it. So, I guess
that we'll wait for the full Board to decide, but just so you know, we need to have a Special
Commission meeting. Mayor, you want to address the Commission on the AT& T?
Mayor Diaz: Sure. And I have Matt Leibowitz with me here, who has been working very
diligently with us. I think we've made significant progress through this process. This is a highly
complicated issue and, obviously, from my perspective and from the perspective of all of you on
the Commission that I've had an opportunity to discuss, we want to do everything that we can to
protect the citizens of Miami, and to make sure they get quality service from their cable operator.
And so it's been a grueling process. It's been a very detailed process. But like I said, I think
we've made a lot of progress. We had hoped to try to finish everything by today, but, obviously,
we haven't. And, so, in communications with representatives of AT&T, they have agreed to
extend the deadline to August 22nd
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-second. OK. We need, then, a Special City Commission meeting
on August 22nd
Commissioner Sanchez: We're already meeting on the 22ndISO...
Chairman Regalado: No, no. We are meeting for this, but so you know, we need to formalize
the Special City Commission meeting August 22nd. You want to say anything, Matt? OK.
AT&T representatives are here, if they want to --
Tom Carlock: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. My name is Tom
Carlock. I'm Vice President of Franchising and Government Affairs for AT&T Broadband.
Like the Mayor, I would just like to affirm to everyone on the Commission that we are making
remarkable progress on this, and we look forward to spending the next several weeks in
completing a deal that we believe will be a win-win for both the City, and for AT&T Broadband
and AT&T Comcast. And thank you very much for your patience, and we look forward to
getting this completed. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
79 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
15. DIRECT MANAGER TO CONDUCT STUDY AND TO REPORT HIS FINDINGS AT
SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 CITY COMMISSION MEETING RELATED TO POSSIBLE
CONSTRUCTION OF POLICE TRAINING CENTER ON LAND DONATED BY FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES (NORTH BY
NORTHWEST 19TH TERRACE, SOUTH BY NORTHWEST 18TH STREET, EAST BY
INTERSTATE 95 AND WEST BY 7TH AVENUE) .
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK, Mr. Chairman. My item is a resolution of the City of Miami
Commission directing the City Manager to conduct a study and to report his findings at the
September 12, 2002 City Commission meeting, related to the possible construction of a police
training center on the land donated by the Florida Department of Transportation for public
purposes, generally described as being bounded on the north by the Northwest 19th Terrace, on
the south by Northwest 18th Street, on the east by Interstate 95, and on the west, by 7th Avenue,
in Miami, Florida. I move the resolution.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado : OK. We have a motion -- how much -- Frank, how much would that study
cost, do you think?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I believe that actually the Police Department is the one
that will have to undertake this study; go out to the site and -- we have the Chief, maybe he can
enlighten us on what the study will consist of.
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yes, Commissioner. Raul Martinez, Chief of Police. I've been
to the site myself, but I just need to see a better sketch of where the limits -- because it's a long
lot and I know it's like the middle piece of the long lot. We discussed it with the Manager
yesterday. We want to make sure there's no deed restrictions, and I understand that there's not --
Commissioner Gonzalez: There's not.
Mr. Martinez: -- from talking to Mr. Castenada. I mean, we would have to see whether -- if it's
4.8 acres, which is what I understand, the initial (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is that it's sufficient for
what we want to do there, if that -- if this happens to be the site.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the funds would come out of --
Mr. Martinez: There's a --- the funds are from the bond. You all approved $10,000,000 --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right, 10,000,000.
Mr. Martinez: -- from the Police Training Center.
80 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's for the --
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: No. He said the bonds for the study, he's asking.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's -- no, I'm not talking -- the funds are coming out for the
construction. Where's the funds that are coming from the study? Also out of the bond money?
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's fine. Call the question.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-864
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT A STUDY AND TO REPORT HIS
FINDINGS AT THE SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 CITY COMMISSION MEETING
RELATED TO THE POSSIBLE CONSTRUCTION OF A POLICE TRAINING
CENTER ON THE LAND DONATED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, GENERALLY DESCRIBED
AS BEING BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY NORTHWEST 19TH TERRACE,
ON THE SOUTH BY NORTHWEST 18TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY
INTERSTATE 95 AND ON THE WEST BY 7TH AVENUE, MIAMI, 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
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
81 July 25, 2002
16. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 96-726 TO DELETE FROM LIST OF PROPERTIES TO BE
CONVEYED TO WIND & RAIN, INC. CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 3648 OAK AVENUE; DECLARE SURPLUS AND APPROVE DESIGNATION OF
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, CENTER FOR URBAN AND
COMMUNITY DESIGN, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH COCONUT GROVE
COLLABORATIVE, INC., AS DEVELOPER TO UNDERTAKE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO
SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER -OCCUPIED HOMES, AFFORDABLE TO VERY LOW, LOW
AND MODERATE -INCOME FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS ON CITY -OWNED REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3658 FROW AVENUE AND 3648 OAK AVENUE.
Chairman Regalado: Johnny Winton has several items. He's delayed in the MPO (Metropolitan
Planning Organization), as well as Commissioner Arthur Teele, and they will be here. We are
going to, in a few minutes; try to hear the item on Virginia Key Beach as a pocket item between
3:30 and 4:30. Yes, an administration pocket item, and Commissioner Athalie Range -- I don't
know if she's here --no, she's not here yet. No, she's not here, so she requested from the
administration that item -- is that -- that is a pocket item, Frank, right?
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Yes, that is correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mrs. Range just walked in.
Chairman Regalado: See? We are --I mean, we're talking about you.
Commissioner Sanchez: As we speak.
Chairman Regalado: Where is the pocket item?
Mr. Rollason: I know there were some issues that were being squared away on some funding
items that Al Ruder was working on. He just walked to the back to see -- I'm not sure that it's
ready to come out at this moment.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. We could always bring him back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez, do you have --
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't have any Commissioner items. I do have pocket items, but I'll
take care of them afterwards, later on.
Chairman Regalado: Frank, find out what is the delay on the Virginia Key, so we can --
Mr. Rollason: I do have some people back there checking out to see what the hold up is.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Item 4, it's a resolution. It's to amend a resolution adopted on
October 10, 1996 to delete from the list of properties to be conveyed to Wind and Rain, Inc.,
certain city -owned property located at 3648 Oak Avenue, in Coconut Grove; several other
properties. Do we have a motion?
82 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion. It's been moved and second. All in favor, say
aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-865
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 96-726, ADOPTED OCTOBER 10, 1996, TO DELETE
FROM THE LIST OF PROPERTIES TO BE CONVEYED TO WIND & RAIN,
INC. CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3648 OAK
AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; DECLARING SURPLUS AND APPROVING
THE DESIGNATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF
ARCHITECTURE, CENTER FOR URBAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN
("UNIVERSITY"), IN PARTNERSHIP WITH COCONUT GROVE
COLLABORATIVE, INC., AS DEVELOPER TO UNDERTAKE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF TWO SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER -OCCUPIED HOMES,
AFFORDABLE TO VERY LOW, LOW AND MODERATE -INCOME
FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS ON CITY -OWNED REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 3658 FROW AVENUE AND 3 648 OAK AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A"
ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED, SUBJECT TO SAID
DEVELOPER PROVIDING EVIDENCE ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY OF
FIRM COMMITMENTS FOR PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND
PERMANENT FINANCING; DIRECTING THE DEVELOPER TO FINALIZE
HOUSING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE TWO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WITHIN
TWENTY-FOUR MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF CONVEYANCE OF THE
PROPERTIES BY THE CITY OR THE PROPERTIES WILL
AUTOMATICALLY REVERT TO THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL DOCUMENTS, IN
FORMS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, CONVEYING SAID
PROPERTIES, SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPER PROVIDING EVIDENCE
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY OF FIRM COMMITMENTS FOR PROJECT
CONSTRUCTION AND PERMANENT FINANCING.
83 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman Regalado: Item 5 needs a fourth -fifth vote. Alex, do we have --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, we don't.
Chairman Regalado: I thought if we have three, we have a --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It's four --fifths --
Commissioner Sanchez: It's four-fifths.
Mr. Vilarello: -- of the entire Commission.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK, the entire. Item 6 needs four -fifth.
17. AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) FUNDS FROM CLOSEOUT OF 26TH YEAR CDBG CONTRACTS, $258,381, FOR
REHABILITATION OF BUSINESSES PARTICIPATING IN COMMERCIAL FACADE
TREATMENT PROGRAM.
Chairman Regalado: Item 7, it's allocation of Community Development Block Grant funds,
CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, $258,381. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll second it for discussion.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Fernandes, for how many years have we been allocating $1,400
per business as a City contribution for the Facade program?
Dan Fernandes (Acting Director, Community Development): As far as I know, Commissioner,
from the inception of the program.
84 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: How long has that been, 26 years? Twenty --
Mr. Fernandes: Twenty-seven years.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Twenty-seven years.
Chairman Regalado : Oh, OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. If -- As you know, with $1,400, there is nothing that you can do
today to improve a facade because out of the -- of those $1,400, if you're going to do awnings
and you're going to do signage and permits -- or permits, you return to the City no less than $400
- 3 to $400, so actually, we're limiting the appropriation of the City to $1,000 per business. I'm
going to -- I'm planning to vote in favor of these, but what I would like to do is to have to do a
study and see if we can increment the portion that the City, not only the portion of the City,
because the limit actually is $2,000 per business, and I'm very familiar with this and done lots,
lots of these Facade programs. We need to increase the limits to at least $3,500 so we can
actually do some improvements out there, because with a thousand -- with $1,400, there is
nothing that you can do. I mean, you can't even paint a facade of a commercial building with
$1,400 or $2,000, especially if you're talking a building that has a front and the two sides that are
facing the street, they're considered facades so they are included on this program, and with the
costs of the labor to pressure clean the building, to paint the -- and to pay the permits and
everything else, you know -- actually, you don't have any money to cover the expenditure, and I
think that maybe this is one of the reasons why the program has not been successful in some
areas, because the amount of money that has been allocated to the program is not enough to help
some of the businesses, so I would appreciate it if you could -- you know, if you could all do
some kind of a study and give me some numbers, and maybe we can sit down and discuss it and
see if we can find a better solution that we can help more, especially more small businesses,
people that are -- that have real small businesses and they are striving to make a living and they
can't afford to upgrade the facade of their busi -- the buildings. We have the inspectors citing
them because the buildings look horrible, and when they come to us, the kind of assistance that
we can give them is so little that we put them in a bind. You know, the inspectors are fining
them on one side and we're trying to help them on the other hand, but we're not been able to
help them a lot so they can comply with the -- with code enforcement and they could -- can
comply with the program with the City, so --
Mr. Fernandes: I have no problem with that, Commissioner. We'll come back; we'll discuss it
with you. We'll do a study for you. We'll give you some information. We'll come back in
September with either a revised program or reasons that we can't, you know, revise the program
we currently have, but we'll work with you on that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK, thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Public hearing is closed. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
85 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its
adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-866
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
ALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) FUNDS FROM THE CLOSEOUT OF 26TH YEAR CDBG
CONTRACTS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $258,381, FOR THE
REHABILITATION OF BUSINESSES PARTICIPATING IN THE
COMMERCIAL FACADE TREATMENT PROGRAM.
0(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman Regalado: It was decided earlier by the Commission that Item A will be done around
4 o'clock. It is a public hearing. It's the CDBG program funds, program income, so we'll wait.
Also, Item 9 is a companion of CDBG, so we'll wait. Item 10 is also a companion, so we'll wait.
Item 11 and 11 A have been deferred to August 22nd
18. APPROVE ISSUANCE OF $35,000,000 SPECIAL OBLIGATION NON -AD VALOREM
REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2002A FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 147(F)
OF INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986.
Chairman Regalado: Item 12, the bond -- issuance of bonds. Go ahead.
Scott Simpson: Scott Simpson, Finance Department. What we're here to do today is conduct a
TEFRA (Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act) hearing in regards to the refunding of the
Series 2002A, Special Obligation Bonds in accordance with Internal Revenue Code. I also have
bond counsel here to answer any questions before we -- after the proceedings for the public
hearing. Basically, the intent of a TEFRA hearing is to ensure that the tax exempt status on these
bonds remain.
86 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. This is a public hearing and, of course -- is the bond counsel here? It
is?
Mr. Simpson: Yes, bond counsel is here.
Chairman Regalado: Do you want to -- your name and address --
Lori Smith-Lalla: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: -- and explain to the Commission what your proposal is.
Lori Smith-Lalla: Hello, Commissioners. My name is Lori Smith-Lalla. I'm with Squire,
Sanders & Dempsey, your bond counsel. The reason we're having the TEFRA hearing today is
to continue the tax exempt status of these bonds. The Series 2002A bonds actually are refunding
bonds that are tax exempt and to continue that status, we need to hold a public hearing.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I need to, as part of the public hearing, read some of the things that
need to be put on the record and we're conducting a public hearing on the proposed issuance of -
- by the City of its special obligation non -ad valorem revenue refunding bonds Series 2002A in
the aggregate principal amount of $27,895,000; the bond, a portion of which, have been issued to
refinance a portion of the City's $65,271,325.05 special revenue refunding bonds. These are
Series 1987, which were issued to refinance the City's $60,000,000 convention center and
parking garage revenue bonds, dated July 1, 1980, which were issued to finance a significant
portion of the cost of acquisition and construction of the City of Miami, University of Miami,
James L. Knight International Center, and the Herman parking garage located on the north bank
of the Miami River in the downtown area of the City and border to the east by Southwest --
Southeast 2nd Avenue; to the west by Southeast 1St Avenue; to the north by Southeast 2nd Street,
and to the south by the Miami River. The facilities include an approximately 410,000 square
foot exhibition and convention center and 1,450 space parking garage, each of which are owned
by the City. The bonds shall not be a general obligation debt or liability to the City or to the state
of Florida or of any political subdivision thereof, or shall be payable solely from certain non -ad
valorem revenues of the City's budgeted and appropriated for the payment of the bonds. This
public hearing is being conducted pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Tax Equity and
Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, as amended by the Tax Reform Act of 1986, referred for
purposes of this hearing as TEFRA, and embodied in Section 147F of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended the "Code." TEFRA requires that in order for the interests of the bonds to
be exempt from federal income tax, such bonds and the projects will then would be financed
must be approved by either a voter referendum or by an applicable elected representative after a
public hearing following public notice. After the completion of this hearing, the City
Commission of the City of Miami, Florida will, for purposes of Section 147F of the Internal
Revenue Service Code, approve or disapprove the issuance of the bonds for the purpose of
Section 147 of the Code. It should be noted that the proceedings of this public hearing are being
recorded and will be maintained as a permanent record, so now we have the Director of Finance.
You need to place on the record the required notice of public hearing.
87 July 25, 2002
Mr. Simpson: The notice of public hearing was published in the Miami Daily Business Review
on July 9, 2002, the Dario Lawson Americas on July 10, 2002 and the Miami Times, July 11,
2002. Each such notice advised that the City would hold a public hearing on July 25th during the
City Commission meeting, starting on 9:00 a.m., in the City Commission Chambers of the City
Hall for the purpose of receiving comments concerning proposed issuance by the City of its
Special Obligation Non -Ad Valorem Revenue Refunding Series 2002A.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Being a public hearing, we invite the public for any comments. If we
have none, we will close the public hearing, and discussion. The members of the Commission.
Commission Sanchez: No discussion. when we move the item, I just wanted to make sure that
anyone could appeal the decision made here, so we just wanted to make sure that it be paramount
that the public hearing was properly advertised and that's the key why it was read into the record,
correct?
Mr. Simpson: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. It's been moved and second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-867
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE
ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $35,000,000 CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
SPECIAL OBLIGATION NON -AD VALOREM REVENUE REFUNDING
BONDS, SERIES 2002A FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 147(F) OF THE
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
88 July 25, 2002
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Mr. Simpson: Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. 12.
19. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE PROJECT CORPORATION AGREEMENT
WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ARMY, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF VIRGINIA KEY,
SECTION III PROJECT, WHICH CONSISTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW
TIMBER GROINS, REMOVE AND REPLACE 25 TIMBER GROINS AND PLACE 8,000
CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL ONTO VIRGINIA KEY BEACHES AND APPROPRIATE
MITIGATION, WITH FUNDING PROVIDED BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT UP TO
$5100000.
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE SPONSORSHIP LETTER TO U.S. ARMY CORPS
OF ENGINEERS FOR PROVISION OF FEDERAL SECTION 1135 ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION PROJECT FOR PORTIONS OF VIRGINIA KEY, AND ACKNOWLEDGE
CITY'S WILLINGNESS TO BECOME NON-FEDERAL PROJECT SPONSOR FOR THIS
RESTORATION PROJECT, $2,539,625 AND CITY COST OF $877,675 WITH MATCHING
FUNDS FROM SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND PROGRAM.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Mr. Rollason: Just to let you know that we're ready on the Virginia Key item. Whenever you
want to bring that, we can distribute that.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Virginia Key. Commissioner Range, is she here? Oh, OK.
Mr. Rollason: There are two separate resolutions coming before you on this.
89 July 25, 2002
Athalie Range: Thank you very much. Honorable Commissioners, my name is Athalie Range. I
reside at 5727 Northwest 17th Avenue. We are here today for two specific items and they are
113 5, and what is the number of the other?
Unidentified Speaker: Section 111.
Ms. Range: And Section 111. You are presently, I believe, being passed out these resolutions,
and we have come to ask that you would kindly authorize the Legal Department to bring to a
close these letters by signing for us in Section 1135, the Ecosystem Restoration project, for the
portions of Virginia Key Beach. We also have a resolution, which is a project corporation
agreement. This is Section 111. We could possibly read the entire resolution for you. I mean,
the facing of the resolution, but we feel that it is not necessary, since you do have it before you.
If you would like further explanation on it, we'd be more than happy to give it to you.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, I would -- as we, you know, have these sessions broadcast -
- and we have many guests here, I think it would be nice if you give us a brief report of Virginia
Beach and the things that the Trust has done in the past six or seven months, and your immediate
plans, and why is that you have this urgent need.
Ms. Range: Thank you very much. The Virginia Key Beach -- if I may go back for several
years, it has been very much in the news in the past two years or so, but Virginia Key Beach is a
place that was once set aside for special purposes of the black community to have a recreation
place in the City of Miami. During the year, I believe, of about somewhere in the 19 -- late
1900's -- 1982 or so -- this property was given over to the City of Miami by Dade County for the
purpose of giving it to -- for the entertainment of the predominantly black community. However,
it was my — I made a mistake in saying in 1982. That was 20 years hence. In 1982 the City saw
fit, I believe, to close the beach because it felt that it could not have -- it did not have the
maintenance for it. In more recent times, possibly two and a half to almost three years ago, a
group came before the Commission to seek an eco tourism place for Virginia Key Beach. We
felt that this was unfair to the community for, over the period of time this beach had not been
used, and this Commission was kind enough to form a committee, friends of Virginia Key
Beach, which has been working diligently for this period of time to bring back Virginia Key
Beach in its beginning form and with improvements. Over the years, we have met -- we have
been able to bring into the City coffers over $10,000,000, half from the federal government in
the amount of $5,000,000, and half which was given over by the county for the express purpose
of whenever we are ready for the historic museum that we hope to bring to Virginia Key Beach.
Since that time, we have attempted to have events -- special events. Because of the beach's
condition, it cannot be opened on a daily basis, but making special amendments there, we've
been able to open the beach for a number of things. One of the first, which was bringing back
the Easter celebration on the beach. Two years ago, we had some 2,500 people who gathered to
come for a sunrise celebration on the beach, which is an outstanding factor in view of the fact the
beach had not been used for a great period of time. Since that time, we have had a number of
occasions there, the most recent being A Family Hour, which -- A Family Day, which we had
this past week, which we consider a success. We feel that the only way that we can continue
with this project is to have the community involved in sharing, and there is a great need and
desire for the community to come forward and they have at this point. Now, we are at a point in
90 July 25, 2002
the -- in our deliberations where we need the Attorney or the Legal Department to look at
Section 11. This is the Project Corporation Agreement which will give the army the -- to restore
the (UNINTELLIGIBLE), which is needed in order to bring the beach back to a place where it
can be a place of -- to entertainment. That work was to begin in August, but because we wanted
to be very sure of the City's participation, it has gone now and we figure that in another 30 to 60
days, this work will begin. This is federally funded. No monies is being asked of the City to
begin this work. We will have almost more than enough to complete this.
Commissioner Sanchez: Ms. --
Ms. Range: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mrs. Range, I apologize for interrupting you.
Ms. Range: That's all right.
Commissioner Sanchez: But there are two resolutions --
Ms. Range: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- in front of us here today. Which one of those resolutions will, in
other words, take care of that problem that we're having? Is it --
Ms. Range: Resolution 111.
Commissioner Sanchez: Which one is that, because they're not numbered. Is it --
Ms. Range: They're not numbered?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Is it the two --
Ms. Range: It is shown -- if you look --
Vice Chairman Winton: Joe, we need to do both.
Ms. Range: -- about the fifth or sixth line, you'll see the word "Section --
Chairman Regalado : We need both.
Vice Chairman Winton: We need to do both.
Ms. Range: -- I I L" The --
Vice Chairman Winton: Joe, we need to do both resolutions because they're --
91 July 25, 2002
Mr. Rollason: The one not in bold. Commissioner, the one not in bold is the one you're
speaking to.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Range: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Range: Is that satis -- do you have the satisfactory answer?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Range: All right.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, and it's important to note what you said, Commissioner Range, that
this is all federal funds, and it's close to 2,500,000 -- more than $2.500,000 from the federal
government and the Army Corps of Engineer.
Vice Chairman Winton: Five.
Chairman Regalado: It's going to do what they need to do.
Ms. Range: Yes, the restoration of the beach.
Chairman Regalado: And that is a very important step for Virginia Beach.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, I'd moved the resolution on accepting the $5,000,000
federal grant for the beach restoration.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have --
Commissioner Sanchez: Madam Attorney, are you satisfied with this resolution?
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Yes. We reviewed the resolutions.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
92 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
Ms. Range: Thank you.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-868
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
A PROJECT COOPERATION AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE VIRGINIA KEY, FLORIDA SECTION
III PROJECT, WHICH CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE
NEW TIMBER GROINS, REMOVING AND REPLACING 25 TIMBER
GROINS AND PLACING APPROXIMATELY 8,000 CUBIC YARDS OF
MATERIAL ONTO VIRGINIA KEY BEACHES AND APPROPRIATE
MITIGATION, WITH FUNDING PROVIDED BY THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT UP TO A FEDERAL LIMIT OF $5100000 AS A TOTAL
PROJECT COST AND A ZERO (0%) PERCENT COST TO THE CITY AS
THE NON-FEDERAL SPONSOR UP TO SAID LIMIT AND ONE HUNDRED
(100%) PERCENT OF THE COSTS TO BE SHARED BY THE CITY
THEREAFTER TO INCLUDE COSTS OF BETTERMENTS, MAINTENANCE,
OPERATIONS, EASEMENTS OR RELOCATIONS REQUESTED BY THE
CITY OR OTHER COSTS NOT COVERED UNDER THE AGREEMENT.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez and 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.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would further move acceptance of the next resolution, which also is
$2,500,000 from the federal government to be matched by $877,000 from the Safe
Neighborhood Parks Bond Program, and that money's already been allocated for this.
Ms. Range: That is correct.
93 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Again, no general fund money for this. It's Safe Neighborhood Park
Bond money and federal money, and so move that resolution, as well.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Ms. Range: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-869
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A SPONSORSHIP LETTER, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS FOR THE PROVISION OF A FEDERAL SECTION 1135
ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT FOR PORTIONS OF VIRGINIA
KEY, AND ACKNOWLEDGING THE CITY'S WILLINGNESS TO BECOME
THE NON-FEDERAL PROJECT SPONSOR FOR THIS RESTORATION
PROJECT, WITH AN ESTIMATED FEDERAL PROJECT COST OF
$2,539,625 AND A CITY COST OF $877,675 WITH MATCHING FUNDS
FROM THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND PROGRAM.
(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: Thank you very much.
94 July 25, 2002
Ms. Range: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mrs. Range.
Ms. Range: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Nice seeing you again.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Vice Chairman, before you came in, the Mayor had requested
time. He announced that he is still talking to AT&T (American Telegraph & Telephone), and he
requested, and AT&T agreed, a special Commission meeting on August 22nd. I knew you were
going to say that. I told him. But anyway, Johnny, on that meeting, we need to do several other
things.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's my fear.
Chairman Regalado: Huh? We need to do something about --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm just grumbling to myself.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I knew. I told them, but apparently, somehow August 22nd is a drop
dead, and so it -- we were waiting for you and Commissioner Teele to decide on a time. We
need to do this on the Miami Arena site because we won't be able to do it here. Now, if you're
OK, we'll wait for Commissioner Teele to take a vote on this, a Special Commission meeting.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, if I happen to be away on that date, I will trust, because I know
you all well, that you all will do just a fabulous job at dealing with this issue.
Chairman Regalado: OK. That's a nice way to put it. Let me ask -- because, Johnny, I
remembered that we did several emergency meetings here during the financial crisis and I
remember that Commissioners could attend by phone.
Vice Chairman Winton: I still think you all will do just a fabulous job if I happen to be gone, so
Chairman Regalado: I understand that. I mean -- well, we don't --
Vice Chairman Winton: I have a tremendous amount of faith in you all's ability to get through
this issue.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, I know you do. Yeah, yeah, but just in case --
Vice Chairman Winton: Just in case, right.
95 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- we want to make sure that --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I predicted that we would have one because we haven't had the
month of August off since I got elected. In fact --
Chairman Regalado: You know --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- I think, in the first year I was here, we had --
Chairman Regalado: We haven't had --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- two meetings in August.
Chairman Regalado: We haven't had the -- vacation in the month of -- since I was elected, so --
seven years, so let me -- so the other thing is, Commissioner Winton, we had scheduled the
Regular Commission meeting for September 12th. However, there's no way we can do it on that
day because the county's, as you know, take precedence over the budget, so we have two
alternatives, 9/11 or Friday, the 13th, so you tell me.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the 13th is a -- Friday the 13th.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. It doesn't sound right, huh?
Vice Chairman Winton: That's a lucky day for me. My birthday's on the 13th
Chairman Regalado: Oh, yeah?
Commissioner Sanchez: Friday?
Chairman Regalado: Then you're the only one that doesn't have a problem.
Vice Chairman Winton: My brother's birthday is on the 13 th, my senior son's on the 13 th, my
daughter's on the 13th
Chairman Regalado: Carlos' son's birthday --
Vice Chairman Winton: My office is on the 13th floor.
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): My son was born on Friday the 13th
Chairman Regalado: Hey, more power to you. I mean, you know -- so Friday the 13 is fine by
me. This meeting -- Mr. Manager, you need to call and find out if the Artime is taken that day.
Remember, we were going to do it on the Thursday in -- at the Artime, but usually the Artime
has something going on on Friday.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I'll find out. I'll get back to you as soon as I can.
96 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: If not, we're going to have to do it at the Knight Center or any other venue,
or the Coconut Grove Convention Center.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, on the 13, I'm going to be out of the City on a business
trip.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Carlos, Madam City Attorney.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Got to work for a living.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez is not here on the 13. What day are you here?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Going to be out from the 13, which is --
Chairman Regalado: Friday.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- Friday, until the next Tuesday.
Chairman Regalado: So before.
Mr. Gimenez: The other day that we had was September 11, 9/11.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Gimenez: The county goes on -- has theirs on the 10, and the School Board has theirs on the
12th and they take precedent over ours.
Chairman Regalado: Well, can we do it on the 11 then?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, you can do it on the 11, but that's 9/11.
Chairman Regalado: It's 9/11. There will be several activities in the City of Miami in
remembrance of the 9/11, but I think that, you know, Commissioner Gonzalez has to be present
for the budget process, so if you all agree, we'll do it on September 11.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, and I'll check on the availability of the facility for September 11 and I'll
have it before the end of the day.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving right along.
Chairman Regalado: Johnny --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes„ sir.
97 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- you had one of your items. You want to do it in the afternoon?
Vice Chairman Winton: I think I have time certains on --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, the time certain at 5:00, but I see --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- my two others. There's one at 5:30, as well, right?
Chairman Regalado: OK, so you want to wait?
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm checking here real quickly to see -- to make sure I know what I'm
talking about, not that I check and will know anyhow, but maybe I will. That one's done. Yes,
sir, I'm waiting for the time certain.
20. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO STIPULATION AND AGREED
FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING TEMPORARY EASEMENT RUNNING WITH LAND
INTO DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF NORTHWEST 20TH STREET,
NORTHWEST 11T PLACE, AND NORTHWEST 11T COURT TO ALLOW ENCROACHING
1924 HISTORIC STRUCTURE AT 164 NORTHWEST 20TH STREET TO REMAIN IN
DEDICATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY UNTIL 1924 HISTORIC STRUCTURE IS
DEMOLISHED OR DESTROYED.
Chairman Regalado: Twelve -A is a resolution authorizing the City Attorney to enter into a final
judgment, temporary easement running with the land into the dedicated public right-of-way,
Northwest 20th Street, Northwest 1St Place, Northwest 1St Court, Miami, Florida, to allow the
encroaching 1924 historic structure at 164 Northwest 20th Street, Florida, to remain in the
dedicated pubic right-of-way. Do -- Public Works -- this is a public hearing, as, of course,
requested. Public Works, anything that you have to say?
John Jackson (Director, Public Works) : No, not really, Commissioner. I'm familiar with this.
This is an encroachment of a structure into the right-of-way and it was replatted, which leaves it
in the corner radius in the right-of-way. This is a way for the property owner to clear up the title
in order for the property to be used, so this will be covenant running with the land for the
structure to remain in the right-of-way until such time it's demolished.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's moved and second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
98 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-870
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO A STIPULATION
AND AGREED FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING A TEMPORARY
EASEMENT RUNNING WITH THE LAND INTO THE DEDICATED PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY OF NORTHWEST 20TH STREET, NORTHWEST IST
PLACE, AND NORTHWEST IST COURT, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO ALLOW
THE ENCROACHING 1924 HISTORIC STRUCTURE AT 164 NORTHWEST
20TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO REMAIN IN THE DEDICATED
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY UNTIL THE 1924 HISTORIC STRUCTURE IS
DEMOLISHED OR DESTROYED, AND SUBJECT TO GLOBAL HOLDINGS
INTERNATIONAL, INC. EXECUTING A COVENANT TO RUN WITH THE
LAND, 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: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
21. ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED FORTUNE OF THE CHI.
Chairman Regalado: Item 13 is accepting the plat entitled "Fortune of the Chi."
Commissioner Gonzalez: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: Subdivision in the City of Miami.
Commissioner: Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
99 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gonzalez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-871
ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED FORTUNE OF THE CHI, A
SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE
CONDITIONS OF THE PLAT AND STREET COMMITTEE, AND
ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT;
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE SAID PLAT; 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
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
22. TABLED: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY CODE REPEALING ENTITLED
"FINANCE, PURCHASING AND CONTRACTS GENERALLY" .
Chairman Regalado: We have several four -fifth votes, so -- there's another one here. Items 13A
-- oh, Item 13A has been --
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): It's been deferred.
Chairman Regalado: -- pulled and deferred to September. Item 14 is a second reading.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I think we should wait until Commissioner Teele --
Chairman Regalado: For Commissioner Teele.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- is here on that one.
100 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Of course, of course, of course. I haven't -- second reading is Item 15.
This is the --
Commissioner Gonzalez: This was also proposed by Commissioner Teele, so --
Chairman Regalado: -- purchasing and contracts.
Mr. Gimenez: It's a new procurement ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: Huh?
Mr. Gimenez: This is a new procurement ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Do we have a --
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Vice Chairman Winton. Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. This is a public hearing. It's a second
reading ordnance. Anybody from the public who wishes to address the Commission on this
ordinance?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Mr. Vilarello: As -- if any members of the public are coming forward, there's two policy issues
that I think the Commission has to address with regard to the procurement ordinance. One has to
do with the Cone of Silence and its applicability, and the other one has to do with the
applicability of the procurement ordinance to our independent and related agencies, such as the
DDA (Downtown Development Authority), MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority),
International Trade Board, Bayfront Park, Virginia Key, those agencies which have the
independent authority to spend dollars. As it's written right now, there are -- it applies to all of
those agencies. That is a policy decision of the City Commission. The exception to the agencies
-- it does not apply to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) because of the unique
nature of Chapter 163 and -- the CRAs, Southeast Overtown/Park West CRA and the Omni
CRA, are not written for this ordinance. However, the balance of the agencies, it's applicable
because you make it applicable to them by your decision. The cone of silence issue is, the way
the ordinance is currently written, it deviates slightly from the county's cone of silence. First,
this ordinance opts out of the county's cone of silence and imposes our own cone of silence. Our
cone of silence deviates in two respects. It sets a level at which the cone of silence applies. It
applies in all UDP, Unified Development Projects, and it limits the Commission's and Mayor's
ability to speak with the City Manager -- that's consistent with the county's -- but it allows
vendors to speak wit the elected officials, which is inconsistent with the county's. My
recommendation is that you make it consistent with the county, that is, you limit the conversation
101 July 25, 2002
or communication -- verbal communication, non -written communication by vendors with both
the elected officials and with the Manager and the Manager's professional staff, until such time
as the Manager makes a written recommendation on the award of a bid or the award of a request
for proposal.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, this is a rewrite of the code and although it's been
eloquently represented, there are some questions that need to be -- some information I think
needs to be very clear on the rewrite and that is, you know, the expert consultants, language onto
-- specifically have language to identify who are the experts consultants, and also the other issue
is the code of silence [sic], which basically I don't see a reason why we can't mirror another
government that has it. Maybe the county has it or some other -- huh? I mean, we could just --
Well, if its horrible, we could modify it in a way but it's got to be clear. The language has to be
very clear on the code of silence [sic] because the last thing that you want to be accused of, or
myself or anybody is, you know, violating the code of silence [sic], specifically -- and I know
that it's been very informative now when you have provided us those who use our computers and
our laptop the warning on the -- or the companies that are under the code of silence [sic], which
is good for us to know, because you basically don't know when you bump into somebody in the
street or somebody is going to approach you and ask you on the topic whether it falls under the
code of silence [sic], so I think those two issues have to be clearly addressed -- crystal clear -- so
we, as elected officials, of course, City employees and staff, don't end up getting in trouble
because the code of silence [sic] applies to everyone, not just the City elected officials.
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing Department): Absolutely, it does, and we will continue to --
Chairman Regalado: Your name.
Ms. Carter: Oh, I'm so sorry. Judy Carter, Director of Purchasing. We will continue to ensure
that affected employees or all employees are fully aware of this, which is why we utilize the
computer because we felt that it probably was the best way to get it out on an instant basis. The
other thing we plan to do is to seek the assistance of the Law Department in conducting training,
so that it is very clear exactly what our prohibitions are as it relates to the cone of silence. Now,
as it relates to the contents of the cone of silence, it essentially mirrors Dade County but for such
certain modifications. For example, if you can remember when I made my presentation to you
about our Local Vendor Outreach program -- Do you remember that? -- and part of that program
was to attempt to be more aggressive in outreaching to local vendors to include them in our
process. I've asked that the implementation of that program be exempt from the cone of silence
because I actually dispatched individuals out there to begin to talk about the City of Miami and
how we desire to want to do business with you, and I don't want to have that restriction to be
able to not speak to them in that vain, but basically, in principle, the contents of the cone of
silence mirrors that of Dade County; is that correct, sir?
Mr. Vilarello: The Manager says that I should say yes. I didn't hear the question, though.
102 July 25, 2002
Ms. Carter: Well, what we were -- what I wanted to affirm on the floor was that the contents of
our cone of silence essentially and substantively mirrors that of Dade County.
Mr. Vilarello: Absolutely, with the exception of the one comment I made at the beginning of the
discussion.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Cone of silence, I think we shouldn't -- and recognizing that
government is different than business because, in many ways, we are, but in some ways, we
shouldn't be -- but the cone of silence was created because there was a mess at County Hall in
Purchasing, and the cone of silence is this way overboard new rule that almost doesn't allow you
to have face-to-face -- almost. I think, in most ways, it doesn't allow you to have face-to-face
dialogue and discussion with potential vendors about anything. They can't -- everything has to
be done in writing and it has to be done equally in writing to everybody, so it's an awful process,
as far as I'm concerned, to conduct purchasing in, and the reason it exists is because the county
has a purchasing mess. That's what created the whole cone of silence, and so, I'm not a fan of it
at all, not at all. I'm the Chairman of the Downtown Development Authority. The DDA -- the
property owners within the DDA district pay a special tax, over and above every other tax and
fee and permit and blah, blah, blah, that the City already charges. We pay an extra tax that
supports 100 percent of the operation of the Downtown Development Authority, and I'm really
unenthusiastic about including -- I'm not sure I'm enthusiastic about having the City in the damn
cone of influence, but I'm absolutely not enthusiastic about having the DDA in this cone of
influence because, from a business perspective, it's really lousy business. From a government
safety standpoint, if you will, I guess it does something to keep all the lobbyists out from driving
the whole ball forward in terms of what gets bought and sold, but we don't have those folks
swarming around City Hall; they swarm around County Hall, and I think we've done a good job.
I think we were doing a good job before the cone got put in place. The cone got expanded and
hardened, which is the reason this issue's come back before us. The City Attorney's convinced
me that there's some good reasons for this cone in some arenas where it's worked well, like the
UDD process, which seems to make some sense to me, but I'm not a fan of the overall process
and would almost like to see us back up and revisit this thing and water it down much more, and
I absolutely want to pull the DDA out from it. Now, I said pull the DDA out. The City Attorney
says, "Well, what procurement system do you want?" And I said, I don't know. You know, I
don't know what system there is that we're allowed to substitute if you carve it out, because I
don't know enough about this whole -- you know, what the government rules are relative to
procurement, so I couldn't give him that answer, and you really ought to have an answer, but I
hate to get it in because once you get it in, then you can't get it out, so --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
103 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Just some question. Before you came, well, I think the City
Attorney said that we need to make some policy decisions and that is one. You want to pull the
DDA and Commissioner Sanchez want to pull Bayfront Trust.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, it --
Chairman Regalado: I'm just saying. You know --
Commissioner Sanchez: Listen --
Chairman Regalado: -- it's a policy decision.
Commissioner Sanchez: The beauty of democracy is, we could disagree and agree with each
other. Let me just say that there's a saying that says "Honest people don't need codes."
Dishonest people are the ones that need code but, at the end, they end up violating and breaking
every rule in the book, so you know, it was established for a reason. I don't need people to be
chasing me around talking to me about a procurement process in the City. I don't need it. I
don't want it. It's going to get me in trouble. It'll get you in trouble in the long run because, you
know, yeah, the City today is recuperating and we don't have -- we only have the Gucci
attorneys here when we have big issues coming up, but the City's going to be doing much better
as it goes along and you start seeing major projects in the City -- budget moving up. I mean, I
went to the county a couple of days ago on an issue and, you know, it was incredible how many
lobbyists -- which is fine, lobbying -- I respect lobbyists; been there since day one. They have a
purchase that they do. I have the utmost respect, but it opens up the door for irregularities,
corruption, assumptions, you know. It just the -- I don't know whether you could say you
couldn't have any rules and regulations or you have rules and regulations. I'm just saying that it
could get very, very messy. I don't do procurement. Ms. Carter, you do procurement. You
know, I follow the advice that you give us, and all that I worry about is that we got the best deal
for the City and in the long run, I worry about the local vendors. That's all I have to worry
about. If we didn't have this in place, they wouldn't be chasing you around; they'd be chasing
me around, and they'd be chasing you, Johnny, and every Commissioner up here on an item.
Vice Chairman Winton: And you do the same thing you do now. Tell them, I ain't talking to
you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fine, but at least there's a law --
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean, I don't have any trouble saying it.
Commissioner Sanchez: But there's a law now that says I can't talk to you. It's not that I don't
want to talk to you. It's that I just can't talk to you. Just like the Jenning' s Rule, such as the
sunshine -- these rules are established for a purpose. I hope you understand.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, yeah, I understand. I understand that one body of government
locally couldn't control lobbyists. That doesn't mean that I can't. I don't have a bit of problem
telling anybody that they're not talking to me. I don't have any problem throwing people out of
104 July 25, 2002
my office, so I don't need a new law to tell me who I ought to be able to talk to, and I'm happy
to scoot them all out. We got a processing -- a Purchasing Department. I don't need a law to
hide behind. I'm perfectly capable of looking at them and saying, that's who you need to go talk
to. I don't need a new complicated process that really doesn't allow them to negotiate anything
to un -- to allow the vendor to understand things. This law is designed very specifically for big
corporations that can afford to go through all these very difficult hoops. It is terribly
discouraging to mid-size vendors and for very, very small vendors, which seem to carve out a
role to get those in, which is good, but mid-size vendors that don't have all the resources that
these big corporations have, they're out because they simply don't have the skill sets, the
resources, the drive to put up with these goofy rules that you have to go through to do
procurement. They can't talk to anybody. They have to write them a letter. I can't get a
response in verbally. I have to get a response in writing. That response has to go to everybody
else out there, and it's an awful process, so that's why I'm not a fan.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think it's bad for our local businesses.
Chairman Regalado: What do you want to do? You want to amend this ordinance to get DDA
out or --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I would.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Chairman, I think --
Commissioner Sanchez: But there are two issues.
Mr. Vilarello: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: There are two issues here.
Mr. Vilarello: If the Commission wishes to address the first issue of who it applies to, I guess --
and Commissioner Winton wishes to remove the DDA -- there were several boards that were not
in existence and weren't considered when we first drafted this, and I would suggest that you, at
least, add those to be --
Chairman Regalado: No.
Mr. Vilarello: --- all inclusive.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez doesn't want to do it.
Mr. Vilarello: No, no. This is --
Chairman Regalado: He's the chairman of the Bayfront Trust.
105 July 25, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: The Bayfront Park Trust is in there.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is already in there.
Mr. Vilarello: And I believe Commissioner San -- I'm pretty sure he wants it still in there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, first --
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Sanchez: First of all, we should -- you know, I thought the debate was going to
be a simple debate. This is second reading right now. There's additional debates been put on the
table. I think it would be paramount that we wait for Commissioner Teele to get here because, of
course, he may have some input on this. Well, I'm willing to take it up later, if you want to.
Vice Chairman Winton: And it could be good input.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK and it may be good input on the code of silence [sic]. I just think
it's a double-edged sword, but I think it does more good than bad. Of course, Johnny, you
disagree with me and I respect that, and you know, let's just go ahead and table it for now, wait
till Commissioner Teele gets here.
Vice Chairman Winton: Good idea.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sure he'll have some input, and then we'll vote on it later on.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a 4 p.m. resolution on the CDBG (Community Development
Block Grant), so I was wondering if I could take one of my items -- two of my items on the blue
page, and I think that this will be quick and will get us to the 4 p.m. and then on to the public
hearings and the zoning and the personal appearances.
23. DIRECT MANAGER TO OBTAIN APPRAISALS FOR RUSTY PELICAN PROPERTY,
AND NEGOTIATE WITH OWNERS OF SAID PROPERTY FOR PROPOSED EXTENSION
OF LEASE; DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE REFERENDUM LANGUAGE FOR
EXTENSION OF RUSTY PELICAN LEASE.
Chairman Regalado: Item A is a discussion concerning an extension of the Rusty Pelican lease
agreement, and what we need to do today, if the Commission agree, is just approve a motion
directing the City Manager to continue negotiations with the owners of the Rusty Pelican, obtain
appraisals for the property, and direct the City Attorney to prepare referendum language for an
extension of the Rusty Pelican lease. Now, this will come back to us on the Special Commission
meeting of August 22nd. Everything -- it's either the Manager will recommend that we move
forward, place it on the ballot that he has finalized with benefit to the City the agreement or not,
and then the Commission will decide, so basically, what I'm asking the Commission is to move
forward with the directions to the Manager and the City Attorney and then we will make a
106 July 25, 2002
decision on August 22nd because if we are going to make a decision, it has to be done before
September 5.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right.
Chairman Regalado: So -- Mr. Vice Chairman, could you Chair so I can move this motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I will.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I move motion to direct the City Manager to negotiate with the
owners of the Rusty Pelican, obtain appraisals for the property, direct the City Attorney to
prepare referendum language for an extension of the Rusty Pelican lease, and to have this back
before the City Commission on August 22nd
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Manager, are you OK with that?
Carlos A. Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir, I am.
Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Winton: No problem. I agree, yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, thank you. I think it's very important that we, as
quickly as possible, get that property appraised to see how much it is. I mean, I don't think the
City has done that yet. Also, I think there's some very important issues that we need to have in
writing on this matter. One is, the term, as to exactly what is that they want. We're talking
about just not any property; we're talking about a very precious property to this City. I'm not
going to go back into the history of this City, as we gave away our prime waterfront properties.
We've given them away and, of course, today we're paying for it, so all that I ask the
administration is that we look at, one, the term; what capital improvements will be done to that
property, which I'm sure needs capital improvement; both looking in the aspect of parking
improvements to the area. I visit out there every now and then and the place -- people are
parking outside of that establishment because of the volume of visitors, both to the Rusty Pelican
and that something bone fish restaurant out there. The other thing is revenues to the City. I want
to make sure that we get the best return possible for that property. Now, I know that time is of
an issue on this and we have to approve it by September 5, so I -- you know, I second it for the
purpose of discussion -- September 5. I mean, we have to --
107 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: I thought we were doing that on the 22.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, no, no. This requires an amendment to the City charter.
Chairman Regalado: No. What I said on the motion is that the Manager -- and I asked him that -
- he says that he can do it. It has to be before the Commission on August 22.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right. But this is --
Chairman Regalado: With all the information that you requested. All the information that you
requested is what the Manager --
Commissioner Sanchez: It's fine, but we need to put on the record exactly what we're doing.
People need to know that this is an amendment to the City charter.
Chairman Regalado: And it has to go to the voters.
Commissioner Sanchez: Go out to the voters. That -- and time is of an essence. That's why we
Chairman Regalado: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- have to have it done -- I believe the language was -- only requires
what, 75 letters? Seventy-five words?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seventy-five words the language to be put out for the elections in
November. I just want you to know that.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, it's our intent to --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, but he keeps saying (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Mr. Gimenez: -- answer all your issues, if we come to some kind of an agreement. I mean, all
this does is allows us to negotiate and if we come to an agreement, which I think is beneficial,
I'll submit it to the Commission for consideration and then you can put it on the ballot or not put
it on the ballot.
Chairman Regalado: Right, and that's all we are doing this afternoon. Today, we're not doing
nothing else but to give the Manager and the City Attorney the time and very, very strict
timeframe to do and to answer all these issues, which are the same questions that everyone has
here, so Mr. Chairman, that's my motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second. Do we have further discussion?
Being none, all in favor, "aye."
108 July 25, 2002
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries.
The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-872
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO OBTAIN APPRAISALS
FOR THE RUSTY PELICAN PROPERTY, AND NEGOTIATE WITH THE
OWNERS OF SAID PROPERTY FOR PROPOSED EXTENSION OF LEASE;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
REFERENDUM LANGUAGE FOR EXTENSION OF THE RUSTY PELICAN
LEASE; FURTHER DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO BRING THIS
ISSUE BACK ON AUGUST 22, 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
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
24. APPROVE ALLOCATION OF $25,000, FROM BUDGET OF COCONUT GROVE
SPECIAL EVENTS AND MARKETING COMMITTEE, IN SUPPORT OF SPEED
WEEKEND ON SEPTEMBER 28-29,2002 FOR BANNERS, SIGNS AND PROMOTION.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Oh, I have another item very
quick.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: You all told me to chair the Coconut Grove Special Events and Marketing
Committee. The committee has met twice. It has decided to do a speed weekend on the
weekend of September 28 and 29 in Coconut Grove. The committee has approved a motion to
allocate $25,000 for the expenses of banners, signs, promotion for a speed weekend in Coconut
Grove. We need the approval of the City Commission to use those funds out of the budget of the
Coconut Grove Marketing and Special Events Committee, so my motion is to approve the use of
those funds, which are, I insist, not general funds, not City funds, but they belong to the Coconut
Grove Marketing Committee.
109 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and second. Do we have further discussion? Being
none, all in favor, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries.
The following motion was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-873
A MOTION APPROVING THE ALLOCATION OF $25,000, FROM THE
BUDGET OF THE COCONUT GROVE SPECIAL EVENTS AND
MARKETING COMMITTEE, IN SUPPORT OF SPEED WEEKEND ON
SEPTEMBER 28-29, 2002 FOR BANNERS, SIGNS AND PROMOTION.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, sir. We are now at 4. I don't know. You all
decided that Resolution 8 was going to be heard at 4 p.m. This is CDBG (Community
Development Block Grant) allocation. Did you -- Was he or Commissioner Teele who --
Dan Fernandes (Acting Director, Community Development) : Commissioner -- excuse me. Item
Number 8, Chairman, both Commissioner Teele and Commissioner Winton have a part in that.
It's their district funds.
Chairman Regalado: So we'll wait. OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Can we do four-fifths?
Chairman Regalado: We can't; he's not here.
110 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Whenever Commissioner Winton comes back, we can do it.
Chairman Regalado: How about if he votes no?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Huh?
Chairman Regalado: How about if he votes no? (UNINTELLIGIBLE) four -fifth.
25. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTIONS 22-1,22-2, 2241 22-61 22-71
22-121 22-141 22-151 22-181 22-461 22-471 22-501 22-521 22-531 22-541 22-551 22-561 22-571 22-
871 22-921 AND 22-93 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED "GARBAGE AND OTHER SOLID
WASTE/IN GENERAL/REGULATION OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN COMMERCIAL
WASTE COLLECTION/ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION" TO UPDATE
CERTAIN SECTIONS AND PROVIDE FOR MORE STRINGENT ENFORCEMENT OF
LITTER VIOLATIONS.
Chairman Regalado: OK, let's move on. OK, 16. Can you find out if Commissioner Teele is
coming so we can move on with the full board? Sixteen, Second Reading Ordinance. It's a
public hearing. It's about garbage and other solid waste.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I move 16, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK, we have a motion and a second. This is an ordinance, second reading.
It's a public hearing. Anybody who wishes to address the City Commission can do so. Being
none, OK, close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. OK. Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): The ordinance is approved on second reading.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 22/ARTICLES I, II, AND III, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "GARBAGE AND OTHER
SOLID WASTE/IN GENERAL/REGULATION OF PERSONS ENGAGED IN
COMMERCIAL WASTE COLLECTION/ENFORCEMENT AND
ADMINISTRATION TO UPDATE CERTAIN SECTIONS AND PROVIDE
FOR MORE STRINGENT ENFORCEMENT OF LITTER VIOLATIONS;
MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 22-1,22-2, 2241 22-61
22-71 22-121 22-141 22-151 22-181 22-461 22-471 22-501 22-521 22-531 22-541 22-
551 22-561 22-571 22-871 22-92, and 22-93 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
111 July 25, 2002
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of July 9, 2002, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez,
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
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12258.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
26. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
ENTITLED "CORAL GABLES HOSPITAL/TENET FOUNDATION CONTRIBUTION
FUND (FY 2001-02)" AND APPROPRIATE $2,500, CONSISTING OF GRANT FROM
CORAL GABLES HOSPITAL/TENET SOUTH FLORIDA HEALTHSYSTEM AND TENET
FOUNDATION FOR USE BY DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE TO PURCHASE
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Item 17.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- and second. It's an ordinance, second reading, public hearing. Funds
entitled "Coral Gables Hospital/Tenet Foundation Contribution Fund." It's a public hearing.
Anybody from the public? Being none, we close the public hearing. Read the ordinance. Roll
call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): The ordinance is approved on second reading.
112 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED "CORAL GABLES
HOSPITAL/TENET FOUNDATION CONTRIBUTION FUND (FY 2001-02)"
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,500, CONSISTING
OF A GRANT FROM CORAL GABLES HOSPITAL/TENET SOUTH
FLORIDA HEALTHSYSTEM AND TENET FOUNDATION FOR USE BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -RESCUE TO PURCHASE MEDICAL
EQUIPMENT; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID
GRANT AND 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.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of July 9, 2002, was taken up for its second
and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by
Commissioner Gonzalez, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title,
and was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12259.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
27. SARMIENTO AND BUS BENCHES.
Chairman Regalado: We have many people in the audience, and we need to move. We have
advised Tory Jacobs that he would have time to address the Commission regarding the bus
benches on Brickell. Commissioner Winton is here, I'm told, and he will be here for this
presentation. He's not on the agenda. However, it was my mistake, because I did get a letter
from Tory, and I did respond to him, inviting him. But somehow it wasn't placed on the agenda,
but he was supposed to be here. So, Tory, you are recognized. And the Administration knows
that you're coming in regards to the bus benches.
Tory Jacobs: Thank you very much, Chairman Regalado, and Commissioners. Tory Jacobs, 145
Southeast 25th Road. I'm here representing the Brickell Homeowners' Association, and myself,
113 July 25, 2002
as a resident of the Brickell area. A brief chronology related to the bus benches with advertising.
On January 10th, we were here at City Commission, and a resolution was passed that -- to the
effect that no benches with advertising would be installed without input from the community,
individual neighborhoods, and approval of the Commission, itself. I'm going to pass a copy of
that resolution out, if I may. The following week, the folks from Sarmiento Advertising and
their counsel, Greenberg Traurig, met with our board on the 16th of January, and Frank Rollason
and Tony Wagner, Simon Ferrero, and Alberto Waisman, and assured us that we would have an
opportunity for input on these bus benches. They pointed out there were 1500, of which 900
would have advertising, and 600 would not, and they were permitted individually. And, at that
time, they were wired, not rather than solar power. Subsequently, we never had that meeting that
was indicated by the Sarmiento, nor indicated by the Commission, or demanded by the
Commission before any installations. And then, last month, all of a sudden these bus benches,
with these rather large ads, started to appear on Brickell. They didn't just appear. They
encroached. They encroached on our sidewalks. I want to show you a picture of what it looks
like. Would you pass them out?
Unidentified Speaker: They've already done that.
Mr. Jacobs: Oh, you did that? Oh, OK. Over well of a half of the sidewalk is obscured. These
were put in without consideration for the pedestrians, or the cyclists. You ought to see what it
looks like in the mornings, early mornings, and late afternoon on Brickell, with the joggers, the
dog walkers, the cyclists. These sidewalks are crowded. And these installations show no
consideration for pedestrians, cyclists, or public safety, because sight lines are obscured. So,
there are three points that we would like to make. One, outdoor advertising belongs not in
residential areas, but in commercial areas. Neighbors should have an opportunity to input their
thinking about any street furniture that comes along, whether it's benches, advertising, street
lighting, trash receptacles, phone booths, whatever. Secondly, it is discriminatory for the City to
exempt R-1 and R-2 from these advertising panels, and not R-3 and R-4. It's just another
example of how we are -- we, who live in condominiums, are discriminated against in consider --
compared to consideration given to single-family homeowners. We all live in residential areas.
We go in condos up. Single-family, horizontal. We both pay taxes. Perhaps, the most grievous,
the most serious, is the breach of faith. We've been told by the City that no benches until these
other things were done, and then these benches came, and they came with little or no
consideration for our public. So, we ask of you to, one, order the removal of these advertising
panels in the Brickell area, and we respectfully request that the bus sign or these advertisements
be prohibited in residential areas and remain in commercial areas. I thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. You're welcome. And I -- we have a very packed
agenda, but -- is it long? Go ahead. You want to address -- go ahead. Go ahead. We're ready.
You're on.
Mac Seligman: My name is Mac Seligman. I live at 2451 Brickell Avenue. That's the Brickell
townhouse. I serve on the Board of Directors of the Brickell Homeowners' Association, and I
Chair the Security Committee. In the past couple of months, I've had more complaints from
people on the subject of these advertising panels blocking the sidewalk on Brickell Avenue.
There were two of them put up, which were egregious examples of blocking the sidewalk. One
114 July 25, 2002
was in front of the UTD Building, and the other at the corner of 25th, our entrance. The
advertising panel, in both cases, was horizontal to the sidewalk, blocking movement for people
who are walking or riding bicycles or roller skating or, indeed, in wheelchairs. Last week the
panel in front of the UTD was taken down and has been put up again at a slightly more favorable
angle. The one in front of the Brickell townhouse entrance is still the way it was, blocking the
sidewalk. This is an egregious example of overdo. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. You know, this -- we're not going to let anybody
else talk, because we accommodated Tory, because he had an issue. I think that he has said what
needs to be said. I have all the information. I agree with him a hundred percent. I don't think
that we should let this in residential, but that's up to the City Commission. I distinctly remember
that we discussed this and we said, "In certain neighborhoods, you have to go to the residents and
discuss the plans, and decide whatever you decide with the neighbors." So, Commissioner
Winton is the area Commissioner. But I do agree that this should not be in a residential area.
I've seen it on 27th Avenue, near my home, one block, but it's fine because 27th Avenue is a
commercial. Coral Way is also a commercial. There's one -- maybe one or two. Now, they are
building two condos. But I think that near residential, this advertising should not be placed. For
one reason, you have people, especially residents that walk around or jog or skate or use
bicycles, and this is very dangerous for these people. They have to go out of their way on the
swale and maybe on the street, and then go back. And I think that someday there's going to be an
accident, and, you know, hopefully, we will be proactive in this and not let this happen. But
that's my comment on that. Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. I was sitting here having a major debate with the City Attorney in
terms of what the motion did and didn't do, and we don't -- and, in fairness to him, he didn't get
any notice on this issue, so he's not prepared to render a clear opinion. We are arguing over what
was said and wasn't said, and how that motion was supposed to have ended. But I will tell you
that we've all had this discussion many times. Significant revenue, in support of all the
neighborhoods, is generated out of downtown and Brickell and Upper Eastside, and there's -- not
nearly enough money goes back into improving infrastructure. And every time we turn around
and decide there's going to be some new fee, it goes back into the business community again.
And then we get this. And this picture, as you just said, Commissioner Regalado, says a
thousand words. We've got a beautiful wide sidewalk. Now, we're moving citywide to try to
create wide sidewalks that are pedestrian -friendly, so the people can roller blade, they can run,
they can walk, they can do whatever they want, but they can use the sidewalks. And what we do
here, for a few extra dollars for the City, is we put up an ugly, ugly advertising panel and we
block the sidewalk, and I just don't get it. And I know -- and maybe it will turn out that the
resolution that I screwed up some way or another and didn't make the resolution clear enough,
but I can tell you my intent was crystal clear that day, and I think all of you heard me. And that
was, that the Manager was going to meet with Sarmiento and the neighbors in these
neighborhoods, before a single one of these damn things went up, and get some agreement in
terms of what we're putting up and where. And you don't know how many calls I've gotten from
my area with people ticked beyond belief at these things, and that includes the core of
downtown, which is only business. We don't have any residentials down there. But in the core
of downtown, we have sidewalks that are this wide, not great big wide sidewalks. There's not
enough room for people to walk on them now, and then they're going to be blocked.
115 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: They've got to meet the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act).
Vice Chairman Winton: And more -- oh, I don't know how they meet -- and this -- I mean, it's
just -- it's awful. It's degrading to our City. It looks awful. And we've got these new phone
booths all over the place downtown. Now we're getting new advertising all over the place
downtown. We might as well just erect a banner on all of our sidewalks in the downtown area
and let people sell. Then we could make some real money, because it's going to be ugly. And if
we're going to make it ugly, we might as well make it real ugly and get more money. And, so, I
don't know how we're going to solve this resolution problem. I just can tell you that I remember
what my point was.
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, I remember that we mentioned several areas. Now, I distinctly
remember that we mentioned Coconut Grove, the Upper Eastside, and I really believe that we
mentioned Brickell as an example, not to exclude any -- but it was mentioned during the debate.
Whether or not it was in the resolution, I don't know. But I think, you know, this has to be
citywide. And commercial in downtown, well, you know, that's an issue for the DDA
(Downtown Development Authority). But I think that we should protect the residential areas of
the City, and try to do something in terms of this issue that we have in Brickell, and that it may
come up in other areas. Because if, like tomorrow, we have the grand opening of the new
condos in Coral Way and 35th. You know, it's beautiful, grandiose. And then, you know, we
have at the entrance of one of those, it's going to be an issue. But it's going to be an issue that is
going to come back to us some time in the next six months. We might as well resolve this
residential situation and, you know -- I think that the City Attorney and the Manager can solve.
But, to me, it is wise to tell the people that are doing the street furniture, you know, "Just hold on
on the installation. Why don't you start meeting and start -- instead of taking down all the new
ones that you plan to place, why don't you meet with the Manager and the City Attorney and
decide what to do?" We have a representative from Sarmiento here. If they want to --
Vice Chairman Winton: And, by the way, Mr. Chairman, the DDA passed a resolution at the last
board meeting, that's coming our way, to the Commission, asking for a moratorium on the
establishment of any more bus benches, telephone booths, and something else that has
advertising on it, until we can develop a coordinated comprehensive policy for dealing with these
things, as a whole, as they begin to flood into the neighborhoods. So, just so you know, that's
coming our way.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Manager, you want to say something or you want the Sarmiento
people --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I do. Mr. Chairman --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): The only thing --
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner.
Mr. Gimenez: The only comment that I would make is that there have been no bus benches
116 July 25, 2002
installed in Coconut Grove, nothing in the Upper Eastside, because that is what we thought were
the two areas that were excluded. Now, if Brickell is now, you know, included -- I mean, I have
no problem following whatever direction you give me. If you say you want Brickell out, I'm
sure the City Attorney can give you some language to resolve this issue. I will go back to the
Sarmiento Company and say, "Look, Brickell is out until we come with some kind of a
resolution in Brickell." It certainly is not our intent to impose these things on those areas that are
not wanted. They were meant to be on the commercial corridors. I still think they look a lot
better than the things we had in the past, and that's the way it was sold; that this is what we had
in the past and this is what it could look like. And I, to this day, believe they look a lot better
than what we had. The problem is, some of the old ones are still hanging around. We need to
get rid of all those, OK. Because the new bus bench looks a lot better than what we had in the
past.
Vice Chairman Winton: Actually -- and this is what I will disagree with in that regard. The new
bus bench, itself, looks better than the old bus bench, but the combined element here does not
look better than the old one, because the old one, at least, was low to the ground, shoved up
against something, and had some degree of invisibility. This is a wave -it -in your flace (sic) --
flace. Can't even speak English today. Wave -it -in -your -face, big giant billboard blocking
intersections, view corridors, and sidewalks. I mean, this is worse. And I remember the
Manager saying, at one point, that if he had to -- that he had told Sarmiento that if the economics
of this thing didn't work, because we had too many exclusions, that he would be willing to
reopen the negotiations.
He said that at a Commission meeting. And, so -- and I'm not opposed to that, because this
shouldn't be just about a revenue -producer for the City. This is about what our City will look
like and the quality of life in our City. And, so, this shouldn't be a -- it's OK with me if it
produces some revenue, but it cannot produce revenue at the expense of degrading our
neighborhoods. That doesn't make any sense to me. So, I'm all in favor of him, if he has to --
because we have to have too many exclusions for the advertising panel -- to modify the contract.
Mr. Gimenez: And I said that I would be willing to do that so that, you know, everybody is -- I
mean, you can't please everybody. But so that -- you know, it's something that you all, as a
Commission and the citizens, can live with. I'll be happy to go back and modify the contract. If
it's less revenue, it's less revenue. The intent was never so much the revenue, as it was the look.
It's a different look. And the bus benches that we had are horrible, and this is a much better -- in
my -- in my opinion, still a better looking bus bench. But, again, that's just one person's opinion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. So --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I wasn't here when this started. I don't want to weigh in on it, except for
one thing. I don't know how many people in here ride the bus, but I get tired of hearing the
117 July 25, 2002
debate between the aesthetics versus the dollars. There's a three-part issue here. There are
people in this City who rely upon the bus the way we rely upon cars. And the bus benches are
not for the dollars of the City or for the aesthetics of the community. The bus benches are for the
transit -dependent, the people who don't have the lobbyists, the people who don't have the
Homeowners' Association, the people who don't get their salaries paid for. They're for the
people who -- we keep talking about welfare -to -work. We keep talking about this is the poorest
City in the nation. Well, guess what, folks? If this is the poorest City in the nation, as the U.S.
Census continues to suggest, some of us up here ought to not be so concerned about the
aesthetics or, for that matter, even the dollars. But we really ought to be concerned about
ensuring that the transit -dependent, the people who need bus transportation, have adequate buses,
bus shelters and bus benches. And if we can recover the costs of those bus benches, if we can
make it better for the neighborhoods, if we can make it better for our budgets, that's all well and
good. But, Mr. Manager, I have to continue to say, every time I hear the debate becoming one of
the two, there's a third issue here that's bigger than the other two combined, and that is the
transit -dependent.
Vice Chairman Winton: Except the debate isn't what you just described it as, because the people
in my district are not complaining about the bus bench. That's not the complaint, Commissioner
Teele. The complaint is about this panel of advertising. It isn't the bus bench.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But that is -- but, Johnny, you know what? We can -- it's real
simple. We don't need any advertising on bus benches, if we're prepared to write a check and
pay for it.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's absolutely correct.
Commissioner Teele: And let's don't let the tail -- I mean, we obviously have a contract, but at
the end of the contract, we don't -- you know -- and I keep saying that. If we -- Aventura, if I'm
correct -- and I believe Aventura made a conscious decision. They don't want signs. They're
writing checks all over the place. Their bus benches cost three times what these bus benches
cost. They look good. They're a part of the aesthetics of the City. But, you know, you can't do
this on the cheek. You either are going to have to have bus benches that have signage to pay for
the costs or we're going to have to provide for the bus benches. But I do think, Commissioner
Winton, that it is very, very important that we not abrogate our responsibility to the transit -
dependent, the people who really use these bus benches. Because -- I mean -- you know, I start
asking questions about, "Well, why are the bus benches of this color and material, you know?"
And more and more -- and I'm hearing the City, you know, they gave certain suggestions. And I
said, "Well, why don't -- did anybody talk to the transit professionals, the association in
Washington?" You know, we become experts on everything overnight. But the fact of the
matter is, we need to be concerned about the people who are sitting on those bus benches, as
well. And I really don't want this to be an issue. I just think that it's important that we consider
the transit -dependent in our thinking. And we do need bus benches, and we do need to have bus
118 July 25, 2002
benches that are available to the public, and advertising is the proven nationwide way of
providing bus benches at no cost to the taxpayers, at no cost to the taxpayers.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Manager, what can we expect? Why don't you --
Mr. Gimenez: I'm guided by ordinance and resolutions. I guess the City Manager will have to
advise you as to how to --
Chairman Regalado: City Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: City Attorney.
Mr. Gimenez: City Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: The contract does provide the Manager a great level of discretion. Certainly, my
review of the transcript indicated to me that only the Grove and the Upper Eastside were
excluded from placement of any bus benches, until further resolution of the City Commission.
Commissioner Winton has clearly indicated that that did not carry forward his intent, which was
to include Brickell in that same scenario. We can certainly look at it and review the contract
with the Manager and with Sarmiento to see if we can accommodate the placement of benches in
the Brickell area, based upon the input from the community and further resolution of the City
Commission.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm going to tell you this. And, you know -- because I've watched
this. I've said nothing. But, you know, I'll be damned if this City should put all of the bus
benches -- first of all, the bus benches were deployed on Biscayne Boulevard and Brickell, ahead
of everywhere else. And whether that was Sarmiento's decision or not -- but you know what?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, it wasn't ours, that's for sure.
Commissioner Teele: It certainly wasn't our decision, because I would have put them where
Super 7 runs, down 7th Avenue, Northwest 7th Avenue. I would put it where the transit -
dependent population --
Chairman Regalado: Exactly.
Commissioner Teele: -- is in need of it. Northwest 2nd. Now, I will admit, Brickell has got to
be a big destination, where a lot of these people that are doing domestic work and doing other
work and housekeeping, they've got to go, you know. And I have no objections to bus benches
being put on Brickell or Biscayne Boulevard or anywhere else. But you know what? I'd be very
interested, Mr. Sarmiento, if you all would share with us a map of where you all have deployed
these bus benches, at least by district, because I've got to tell you something. I don't see them in
my district. And unlike what we're talking about now, the people in my community would
welcome the bus benches, with or without the advertising.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman?
119 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: But they're not there.
Chairman Regalado: One of the --
Commissioner Teele: But they're not there.
Chairman Regalado: One of the things, Mr. Manager, you need to provide the members of the
Commission, a map of the placement. I know, I know, I know that in the area that I represent --
you know, it's funny, because it's the same scenario of what Commissioner Teele is saying, and -
- For instance, Coral Way and 27th Avenue, which is part of the district that I represent, has a
new bus bench with an advertising, and it's a few people there that you've seen on the bus.
However, in Flagler and 27th Avenue, which is West Little Havana, that's where the old bus
bench is, and where you see 10, 20, 30 people waiting on the bus stop for the bus. So, it's a
matter of, you know, poor area generating more passengers, but probably that's the kind of
market that they are not interested in reaching, because these are the people who have, you
know, low buying power, and they need to reach, you know, the Brickell people and the
downtown, and the upper class, which is fine. I understand that. That's the whole thing about
marketing. But there is a disparity here and, so, you need to give the members of the
Commission --
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. I do -- I also have certain concerns with the bus benches. As
Commissioner Teele said, in my district I haven't seen, especially -- specifically, in the
Allapattah area, I haven't seen one bench installed yet. And, believe me, a lot of the people in
Allapattah, they ride buses because they depend on buses to go to work. When we first
discussed the bus benches, we were shown a model of a bus bench that we agreed to, or at least, I
had -- I said that I didn't had any problem on having that model bus bench in my district. Later
on I saw all these new models of benches made of iron, and I said, "I wonder what is going to
happen when someone sit in one of these benches at twelve noon with the heat." Then I was told
that they were going to apply a special paint that will make the benches not that hot, but it was
inconceivable because the other one was going to be made out of wood. The seating and the
backing of the benches were going to be wood. Now, they're all metal. Apparently, they haven't
-- they have satisfied that problem. I sympathize with Mr. Jacobs, because I believe that it is
very unfortunate and very disappointing to have people trying to impose on you and in your
community their desires. So, I do sympathize with you. But I do have another concern that I
want to -- you know, in all fairness to Mr. Sarmiento. Mr. Sarmiento has a contract with the
City, that he's supposed to install certain amount of benches during a certain period of time, and
I'm -- you know, one thing that I want to make sure that the Brickell people are happy with it --
whichever bench they decide to accept, same as the Grove and Upper Eastside -- but I want to
make sure that, if we interrupt their installation of the benches, that we take into account that, if
they cannot comply with the contract, it's because we up here stopped them, you know, on the
installation until we make another decision. So, you know, what I don't want to see is that, two
120 July 25, 2002
months from now, we say, "Let's cancel the contract because they never comply and they never
install the benches." So, you know, it has to work both ways. So --
Mr. Gimenez: We're working in good faith with the company. And they're not installing as fast
as they would like to, because we're actually -- you know, we're concerned about design, the size
of the panel, and all. We've gone back and forth with them on a number of issues on that. In
terms of the wooden benches, we wanted the wooden benches. They constructed 200. They will
be located in one district. It will be in your district, I believe, most of it. But just -- we just
wanted to keep it in a geographical area, because we wanted to keep a consistent look, you know,
throughout the City. Once we agree on the area, then they'll start to put those benches mostly in
your area, Commissioner Gonzalez, because you said that you would like to have those benches
in your area.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes. And as Mr. Teele says -- Commissioner Teele says, I don't have
any problem in my district with the benches or the advertisement or anything, but I sympathize
with Mr. Jacobs and the Brickell residents, and the Grove residents, and I believe that Mr.
Sarmiento has to finally sit down with those communities and decide what is it that they want
and try to please them, so everybody in the City will be satisfied with the benches. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : OK. OK.
Commissioner Teele: I just want to get clarification. What are these 100 benches that we agreed
on, would go into one district?
Mr. Gimenez: Sarmiento apparently had manufactured 200 of the wooden benches, and the
design -- from the Planning Department, it was felt that the same benches would look better
throughout the City. So, they came up with the metal benches throughout the City.
Commissioner Teele: But, see, metal benches -- I mean, with all due respect to the Planning
Department, with all due respect to the Planning Department, metal benches are not what people
want to sit on, OK. They hold the heat. They will -- I mean, you literally -- it's like putting an
egg on a skillet, if you're out there in the hot sun. And these benches don't have covers on them.
Metal benches may sound good, but I'm going to tell you. If you go to transit city after transit
city in this country, nobody wants metal benches. They may look good. They don't -- you
know, they have a longer life cycle. They may -- they don't peel. But they hold heat. And
Miami -- I mean, if this were in Minneapolis or -- you know, this is Miami.
Mr. Gimenez: Then it would be cold.
Vice Chairman Winton: They'd hold cold.
Mr. Gimenez: They'd be cold, then.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's late.
121 July 25, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, that was the -- you know, that design was put throughout the City.
That was the design through -- community groups, too, said that that's the design that most of
them wanted. So, it was felt it was best to have --
Commissioner Teele: How many transit -dependent people served on those advisory boards?
Mr. Gimenez: These were -- these went through different community meetings.
Commissioner Teele: I understand that, but --
Mr. Gimenez: I don't know how many people that actually --
Commissioner Teele: May I inquire of the Sarmiento representative?
Kenneth Newman: May I --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. No, no. I want to inquire one thing of Sarmiento
representative. Where do you all have metal benches? Where do you all have benches now, in
what Mayor cities in South America?
Alberto Waisman: Metal benches?
Commissioner Teele: No. In what major cities in South America do you all have your benches?
Mr. Waisman: We have other kind of street furniture, not bus benches. We have shelters and
many other pieces of street furniture, but not bus -- this is the first time we installed bus benches.
Commissioner Teele: Do you have bus shelters?
Mr. Waisman: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: So, this is your first bus bench?
Mr. Waisman: Right.
Commissioner Teele: May I just hear from the gentleman who wanted to say something?
Mr. Newman: Commissioners, I'm all -- I'm very concerned, from an ADA standpoint --
Chairman Regalado: Your name. Name, name, name.
Mr. Newman: Oh. Kenneth Newman, 1030 Southwest 1st Avenue, Miami. I was very
concerned, from an ADA standpoint, a blind person walking right into one of these things.
There's no -- their cane can go right under the sign and smack their head right into it. Baby
strollers, people in wheelchairs, cannot get around them. The installation of these things has
122 July 25, 2002
been a nightmare and is a hazard to the public. And they need to be put parallel to the sidewalk,
not perpendicular. And then, of course, the iron. You want to sit on that? You're going to
Friday your rear end. That's the bottom line on it. There's got to be a change.
Commissioner Teele: Well, why is -- I still want to know -- Angel Gonzalez is going to get
wooden bus benches for his district, right?
Mr. Gimenez: Fortunately, his district will get the 200 that were already previously
manufactured.
Commissioner Teele: Now, what Commission meeting was that decided in?
Commissioner Gonzalez: That was the first design of benches that they presented to us. And
supposedly, those were the benches that --
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But when did the Commission decide on that? I mean, was that
something the Manager decided on?
Chairman Regalado : It wasn't --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I don't know. I -- when they made the presentation and everybody
was arguing, "I don't want benches, I don't want to pay taxes" --
Chairman Regalado : Can I clarify something? Can I clarify something?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I don't have a problem with what --
Commissioner Gonzalez: You and I were the ones that said, "We're ready. We're ready for them,
you know, tomorrow." I mean.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I thought you and I both agreed on it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yep.
Commissioner Teele: Our districts are very much parallel.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Commissioner Teele: And, you know, I'm really getting confused now about what your district
is and what my district is. Does that mean the area now where the Camillus House was going to
be is going to get them? Is that in your district or is that in my district?
Commissioner Sanchez: You'll be able to (inaudible) by the different (inaudible).
123 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Both of us. I'll fight for your benches.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no. I mean, I'm being -- no, no. I'm being very seriously.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No.
Commissioner Teele: Because, see, I'm going to be very honest with you. If the management of
this City is going to -- Mr. Manager, let me be very open. I would appreciate, as I have said in
every meeting -- you know, we sit here and we talk about bus benches. I don't know how long
this has been going on. But the only person that talks about transit -dependent, if you check the
record, is me. Everybody talks about aesthetics. Everybody talks about money. I'm concerned
about my district and my district not having bus benches. And I'm going to be very honest with
you. I want, today, before we leave here, I want to see how many bus benches are being
deployed, district by district, because I'm going to be very honest with you. If my district is not
getting the bus benches, there's going to be hell to pay around here. Because I have said it -- at
every meeting, I've said, "I welcome you to take Northwest 2nd Avenue, between 36th Street and
79th Street, where there are no bus benches at all." You can see people all over the Haitian
community standing there in the rain, in many cases, in the weeds, because there's swale area,
and the trash. No bus benches. Northwest 7th Avenue. I said that the last time we met. You
know, now we've got to, you know, hear from Brickell and we've got to hear from Upper
Eastside and we've got to hear from Morningside, and my district, Buena Vista, and all of that.
But, you know, the fact of the matter is, I want the people that I represent to have bus benches.
And let's don't let the tail wag the dog. This is not about advertising and it's not about aesthetics.
This is about transit -dependent. And if I'm hearing now, for the first time, that one district is
going to get 100 wooden bus benches, and I'm going to get metal bus benches, which is worst
damn thing I've heard to date about the bus benches, as someone who has served as the nation's
undersecretary, in charge of public transportation for the nation, confirmed by the Senate, thank
you very much, and I'm going to be treated on the back end of this thing, with what I consider to
be an inferior bus bench -- because I don't want metal bus benches in my district. But I'm not
here to argue about bus benches, metal, whatever the City has. But if now I'm finding out
there's going to be one group of citizens that have wooden and one group that have metal, and
then we're going to find out that, at the end of the day, certain areas that are very transit -
dependent are not getting them -- because I drive around. I don't see the bus benches in my
district. So -- I mean, you know, I have a big district, like everyone else does, but I just need to
know that on Northeast 2nd, Northwest 2nd, Northwest 7th Avenue -- you know, and this is
about where the buses run. This is not about where Commissioners want them, you know.
Northwest 17th, you know, the areas there, I want to know that some bus benches have been
deployed there, Frank Rollason. Is that what you're going to tell me?
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): What I'm going to -- Frank Rollason, Assistant City
Manager. Mr. Jackson is going to get us a -- he's getting back with staff right now to get a
mapping of where they are at this point.
Commissioner Teele: Who made the decision -- Sarmiento made the recommendation as to
where they're going to be or the City?
124 July 25, 2002
Mr. Rollason: Sarmiento has come forward with their permits, as they've been allowed in the
areas to go, that have not had the restrictions, and said "These are the areas that we're going to
place them.". They have placed many that don't have advertising. Their contract calls for 900
with advertising, 600 without --
Commissioner Teele: Frank, my question is real simple, before we get --
Mr. Rollason: They have, Sarmiento. We have not told them where to put them first.
Commissioner Teele: So, Sarmiento? Sarmiento was the representative? What part of this
discussion that we've had three times, where I have said repeatedly, "I want you to put bus
benches in my district," did you not hear or did you not understand?
Mr. Waisman: When you asked for -- to place the benches in your district, I personally was not
here, but you --
Commissioner Teele: Well, that gentleman was here.
Mr. Waisman: Yes. But I was told that you asked many times of that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, why isn't that a -- where aren't you all pulling permits? The City's
saying that they're accommodating where you all are pulling permits.
Mr. Waisman: I'm sorry. I didn't understand you.
Chairman Regalado : Look.
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to tell y'all something. You know, it's pretty clear to me, we're
getting back to the old City of Miami days, you know. And let me tell you, if we get back to the
old City of Miami days, where there's two systems of City government around here, you're going
to have a Commissioner who's not going to play by the new rules, but play by the old rules, too,
Mr. Manager. Now, two of us can play by the old rules, OK, and I'm not going to let you all --
I'm not going to let you, sir, or your staff, sir, with all due respect to Public Works, Frank
Rollason, and everybody involved -- because I'm going to get to the bottom of this. Because
you're not going to put 100 bus benches -- and I'm the one up here talking about bus benches.
I'm the one saying get them out there for the transit -dependent. I've got one of the poorest
districts -- based on CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funding, I have the poorest
of the poor.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, in terms of those 200 wooden benches -- and I'll give you the
reasons why it was my decision to put them in one area, is if you put these 200 benches and
started scattering them all over the City, then you'll have a hodgepodge of different looks. So --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, let me just be very clear with you.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
125 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: The last time I checked, I represent District 3, contrary to all the bullshit
that I've heard about -- District 5, contrary to all the stuff that I've heard about the Camillus
House and who represents the area, where it was proposed. It's my district. It's not Allapattah.
It may be served by the Allapattah NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team), but it's my district.
Now, if, all of a sudden, 7th Avenue is a part of Allapattah, then why is that all over the City? I
don't get it.
Mr. Gimenez: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I don't get it. I mean, those two areas have contiguous parts, admittedly.
Mr. Gimenez: Sir. Sir, what I --
Commissioner Teele: I have contiguous parts with Commissioner Winton, admittedly, but I
would think, rather -- I would think you would look at this a little bit differently, because these
are communities that are communities of interest, and not purely by district lines. And, again,
the areas that are poorest -- just pull your CDBG public service allocation of dollars, because it's
based on the calculations of poverty in this City. I have the poorest -- net poorest district in the
City. Commissioner Winton's district represents about 50 percent of all of the ad -valorem taxes
in the entire district -- City.
Chairman Regalado: Fifty-six.
Commissioner Teele: Fifty-six percent of all of the ad -valorem taxes are paid in the district that
Commissioner Winton is privileged to represent, which includes, of course, the Brickell area and
the Grove and downtown and other areas, and that's, unfortunately, the way the City Commission
drew the boundaries. As opposed to drawing them to some extent east/west, they drew them to
a great extent north/south, but that's neither here nor there. All I want to be very clear with you,
Mr. Manager, on is this, I have been the one person, of five people on this Commission, that has
continued to inject into the debates, going all the way back to January, the need to provide bus
benches for the transit -dependent, for a reason. I have a very large population that is involved in
welfare -to -work, trying to get people off of welfare, trying to get them to work. The number one
and number two impediment to moving people from welfare -to -work is mobility and
transportation, OK. This is not about bus benches for me. But there is a very much -- a different
issue that is continuing to raise its ugly head, that I have seen more and more, that I have seen for
the first time, and that is this: These districts have got to be respected, and you can't be the
district Commissioner or the district one day and then the next day, when it comes to bus
benches, you know -- if you're going to put all the bus benches in Commissioner Gonzalez'
district -- and I'm not trying to change that. If you made that commitment, fine. But I would
assume that, if 7th Avenue was his district for the Camillus House, then 7th Avenue is also going
to be a part of the district for bus benches.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And it is going to be.
Commissioner Teele: Because 7th Avenue is where the vast majority of the transit -dependent
use the 77. That's one of the main ways to come into this City, all the way from Carol City, Opa-
126 July 25, 2002
Locka. And, so --
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, maybe I didn't explain myself correctly.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Sanchez: Listen. Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Just a minute.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- we spent an hour --
Commissioner Gonzalez: May I, please.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but hold on.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because for some --
Commissioner Sanchez: Can I just -- and I'll yield for you for a minute. We spent an hour on an
item that is not even on the agenda. If you want to discuss benches, it should have been on the
agenda. We could just, you know, from 9:00 in the morning until 2 o'clock in the morning, if
you wanted. But, you know, we're banging our heads here on an item that's not even on the
agenda.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK.
Commissioner Teele: The order of the day.
Commissioner Gonzalez: May I?
Chairman Regalado: The order of the day was that -- I explained that it was my mistake,
because Mr. Jacobs did request a presentation before the City Commission. And we
communicated, and I told him that he was invited. And by mistake, it was not placed officially
on the agenda. But I made a commitment with him, and I try to get -- you know, to keep that
commitment. So, other than that, it is a very important issue, and I -- you know, Mr. Manager, if
-- we have several groups of people here that are in here, we can -- since this is an issue that we
can discuss among us, we can come back later on, but I would rather take the people in the
audience first, and then deal with that later on. When you bring the mapping, you can give us
your views on that.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Is that OK?
Mr. Jacobs: May I --
127 July 25, 2002
Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No.
Chairman Regalado: Please. No.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I need to --
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Go ahead, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I need to say a few words, because Commissioner Teele came into --
in an attack to me.
Chairman Regalado: He didn't attack you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, he did. He did. He attacked me, publicly, because of a simple
bus bench. Because he was not allowed by the community to put Camillus House in 7th Avenue,
and that I believe. I believe that is very unfair, that he project himself against me, because
Camillus House is not on 7th Avenue. The reason that these bus benches, whatever bus benches
are, frame or whatever -- and, specifically, the wood benches are going to go into the Allapattah
area. And I don't have a problem if they want to split them with you. If they want to give 50
and 50, I have no problem with that, because you and I were the ones that, when everybody was
fighting about the models of benches, we said, whatever it is, but something for people to sit on
to wait for the bus. You and I said it. We want bus benches so people can sit down and wait for
the bus to go to work. Because I remember the words. You say, "The people in my district get
up at five o'clock in the morning to wait for the bus to go to work," and I said exactly the same
thing happens with the people in my district. So, I don't care if it is wood. I don't care if it has
the panel, if it has ten panels, whatever. What I want is benches. And I specifically said, and in
some areas, I would like to see shelters, because I have a lot of senior citizens in my district that
cannot be sitting in a bus bench waiting for a bus for two hours under the sun or under the rain.
So, those were the arguments. Now, how they're going to split them? I don't have one bench in
my district yet. How they're going to split it? They are the ones that are installing the benches.
All I said is, I'm ready for my new benches in my district. Whenever they want to do it, I'm
ready. I don't have an objection to a sign. I don't have an objection to the color. I don't have an
objection -- and my people don't have an objection to anything, as far as the type of benches, the
colors of the advertisement. All my community want is benches, so they can sit and wait for the
bus. Because, unfortunately, unfortunately -- and we're talking about -- we're creating some type
of divisionism here of "if this district produces 56 percent of the money, and that one produces
two percent, and the other one five percent." Well, if we were all rich, if we were all rich, we
would all been lucky. That's why we have some people that are millionaires, and we have other
people that have to go to work. If everybody were a millionaire, we would all be sitting at the
beach fishing, and maybe we will not be sitting here discussing problems. So, that's -- you
know, lucky for the district that is -- that has all the millionaires in the City of Miami.
Unfortunately, I have a district that all I have is poor people, as you do, Commissioner Teele,
and you, Commissioner Sanchez, and you, Commissioner Regalado. It's unfortunate.
128 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you. We're going to have the map --
Mr. Jacobs: I have a question. No comments.
Chairman Regalado: No, please. No, please. No, sir. No, sir. We're going to wait -- we're
going to close this issue here. We're going to get the mapping in a few minutes or an hour, but
we -- Tory, we are going to continue with the agenda. We have personal appearances, and we
will come back to this item tonight, sometime.
28. PERSONAL APPEARANCE BY MR. JOSE MILTON TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSAL
FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO ANTONIO MACEO PARK, AT HIS
EXPENSE, IN EXCHANGE FOR ACCESS THROUGH THE PARK TO HIS RESIDENTIAL
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED ON BLUE LAGOON LAKE ADJACENT TO THE
PARK.
Chairman Regalado: We are going to continue with the agenda. We have personal appearances,
and we will come back to this item tonight, some time. We have a personal appearance, Mr. Jose
Milton, to discuss the proposal for infrastructure improvement to Antonio Maceo Park, at his
expense, in exchange for access through the park to his residential condominium project, located
on Blue Lagoon Lake, adjacent to the park. This is a personal appearance requested to the
Administration, and we have his representative. Go ahead, sir. Your name and address.
Stanley Price: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Stanley
Price. I'm with the law firm of Bills and Somberg. I'm privileged in representing Mr. Jose
Milton, who's the developer of the Blue Lagoon Airport Club Apartments, which is directly
adjacent to the park. Well over a year ago, we communicated with the City Administration in
regard to the negotiation for an easement, and to improve the park by making several physical
improvements, including a 3500 square foot recreation center, as well as providing a security for
the park through the construction of a gate house and guard house that would provide 24 -hour -a -
day supervision of a park, which, right now, does not receive that from the City. We would
respectfully ask your permission to enter into negotiations for a leasehold and construction
agreement with the City to proceed with these plans, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Can you explain, briefly, the plans and the costs of this project? I think
you must have portable -- where's the portable mike here? Why don't you use the portable mike
and explain to --
Mr. Price: Yes. Once again, what we're proposing is a dual entranceway with the construction of
a guard house, which will also have the ability to view the entire park, which, right now, does not
have any type of supervision, especially in the evening hours. We are also suggesting building a
3500 square foot recreation center, with additional parking for boats, as well as making other
physical improvements to the park. We're talking about improvements of well over a half a
million dollars ($500,000), sir. This has gone to the State. The State has indicated that there is
no prohibition for us doing that. They have suggested a procedure, which the Manager has
written to us, which we have agreed to follow, and we'd like permission to enter into a formal
written agreement with the City.
129 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Manager, you have any comments, members of the Commission? Mr.
Manager.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I do have some comments.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I wonder if they're finished with their presentation, so I can do my
statements?
Chairman Regalado: You're finished?
Mr. Price: Yes, sir. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. May I -- OK. May I go down and use -- may I use your exhibit
for -- no, no, you can leave it there.
Chairman Regalado: Why don't you give him the portable mike, and then we'll -- you use that
one and he'll use -- Commissioner Gonzalez, use that one.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So the Commission understand exactly what we're doing here or what
they intended to do here, this area here now is the entrance to the actual park, and we have
parking across, like these four automobiles. And on this side of the -- of this aisle, what we have
is parking for the trailers. When they come in, they put their boat in the water or they Jet Ski in
the water. They come back here and they go in an angle and they park their trailers here.
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Regalado, can I -- so that we're clear here, there is a
publicly accessible boat ramp in this park for use for people accessing the lake?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Currently.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Currently.
Vice Chairman Winton: And they park their boats and trailers and regular cars, either visiting
the park or the boat ramp there in that area?
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's correct.
Chairman Regalado: Sometimes it's unattended and --
130 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, yeah, sometimes it's unattended, as probably 95 percent of the
parks in the City of Miami. If we would had considered to allow this to happen here, this area
that we're missing in here, we would have to take away from whatever is left from the park. If,
in addition to that, we build a community center that we're planning on building -- the City is
planning on building a community center, for which the money has been in an account for more -
- I believe it's over seven years or ten years, seven hundred and fifty-two thousand dollars
($752,000) -- then we will have to build more parking space here. First of all, we would have to
build a parking space that we're going to miss here, plus the trailer, the parking for the trailers,
plus the parking for the community center. So, actually, we want to convert this park in a big
huge parking lot, and there will be no more park, there will be no recreation, there will be a
limited amount of green area for the people in that community to enjoy. We have been going
through this entire process ever since I became a Commissioner. I have here hundreds of
signatures collected from residents of the entire Northwest 7th Street, OK. As a matter of fact,
the opposition to this project started -- and the Commission may not know this -- it started in
May 20, 2002, when the residents of Flagami, of Northwest 7th Street, wrote a letter and then -
Commissioner Willie Gort, asking him to oppose to this project because of the negative impact it
was going to have in the park. This is the regular original letter sent to Commissioner Gort, and
it has about 253 signatures attached to it. There was a community meeting advertised yesterday
and some of the people on 7th Street found out about it and they went out and collected more
signatures against this project. There is community opposition to this park. We, as the City
Commission, decided about a month ago, two months ago, under a discussion item that was
brought by Chairman Regalado, that the City was going to undertake the project of improving
this park. We directed the City Manager and the Park Director to start working on the
development of this park, and to start working with the different vendors for the facilities and the
equipment that we were going to install in that park. I visit this park at least twice a week on
weekdays, and I visit this park every single Saturday. And the reason is not that I love the park
so much. The reason is that I go to a cemetery on Flagler and 53rd Avenue every Saturday, to
bring flowers to my mother. So, I go to the cemetery and, on my way back, I go into the park,
park my car, walk around, say hi to the people, and I see how many people that are attending that
park every weekday and every Saturday and Sunday. Some people go there to go fishing. Some
families bring their kids to play on the playground. Some youth use the ramp to use their small
boats, their jet skis. Some of the kids place baseball, even though they don't have a baseball
field, but right on the grass, they play baseball. So, this is a park that is very much used by the
residents of Northwest 7th Street. The proposition of Mr. Milton is exactly what I promised that
community, when I was running for City Commissioner, that I was going to bring to them to the
park. I made a promise to them that I was going to work in that park, that we were going to
improve that park, that we're going to bring them what they needed there, so they can enjoy the
park. Commissioner Sanchez, a while ago, on another item that we were discussing, complained
about the City talking about giving away waterfront property. Well, for your knowledge, this is
waterfront. This is waterfront property. Also, for your knowledge, this is one of the smallest
parks in the City of Miami. One of the smallest parks. If we take away from this park more land
to give it to -- it's not directly to Mr. Milton. It's to anybody. If we decide to give more land out
of this park, we might as well sell the park. Now, if we want to go into the business of selling or
exchanging park land for money or for buildings, then let's talk about it. But then I'm going to be
coming back to this Commission proposing doing the same thing in the parks in your districts,
131 July 25, 2002
and then I hope that you don't object to it.
Commissioner Teele: Say that again.
Commissioner Gonzalez: If we're going to go into the business of exchanging park land for
buildings or for money, then let's talk about it and let's discuss it. Maybe it's a good idea. But
I'm sure that we're not in that business. And if we're going to go into that business, then I may
come back and propose donating or exchanging park land for some kind of improvement, maybe
for building, maybe for a boat, maybe for a restaurant. That is not the intention of the parks of
the City of Miami. Many, many occasions we have discussed here the need for more parks. I
believe you saw Commissioner Teele in one occasion mention and quoted that the City of Miami
is the City that has the less amount of parks in the United States. So, if we have the less amount
of parks and we have these tiny parks, and then we are planning on giving away land from this
park so a developer can make a private entrance to his project, I don't think that's honest, I don't
think that's fair to the community, and I don't think that's proper. And that is my argument.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. You want to respond to that? Go ahead. You want to use
that mike, go ahead and use it.
Mr. Price: Yes. Thank you. Once again, I respect what Commissioner Gonzalez has indicated.
We're not asking to avoid a public hearing process. We'd be happy to have a public hearing
process, but we need a vehicle to get in front of this Commission to have a public hearing.
There's no question, there are people who may be opposed to this concept, but we believe the
overriding amount of people in this area are supportive of this, specifically with regard to the
construction of a recreation center at no cost, whatsoever, to the City. We're only asking today is
not to approve what we're suggesting. It's to permit a public hearing on a specific document that
encompasses not only the easement, but the physical improvements, and the requirement of the
State that we acquire other similar property for the City, and that's all we're asking for. We're not
asking for an approval today. We're asking for the opportunity to get a public hearing.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: The Parks Department in the City of Miami is already in the process of
-- Mr. Ruder, we are already in the process of making all the improvements that I just mentioned
in the park. And, as a matter of fact, maybe you can enlighten us on the contracts that we are
working on, the acquisition of equipment, and improvements to the park.
Albert Ruder (Director, Parks &Recreation): OK. By March of next year, we already started --
we already commissioned a survey of the park for about fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000).
We're about to award a bid for the fencing.
Commissioner Teele: You didn't say a survey of fifty thousand?
Mr. Ruder: Fifteen, fifteen. At the Commission meeting of June 27th, the Commission
132 July 25, 2002
approved two hundred and fifty thousand, which is going to be different types of improvements,
including new shelters, picnic tables, and the prefabricated bathroom. It's not one of the -- we
have a design, piggy packing on a County bid, that is a prefab bathroom, that I have enough
copies, if you want to see them.
Chairman Regalado: And the community center --
Mr. Ruder: The community center, we're starting to look at different designs, and we're start --
we're probably going to use the same design that was used at Shenandoah, which is speed up the
time, you know, so that they don't have to start a new design. They're going to look at the new
building in Shenandoah and make some modifications. And Public Works has been looking at
that, and that could work -- that could speed up the time significantly.
Chairman Regalado: There are no bathrooms, but --
Mr. Ruder: No. There are no bathrooms right now. That's why, by next March, we want to
have a prefab bathroom. And even when you build the community --
Chairman Regalado: What is a prefab?
Mr. Ruder: I'll show -- it's just a bathroom that -- it's a building -- to the eye, it looks like it's a
regular bathroom, but just it comes built already. It's not a -- I mean, I heard --
Vice Chairman Winton: It's not built on site.
Mr. Ruder: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: It's fabricated off site and brought up and --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Prefab.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Right, it's fabricated off-site, and then the final
plumbing hook-ups and all that are done in-house. It meets the South Florida Building Code or
the new Florida Building Code, all the requirements. And that would remain on site after a new
facility is built. So, that when you're just using the park, it wouldn't be that people would have to
have access to the community center on a weekend or, you know, during a weekday to have
bathroom facilities. The bathroom facilities would be permanent in nature.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm familiar with this park, and the rendering that's up there is a very
pretty rendering, and provides the impression, which is terribly misleading, that this park will be
a much more attractive and functional park at the end of this effort than it is today. And that
rendering has zero basis in real reality. Because, as Commissioner Gonzalez said, there is no
133 July 25, 2002
room left for boaters to park their trucks and their trailers, or the visitors to the park to really
park. There is not going to be enough parking for the community center, and that's a very, very -
- the other misleading part about that rendering is that it's a very, very small park, and it just
doesn't have -- even if -- if this were done -- if this were a proposal by the Parks Department,
which is a department of the City, to do that as an improvement, and that driveway led to
something else that wasn't private in it's orientation, I would be opposed because it would be
misleading. The second part, though, is that this isn't about a driveway into some other public
good thing. This is a private sector for-profit entity that wants to take over the park -- a part of a
public park for their own driveway. Now, this plan -- Mr. Milton's plan for his development was
approved a long time ago, by this Commission, or some Commission -- I guess, maybe I voted
on it -- and it had a plan for ingress and egress from his site back to whatever this is, 7th or
whatever that is, and there was never a suggestion from the developer at that point that now,
"You know, for my development to be successful, I really have to take over your park." But it's
coming now, after all of the approvals and the development's almost done, and I think it's just
absolutely awful public policy to consider selling a piece of that public park there for a private
sector's driveway.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, I would like to, at this point, introduce a motion. My
motion is that we continue, as a City, to work on the improvement of this park, as we agreed at
the last meeting that Maceo Park was discussed, and that no more hearings are held in reference
to this specific project, since it was the agreement of this Commission that we, the City of
Miami, we will do the necessary improvement to make this park a jewel among the parks of the
City of Miami with our money, with the money of the bond issue, and with money that has been
retained in an account, in a special account, for more than ten years, money that we plan to put to
work in this park to make the necessary improvements, and that is my motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a -- second on the motion. Discussion. Commissioners.
Commissioner Sanchez. One second. Commissioner Sanchez has the floor.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let me just say that the arguments that I've heard here by both
Commissioners, especially the Commissioner who represents the district, are valid. But let me
just put this very clearly. I think that one of the key issues here is public hearings. There needs
to be input from either people that support it or don't support it. One side says there's opposition.
There's support. We don't know that. I don't know that. I think that what it lacks here is a due
process, and I think that the proper process for -- in order to be legit is to go through the PZ
(Planning and Zoning) process, to come back through a process where the Administration denies
it or approves it, and it has the appropriate public coming in front of us, and a proper presentation
by both sides, the opposition in support for us to make an intelligent and reasonable decision.
I think that's the appropriate thing to do, instead of just denying it right now. Come back with
the people that live in the area, that may support it or may not support, hear the facts of both
134 July 25, 2002
sides, as we always do in a public hearing, in which the public will come and basically discuss it.
For us to just deny it right now, I think it's wrong. I mean, I'm open for it, but I think the
appropriate thing to do here is to put it through the due process of a public -- a PZ hearing that
everyone is entitled to.
Vice Chairman Winton: If I --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Commissioner Sanchez, do you realize that you're talking about public
land? Do you realize that you're not talking about a piece of land that belongs to a private
developer or to a private sector --
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gonzalez?
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that wants to sell it?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir, I do.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Do you realize that you're not talking about rezoning to build a
building on a private land?
Commissioner Sanchez: I understand all that. But at the end of the day --
Commissioner Gonzalez: So, you will be accepting --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, I'm not accepting anything.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I hope that you will be accepting in the future that, if a group of
residents come here and ask to use Marti Park to build a bridge for one of the fishing companies
across the street -- the river, you will accept that?
Commissioner Sanchez: I tell you that I would allow them to go through the process, which is a
public zoning process, that they would come here with the recommendations and presentations
from both sides. You're basically denying someone the opportunity to state their case, for
whatever it may be, whether it's totally wrong.
Commissioner Gonzalez: They have stated their case a thousand times. They have lobbied
everyone. They have stated their case. They have come here with renderings and with deceiving
exposures, because that is very deceiving of what is going to happen in that park. And I wonder,
have we ever traded a park with anybody in the history of the City of Miami?
Vice Chairman Winton: We probably sold it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Have we ever traded a park? I don't think so. I mean, this is --
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gonzalez, please.
135 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: This is outrageous. I mean, this is ridiculous.
Chairman Regalado: You made a motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: We can vote on it, but I don't think -- what Commissioner Sanchez is
saying, that everybody should have the right for a public hearing. And be as it may in that
public hearing, we have, in many public hearings, rejected many, many items, including -- and
approved some items because of -- what about Camillus House? Should we have had a public
hearing or not? In the public hearing --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Camillus House was completely different.
Chairman Regalado: No.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Camillus House was not taking land from a park.
Chairman Regalado: It's a public land.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no, no, no, don't compare Camillus House.
Vice Chairman Winton: It's not a park.
Chairman Regalado: But, Angel, please. Angel, you have a motion --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, if you were in favor of Camillus House, you should
have voted in favor of it. Don't bring it back now.
Chairman Regalado: I am not -- but I'm not discussing my vote on Camillus House. I'm just
saying that every process needs a public hearing. That's all I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I really do disagree with what Commissioner Sanchez said, because --
and while I strongly believe that Camille House still ought to go on that site, this is a public park
that's been a park, it is a park. And I could get a developer to go into every park that is in
Commissioner Sanchez' district, in every park in my district, in many of the parks in
Commissioner Teele's district, and in every park in Commissioner Regalado's district, and get
them to come here with a proposal to take over part of our park land for some private purpose. I
don't think -- and I could get that. Trust me, I could get it. And I don't think we're obligated to
expose our parks to a public debate and public hearing every time one of those people came
forward. This is park land. This isn't surplus government land that is used for nothing but a
scrap peep or a dump yard or something else. This is a park. It's an existing park. It works as a
136 July 25, 2002
park. It looks like a park. It acts like a park. As far as I'm concerned, we've had the public
hearing. And for the public to come and both sides run around there and see if they can get
enough people to come with a placard that says, "I don't want that park anymore, because I'm
going to live in that building, and I want to be able to drive there because it's better for me," and
then, suddenly, we're swayed by that kind of behavior is awful public policy. So, I feel zero
obligation to have any further public hearing about this kind of issue, and I think it's really bad to
suggest that we ought to have a public hearing, a public hearing, every time we could find some
developer that would like to come take part of our park land. I don't see it. I don't see that that's
a part of our overall mission in fairness and openness to the public. It's not.
Mr. Price: Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Price: Could I respectfully ask that Mr. Milton be permitted?
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, one second. And Commissioner Teele wants to --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Price, have you discussed this matter with me?
Mr. Price: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Has anyone from your office discussed this matter with me?
Mr. Price: I don't believe so. No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I don't think -- to my knowledge, I've not been discussed -- this is not
about lobbying. I want to pick up exactly where Johnny Winton left off. I agree with everything
that you have said, Commissioner Winton, but I come down with a different result. A public
hearing should not be about who can produce as many people busing them in with placards, and
we make public policy from that. You know, if you know anything about me, from the time I've
been elected, I don't give a darn about people coming in and being bussed in and saying this, and
any politician, which this City of Miami Commission, long since any of us got here, is notorious
for. I mean, it's a joke. Anybody buses in people can get their way in this town, whether it be in
the black community or whatever community. That is the history of the City of Miami
Commission. I view public hearings for a totally different purpose. I view public hearings as a
way of letting staff and professionals make an intelligent presentation with the benefit of the
public, recognizing that people have every right to bus in people, and go on radio stations, and
television stations and exercise their very precious constitutional right to free speech. And I
don't object to anybody coming down here with placards. I object to Commissioners, or
Congressmen, or Senators making public policy based on polls and based on that, because what
you're not here to do is not to serve the public, your own public conscious. What you're doing
now is just responding to polling or to public opinion for the moment, without regard to the facts.
Where I differ with you, Johnny, in the outcome is this: If everything that Commissioner
137 July 25, 2002
Gonzalez -- and, Commissioner Gonzalez, the one thing that I have learned, as an elected
official, I never want to take the position of being the presenter, because you're much better off
sitting up here than going down there, in my opinion. But, you know, I don't think -- using your
own style. But stay on the high ground, if you can. That's the only thing I learned in the Army.
But where I disagree with your conclusion, Commissioner Winton, is, I believe Commissioner
Gonzalez, in the context that this is going to take away land from the public. I don't see room for
the boat ramps. I don't see room for the kind of parking that is so essential in this. What I don't
see is, I don't see the park as it's currently laid out. I don't know what the facts are, to be very
honest with you. I don't know if the Planning Department has looked at this item and has
evaluated their proposal and come up with how many recreational square feet there are now and
how many recreational square feet there will be afterwards. I agree one hundred percent, we do
not want to put our parks for sale. And the comment that you made reference to is, I've never
said that the City parks are the -- City park spaces are the smallest in the country or anywhere in
that. I've only said, in the past, that there was a study made -- which we need to get a copy of
that study, which had a lot of inaccuracies. For example, that study did not include the cemetery
as a part of our -- did it include the cemetery?
Mr. Ruder: No, it didn't include the cemetery. And it also compared us to other cities that had
national and state parks within their boundaries, and then those were counted in their favor --
Commissioner Teele: But not in ours.
Mr. Ruder: -- while we don't have any state or national within our corporate limits.
Commissioner Teele: But the point is, there is a study. There is a study that doesn't paint a
beautiful picture of the amount of park space that we have, which puts us all on guard that we
don't want to further diminish the square footage of parks, and I stand strongly in that
proposition. But I also note that you have before you a proposal, something -- I mean, Mr.
Milton or whomever, I would plead with you to come to Overtown or to Little Haiti and see if
you can help us build a park over there. I mean, I'd be more than willing. We don't have any
waterfront land, unfortunately. But the fact of the matter is, is that there is a tremendous desire
on some of our community's parks to get developers involved in unique, joint development.
We're going to hear of a debate this afternoon about some uses that the City committed to eight
years ago in -- not Gibson Park, but in your district, Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: Verrick.
Commissioner Teele: Verrick Park, where the City resolution said, we're going to have three
non-traditional parks citywide, and Verrick, Gibson, and one other. So, I mean -- and we do
have a user trying to use for what may not be viewed as a public purpose. And more and more,
that is a challenge. I will say right here, right now, I don't understand Commissioner Sanchez'
discussion about the PZ, but I do understand the context that, if someone out there has had a
proposal, that they spent a lot of time on that proposal, that this Commission has given them an
opportunity to develop that proposal, they ought to have a chance to come in and win or lose.
Yes and no, you know. And making a decision without any facts, you know -- and I will be
very candid. I am a big supporter of our Parks Department. I think they operate with the
138 July 25, 2002
minimum resources and the minimum dollars. And I'll vote, later on today, to move the millage
rate from the roll back rate. What's the roll back rate, eight point one mills?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): I'll get the Budget Director to come.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, about eight point one mills. I'll move to move it up, as long as I
know where the money is going. If the money is going in Parks Department, you know -- if
we're going to put two tenths of a mill in the Parks Department, the equivalent, and an increase
in budget, you can count on me. If we're going to be at eight point nine for business as usual,
I'm back at eight point one mills. I mean, I'm not at all enamored with just spending more money
and not knowing where the dollars are going. And I think the Parks Department needs as much
help as we can get. What's the roll back rate, sir?
Marcelo Penha: Marcelo Penha (Budget Department): Eight point one nine eight three.
Commissioner Teele: Eight point two, roughly?
Mr. Penha: Roughly.
Commissioner Teele: And, so -- I mean, I'm willing to put an extra tenth of a mill for parks.
But the fact of the matter is, is that what we've got here now is this quagmire, where this thing
started some years ago, long before I got here; developer got the resolution from the City to go
forward, two Commissioners later, you know. And we ought to be able to either approve this or
disapprove this. I, for one, think that this developer -- this proposal is going to have a very hard
time getting the support of this Commission. I do. I think if the facts are presented, I think if the
Planning Department and the Parks Department and the appropriate staff present the objective
facts, I think it's going to be very difficult to overcome Commissioner Gonzalez' very eloquent
and very persuasive presentations. But I'm not prepared to vote to give this developer or any
developer the use of park land for private purposes. I am prepared to allow for a hearing and a
discussion. A hearing being the format by which that is, based upon the fact that this developer
has been involved in this queue now for at least six, seven -- how many years, Mr. Price, have
you all been in this queue?
Mr. Price: The Blue Lagoon project has been about eight years, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Eight years. Which predates me on the Commission. And I think there
ought to be a process by which the Planning Department, and the Public Works Department, and
the Parks Department, along with the district Commissioner, make their presentation, and the
developer have an opportunity to make his presentation, and we need to resend the previous
rescind the previous resolution.
Commissioner Gonzalez: There hasn't been any resolutions. Has there been any resolutions
accepting this change of the park?
Mr. Penha: No, sir.
139 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: There has never been a resolution.
Vice Chairman Winton: This just was kind of a public appearance?
Commissioner Teele: I was under the impression, based upon what Commissioner Regalado has
said on the record, is that this developer -- this project has been in the queue for seven or eight
years, and that the developer has been working with the City for seven or eight years.
Mr. Price: No, no. Your --
Commissioner Gonzalez: There has never been a resolution to allow this.
Vice Chairman Winton: No. There --
Mr. Price: Your question was, how long has he been trying to develop the Blue Lagoon
property? That's over eight years. We had started this process, in regard to the park, about 18
months ago.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, even you read into the record the petitions to Commissioner Gort
on this. So. I mean, this is -- you know, I don't know, but --
Mr. Price: Well, the correspondence, Commissioner.
Commissioner Gonzalez: March 2000, when they started talking about this in the community,
the community found out about it, of the proposition of taking some park land to build a private
entrance to this development, and they mobilized themselves, and they wrote a letter to
Commissioner Gort, signed by over 250 people, asking him not to -- to please not to approve, not
to approve this project on the park. And that is part of the record.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez, the only premise that I'm speaking to is the
premise that Commissioner Sanchez has said. That is, we have this proposal that is before us.
We ought to let the staff study it. I am not going to support this proposal without a
recommendation and study from the staff, OK, and a process. But all that I'm saying to you is,
very simply, what we've got to stop doing -- what we need to do is do what we have done and,
that is, bring these projects out in the open, let them be discussed. I was about to say the Parks
Director. That was the most temporary -- you know, I'm glad it's in Commissioner Sanchez -- in
Commissioner Gonzalez' district in this case, because if you had come up talking about putting a
prefab bathroom and doing this and doing that and all that, that -- I mean, that's not artful at all. I
mean, you know, I'd like to have -- doesn't the City have an architect, a distinguished architect?
Mr. Ruder: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: There is a City architect. That's who should be making these
presentations. And I just think we ought to have a full discussion on it. I'm not opposed to a
discussion on it. And I'm going to vote my convictions on it. And I think the developer's going
to have a very hard time overcoming the opposition of the Parks Director, if that is opposition
140 July 25, 2002
that I heard, and the Commission district director, but what I think we ought to have is a process.
If they're asking for a public hearing, I have no problems for a public hearing for the purpose of
letting the staffs, the Commission, the public all come together. I only wanted to pick up with
the point that this should not be about how many people can bus people in.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, that's what is going to happen. That's what is going to happen.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm not going to vote -- I have never voted and I will not vote on
how many people get bussed in.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's what is going to happen because it happened yesterday.
Yesterday morning they called a meeting. They call a meeting at St. Dominick Church, and I
found out about it, and I had people there at the meeting. And they were calling people, leaving
that -- people that don't even live in the City of Miami. People that don't even live in the City of
Miami were sitting at the meeting. So, you know -- but just take a vote. I mean, just take a vote.
Decide -- just take a vote. You want to continue with this game, let's continue with the game.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion to -- stated by Commissioner Gonzalez earlier, and we
have a second. We have an alternative motion, if this motion fails, in order to have just a public
hearing, and have the staff to report to the Commission and set a public hearing at some time in
the fall.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question on the motion on the floor.
Chairman Regalado: OK. The question on --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Can you do a roll call?
Chairman Regalado: The question on Commissioner Gonzalez' motion, roll call, please.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Presume a roll call so the record is established who voted in favor and
who voted against it.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: No.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez.
141 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Chairman Regalado.
Chairman Regalado: No. OK. Motion fails. Do we have a motion for a public hearing?
Commissioner Teele: At least 60 days from now. I don't want a public hearing that's
ambushed. I mean, it cannot be in September. It's got to be in October. September is budget
hearings. It's no need in getting this thing all charged up.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: The 12th or the 26th.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. In October. At least 60 days from now.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second.
Vice Chairman Winton: Discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Discussion. Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Does that mean, then, that because we're going to have this public
hearing, that the plans that the staff already has in motion to improve -- make further
improvements to the park, are they supposed to stop those plans so that we can have this great
public hearing on utilizing public land for a private developer?
Commissioner Teele: You know, Johnny, let me tell you something. Somebody said -- and I
didn't want to pick it up, but since you've raised it, you know -- because we've got to stop
shooting ourselves in the foot. Is it true that the money that you all are talking about has been
held in limbo for seven years?
Mr. Gimenez: You're talking about --
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez said that the funds --
Mr. Gimenez: The seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000).
Commissioner Teele: The seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000).
Mr. Gimenez: In 1997 it was appropriated.
142 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: 1997?
Vice Chairman Winton: So, five.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: So, your point's still going to be good, whatever it is.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So that's five years, right? And because this Commission acts, they
can't wait 60 days, and they've had five years? See, Johnny, don't use the -- don't get --
Vice Chairman Winton: My apologies. I'll take it back. Take those words back. Right.
Commissioner Teele: -- manipulated. I mean, you know, we don't -- the only time we get action
is like today. If we don't approve the roll back -- if we don't approve the millage rate today,
guess what? We all get executed. Because the State Constitution says you've got to do this at
least 45 days before the 30th day before the first week of something. So, this is the only day we
can do it. Did anybody bring it before us for discussion a month ago? Have we seen any budget
documents? I mean, so, you know, don't buy into -- please don't buy into the fact that, if the
Commission takes an item --
Vice Chairman Winton: It was probably a little dig that I -- was inappropriate for me to use that
-- I just couldn't resist. I screwed up, so --
Chairman Regalado: OK. Roll call.
Commissioner Sanchez: But, listen, at least you admit that you screwed up. That's good.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call on Commissioner Sanchez' motion.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-874
A MOTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING IN OCTOBER IN
CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSAL FROM MR. JOSE MILTON FOR
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO ANTONIO MACEO PARK, AT
HIS EXPENSE, IN EXCHANGE FOR ACCESS THROUGH THE PARK TO
HIS RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCATED ON BLUE
LAGOON LAKE ADJACENT TO THE PARK.
143 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion 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
Chairman Regalado: OK. Sixty days from now, a public hearing. The staff needs to bring all
the details to this.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
29. NAME SECTION OF PEACOCK PARK AS "AMY BILLIG MEDITATION GARDEN".
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Winton, time certain. I'm sorry. It's a resolution naming a
section of Peacock Park as the "Amy --
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: -- Billig Meditation Garden." You have --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second. This is going to a quick one.
Chairman Regalado: -- here.
Vice Chairman Winton: (INAUDIBLE) public hearing. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm not going to waste time on this one.
Susan Billig: Thank you. Can I say something for one minute?
Commissioner Sanchez: Way overdo, for crying out loud.
Ms. Billig: No, no, no.
Chairman Regalado: And we're sorry that you had to wait and -- but you know -- but --
Ms. Billig: I just wanted to thank all of you, especially Johnny and Jason and Al Ruder and
Frank and all my neighbors and everybody. It's been a long time coming, but I'm still here and
I'm going to enjoy it all. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Here, here. Thank you.
144 July 25, 2002
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): May I have her name and -- for the record, please, sir?
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Ms. Billig: Susan Billig, Avocado Avenue.
Ms. Thompson: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.
Ms. Thompson: Thank you.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-875
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION NAMING A
SECTION OF PEACOCK PARK AS THE "AMY BILLIG MEDITATION
GARDEN"; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO TAKE THE
NECESSARY STEPS TO EFFECT SAID CHANGE.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Regalado: OK, congratulations.
145 July 25, 2002
30. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT
WITH THEODORE AND THELMA A. GIBSON CHARTER SCHOOL REVOCABLE AT
WILL FOR TEMPORARY USE OF 61120 SQUARE FEET OF COMMUNITY CENTER
LOCATED 3255 PLAZA STREET, ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK FOR PURPOSES OF
OPERATING CHARTER SCHOOL ON TEMPORARY BASIS, WHILE PERMANENT SITE
IS BEING CONSTRUCTED.
SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PROPOSED $50,000 TRANSFER OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDS FROM DISTRICT 5 TO
DISTRICT 2, DEPROGRAMMING OR RELEASING FUNDS FOR RESERVE FOR
EDUCATION INITIATIVE IN DISTRICT 5, OR IDENTIFYING FUNDS THAT ARE
CURRENTLY IN DISTRICT 5 FROM PREVIOUS PUBLIC SERVICE PROGRAMS.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Don't I have a -- is there a 5:30 --
Chairman Regalado: For Commissioner Teele, you and Commissioner Winton, before we go on
to the zoning --
Vice Chairman Winton: We have another time certain.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Which one is that?
Vice Chairman Winton: That's the --
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Gibson.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right, and let me see if I can set the background here. Commissioner
Gibson has had -- been in the process of trying to get a charter school in the West Grove for
many, many, many moons. They've been working on -- they have a site, they have a plan, they
have approval of the -- they have an approval from the School Board for the charter school, so all
of the pieces are in place. The problem popped up that they can't get into their facility and the
charter school's supposed to be opened by Aug -- the end of August, early September, and they
went to the community, to the Virrick Park -- whatever the committee is called that's been
managing the Virrick Park renovations and everything and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Listen, good friend, Mr. Winton, this is a no-brainer. Would you make
a motion, please?
146 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- but we need to put some of this on the record because it isn't
just us.
Commissioner Sanchez: This is good for everybody.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct, so -- but everybody recommended -- and so what they
needed was temporary use of the new gym for the school. They came to me -- probably less than
a month ago is when it finally landed on my desk, I forget -- and I was very concerned because
once you get something in somewhere, you can't get it out, and the Gibson School people were
very responsive and to make a long story short, we asked for a whole series of conditions,
including an executed Letter of Commitment from a bank to loan them the money that they
needed to close the gap between the cash they had in hand and the money that they may need for
finishing the renovation to the building that they're working on renovating right now, and that
was the -- almost the final hurdle in getting all this done and there was a legal question that
popped up yesterday. That legal question was worked on all yesterday and today and is now
resolved, and so therefore, we're moving to -- this long, long resolution that I'll let the City
Attorney read, but in essence to allow the school to occupy the gym to the end of this calendar
year, at the end of the semester. At which point in time, they expect to be in their new facility.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved. Sorry.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
The resolution was read into the public record by the Assistant City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. Commissioner Gibson,
you --
Commissioner Thelma Gibson: Just wanted to thank the staff because they really worked
hard on this.
Commissioner Teele: Your name for the record.
Commissioner Gibson: Oh. Thelma Gib -- Thelma Anderson Gibson, 3 661 Franklin
Avenue, Coconut Grove, 33133. I just wanted to thank you on behalf of all of us who've
been working and thank your staff for working very hard on this, and we can promise you
that we will be out on January 15 or 14, whatever that date is, and we do appreciate the
fact that the community has been supportive of us, as well as the staff, and Jason has
worked very hard to help get this done, along with Commissioner Winton and
Commissioner Teele, and we're just grateful, and just wanted to say thank you.
Vice Chairman Winton: You're welcome, but I think it's important to put one more thing
on the public record so everybody understands. They have no intention of staying in the
gym. I don't want them staying in the gym. We had very exhaustive conversation about
147 July 25, 2002
the steps to take and they took all the steps necessary to give us all the assurances, and
the key element that brought this together for me was the execution of a commitment
letter from a bank committing to loan the money, under certain terms and conditions,
which has been executed by both the charter school people and the bank, and money
exchanged hands, so there's a real commitment there, and so I think that's the principal
guarantee that we've put in place; in addition, to the fact that they're going to pay
essentially hold -- something called "holdover rent," which is 100 per -- on 50 percent of
normal rent if they go beyond the 15, so there's penalties in here. There's assurance in
here that this won't be one of those things that kind of lands in there on a temporary basis
and drags out for another year.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: And they agreed to all of that and I was thrilled.
Commissioner Gibson: That's --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commission Gibson: And God sends also Mr. Gibbons, who's president of the Grove
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) Survive, who owns the building --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gibson: -- with a group of us.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I want to express my appreciation to Commissioner Winton for
reflecting the -- showing the flexibility to help a community really that has had
tremendous institutional struggles to overcome and obviously Ms. Gibson, who
previously served as a member of this Commission, as did her late husband, Father
Gibson, and made such a contribution to our city and our overall city, I certainly think is
entitled to the presumption and the weight that you've given her in doing that, and I
really want to express my appreciation to you on behalf of a grateful community that
you're showing this flexibility.
Commissioner Gibson: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Gibson for the benefit of the area, we want to
have a roll call.
148 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-876
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A REVOCABLE LICENSE AGREEMENT,
IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH THEODORE
AND THELMA A. GIBSON CHARTER SCHOOL ("THE LICENSEE"),
REVOCABLE AT WILL, FOR TEMPORARY USE OF APPROXIMATELY
6,120 SQUARE FEET OF COMMUNITY CENTER (THE "AREA") LOCATED
AT 3255 PLAZA STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, COMMONLY KNOWN AS
"ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK" (THE "PROPERTY") FOR THE PERIOD OF
AUGUST 15, 2002 TO JANUARY 14, 2003, FOR THE OPERATION OF A
CHARTER SCHOOL ON A TEMPORARY BASIS WHILE A PERMANENT
SITE IS CONSTRUCTED; SAID APPROVAL CONTINGENT UPON
LICENSEE'S COMPLIANCE WITH ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO BE
SET FORTH IN THE LICENSEE AGREEMENT AND LICENSEE: (1)
PROVIDING EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE CITY MANAGER
THAT ADEQUATE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE TO COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW CHARTER SCHOOL; (2) PAYING A
MONTHLY FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,120; (3) PAYING AN INCREASED
MONTHLY FEE OF $12,240 IF PREMISES ARE NOT VACATED BY
JANUARY 14, 2003; (4) PROVIDING SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO THE
CITY THAT THE PREMISES WILL BE VACATED UPON EXPIRATION OF
THE TERM; (5) OPERATING THE CHARTER SCHOOL PROGRAM IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DIRECTOR OF
PARKS AND RECREATION; (6) OBTAINING ALL NECESSARY PERMITS
AND LICENSES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, A CLASS I PERMIT
AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE; (7) INSTALLING ANY
IMPROVEMENTS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CITY TO PROTECT
THE CITY PROPERTY AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE; (8)
INDEMNIFYING AND HOLDING THE CITY HARMLESS WITH RESPECTS
TO ALL MATTERS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF THE PROPERTY,
THE OPERATION OF ITS PROGRAMS AND THE STORAGE OF ITS
EQUIPMENT; (9) PROVIDING INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS AND
TYPES REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI DIVISION OF RISK
MANAGEMENT; AND (10) SHALL NOT ASSIGN SAID AGREEMENT.
149 July 25, 2002
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Gibson: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Barbara Rodriguez, I would like to move that a public hearing be
established for the purpose of the transfer of not to exceed $50,000 from District 5 to District --
what's your district, Johnny?
Vice Chairman Winton: 2.
Ms. Thompson: 2.
Chairman Regalado: 2.
Commissioner Teele: -- 2, a public service community development funds deprogramming or
releasing funds for the reserve for the education initiative and District 5, or alternatively, or
alternatively identifying funds that have not been used that are currently in District 5 and from
previous public service programs, not to exceed $50,000, and for there to be a public hearing on
this matter consistent with the instructions of the district Commissioner, who receives the funds
on September 12, not to exceed $50,000.
Barbara Rodriguez (Assistant Director, Community Development): That will be done.
Vice Chairman Winton: I got -- I have to second that. Thank you. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Excuse me. Johnny, do you have -- and Commission Teele, you have
Item 8. We waited for you because this is about the transfer of money, the one that you're
talking about. Johnny, it's about your district and CDBG (community Development Block
Grant), so if you want to do that now or if we want to move to the zoning issue, it's --
150 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gibson: Could we do it now?
Chairman Regalado: -- up to you all.
Commissioner Gibson: Could we do it now, Commissioner?
Vice Chairman Winton: Do what?
Commissioner Gibson: Commissioner Teele is willing to --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, we did get a vote. We did --
Commissioner Gibson: We had -- for Item 8, 9 coming up, is that what it is?
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, we did get a vote on --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, we voted, on your --
Chairman Regalado: -- this resolution.
Vice Chairman Winton: On the resolution. We voted.
Commissioner Gibson: Yes, I know.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, oh, on Commissioner Teele's motion.
Commissioner Gibson: But Commissioner Teele's --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, on Commissioner Teele's motion, we haven't got a vote. I just said
that if you want to follow up with Item 8 and 9, which are the transfer of funds and allocating
your social services set aside money in your area. We have not voted on Commissioner Teele's
request to transfer and have a public hearing on this $50,000.
Vice Chairman Winton: Commissioner Teele, are you suggesting -- do you have a spot that
you're trying to -- a specific agency that you're directing that to or is it --
Commissioner Teele: Well, you remember, you all --
Vice Chairman Winton: I didn't understand.
Commissioner Teele: Last year, Mrs. Gibson's agency received $50,000. This year, because of
-- is that --
Commissioner Gibson: No, no.
Chairman Regalado: No, that's new.
151 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gibson: This is a --
Chairman Regalado : She's a new agency.
Commissioner Gibson: This is the first time --
Chairman Regalado : She's a new agency.
Commissioner Gibson: This is the first time --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Commissioner Gibson: -- we're requesting funding for the health initiative, but we've been
doing this work now for a long, long time, but we have a health initiative going and we requested
100,000. Staff said that they thought our proposal was good and they were going to give us
10,000, and I came up here very upset because for all of Coconut Grove -- West Grove, staff had
recommended $20,000 and, of course, Coconut Grove Cares was a part of that and the Coconut
Grove Local Development and the Gibson Memorial Fund, and Commissioner Winton said he
would get some money for Coconut Grove Cares, but the others didn't get any, so we were
trying to get a little bit of money.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I took -- and some of the children's programs in Wynwood got
whacked real hard.
Commissioner Gibson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So I told Mrs. Gibson, from the podium, that when I'm whacking the
heck out of people that have had the money in the past -- you know, it's pretty hard to funnel
some money over to a new agency when we didn't have enough to even support the ones that
we've been historically supporting, so --
Commissioner Gibson: Yes, but we were doing all of this work pro bono. We have no paid staff
and we have been having just volunteers doing all of this. We were housing women and
children. We worked with Celebration of Diversity everywhere with middle school children and
we have been doing this for 19 years --
Vice Chairman Winton: But Ms. Gibson --
Commissioner Gibson: -- and this is the first time -- I'm not arguing the point. I accepted it. I
tell people I'm chewed up and spit out all the time, but I keep on going because I don't plan to
stop because of not being able to get funding, but I think that the program is so good that if we
could get enough funding to hire a staff, at least one staff person, we'll be happy with that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, and 10,000 doesn't do it.
152 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner San -- Commissioner Winton, what I'm trying to do at the
expense of obviously creating some problems in my district -- I think the formula that we used
was wrong and we've gone over that. We've agreed not to use that formula again. I am trying
now to transfer $40,000 of allocated money from District 5 to District 2, but that's got to be
subject to a public hearing, which you and the staff would -- I am not going to try to transfer
money to any organization within your district. I mean -- but I've made that commitment to you
in the context of Ms. Gibson's plea that day, that I would dig down deep and wrestle with my
soul because the formula that this Commission adopted was just not an appropriate formula in
retrospect. We all voted for it and that's not the issue.
Vice Chairman Winton: And only in retrospect, that's right.
Commissioner Teele: Only in retrospect, and so what I'm trying to signal you now is that
notwithstanding Number 8, which doesn't do this, is that I'm asking staff to prepare and
deobligate $40,000 of funds, which I've given them at least two sources. One would be the
public service initiative for "F" schools in District 5, which we've already approved, etcetera, but
not earmarked the dollars specifically. They're working on a program. We're taking $40,000 of
those funds and transferring them to District 2 for a public hearing allocation process. You've
got to work with staff on how that would go. I would be remiss if I didn't say I would hope that
Mrs. Gibson's organization would receive some consideration, but it's your decision and I'm not
going to interfere with that.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Commissioner Gibson: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: And who's this chairing this? We have a motion, right?
Commissioner Teele: Call the question on the motion (INAUDIBLE).
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second. Can I act as chair if I seconded the
motion?
Commissioner Teele: Sure.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, 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. Thank you, Commissioner Teele.
153 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-877
A MOTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2002
TO CONSIDER PROPOSED TRANSFER OF AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $40,000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC SERVICE
FUNDS FROM DISTRICT 5 TO DISTRICT 2, CONSISTENT WITH THE
INSTRUCTIONS OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER WHO RECEIVES
THE FUNDS, DEPROGRAMMING OR RELEASING FUNDS FOR THE
RESERVE FOR EDUCATION INITIATIVE IN DISTRICT 5, OR
ALTERNATIVELY, IDENTIFYING FUNDS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN USED,
THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN DISTRICT 5 FROM PREVIOUS PUBLIC
SERVICE PROGRAMS.
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
31. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 02-772 RELATING TO ALLOCATION OF $11928,400 OF
28TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS
AND $960,000 OF PROGRAM INCOME IN CATEGORY OF PUBLIC SERVICES, BY
SPECIFYING AGENCIES PROVIDING SAID SERVICES IN DISTRICT 2 WITH
AVAILABLE ALLOCATION OF $462,144 AND ALSO $40,000 PUBLIC SERVICES
DISTRICT 5 PRIORITY SET-ASIDE FOR 28TH PROGRAM YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER
1, 2002.
Vice Chairman Winton: What agenda item are we on?
Dan Fernandes (Acting Director, Community Development): Agenda Item 8.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK. You're on.
Mr. Fernandes: Dan Fernandes, Community Development. During the public hearing for the
allocation of CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) monies on July 8, District 2
allocated all of their funds into a reserve pool, as we discussed at that particular meeting. This
particular meeting is to identify specific organizations to receive the monies that were targeted
for District 2. This is a public hearing.
154 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Go on. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: Clarify the record, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: There will be another public hearing relating to District 2 on the --
September 12 on an additional up to $40,000.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, ma'am.
Commissioner Sanchez: What item is this?
Vice Chairman Winton: 8. Yes, ma'am Your name and address, please.
Susan Nierenberg: My name is Susan Nierenberg. I'm representing Jewish Community
Services of South Florida, 1790 Southwest 27th Avenue, and I'm appealing the loss of one-fifth
of the amount of money we've received for 21 years for a Senior Crime Prevention and Victim
Assistance program to the City of Miami. We've received $55,000 for the last 21 years and this
year we received $44,000. We going to have to cut the program and at -risk elderly --
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. You went from what to what?
Ms. Nierenberg: From 55 to 44.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Just wanted to get that on --
Ms. Nierenberg: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- write it down. Thank you.
Ms. Nierenberg: We serve at -risk elderly in their homes. We work with the Police Department,
City of Miami. We put up screens. We do case management. We put up door viewers and
locks, and we've been serving, as I said, the community for 21 years. We'd like you to
reconsider and refund us the money that we -- so that we don't have to cut the program. Thank
you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Mr. Fernandes: Commissioner, the spokesperson right there is actually addressing Item Number
10, which is the Housing area.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh.
Mr. Fernandes: Jewish Family Services was funded under Housing and it's the Senior Security
program, so that's --
155 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh.
Mr. Fernandes: It's really another item.
Vice Chairman Winton: All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
Ellen Gilligan: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Ellen Gilligan. My --
Vice Chairman Winton: Ellen, bring the microphone closer to you, please.
Ms. Gilligan: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Thank you.
Ms. Gilligan: Good evening. My name is Ellen Gilligan. I'm representing De Hostos Senior
Center from 2902 Northwest 2 Avenue, in Miami. First, we'd like to thank Commissioner
Winton and the other Commissioners for their support of our agency for over 26 years.
However, at the present time, we are in a crisis situation because of the reduction of $70,000
from our upcoming budget for the year 2002 to 2003. We are presently serving at De Hostos
over 200 meals daily to the seniors and we also provide them with bulk packages to take home
for food over the weekends. The reduction will force us to make cuts in our program, and being
a nurse myself to have the thought of having to say that you cannot feed someone today is
getting more difficult just thinking about it. We are asking Commissioner Teele and
Commissioner Gonzalez to help us recapture part of these lost funds because the -- we have
another center, which is called Claude Pepper, and if we are unable to capture these funds, we
will have to suspend the daily feeding of all of the residents. We have a list attached with 59
names, and this center is located at 750 Northwest 18 Terrace. We understand that District 5 has
been facing with some cuts. However, we hope that they're not as severe. We at De Hostos
Center believe that as a community, we have a responsibility to those seniors who can no longer
provide for themselves, due to their limited income and we feel that they have paid their dues
and we say thank you very much on behalf of our chief executive officer Esther Couvertier.
Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome. Thank you.
Nilsa Velazquez: Good afternoon. My name is Nilsa Velazquez. I'm the executive director of
Kidco Child Care. We are located in 3630 Northeast 1 Court. That's Wynwood community.
We were facing 90 percent reduction at the last Commissioners' hearing, and I heard that
Commissioner Winton is recommending additional funding for us. I wanted to appeal to -- we
have served the community for 26 years, providing services to at -risk children and 100 percent of
low-income families. We need your consideration, since we have other children from other
areas, like Allapattah and Edison Little River and Little Haiti, as well, so we ask for your
consideration in increasing our allocation to our maximum funding. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you. Go ahead, sir. Go ahead.
156 July 25, 2002
Gerardo Alvarez: Hi. My name is Gerardo Alvarez. My address is 2800 Northwest 18 Avenue,
Miami, Florida. I work for Catholic Charities Elderly Services and I'm here requesting
assistance with our Gesu Senior Center that is located in the downtown area. The Gesu Senior
Center's one that serves primarily residents from Overtown, downtown, and the East Little
Havana area. Our goal is to providing daily hot meals and activities, both educational,
informative, and recreational, to promote a sense of independence and keep them active to avoid
early institutionalization. In years past, we've been awarded $28,500 in CDBG funds and on this
year, it was re -- originally, we were going to issue the 28,500, but then we received notice that
the recommendation was lowered to $16,500, and what I'm asking is help from the City so that
we do not have to discontinue the service to some of our elderly that look forward to this that's --
the meals, they're a very integral part of their daily functioning, their orientation, their social
network, and their general well being, so we're asking that you increase the recommendation to
help this vulnerable population. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Commissioner Winton, anything else?
Vice Chairman Winton: Amilio, do you all want to loan me some money?
Chairman Regalado: We close the public hearing.
Commissioner Sanchez: I do.
Vice Chairman Winton: The --
Commissioner Sanchez: If you could yield, Commissioner.
Vice Chairman Winton: Sure.
Commissioner Sanchez: I wish I had money to give you, but I just found out I'm broke.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, let me --
Commissioner Sanchez: But let me just say, I think it's important -- and although the -- you
know, it's not in my district and once again, I think that one of the questions that you've got to
ask yourself -- and I do -- that I do all of the organizations in my district, how they have
performed, and I just want to ask Barbara how -- there are two organizations that provide
assistance to the elderly and meals and stuff. De Hostos Senior Center, how have they
performed at the year's end? Have they performed (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Vice Chairman Winton: De Hostos, you said?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, they're great.
157 July 25, 2002
Barbara Rodriguez (Assistant Director, Community Development): Barbara Rodriguez,
Community Development. On reference to De Hostos, they're running behind their
performance. When we monitored them March 31, they were supposed to have been at 50
percent of the -- what they promised delivered; they were at 38 percent, so as part of their
monitoring, they do have to increase in their weekend and home meals, and if you go back to it,
that's some concern that we have, that they were supposed to have done 2,000,000 -- 2,000 plus
meals and they were at 900, so from that angle, we're watching their performance to make sure
that they're (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: And how about the previous one, the other -- the ones before? Who
was before DeHostos Senior Center?
Chairman Regalado: You had Kidco and you had Jesu.
Ms. Rodriguez: Kidco is child care and they're --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no. The one you just (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Chairman Regalado: Jesu.
Ms. Rodriguez: The first one that spoke is from the housing agen -- from a housing component
and they have done excellent throughout the years, and what they do is they put security locks in
the elderly housing to prevent from victims of crime.
Vice Chairman Winton: But I would like to put on the record the impact of the decision that we
made in reallocating funding in District 2. Catholic Charities, Centro Espano, $22,000 less this
year than last year. The Jesu, which is Catholic Charities again, $12,000 less than last year;
Coconut Grove Cares, which is all kids, and the only entity in the West Grove that's getting a
dime in social services money, at all -- there isn't any for the LDC (Local Community
Development). There isn't any for Commissioner Gibson's program or anybody else, but that
program still had to be cut by $7,000. De Hostos got cut by $70,000, the Methodist Community
Church by $12,000, the Kidco Child Care in Wynwood by 30, the Lion's Home for the Blind by
72, but they got some additional money from somebody else, so that was -- thank goodness; and
Espira by 40,000, so every single agency, public service agency in my district took substantial
hits, every single one. There's no one got as much money this year as they did last year as a
result of our unanimous decision to review the way we look at this formula.
Commissioner Sanchez: They all took hits.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's the only choice I had.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, maybe -- well, just to put it on the record, Commissioner. They
all were reduced. Maybe yours more than others, but they were all reduced.
Vice Chairman Winton: What do you mean that, they're -- these are all in my district.
158 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: This was -- they wouldn't have been reduced if we wouldn't have
reallocated.
Ms. Rodriguez: Well --
Commissioner Sanchez: But you know -- but once again, you know what?
Chairman Regalado: Joe?
Commissioner Sanchez: You know what?
Ms. Rodriguez: They -- Commissioner, every agency got reduced because we got a reduce in
funding, so even putting back --
Vice Chairman Winton: But --
Ms. Rodriguez: -- program income, there was still a $400,000 reduction across everybody.
Chairman Regalado: No, but what Commissioner Winton is saying --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: -- a decision made here in reference to each district affected his more --
Ms. Rodriguez: Right.
Chairman Regalado: -- than it did --
Ms. Rodriguez: Correct.
Chairman Regalado: -- others and that's what he's saying.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, these were big cuts, not little cuts.
Chairman Regalado: Exactly. OK, we have a motion. Commissioner Winton --
Vice Chairman Winton: So every dollar that Commissioner Teele moved back over in this
direction will be greatly appreciated by somebody or somebodies [sic] here, so thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much. After we do some items, Johnny, I need to speak
about the workforce issue, and I know that you -- but I was -- I wanted to have a vote on this
item and Item --
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
159 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- 9, and then if we move to PZ (Planning & Zoning) because we -- as a
deference to elected officials, we have here a very dear state representative, who represents the
City of Miami and very well, and he wishes to speak on one PZ item, so we will accommodate
him in a few minutes, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I move the allocation in --
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- Item 8.
Chairman Regalado: -- and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- a second on Item 8.
Commissioner Teele: 8, as it relates to District 2 item, and would you amend that to allow the
item relating to District 5 to carry over to September 12?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. September 11.
Commissioner Teele: Whatever date.
Vice Chairman Winton: Whatever the date it was.
Commissioner Teele: You're going to move everything from whatever date to whatever date.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Right. OK. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
160 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-878
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 02-772, ADOPTED AT THE SPECIAL CITY
COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 81 2002, RELATING TO THE
ALLOCATION OF $119281400 OF 28TH YEAR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS AND
$96000 OF PROGRAM INCOME IN THE CATEGORY OF PUBLIC
SERVICES, BY SPECIFYING THE AGENCIES PROVIDING SAID
SERVICES IN DISTRICT 2 WITH THE AVAILABLE ALLOCATION OF
$462,144 AND ALSO THE $40,000 PUBLIC SERVICES DISTRICT 5
PRIORITY SET-ASIDE FOR THE 28TH PROGRAM YEAR BEGINNING
OCTOBER 1, 2002; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH SAID AGENCIES FOR SAID
PURPOSE, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY,
SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE CITY CODE PROVISIONS.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
161 July 25, 2002
32. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 02-774 RELATING TO ALLOCATION OF $21223,400 OF
28Tx YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS
IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY, BY ALLOCATING $400,000 TO SPECIFIC
AGENCIES PROVIDING SAID SERVICES IN DISTRICT 2 FOR 28TH PROGRAM YEAR
BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2002.
REGARDING RESERVES IN DISTRICT 5, TO INCLUDE FULL AMOUNT AND TO
PROVIDE APPROPRIATE NOTICE TO PUBLIC WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION
RELATING TO ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM, INCLUDING PREVIOUS YEAR FUNDING.
Chairman Regalado: Item 9 is a companion, right?
Dan Fernandes (Acting Director, Community Development): Item 9 is a similar issue. It deals
with the Economic Development funds. Again, in District 2, the monies were lumped into a pool
to be allocated specifically at this particular meeting.
Chairman Regalado: OK. All -- do we have a motion on 9?
Mr. Fernandes: It's a public hearing, Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, it is. It's a resolution and this is an amendment to a resolution. This
is a public hearing allocation of CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds; inviting
the public to address the Commission on this item. Being none, we close the public hearing. Do
we have a motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes, I do. Move the allocation.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
162 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-879
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 02-774, ADOPTED AT THE SPECIAL COMMISSION
MEETING OF JULY 81 2002, RELATING TO THE ALLOCATION OF
$2,223,400 OF 28TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
CATEGORY, BY ALLOCATING $400,000 TO SPECIFIC AGENCIES
LISTED HEREIN PROVIDING SAID SERVICES IN DISTRICT 2 FOR THE
28TH PROGRAM YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2002; AND FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT
WITH SAID AGENCIES FOR SAID PURPOSE, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE
TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE CITY CODE
PROVISIONS.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Regalado: Ok. We --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, may I also make a motion regarding the reserves from
District 5 to include the full amount and include a notice relating -- and a staff recommendation
relating to the alternatives program of Ms. Georgia Ayers, including the previous year funding
and a staff recommendation. I would so move.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved, and do we have a second --
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- on this? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
163 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION 02-880
A MOTION REGARDING THE RESERVES IN DISTRICT 5, TO INCLUDE
THE FULL AMOUNT AND TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE NOTICES) TO
THE PUBLIC WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION RELATING TO THE
ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM, INCLUDING THE PREVIOUS YEAR
FUNDING.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
33. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 02-775 RELATING TO ALLOCATION OF $11117,500 OF
28Tx YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS
IN CATEGORY OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, BY ESTABLISHING DISTRICT 2
HOUSING RESERVE FUND WITH $178,800 OF 28TH YEAR CDBG FUNDS AVAILABLE
IN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY FOR DISTRICT 2.
Chairman Regalado: As I said, we have a state representative, Gus Barrero, here and I was told
that he wishes to address the Commission --
Vice Chairman Winton: Do -- are we going to do --
Chairman Regalado: -- on PZ -5.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry. Isn't 10 related to all this?
Dan Fernandes (Acting Director, Community Development): Item 10 is also related,
Commissioner. It is the Housing component.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK.
Mr. Fernandes: And just for the record again, the speaker that spoke on public services earlier
for Jewish Family Services, the funding that she was talking about specifically related to this
particular category.
164 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion on 10?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved --
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: -- and second. This is a public hearing. We invite the public to address the
Commission on this item. Being none, we close the public hearing. Item 10 has been moved
and second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-881
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 02-775, ADOPTED AT THE SPECIAL CITY
COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 8, 2002, RELATING TO THE
ALLOCATION OF $111171500 OF 28TH YEAR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM FUNDS IN THE
CATEGORY OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, BY ESTABLISHING A
DISTRICT 2 HOUSING RESERVE FUND WITH THE $178,800 OF 28TH
YEAR CDBG FUNDS AVAILABLE IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
CATEGORY FOR DISTRICT 2.
(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
165 July 25, 2002
34. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL
PRESERVATION BOARD DECISION CONCERNING REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF
TREES AT 2015 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE FOR INSTALLATION OF PLAYING (BALL)
FIELDS, TO COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 26,
2002.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Item PZ -5 is a second reading ordinance.
Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: This is a companion to PZ -6. It's 24415 Northwest 16 Street Road.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Would the Chair and the Commission entertain for one second a
continuance on PZ -19 so Mr. Gibbs can leave?
Chairman Regalado: Again?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Again.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: On Ransom Everglades, we would like a continuance to the next P&Z
meeting. I believe that would be the September meeting.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You --
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning)" September 26.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And we apologize.
Chairman Regalado: You want it -- you want spots in the agenda for December and January of
2003?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We deserve that, yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, you do.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Chairman Regalado: Johnny, they want the spots on September and also --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: October --
166 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- in January of 2003 and January 2004.
Vice Chairman Winton: We should be taking out options on this deal.
Tucker Gibbs: They're in the stock market.
Chairman Regalado: Call the Guinness World of Record. OK.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Back to -- OK. Are you OK with that deferral? He's OK. Everybody's --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: He moved it, I think, but --
Chairman Regalado: You moved it?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We have a mover by Winton. I don't have a second or a
vote.
Chairman Regalado: We need a second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: Second by Commissioner Sanchez. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: You have your deferral.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
IUV III[IpZ:1611
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF HISTORIC
AND ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION BOARD DECISION
CONCERNING REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF TREES AT
APPROXIMATELY 2015 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE FOR INSTALLATION
OF PLAYING (BALL) FIELDS, TO THE COMMISSION MEETING
CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
167 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
35. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION
FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" AT
2415 NW 16TH STREET ROAD.
Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -5. It's --
Vicky Garcia -Toledo: This is in --
Chairman Regalado: 2415 Northwest 16 Street Road.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, this is in Commissioner Gonzalez' and he's not on the --
Chairman Regalado: It is in Commissioner Gonzalez district. He is -- he knows. I think he's in
a meeting, but he said that he'll come out for this item. PZ -5.
Vice Chairman Winton: What item is this?
Chairman Regalado: PZ -5.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: And 6.
Chairman Regalado: And the reason we're jumping is because we have an elected official here
that wishes to participate in the debate.
Commissioner Sanchez: Out of professional courtesy --
Vice Chairman Winton: Very important elected official.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- for an outstanding representative.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Hey, he brought a check -- no, two checks this morning.
Vice Chairman Winton: Would you make clear what that was for on the record, please, sir?
168 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: For the Parks Department. Go ahead.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: You want me to proceed? Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record,
Vicky Garcia -Toledo, with offices at 2500 First Union Financial Center, and I am here today
representing Munez Development, through its president Jorge Munez, who is also the president
of River Run South. River Run South is a development company which has, under contract for,
purchased the property at 2415 Northwest 16 Street Road, which is approximately 2.68 acres of
land. The property currently has a split designation. A portion of the property is industrial, the
other one is residential. This application requests and seeks to consolidate the property under
one designation, so that it may be developed, and we are requesting a land use of medium
density residential and of R-3, which is the zoning aspect of it, and the land use request is
consistent with your Comprehensive Plan and your land use policies, and without enumerating
the policies individually, because we have done so before on the record, these are land use
policies which mandate that the City of Miami improve the quality of life of its residents,
increase home ownership, redevelop and revitalize threatened neighborhoods, increase
affordable housing, secure county, federal, and state funds for housing. You will hear more of
this in detail later. The zoning request is consistent with the residential uses of a very stable
neighborhood. This property is surrounded on three sides by residential use, and I'd like to show
you the photographs of the properties directly surrounding the site. The proposed project is for
affordable housing. when this application was first submitted to the county, it was submitted for
low-income rentals. After its research, the developer found that the real demand in this
community is for affordable home ownership, and as a result -- and I'd like to put into the record
-- he submitted, in March 22 of this year, a request to Miami -Dade County to change and amend
that application to ownership and to affordable housing. The letter that I'm putting into the
record --
Commissioner Sanchez: Can I interrupt you for a minute?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Absolutely.
Commissioner Sanchez: I've been advised by the Attorney that we need to swear everybody in
who's going to testify, so Madam Clerk?
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We need everyone who's going to testify to please stand --
Commissioner Sanchez: On this item or any other item that had just gotten here, please, for the
record.
Ms. Thompson: I need you to stand and please raise your right hand. Thank you.
AT THIS POINT, THE CITY CLERK ADMINISTERED OATH, REQUIRED UNDER CITY
CODE SECTION 62-1 TO THOSE PERSONS GIVING TESTIMONY ON ZONING ISSUES.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Attached to that letter is the actual letter from the Miami -Dade Housing
Authority granting the amendment of the original application to home ownership, which has
169 July 25, 2002
been now been approved by both the Housing Authority and the Commission for Miami -Dade
County. You should also be advised that this property received a grant from Miami -Dade
County for land acquisition of $1,000,000 and that there is, right now, a pending application with
Miami -Dade County for $1,000,000 of public funds for the construction of this project. This
particular application has the support of Commissioner Bruno Barreiro and under Tab 7 of the
book that we submitted into the record last year and that -- I mean, last meeting -- and that you
all have -- you have a letter of support from him. You will also hear more about this later. This
project is consistent with the City of Miami Development Summit that Commissioner Sanchez
was so kind to organize, and head, as well as with the city, county and the state of Florida Infill
Plan. The project, in terms of its esthetics, will require a Class 2 Special Permit for design,
which will be submitted to City after appropriate approvals. The developer has also offered to
work with the department and the community in the develop and design of the project. There are
some basic facts about this land, and it is that this land has never been developed in any form,
and I'd like to submit into the record a copy of the City of Miami printout showing the CU, or
Certificate of Use, activity on this parcel of land, which shows that since the 1950's when this
information went into the system, there has been no Certificate of Use obtained by anyone on
this property. In the past, you have heard some confusing testimony that this land has been used
in the past, but if it has been used by anyone, it certainly did not have the appropriate City
approvals obtained. You also have under Tab 3 of that book the letter from Erik Person, who is
here and will speak to you a little later, stating that this property had been vacant and listed for
sale for nine years, and this is the first contract that they have ever received on the property. You
also have received into the record over 600 signatures in support of this project, and you have
approval and recommendations of approval from your expert staff, your Planning Department.
This project has also received approval from the Planning Advisory Board by a vote of 5 to 2,
and in the Zoning Board by a vote of 6 to 2. At this time, I would like to introduce
Representative Barreiro, who would like to address this project and subsequent to that, I'd like to
introduce Jerry Proctor, who will be testifying as a planning expert on this application.
Gus Barreiro: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I stand before you to
ask for your approval of this plan.
Chairman Regalado: Your name, Gus Barreiro.
Mr. Barreiro: Gus Barreiro, 325 Ocean Drive, Miami Beach, Florida.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Mr. Barreiro: One of the things that I would like to stress to you all -- and I think everybody
here who deals in public with constituents like I do, probably the one -- number one issue that we
deal with it is housing, in public housing in coming into our offices, and we all know the rules
and the number of people that -- over 6,000 people are looking for public housing in the City of
Miami on the rolls as we speak. This is not about developing high-priced homes that individuals
cannot afford on the river, but rather, low-income housing that people can, for the first time
maybe, believe in the American Dream, which is ownership of a home. I ask your approval of
this project because it truly will blend in with the aspects of the river. As many of you know, I
sponsored the funding for the river dredging and the River Commission up in Tallahassee, and I
170 July 25, 2002
will continue to do so. I'm a great supporter of the river and in keeping it as a working river, but
also maintaining as a working river is the development of the river and this truly will blend in,
and this will not go away from the scope of the original legislation that was created in
Tallahassee in reference to what the river should look like at the end. I ask for your support
again. I think it would be a great step forward of development in allowing over 174 families to
own their home for the first time, whether it's on the river, and this (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
property happens to be on the river. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Commissioners, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Maxwell: Because I know that you have a long agenda today, one of the things that I think
that you should be aware of is just to remind you that what's before you now is an application for
a change in the Comprehensive Plan, one, and I believe a companion plan -- application to
amend the zoning ordinance. This project that's being discussed and the use of the land has been
proposed to be put to is not before you today. At such time that such a project would actually be
proposed and approval sought from this City, it will come to you at that time. The -- if you
should approve the applications before you today, the applicant will be able to use that property
in all the ways permitted under this zoning and comp. plan designation. It is not a public hearing
on this particular use.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Why don't we --
Mr. Maxwell: So to that extent, it's not relevant.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Why don't we limit the scope and then, you know, on the merits of
what we have here on second reading.
Mr. Maxwell: OK. That would apply to sides, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Of course --
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: -- it would.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, the on --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, there is opposition. We want to know if there is any opposition to this
project. Anybody? OK. We need to sort this --
Ms. Thompson: We did, Commissioner.
171 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Oh, we did. All right. I'm sorry. I didn't --
Commissioner Teele: It's second reading, right?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: It is second reading. It is second reading --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Commissioner, just --
Chairman Regalado: -- on both --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: -- to respond, the request that we are making here today would only allow
us to use this property as residential apartment use.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: You heard what she said?
Lourdes Slazyk: For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Planning and Zoning. The R-3 category allows
other uses that would be permissible on this property if the land use and zoning change were to
be approved. Day care centers and -- you know, there's a series of other uses, but it is primarily
for a medium density multifamily residential, but there are other smaller uses that are allowed.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Jerry Proctor: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Jerry Proctor, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I am
here in my capacity this evening as a Certified Planner. I will submit my resume into the record.
Mr. Chairman, I want to stick to just the planning issues here and the zoning issues, not what
might be built and the number of units, as you said earlier. I just want to go over two or three
points, I think some of which have been raised in your staff recommendation and some of which
might have been addressed in prior hearings strictly relating to the planning and the zoning
designation on this property. As you've heard, Mr. Chairman, this property has a split
designation. It really cannot be efficiently developed with a split designation. Your
Comprehensive Plan speaks to that on the very first page, right after the table of contents. In the
future land use portion of the code, it states that the code in the land use plan should -- and I
quote -- promote efficient use of land and minimize land use conflicts. What we have right now
on the property is, in essence, within the property, a land use conflict. We have two different
zoning designations and the property cannot really be efficiently developed, using the words of
the plan, the way it's currently designated. We believe that the most logical choice going
forward would be to redesignate this property and develop it in the R-3 manner, and I want to
talk about just a couple of points that lead me to that conclusion. This property -- Mr. Chairman,
this property is located in the orange here on this exhibit. It is located, as you can see, at the
northern terminus in -- really in the middle of a developed residential area. You have some
172 July 25, 2002
multifamily and some duplexes. You even have some scattered single-family, but it's primarily
a multifamily area, and this property sits at the northern end of this community directly adjacent
to it, but between the community and the river, along Northwest 16 Avenue Road. This
property, as Ms. Garcia -Toledo has already mentioned, has residential designation on three sides
already, and we would suggest to you, as -- in terms of planning principles, that to have some
other designation or not to approve the continued and expanded residential designation that
we're seeking would really be incompatible with what is an established planned and zoned
residential area. This area is really distinct in that regard from the area to the east. The area to
the east has the SD -4 designation going deeper south from the river. It has cargo uses, larger
marine -related uses that are zoned and master planned coming this way to the east, and a depth
of several hundred feet from the river to work with to place those marine uses and to be further
away and not in the middle of a residential community. This property, unlike the area to the east,
is in the middle of a residential community, and at the base of a river, and for that matter,
residential even across the river with this R-4 designation. Let me just mention a couple of other
things as you make your choice here this evening. The SD -4, which is the overlay district that
we are seeking to remove, has some quite intense development limitations that would be applied
if it were to be continued or even expanded. The SD -4 permits a floor area ratio of 1.72, a
setback of buildings of only five feet from the property line, and a building height of about 120
feet maximum of about 12 stories. The R-3 designation, which is what we're seeking, again in
the midst of our residential neighbors, allows -- requires a 20 -foot front and rear setback, a 50 -
foot building height maximum only about five stories and a floor area ratio of about 0.75.
The zoning that we are seeking, as a result, requires four times the setback and allows only less
than half of the floor area ratio, and less than half of the building height. We think that this
designation, because of our location at this point and because of these limitations that we're
going to have to adhere to, makes a lot more sense in this location. I'm not suggesting that this
would make as much sense, perhaps, somewhere else along the river; perhaps to the east, where
you have a greater concentration of SD -4, but in this location, I believe it's logical. Just a couple
of other points. Your master plan, as it's been noted in the future land use element, to the extent
that there are any other provisions in your master plan that might conflict or bring doubt on the
land use provisions that your staff has quoted, I would say to you this: The land use provisions
in the future land use element, which is really the constitution at the beginning of your plan, to
the extent that there are any conflicts -- and I'm not suggesting that there are -- those provisions
that we've already quoted from and that your staff has quoted from really should govern and
should supersede any potential conflicts in your plan. I'm not suggesting that there are any.
There are some provisions in your plan, for example, that deal with a term known as "Port of
Miami River;" talks about certain sites along the river, and we looked at this because we're
obviously along the river. Here's what that section of the plan indicates, and this is within your
ports and aviation element; says that "The port of Miami River is a name used to identify some
14 independent, privately owned small shipping companies located along the river." We're not
one of those shipping company properties. We have never had a use on this property. This
section of the master plan, although it does talk about the river under the term "Port of Miami
River," simply does not apply to this property, and therefore, we think that your staff report is
accurate when it hones in on the inefficient use of -- inefficient designation that we currently
have and the efficiency and acceptability of the designation that we're seeking. Mr. Chairman,
just one other issue that I think has come up at some of the prior hearings. I have not attended
any of the prior hearings. Concern about compatibility along the river of our proposed
173 July 25, 2002
residential use with our neighbors. We have looked at the yacht basin use to our east which
exists and we've looked at similar facilities up and down the river, and our client is here and can
personally testify to the information that I'm going to submit, and the information I'm going to
submit is a list of marine service similar type operations located along the river. There is a list of
some 10 or so facilities with name, address and phone numbers and hours of operation. Almost
without fail, we have hours of operation during the daylight hours, generally Monday through
Friday. Some are eight to four. Some are eight to five. A couple of them are open for very
limited hours on Saturday. These facilities, such as the yacht basin to our east -- and that's a
good example in terms of practice -- they do create some impact. Any use on a property creates
an impact, but that impact, and that activity, and the noise, and things that might be associated
with it happen during very limited hours. They happen at a level that's acceptable to us and I
have this list to present to you.
Chairman Regalado: You may give it to the City Clerk. Are you done?
Mr. Proctor: Yes, sir. I'm here to -- happy to answer any questions and I appreciate your
attention.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Are you done with the presentation, Vicky?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: There's several individuals that would like to speak in favor of this project,
but I've just noted that the Commissioner for the district, his absence from the dais. If you wish
us to defer until he returns, we'll be happy to do so.
Chairman Regalado: No.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: It's your pleasure.
Chairman Regalado: We'll continue with the meeting --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: OK.
Chairman Regalado: -- until, you know, we're finished because we do have -- you know, we try
to accommodate --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I understand.
Chairman Regalado: -- Representative Barreiro and we skipped several of the PZ items --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I understand.
Chairman Regalado: -- and we have several people here waiting for that.
Commissioner Sanchez: But, Mr. Chairman, can we limit it to two minutes?
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry?
174 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Can we limit it to two minutes per person --
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, sure.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- that are going to be testifying for or against?
Chairman Regalado: Sure. Do we have anybody who opposes this --
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Maxwell: Well, Commissioner, I thought I heard Ms. Garcia -Toledo say that there were a
couple of people who still wanted to speak --
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Maxwell: -- in favor.
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely.
Mr. Maxwell: I think you may want to hear those to keep it in order, and then move to the --
Chairman Regalado: Sure.
Mr. Maxwell: -- opponents.
Chairman Regalado: We'll hear the people in favor of the project and then we'll hear the people
in opposition. It is the wish of this Commission to limit to two minutes. Madam City Clerk, run
the clock. Go ahead, sir.
Mariano Cruz: OK. Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26 Street. I'm here on behalf of my
daughter that lives at Fern Isle Development at 1315 Northwest 24 Avenue, and Dr. Soraya
(phonetic), 2101 Northwest 14 Street, right in the neighborhood within 350 feet. The only thing
I'd like to say is that I am for affordable housing. We should have that in Miami. The other day,
Mr. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Martinez was here, the secretary of HUD (Housing and Urban
Development), and he is for affordable home ownership. He said that at the beginning when he
took his position and he repeated it the other day at the National Council of La Rosa (phonetic)
in Miami Beach. You see downtown now going -- commercial property is being developed into
residential property. The old Dade Federal Building is being developed by Mr. Constantine as
residential property and one thing. Miami's been converted to a play, but people come to work.
People are being -- residential property is being converted into commercial property for many
years. You go to the Civic Center and you go to (UNINTELLIGIBLE) that used to be residential
property; it's now an office building that UM (University of Miami) has there. You go around
there and you see that we need more and more and more affordable housing. That's what
175 July 25, 2002
stabilizes the neighborhood and they say that the river are good neighbors, but I can mention
here a lot of violations of the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- I'm not going to say that, but a lot of
violations in the Zoning Code that the people of the river are doing with the containers, and it's
right here, City code, you can check it. Page 391, 942.3. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you, sir. Go ahead, sir. Your name and address.
Erik Person: My name is Erick Person, 801 Brickell Avenue. I'm a Senior Vice President with
Grove & Ellis Company (phonetic). I represent the owner of this site. I've been marketing this
property on an exclusive basis for nine years. In the early `90's, in 1993 through 1996, there
were numerous inquiries from the marine industry for this site. Those inquiries never led to an
acceptable deal. It was my experience that the perspective purchasers in the marine business
were not sufficiently capitalized. Nothing happened with the site. We entered into a long period
of slow activity. In the last two to three years, I have averaged perhaps two to three calls a week
on this property. Every single one, without exception, was from residential development. This
property has been vacant since 1993 when I started. It was acquired by the present owner, who
is a elderly widow presiding in New York. This is her only asset, her -- has a strong desire to
sell it. It has been used mostly as a dumping ground for garbage. Over the past nine years, I've
had to hire people from time in, time out to clean it up. In my judgment, this is the perfect use of
the site. It is a beautiful site that will be successfully developed for the residents of the area, and
I think it is very, very positive for the district. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead.
Marisol Trujillo (as translated by Chairman Regalado) then by Manuel Matienzo) My name is
Marisol Trujillo. My address is 2650 Northwest 25 Avenue. I am representing the group of
residents who live around where the site is being planned for condominiums. They couldn't
attend because of work reasons.
Ms. Trujillo (as translated by official Spanish interpreter Manuel Matienzo) : I am here in
support of the project that it is thought will be built. Inasmuch as I am in accord with the
perspective benefits to all the neighboring citizens, in the first place, it would improve the area.
Inasmuch as I would -- it would improve piece of land, which is vacant and would then also
preclude the illegal activities going on around there. I am not in accord with the container
business, since I would produce traffic in the area during the daytime, but at night it would not be
welcomed. That is the reason I request from the Commissioners to think of all of us who live
there and who are of moderate means.
Chairman Regalado: Gracias. Thank you. Next.
Acela Rio (as translated by official Spanish interpreter Manuel Matienzo). Good afternoon. I
am Acela Rio, a political activist and I'm an ex -prisoner for political reasons. I live at 1855
Northwest 15 Avenue. I am in accord and I give my unconditional support to the project because
the project would be very good for Allapattah. Do you realize what it would mean for the low-
income families of Allapattah to become property owners? You realize what it would mean to
have people in Allapattah to become owners? Even I would buy a little house or an apartment. I
176 July 25, 2002
believe that all of low-income who could purchase their own apartment, I beg God to bless them
and that we end up owning our own apartments; that all of the Commissioners give their support
to that. Allapattah would be a very happy neighborhood. I apologize for my lack of oratorical
skills. Good afternoon and thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Clarivel Gonzalez (as translated by official Spanish interpreter Manuel Matienzo): Good
afternoon. My name is Clarivel Gonzalez, 2200 Northwest 16 Street. I come as I did before, to
support the condominium project because I'm a local resident there and we have many problems
with the people who move around the place. I wish for the Commissioners to please give us
their support because that would benefit us very much if that were built. The situation of stolen
cars around the place would also be finished and of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) gangs that break our
windows in the night and go there to smoke and to do drugs. I also want to thank the police that
when I came the last time to announce or denounce the theft of a almost brand new car, took
action by going immediately and verifying that the car was indeed a stolen vehicle. Thank you
very much.
Chairman Regalado : Go ahead.
Frank De La Paz: Good evening. My name is Frank De La Paz, with an office at 600 Palm
Avenue, Hialeah. Inasmuch, I also a property owner in the City of Miami. I was here for
another item. I mean, as much as I have yet to hear the opposition, I can figure it out where it
might be coming from, even though I don't like to speculate. I will tell you that I intend to be in
favor of this project. I think it's something that is greatly needed on the City. I heard some
rumors and I -- as much as I don't pay attention to rumors, I know that somebody's going to say,
well, we should buy it and keep it as a green area. Well, that could have been done many years
ago and nobody stepped forward, and that's a pretty lame excuse now to stop a development.
Another excuse might be that we want to use it for the maritime business and use it as a
container yard. Well, it's surrounded by residential. You all going to have all the neighbors
complaining about the truckers that's coming in and out. Not having much experience on
container and transportation, but I can venture to tell you that those who will claim that we're
going to have a future need for the expansion of our ports because some markets might open up,
I can tell you that before 1958, those markets would sell out of New Orleans because you don't
serve those type of markets with little 100 -foot freighters out of the river, and there's going to be
a lot of competition from other ports to serve those markets, so that excuse, to me, is totally
invalid to use it to stop this development, which I believe is creating a need in the City and I
strongly order you to approve it.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you. Are you done?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes. I would request the -- our remaining time for rebuttal.
Chairman Regalado: Absolutely.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you.
177 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Those in opposition, would you come and --
Fran Bohnsack: Good evening, Mr. Chair. My name is Frank Bohnsack. I'm the executive
director of the Miami River Marine Group, which is a not-for-profit trade association that
represents the marine industry on the Miami River. I would like to respectfully request that you
allow me the same amount of time and presentation as given to counsel for the applicant. You
voted on the two minutes per person at the end of her presentation and I think it would only be
fair if you would allow me an equal amount of time. Additionally, I have retained a professional
planning person to provide an analysis of this property and I want that also for the record, but I
think it would be beneficial for you to hear it.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. City Attorney, how do we deal in time wise?
Mr. Maxwell: I think the request is a reasonable one, that the opponents be allowed to put their
case on in chief to the same extent of time that you allowed Ms. Garcia -Toledo. I don't know
how long that was; maybe the Clerk could tell us, but a reasonable period of time
(UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: The Clerk will tell us, but I'm sure that, more or less, you have an idea of -
Ms. Bohnsack: I will do my very best not to repeat myself and to give you the --
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead. Go ahead, Doctor.
Ms. Bohnsack: -- the most expedient version. I passed out some --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, now we have -- excuse me -- but we have on the record
now from the previous hearing -- the previous hearing is also a part of this hearing, is that right?
Mr. Maxwell: That's correct.
Commissioner Teele: So I think, you know, we need to be --
Chairman Regalado: Where is --
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: -- Peter?
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, if I may. The Clerk has also raised another issue. She's raised the
issue of whether or not Ms. Bohn -- I'm sorry.
Chairman Regalado: Bohnsack.
178 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: -- Bohnsack is a registered lobbyist, if she has complied with our lobbyist
provisions? Apparently, the Clerk's records don't show or reflect that she is a registered
lobbyist, and she has indicated on the record that she is an employee of this group, so I think she
falls within the lobbyist provisions.
Ms. Bohnsack: Excuse me. It's my under -- I made specific inquiries about whether I needed to
register and I was asked at my last appearance about registration.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, will you comply at the close of the
hearing?
Ms. Bohnsack: Yes. Am I required to?
Commissioner Teele: I think we need to be very careful in the zoning manners and I think a
simple statement that she will comply -- she's well known to this community. She's a former
state representative. I don't see a need -- think we need to discuss this any further. If you're
going to comply at the close of the meeting today or within 24 hours or sometime, then I think
that's reasonable, but I just want to make sure that this thing doesn't go on and on and on over
matters that we've had -- that we have on the record, and the only reason, Ms. Bohnsack, that
I'm speaking on this is that I saw a number of people who spoke before -- in fact, I see the fine
young lady from Punta Gorda, I think it was? That's right -- is back with us, and so I just want
everybody to know we listen, we listen very carefully, and it's no need to make the same
presentations that were made before, but I think you're entitled to the same amount of time as the
person who made -- if you are, in fact, making the main presentation for the opposition.
Chairman Regalado: Would you check for us, Madam City Clerk, more or less, the time that
Ms. Garcia -Toledo had so Dr. Bohnsack can use that time?
Ms. Bohnsack: Thank you, and --
Chairman Regalado: Well, I'm told that she presented for six minutes. I think not. I think she
introduced the expert and you may do so, so you can speak for six minutes and then introduce
your expert.
Ms. Bohnsack: Thank you. I will be brief. The exhibits that I've given you do include the first
two pieces which are repetitions, and that is to remind you of the value, the economic value of
the Miami River, and to remind you that your City does have in its Comprehensive Plan
protective language about the port of the Miami River. With respect to Mr. Proctor, those 14
terminals that he referred to that are described in the Comprehensive Plan, those are 30 terminals
today, and the fact that the property size is too small to serve a company as a shipping port
doesn't mean that it's insignificant in servicing the industry for a variety of marine, industrial
and marine mobilization uses. I would also say, since I've actually started with Mr. Proctor's
testimony, that there is a certain misunderstanding about the hours and the functions of marine
industry, and I'm hoping that you will accept my expertise on that. For the most part, the cargo
industry is 24 hours. It's related to the tide and we have professional captains here tonight that
you can direct your questions to. Last time, as you recall, I pointed out to you that the proposed
179 July 25, 2002
zoning change defies not only the current use, because the property next door, you will recall,
there was quite a bit of controversy about whether it was an active property or not. If you look
behind Tab 4 of these exhibits, these are new photographs. I went back to the site twice. They
are dated, as you can see. After July -- June 27, I went on July 1 and you can see that the ship is
still being worked on under the shed. You can see it on the next page, which is the western
boundary of the adjacent property next door. It's exactly what would be right next door to
housing and recall, please, that we are not against housing, but we think that this is an
inappropriate area for it. The eastern boundary, you can see, has two large cargo vessels, and if
you turn the page, you'll see in photographs taken on a different date, an even larger cargo
vessels. I would point out that these are not 100 -foot freighters, as Mr. La Paz mentioned in his
testimony. They're closer to 300 feet, and they carry containers. They're -- some of them go to
state-of-the-art facilities, so those are misunderstandings of marine industry that I feel I need to
clarify here. Historic use. I've given you documentation in the last package; a survey, contracts
of historic use of the property in question, so I hope that you've had a chance to take a look at
those, and then also new to this package, behind Tab 3, your own City ordinance -- excuse me,
Resolution Number 00-313, passed on April 13, 2000, and this goes really to the testimony of
my friend, Representative Barreiro, as well, and that is the agreement by the City to participate in
the partnership to dredge the Miami River. The language in your ordinance -- and you have it in
front of you and I've highlighted it -- says, "The Miami River, an extremely vital economic
source of the City of Miami and all of South Florida, requires wholesale dredging along its entire
link to maintain and improve navigation." And then the next, "Whereas, the dredging of the
Miami River will enhance commerce, bring added revenue to local businesses involved in the
shipping trade, marine repair and related services, and will increase the value of properties
located along the Miami River." This same resolution commits the City to spending $1,900,000
for the first year of its local partner share, and overall it commits the City to spend $5,045,000 on
the dredging project, so my question is to is why would you authorize in -- what is very limited
marine industry, it's the yellow on that board, I remind you. It's very, very limited -- why would
you authorize that amount of money to be spent by the City of Miami to dredge a river to 15 feet
for clear, navigational commercial traffic and then have the waterfront be used by a non -water
dependent, not water -related use? Residential that has marina is an amenity; it does not need 15
feet of water. I think that's an important consideration, and as to Representative Barreiro, we're
grateful for his help in obtaining these funds, and the State itself has committed $10,000,000 to
dredge this river for a navigational purpose, so I think those things are, of course, relevant. I will
move through this so that I can (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: Doctor, just to remind you.
Ms. Bohnsack: Yes. I will --
Chairman Regalado: You have 14 minutes left on your presentation.
Ms. Bohnsack: Oh, I only need three more myself.
Chairman Regalado: Well, God bless you.
180 July 25, 2002
Ms. Bohnsack: Thanks. You have talked about this property or that -- it has been said that this
property is surrounded by residential and in the largest sense, that's true, but when you look at
the contiguous nature of the marine industrial area, what you will see is that it really isn't
surrounded by residential. The northern boundary is the Miami River, and by the way, the
applicant's own analysis that came from the Dynotech report says that, that the northern
boundary is the river, and that is, in fact, where the line is drawn, the zoning line, and to the east
we know it's marine industrial; to the south, it's across the street, etcetera, so the only residential
that currently exists there is the one that just touches with the point on the river, and I think that's
important. The Dynotech report at hand says that it's always been a vacant lot. It doesn't say
that there hasn't been use there. It looks only at two indicators: storage tanks and industrial
waste. That doesn't mean it wasn't serving as a site, and in fact, you have evidence in your
possession that it was. I would also point out that the Dynotech report suggests that there were
no indications of suspicious activities observed on the site when they went to check it out, so
that's counter to some of the public testimony that you've heard. I do think it's important that
you hear our professional planner. I'd like to turn the microphone over to Mark Alvarez and to
the other folks who would like your attention. Finally, I would say, though, I've learned in this
process that sometimes new information comes out in the rebuttal and there we are stuck. We
can't respond to it even if we know it's wrong, so if there is any question in your mind about
anything, I hope that you will, please, ask us to respond.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Mr. Alvarez, you have 12 minutes --
Mark Alvarez: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: -- for your presentation.
Mr. Alvarez: Mark Alvarez, I'm a Certified Planner, AICP, business address at 247 Southwest 8
Street, Number 214, Miami. I'm here representing the Miami -- well, (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
opposing this application. Essentially, you know, this, in planning language, is something that,
besides being an encroachment to something we call coming to a nuisance, that basically means
that with each encroachment, as you bring residential, which is a less obnoxious use, you bring it
closer to the more obnoxious use, which is industrial, and you create incompatibilities between
land uses and that's what you would be doing here by changing -- by amending the
Comprehensive Plan and changing the zoning, you'd be doing it legally, but you would be
creating an environment (UNINTELLIGIBLE) right for more incompatibilities. That said, part
of the presentation that was made for this project, so that it is entirely consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan, that's not true. There are many elements of the -- there are many policies
in the City's Comprehensive Plan with which this is not consistent. They are in the ports and
aviation element. Before I go into those, I know Mr. Proctor made a presentation that included
the footnote under the Port of Miami River, which essentially, that footnote says that there is no
geographic definition to this port; that it consists of these 14 terminals. However, the Florida
Growth Management Statute 163, specifically 163.3194, .3201, .3202 established that the zoning
ordinance is related to the Comprehensive Plan and it actually, in fact, implements the
Comprehensive Plan. In this case, you have a zoning district called SD -4, Waterfront Industrial
District. That district, in its intense section, Section 604.1 -- I won't read it to save a little time --
but it basically says all of the same things. It describes all the same uses and all of the same
181 July 25, 2002
goals that the Port of Miami River element of the Comprehensive Plan describes, and therefore,
according to the State's requirement for this relationship, basically any property that is SD -4 is
the Port of Miami River, so it is geographically defined. The policies, which is not consistent,
are objective PA -3.1 -- and I'll read them quickly -- Policy PA -3.1.1, 3.1.2, and policy 3.1.3,
which together essentially say that the City of Miami shall protect, maintain and expand the Port
of Miami River uses through the land development regulations. There's no question there.
Protect, maintain and expand each of those policies. Objective 3 -- PA -3.3 is about coordinating
the planning of the Miami River, and it says that the City shall coordinate the Port of Miami
River (UNINTELLIGIBLE) -- I'm sorry -- shall coordinate the planning of the Port of Miami
River with other providers and regulators, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Coast Guard and by another section of the State Statutes, the Miami River Commission, which is
163.06. It's also not consistent with policy PA -3.3.1, in which the City of Miami -- it is said that
the City of Miami shall support the functions of the Miami River with respect to the unique
characteristics of the Port of Miami River's location and economic position. It is also not
supportive -- I mean -- I'm sorry -- it's not consistent with policy LU (Land Use), and this is
from the land use element, LU -1.3.1, which says that the City will continue to provide incentives
for commercial redevelopment and new construction, and among a whole list of things, the river
corridor. It is also not consistent with policy LU -- also land use element -- 1.3.7, which says
that the City will continue to use the City's enterprise zone, which is -- this property is a part of -
- to stimulate economic revitalization and encourage employment opportunities. If we displace
this with residential, we would be working against or counter (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to that
policy. These are very specific policies with which this amendment is not consistent. What was
presented in the presentation for this amendment were actually very general policies from the
land use plan, but there were very specific ones with which this is not consistent. One of the
other things, when you amend a Comprehensive Plan, is that you have to have a justification for
it, and essentially there is no justification for this change. In the application, there's question 10
and 11, which basically suggests that the existing plan designation is inappropriate and asks why,
and they basically talk about that it's a split designation, which we agree with, and to some
extent, this amendment could cure that split designation of the property. No problem with that,
but then it goes on to say that rezoning the parcel to R-3 would allow the (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
residential development for low-income citizens, and there's a few problems there, and the first
is that there's no dated analysis that's provided with this amendment -- none at all -- to show that
residential development is needed at this location. This is especially important since you would
be displacing water -related or uses that require the waterfront. It also -- using the word for low-
income citizens, I would remind you and I think your City Attorney reminded you of the same,
that changing this land use designation to residential and the zoning to R-3 does not assure, in
any way, that this would be developed for low-income residential housing. It could be
developed for any form of multifamily housing. It does not have to be low-income. The staff
analysis contains four findings and those findings are essentially statements of fact; that this
would be to cure -- the split designation; that the purpose is to bring residential to -- development
to the river and that it will -- this change will allow greater flexibility, but again, that analysis
does not at all address whether there is actually a need for waterfront housing in this area. It
does not address the impact of a displacement of the marine industrial uses or potential marine
industrial uses. It does not address --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me.
182 July 25, 2002
Mr. Alvarez: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: Stop the clock.
Mr. Alvarez: I'm sorry?
Chairman Regalado: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. We need to stop. The reason we stopped is
because --
Mr. Alvarez: The quorum, I know.
Chairman Regalado: -- I lost the quorum.
Mr. Alvarez: Lost the quorum, I understand.
Chairman Regalado: So we'll get it in a few seconds and we'll continue. OK, proceed.
Mr. Alvarez: How much time do I have left, just so I can gauge myself?
Chairman Regalado: Huh?
Mr. Alvarez: How much time do I have left, so I can gauge --
Chairman Regalado: Five --
Mr. Alvarez: -- the rest of my presentation. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: I apologize. I just --
Chairman Regalado: Five minutes and 25 --
Commissioner Sanchez: Those of you --
Chairman Regalado: -- seconds.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- who know me know I mean no disrespect. I just couldn't hold it any
longer.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Alvarez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-five seconds.
183 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: You know, but I'm going to tell you something, this is the same
presentation we heard from that gentleman last week -- last time this thing came up. There's not
one word have you said is different. Every citation has already been read into the record, and to
be very honest with you, it doesn't help your side, it doesn't help any side when you become so
redundant. We've got -- you know, we want to hear all of the facts, but we don't want to hear all
the facts again and again and again, so I would urge you to make your presentation to the point
and to concise and move on. We've got -- we want to hear from everybody --
Mr. Alvarez: I apologize --
Commissioner Teele: -- on both sides.
Mr. Alvarez: -- if I'm repeating some of the facts, but as a professional planner, I've been asked
to read these -- this into the record so that --
Commissioner Teele: Well, as a professional planner, I would urge you to read a record --
Mr. Alvarez: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: -- before you come down.
Chairman Regalado: OK. The thing is that you have -- for the presentation, you still have five
minutes and --
Mr.-
Mr. Alvarez: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : -- you can use it, and then we'll have other people limited two minutes, as
with the proponents.
Mr. Alvarez: I left off on the statement -- on the analysis, which did not include the need for
waterfront housing, the impact of the displacements; the SD -4 district intent, it did not include
any of the comprehensive goals and objectives and policies that I mentioned. It did not look at
the economic impact of this amendment. It did not look at the land use incompatibilities that
would cause or the reduction of buffering that would be caused by this amendment. Well, to be
brief, go on. Ms. Bohnsack presented some information about the maintenance dredging
program and I just want to relate that to, again, State Statutes Chapter 163.3177, Subsection 3,
Subsection A. requires that a Comprehensive Plan and capital improvements, I would encourage
efficient utilization of public facilities, meaning that you locate development near the appropriate
facilities for that development. It's also required in 935.006. We have spent, I guess -- or we are
going to spend -- at the end of this year, start spending, between the City's and the State's and
the Army Corps of Engineer's commitment over $80,000,000 dredging this river to 15 feet --
foot (UININTELLIGIBLE) low tide depth for the purpose of commercial port activities --
maritime commerce. Considering that we are spending that money and then we are changing the
land use designations around that river to residential, which we've not used that public facility
efficiently, it also conflicts with that requirement. Again, this is part of an enterprise zone and,
again, we're reducing the land available for industrial and commercial uses and it's in conflict
184 July 25, 2002
with that. Finally, I guess I'll spend my last minute just stating -- it may be obvious, but this is
not only curing an error or an inefficiency on a parcel, this affectively becomes a policy decision.
Because we have in our justification for this amendment no -- it simply presumes that residential
to be a higher and more desirable use for this area. With that presumption at hand, we're
basically saying, if we vote to make this a residential zone, a residential land use, that it's
essentially the policy that that use is a better use for this part of the river and it would establish a
precedence for that; it would establish a more substantial argument for abutting properties when
they have nuisances between the industrial and residential uses, and the way this policy is being
implemented is through a small-scale amendment and that's not the right way to do it. If a
decision -- a good planning decision would based this decision on an ear -based amendment,
which means the evaluation and an appraisal report, larger -scale Comprehensive Plan
amendment, where you would look at all the impacts the economic impacts, the employment
impacts, the impacts of displacing port uses, and is there enough room in the other areas that are
left for the Port of Miami uses; the impact -- the necessity for low-income housing or housing of
any kind along the river in this area, and we would urge you, one, that this is an inappropriate
amendment as it stands now and that the use of small-scale amendments to try to amend this is
also inappropriate. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have two minutes for those who wish to speak in opposition of
this project and we will limit this at two minutes.
Brett Bibeaux: Honorable City Commissioners.
Chairman Regalado: Wait. We need to run the clock. Go ahead.
Mr. Bibeaux: Honorable City Commissioners, City administration, and members of the public,
good evening. My name is Brett Bibeaux and I am the assistant director of the Miami River
Commission, with offices located at 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, Florida, 33149. I am
before you in order to provide the Miami River Commission's official statement to the City
Commission, as requested in City Resolution 00-320, regarding agenda items PZ -5 and its
companion PZ -6, which directly impact the Miami River. The Miami River Commission
recommends denial of the application to change the zoning on this riverfront property from
marine industrial to multifamily residential, as the presented plan does not comply with the City
of Miami Comprehensive Plan nor Zoning Code. The Miami River Commission respectfully
disagrees with the City of Miami Planning Department's analysis for land use change request,
which states that the proposed amendment minimizes land use conflicts. In actuality, changing
the zoning to multifamily residential would cause a major land use conflict with the adjacent
marine industrial zoning on both the east and west sides of this upper river, which is the heart of
the industrial section of the Miami River, west of the 22 Avenue; the Miami River, which is the
fourth largest port in the state. Urban waterfronts throughout the country have become desirable
real estate and important sites for redevelopment. The City of Miami is no exception to this
trend. Over the last year, the City of Miami has removed marine industrial zoning at three
separate properties. The City Comprehensive Plan clearly protects the economic importance of a
vibrant marine industry along the Miami River. Therefore, it is crucial that low-density, water -
related businesses be allowed in a climate free from high density uses, which would elevate land
devalues beyond their ability to compete. In voting against the proposed zoning and land use
185 July 25, 2002
amendments during the first reading of this ordinance, Honorable Commissioner Winton referred
to this application as upzoning. Captain Beau Payne, P&L Towing, stated during the first
reading of this ordinance that speculation at the site in question drove the price of the property
too high for his marine business to purchase. Therefore, P&L Towing purchased a smaller
waterfront site in the lower river section near downtown instead the industrial upper river section
where the property in question is located. Miami River Commission urges you to protect the
existing marine industrial zoning at this waterfront site as required by the City of Miami's
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code by denying the zoning change application before you.
Thank you for your time.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, ma'am. Name and address.
Vilma Licea-Camejo: Thank you. My name is Vilma Licea and I -- my address is 2210
Southwest 79 Court. The reason I'm here is because I work in the river and I would like to ask
you to please take into consideration the people that do work and make a living in the river
because of the problems, you know, that might arise with the noise -- because we are already
having some problems about it -- the marine industry could decide to leave and then all the
employees, like me, are going to lose their jobs, so please take that into consideration. Thank
you.
Chairman Regalado: You're welcome.
Beau Payne: Good evening again. My name is Beau Payne. I'm from P&L Towing. My
address is 1883 Northwest 7 Street, Miami. Just a few things I want to bring up, some things we
brought forward at the end of the last meeting and we didn't have a chance to rebut. There was
some pictures given to the Commission showing the sheds on this property as being empty.
There was not only a picture of three sheds; there's actually six sheds on the property. You see
pictures of those sheds and their uses between pages 4 and 5 on the book that Ms. Bohnsack
passed out to you. Again, a confusion testimony. I heard Mr. Barreiro mentioning something
like that, that there was confusing. That's my opinion, as well. There's been a lot of confusing
testimony, even -- maybe even some misrepresentation to get this far in the previous Zoning
Boards and land use boards. I want to say there's public housing, a HUD public housing facility
in that neighborhood. It is empty, so I don't know why we don't utilize that before we build
more. Without expansion -- I'm one of the bigger -- I'm the biggest tugboat company on the
river, one of the bigger companies. We can't continue to be a working river without any room
for expansion. We're just kind of spinning our wheels here, so what Vilma there had mentioned
about the marine interest moving is a very important point and is being considered. We have to
protect this. I've heard that we were not supposed to create conflicts through our zoning. We'll
be creating a conflict there. There is SD -4 there. It's surrounded by SD -4, only one side being
residential; that's to the west and that is not on the river. That's why that was allowed to be
residential, I assume, because there's no dock space. You can't put a ship there. I heard a lot of
testimony about, again, the garbage and the criminal activity that goes on there. However, in
their own pictures, you see that there's no gates. There's nothing to lock the property. There's
no way to secure the property. You know, that's not good, and as Mr. Barreiro mentioned there,
that when reading the City of Miami, when they made their Comprehensive Plan --
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
186 July 25, 2002
Brett Bibeaux: -- there was only --
Chairman Regalado: Your time is up. Anybody else?
Carol Fenner: My name is Carol Fenner. I live at 603 Coral Golf Course Boulevard in Punta
Gorda, but I own land in this neighborhood and I've been invited to this meeting by you. I want
to tell you that we keep hearing about how this property's been on the market for nine years.
Everything on earth is for sale at some price. Are they going to be able to sell their condos when
we put for sale zoned industrial on our property where they can see it from their site? We can do
the same thing with prices. It is not surrounded by residences, as we keep hearing. Of course
there isn't marine development on the inland side of the property. They say it's residential
across the river? Across the river is Martin's Point. There are 31 lots on that point and 18 of
them are owned by people who have licenses to operate marine businesses. I think it should stay
marine. We want to operate marine businesses in this neighborhood.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK. We have everybody.
Mr. Maxwell: You need staff, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, but I'm asking if -- because I'm going to close the public hearing and
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: My rebuttal.
Mr. Maxwell: Her rebuttal.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: My rebuttal.
Chairman Regalado: -- for the rebuttal. How much time you need, Ms. Garcia -Toledo?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: About five, six minutes. I'll --
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: About five or six minutes. I'll be as fast as I possibly can.
Chairman Regalado: Please. Does -- Are you in opposition or in favor of --
Andy Grant: I'm Andy Grant, 2551 Northwest 18 Terrace, a resident of the area, and about the
only thing I want to hear -- we've heard what they've said. We've heard what people here have
said -- whether it should be shipping, whether it should be residential. I live in the area and as
Mr. Gonzalez, who has gone at the moment -- I wish he was here because as he got so pissed off
about his park that he seems to like and visit a lot, I live in the area and I don't think that more
resident in the area is what we need. There's enough. There's housing, there's -- like they said
there's a vacant spot right now that is plenty of housing, if they fix it back up. We have
187 July 25, 2002
apartment buildings across the street from us. Maybe we need to think about something entirely
different to use the property for if it won't go marine and, you know, cut down on the residents.
Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Go ahead, your rebuttal.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you. I'm going to be very quick, but I need to put some things for
the sake of the record. I would like to enter into a record the reports from 2000 to the present
from the Department of Environmental Regulation Management, who routinely visit all the
properties on the river. This is in order to settle any confusion that there might be about the
activities next door. DERM (Department of Environmental Resources Management) is saying
that the activities next door are basically storage in nature. I also like to put into the record a
portion of the transcript of the Zoning Board, where Zoning Board member, Mr. Gunguzo
(phonetic) specifically stated that he goes in his kayak into that area all the time and that it's
basically empty or used for storage. I also would like to put into the record the brochure
showing the property next door to ours, which was for sale until shortly -- before we started this
hearing process, and in this brochure it states something that I think is very important. It says
that the property next door is split zoning between industrial use, or SD -4, and R-3, which is
residential in nature. It's very important that we understand something -- all of us -- because you
keep hearing that this is a marine industrial use and that it should be retained as marine
industrial. This property, as well as the property next door, are not marine industrials. They are
split zoned and split land use, which means that if this application is not approved here today,
and hoping that we don't have to wait another year for an industrial marine interest to come
forward and purchase the property, that industrial marine use would have to file an application
exactly like the application before you and they would have to request that you change the
residential portions of this land to marine industrial, and I can assure you that if such an
application is filed, the neighborhoods would be here actively objecting to your bringing this use
into this area. Please note, once again, that our property is both SD -4 and R-3, so it's neither one
use or the other, and it cannot be developed that way. The property next door, a portion of it is
SD -4, but that portion is all water. There is no upland. The uplands on the property next door
are R-3, so basically, a container shipping yard could never take place on that property because
while they could bring the boats in the water portion, they could not place a crane --
(OUTBURST FROM AUDIENCE)
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. No.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: They --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me. You had your time. We have --
(OUTBURST FROM AUDIENCE)
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. You had your time. She has a rebuttal.
I closed the public hearing. The public hearing is closed. After her, we're taking this to a vote.
That's it.
188 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, if I may. I think the comment made is correct to the extent that --
no, I'm saying --
Commissioner Teele: Whose comment?
Chairman Regalado: Whose comment?
Mr. Maxwell: -- if, in fact, the rebuttal goes beyond rebutting the testimony given and there's
new testimony, then it's improper, so I would just remind Ms. Garcia -Toledo --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: This is --
Chairman Regalado : Well -- but that's for you to say to her.
Mr. Maxwell: That's correct, so -- and secondly, you haven't heard testimony yet from staff.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: This is --
Chairman Regalado : Well, of course, but --
Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. You know, just wanted to remind you.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: This --
Chairman Regalado : I'm talking about the public hearing.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: This testimony and this board is the same board that was shown to you
before that Mr. Proctor testified. It just seems like everybody's missing that point, and my
reason, Mr. Maxwell, for making that statement is that everyone that's come up in the opposition
is saying "keep this marine." These properties are not marine. They are nothing because they're
split, and so anybody attempting to use it for whichever use, whether residential, as my clients
are attempting to do, or if someone from the marine industry wanted to use it for marine, they
would have to file an application, unite the zoning and the land use, and we would be exactly
back here again with a difference that your staff is recommending approval.
Mr. Maxwell: I'm not arguing with what you're saying, Ms. Garcia.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I'm not, I'm not.
Mr. Maxwell: I'm simply saying, if you do --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: I understand.
Mr. Maxwell: -- just be sure to limit it to that.
189 July 25, 2002
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: No one here, at least my client, is not questioning the importance of the
Miami River. What we are saying is that one -acre -- approximately, one acre of land that we're
talking about changing here in order to unify this property so that it can be developed is certainly
not going to put an end to the Miami River, as we know it; it's not going to end the marine
industry as we know it, and let's face it, if we follow your very own comp. plan, it says in the
Port of Miami section, the first phrase, the Port of Miami River is a group of privately owned and
operated commercial shipping companies located at specific sites along the Miami River and
those sites that are in that use shall be encouraged to continued operation. It doesn't say stop the
world so that nothing but marine is developed on the river. We hope that you will support your
staff, the recommendation of your staff, and of your Planning Advisory Board, and of your
Zoning Board, and that you approve this application. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Go ahead.
Lourdes Slazyk: Thank you. For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Assistant Director of the Planning
and Zoning Department. The Planning and Zoning Department has reviewed these applications
for land use and the companion zoning amendment and we are recommending approval of the
applications as presented. The Comprehensive Plan issues that were brought up regarding the
conflicts is -- you know, there was a lot of testimony about this is creating conflicts. The
property is already a conflict. There's mutually exclusive zoning on one property. One or the
other must change. It is a conflict and it needs to be corrected. The applicant has chosen to
present an application to rezone to R-3, a medium density multifamily residential. Being that
that is an adjacent category and an adjacent use, we have recommended approval.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We close the public hearing. Members of the Commission, any
comment? Yes? We need to -- can you check -- oh, he's here, he's here. OK. We closed the
public hearing, Commissioner Winton, and we are about to take a vote on this project. We had
an extensive hearing twice and so, do we have a motion on this?
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: When this matter was before us before, what was the vote on this?
Because I said -- and I'm really disappointed that staff didn't address the concerns that I asked
you all to address the last time.
Chairman Regalado: I think you weren't here on the vote.
Commissioner Teele: No, I was here.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, you were?
Commissioner Teele: And I said -- because the fine lady from Punta Gorda was sitting right
over there.
190 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: She's here with us tonight.
Commissioner Teele: She's here tonight and I want to welcome you back, ma'am. I hope you --
Chairman Regalado : Proceed.
Commissioner Teele: But my concern then was -- the vote was 4 to 1 before.
Chairman Regalado : Right.
Commissioner Teele: The one vote I think was Commissioner Winton, and Ms. Bohnsack made
a very interesting point. I asked staff, is there any way, if this land is redesignated, that we don't
create a problem, that is, can there be any kind of restriction or notice put on the land that it is
adjacent to this SD -4 activity? Because see, the problem that you got along the Miami River is
the same thing that you have with people at airports -- candidly, the reason that I was against the
Homestead Airport redevelopment. Everybody wanted to come down and build homes, and you
know what's going to happen five years after the houses are there? Everybody's going to
complain about the airport. Now, what's going to happen here is, if you build housing and there
is a marine activity there, they're going to complain about the lights and the welding and the
noise and the guys talking like guys and people, you know, around shipyards, and what kind of
protection, Madam Director -- that was what I asked you all to research at the last meeting.
Unidentified Speaker: Right.
Commissioner Teele: What kind of protection, if any, can be put -- I have no problems voting
for the land use designation, as long as I know we're not voting to create a new net problem five
years from now, and I'm very uncomfortable voting for this if we're going to have affordable
housing -- and I don't think we should call it low-income housing or public housing, because it's
not public housing, number one, and it's affordable, although it's -- but in any event, if we're
going to have affordable or low-income or whatever the housing is going to be there, what kind
of safeguards can we put so that everybody who comes there from -- that runs with the land
knows that this is an active port and maritime facility? I sleep every night on the Miami River.
It is not quiet. The horns are going, you know, at 1 o'clock. You know. It's --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's very good.
Commissioner Teele: It's dramatic, it's exciting, but after you've lived there four years, five
years, like I have, it's loud. I'm not out here trying to say, hey, look -- you know, I said to my
wife, when the horrible incident relating to the Flagler Bridge occurred, I said, "Well, at least,
now the doggone boats won't be able to come down there and we'll have a night of quiet, and
guess what? The Corps of Engineers and the Florida DOT (Department of Transportation) and
the Coast Guard have never been so darn efficient. They locked the bridges up within an hour,
so we didn't even get any peace that -- the night that it was there, but I'm using this because I'm
not offended. I moved in there knowing exactly what it is, but if you do have a people from
affordable housing in there, you're going to have some serious issues, and the concern that I have
is what safeguards, what kind of notice that runs with the land can we have to stop anybody from
191 July 25, 2002
complaining about the boats, the maritime activity, the work on the yard, all of those kinds of
things? Have you all looked at that, Madam Director?
Ms. Slazyk: We can't put something that runs with the land in that manner, but what I had said
at the last meeting -- this came up at the lower boards as well -- is because it is on the Miami
River, anything on the water requires a Class 2 Special Permit, so all the conditions and
safeguards and all the things that need to be put in from a design point on the project will be
done at the Class 2. That will include the buffering, any walls, any landscape, any sort of issues
that will put a buffer in place at the time the project is done will be done through the Class 2
Special Permit.
Commissioner Teele: I must not be very clear. How do you buffer a waterfront?
Ms. Slazyk: No. It would be on the marine side. On the waterside, the water is what it is, but
where -- on the side of their property where they abut the other SD -4, which is the east side,
there will be buffers and that sort of thing required with a Class 2.
Commissioner Teele: I hear you. I just want to say for the record --
Ms. Slazyk: No. You want something that runs with the land.
Commissioner Teele: -- my concerns --
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. There's nothing we can do.
Commissioner Teele: -- my concerns, for the record, from the last hearing to this hearing, have
not been adequately addressed by the applicant of ensuring somehow that we're not creating a
problem. I do recall --
Ms. Slazyk: I can't condition (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
Commissioner Teele: -- the NET Office had substantial kinds of concerns and complaints about
this and this is a very real concern, and I don't know.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. You can't really condition zoning. I believe the applicant can do something
about that.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: If you allow me.
Mr. Maxwell: If I may.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
192 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: I think what Ms. Slazyk just said that any development -- well, development type
might be contemplated, but almost any development in that district would have to have a C-2.
Ms. Slazyk: Anything.
Mr. Maxwell: Would have to have a Class 2 permit. That would be the time and it would be
perfectly appropriate, I think, given this -- particularly, given the scenario that Commissioner
Teele has outlined, that at that time, the exact things that he's asked to be included would be
included as a condition of a Class 2.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. The Class 2 could actually even include a condition that they do put
something on notice for anybody who -- their condo docks or anything have a provision or a
notice there that the land next door is a marine industrial zoning, so people at least are on notice
before they buy a unit enclose of what is next door.
Commissioner Sanchez: But the developer could do that through a disclosure or caveat.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Where -- whoever they --
Ms. Slazyk: Yes, and I --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We would --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- the buyer knows that --
Ms. Slazyk: And through the Class 2, we could require it as a condition.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We will proffer that.
Commissioner Sanchez: And you will proffer that?
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: We will proffer that.
Mr. Maxwell: And that was --
Vice Chairman Winton: And that was done in the project over here by Peacock Park, the very,
very expensive town homes over here that are built right up against Peacock Park, which has all
the festivals in it, it's got the blaring music, and I was thinking the other day, I'm going to get all
the calls from these people that move in because all of a sudden they don't like everything that's
going on in Coconut Grove and then one of the community people told me "No, no, we took care
of that." That -- the developer that -- it was a condition of something that got put in there and --
Mr. Maxwell: Of the Major Use Special Permit.
193 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Maxwell: See, that's the permit phase.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I know that Commissioner Sanchez wants to get in on this, but that helps
me from the last meeting to everything I've heard, and I really think it would be helpful if staff
and the lawyers, especially, would focus upon those of us that are here and what it is, because
I'm very serious. I want to preserve and protect the river. I think we have a land use designation
issue here. I am extremely mindful of the testimony or the debate and discussion by
Commissioner Gonzalez the last time this matter came up, and I've said in the vote that I was
voting to go forward to try to perfect this issue, and I think with a voluntary proffer --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Yes, sir, we would voluntarily proffer to put a notice on the condo
documents.
Commissioner Teele: Then some of my -- then most of the concerns that I had from the previous
and this that we are balancing the issue here and that is, we're preserving the notion that the river
takes precedent over any use that may come in, and I think it's very important that this be done.
I do accept -- and I don't want to have a debate, but I do accept, counsel, from the notion that this
is the time to get those issues out there because I think the issue is the land designation and, you
know, the question is, is this an appropriate designation from SD -4 to residential? And I mean, I
-- with all due respect, I think that's the issue that I'm trying to make sure that I'm not creating a
problem for the NET Office, the Police, and ultimately for the people who are going to be using
this designation as its there, and if this is not the time and place, then I would ask respectfully
that we look at our land use code and make sure that these kinds of designations are appropriate,
as opposed to trying to do the kinds of things related to the project. Because the overarching
issue here is not whether this is affordable housing or home ownership or housing or any other
use for me. The overarching issue that we have heard ad nauseam now is that the primary
purpose of this riverfront activity is to preserve the history and the tradition and the economics of
a working river, and if this designation is going to impede that, then I'm going to vote no. If this
designation does not damage the working river aspect of it, then I'm obviously prepared to vote,
based upon the record, to allow this use. We've heard on the record that this is not a substantial
piece of property. There's no dispute about that in terms of de -mapping, if you will -- and I'm
speaking primarily to Dr. Bohnsack, whom I greatly respect -- that we're not de -mapping our --
de-annexing a major potential use of maritime or marine property. If this were a huge tract of
land, then I will tell you right now that as maritime or has a potential maritime use, my view
would not be the same, but the fact this is a small tract of land, the fact that we can protect the
abutting maritime uses by notices and disclaimers as the voluntary proffer gives me a lot more
comfort that we're not doing the kinds of things that I want to protect the Miami River, along
with the Miami River Commission, in doing, and so I'm hard-pressed to see the damage that is
done to the Miami River future uses, and I just wanted to explain my thinking on the record, and
Commissioner Sanchez, I apologize, but Commissioner Gonzalez, I'm very happy that you're
back participating in the debate because we look forward to your leadership.
194 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: I'll yield to you, Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm not ready. I would like to see what you have to say and then I'll --
since it isn't my district, I'll be the last one to vote on it, after you decide what you want to do
because maybe you want to change -- you probably vote against whatever I want for my district,
so, you decide.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. First of all, my concerns have been answered. I mean, if
the developers are willing to put a disclosure or a caveat to the buyer saying that the property that
they're purchasing is near a residential area that is normally found in an industrial area that
you're going to have sounds and stuff that are not found in a residential area, I'm OK with that,
and let me just -- on the dredging, I mean, that was irrelevant. I really don't -- what does that
have to do with the price of fish? You know, the dredging of the river with that. Whether you
talk about the river being an historical river or working river, we all realize that. I think I've
been a big supporter of the river in many ways, not only on a local level, state and federal level
on the river, but I think housing is needed throughout the whole city, and this partial land, based
on the arguments heard on both sides here, you know, I am prepared to make the motion or
second it -- if the district Commissioner of the district wants to make a motion, I'm prepared to
second it to go forward with it.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I voted against this item at the last meeting and one of the principle
reasons that I voted against it was the whole argument about creating an expectation out there on
the part of property owners that if they stall long enough and create enough noise out there, they
can plead that the industrial use doesn't work anymore, nobody will buy because they're asking
too much for their land, and therefore, we need to -- and I said up zone, which is the net effect of
this kind of thing, and I didn't want to send that message at all. Since that time -- and I've been
all over the map on this issue -- since that time, we had a publicly noticed sunshine meeting
between myself and Commissioner Gonzalez. We had a Miami Herald reporter with us. We had
a whole van full of people. We drove by the site and, while I've listened to all the kind of
technical stuff from each of the two sides -- you know, just a regular guy going out there looking
to see what's there -- this site is surrounded by residential, except on one side, which is a clear-
cut operating marine facility, and so then I thought, well, you know, residential. If they put a
marine facility there, that's going to create a problem here, so I'm going to come back and vote
yes, and as I began to listen to it and listen to all the arguments, I thought, you know, the real
right answer is neither one of these. Because if you extend in that four -acre site and create
another heavy marine use, you then -- and the mistake probably came -- I don't know when -- a
long time ago -- when that chunk of R-3 got to be R-3, and maybe that wasn't R-3 originally.
Maybe that was part of it the master plan for industrial use or maybe it was R-3 to begin wit, but
that's the problem right there, because that R-3 then kind of moved up into and grabbed
riverfront land for clear-cut, non -marine uses, multifamily, residential apartment property there
so that any time you have something on either end, they're going to be in constant battle, so if
you rezone this piece and make it residential, you still have the active marine piece right next to
195 July 25, 2002
it. Those two are going to be in conflict. Conversely, if you support the marine folks' idea that
it ought to be converted to heavy marine use, which is what they ought to be promoting, and it
does happen, it's going to be right up against that existing multifamily residential project and
there's going to be a conflict, and what's missing along here are the appropriate buffers that will
allow these two uses to work, and I don't see these buffers anywhere. I mean, I think the whole
thing was kind of like our FEC (Florida East Coast) corridor area, Mr. Teele -- Commissioner
Teele, where there was no planning. I mean, it just kind of got mashed together and happened,
and somebody said -- one of the speakers said, "You know, I've heard this rumor that
somebody's going to turn it into a park," and I said, you know, that guy's right. That probably
should be a park, because a park is about the only appropriate buffer that I could think of that
will allow the residential people to live in peace and not have right next door to it the 24-hour
marine -related use and, conversely, won't put a new residential property in there that creates this
new conflict. It would create an absolute buffer between the two uses that are there. That
doesn't seem to be on the table, so you know, then alternate use isn't there, so it's -- I don't think
either one -- I don't think our options are a win-win here. Our options either way are -- either
way we go creates a new challenge and a new problem for us. It's a loss one way or the other.
There isn't a win here, so I don't know how I'm voting.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Commissioner Winton, I want to take this opportunity to publicly
thank you for taking the time to write -- to know my district and to know the needs of the people
of my district, and that is a very gentle act that you did with me and that helped you. You went
through the entire -- some portion of the Allapattah area, Grapeland Height and Flagami, and
that's why I think that you are starting to understand the need of my people more than you could
understand it before and the situation of all of these issues related to my district. I proffer to you
that I'm more than willing to go out with you any time you so desire, so I can familiarize myself
with your district, even though that won't be necessary on my part because I will always respect
your decisions on your district. I don't need to go out there to respect whatever you decide to do
for your people, but I'm offering myself and I'm thanking you publicly for your act. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: And if everybody has finished with their arguments, I move to approve the
proj ect.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Mr. Maxwell: There's something we do need to do based on the comments of Commissioner
Winton and Commissioner Gonzalez. They indicated -- Commissioner Winton and then
Commissioner Gonzalez indicated that doing a property noticed --
196 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Sunshine --
Mr. Maxwell: -- tour -- Sunshine tour meeting --
Commissioner Sanchez: Sunshine tour. You need to state that for the record.
Mr. Maxwell: -- tour of their -- of Commissioner Gonzalez' district. They also observed
information -- observed the site that is --
Chairman Regalado: He didn't say visit.
Mr. Maxwell: No. I think Commissioner Winton did. He says he observed the site.
Vice Chairman Winton: Visited, went there, saw it, looked at it.
Mr. Maxwell: And what -- and he then proceeded to say what he had observed. What I would
suggest that, because of Jennings, you allow anyone who may want to respond to the comments
made by Commissioner Winton and also Commissioner Gonzalez, if you observed anything in
addition to that information already in the record, that you may be basing your decision on, if
you would disclose that information on the record and allow the public to respond and query you
as well.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, I did not discover anything new because everything that I had to
discover in my district, I had discovered for the last 12 years.
Mr. Maxwell: And that infor --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And for 18 months of continued campaigning, knocking door-to-door,
and walking the streets of my district, so I know everything that is out there.
Mr. Maxwell: And your decision would be based on everything that's presently in the record?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly.
Mr. Maxwell: So, then, Commissioner Winton, if you would allow --
Vice Chairman Winton: And rest assured, we were very careful not to be whispering under the
seat, because we had a Miami Herald reporter in the van with us watching our every move.
Mr. Maxwell: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: And we were good boys.
Mr. Maxwell: OK. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest you may want to allow the public, if anyone
desires to, to respond to Commissioner Winton.
197 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: If anyone wants to respond or to cross-examine him?
Mr. Maxwell: Well, respond to -- they certainly have the right to ask questions, as well.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Anyone wants to respond to Commissioner Winton's statement? No
one? OK. We close. Mr. City Attorney.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: Are we OK now?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We close the public hearing and we have a motion --
Commissioner Sanchez: And a second.
Chairman Regalado: -- and a second. It's an ordinance. Read the ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: With the caveat.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
Commissioner Sanchez: For the record, with the caveat.
Chairman Regalado: With the --
Mr. Maxwell: No, that's the Comprehensive Plan change right here. You have the
zoning one that's coming up --
Chairman Regalado: The other one.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: The other one.
Mr. Maxwell: -- which would --
Commissioner Sanchez: That'll be the next one.
Mr. Maxwell: -- include the voluntary proffer.
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Voluntary proffer on behalf of the property owners.
Chairman Regalado: The other one.
198 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Need to state it for the record when we get to it.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner Winton?
Vice Chairman Winton: What are you asking me first for? Yes/no doesn't count, huh?
Chairman Regalado: No.
Unidentified Speaker: Maybe.
Chairman Regalado: "Maybe" doesn't count.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, the -- I guess I'll say a couple of things. One, that the district
Commissioner feels very strongly about this and that weights heavily on me, but I have to say
also that my concerns about these kinds of issues will grow and my opposition to -- and I want to
send this message to the development community out there and the sellers who may be wanting
to jack their prices up because they think they could come here and take the rest of the
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) and turn it into something else. I could assure you, I don't care what the
district Commissioner -- whichever one has whatever part of the territory is -- I ain't supporting
it. This is a unique case, in my mind, a very unique case because it has that R-3 already
crammed in the middle of it, and so in support -- philosophically, I'm still opposed but to support
the district Commissioner that feels so strongly about it, I'll say yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: I want to make a very clear statement to the Miami River and business
community, that I think you all are doing the right thing; that you're on the right track, and that
in this particular case, the evidence is a close call, the close call being the fact that we do want to
maintain the river consistent with our land use and we don't want to see the erosion of land for
non -maritime purposes. However, I'm convinced that this land use designation change is
minimal and the record is very clear that this land use could go in either direction, and so I'm
voting yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Thompson: Chairman Regalado?
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
199 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NUMBER 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT APPROXIMATELY 2415 NORTHWEST 16TH STREET ROAD, MIAMI,
FLORIDA; FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "MEDIUM DENSITY,
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL;" MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING
TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAIN A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITIY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of June 27, 2002, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Gonzalez,
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. 12260.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Item --
Ms. Garcia -Toledo: Thank you.
36. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND PAGE NO. 25 OF ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF
DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM SD -4
WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND R-3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL TO R-3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT 2415 NW
16TH STREET ROAD
Chairman Regalado: OK. Item 6, PZ -6 is a companion. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
200 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. Read the ordinance. Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Winton?
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Gonzalez?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Before you finish the roll call, is this a public hearing?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy County Attorney): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I think we need to just open the record to -- and start the roll call all over
again because I'm not sure that we -- I mean, I realize that, with the previous item, which is a
companion item, but I think, for the purpose of making sure that the record is correct, we should
allow --
Chairman Regalado: We did both --
Commissioner Teele: Oh, did you?
Chairman Regalado: The City Attorney explained the scope of what we're doing and in the
process of the public hearing, we addressed and everybody addressed both issues on both
ordinances.
Mr. Maxwell: But you -- Commissioner, I would agree with the Commissioner, and normally
you do, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: OK, that's fine by me. This is a public hearing. Anybody who wishes --
we have a motion and a second. Go ahead, sir.
Brett Bibeaux: Thank you. Brett Bibeaux, assistant director of the Miami River Commission,
4600 Rickenbacher Causeway. I'd like to speak briefly to the point regarding the caveat. It's a
condo dock, so there's a caveat in it and it says something like you're aware that you are living
next to the river and the river makes noises. Is there any legal binding to that, that even though
201 July 25, 2002
it's in the condo docks, they can't come back cause the problems that we're concerned about?
That's my first question. My second point I'd like to briefly make is, I think Commissioner
Winton is exactly right; there's a lot of developers listening to this case. There's a long line
behind him. Some of them are here; some of whom watching on Channel 9, but I hope that they
heard the Honorable Commissioner Winton's statement and I hope they don't think that they can
go take the fourth largest port and turn it into a giant condo. Thank you for your time.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK, we close the public hearing. We have a motion and a
second. Read the ordinance.
Mr. Maxwell: I read the ordinance, Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK. Yeah, roll call. I'm sorry.
Ms. Thompson: We'll redo the roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT, AMENDING PAGE NO. 25, 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 ZONING
CLASSIFICATION FROM SD -4 "WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL" TO R-3
"MULTFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 2415 NORTHWEST 16
STREET ROAD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON
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 June 27, 2002, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Sanchez, seconded
by Commissioner Gonzalez, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by
title, and was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
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. 12261.
202 July 25, 2002
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
Vicky Garcia -Toledo: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you. We are taking a five-minute recess, and we'll be back --
Commissioner Sanchez: Ten minutes. Ten minutes.
Chairman Regalado: Ten minutes. We'll be back in exactly 10 minutes.
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION RECESSED AT 7:59 P.M. AND RECONVENED
AT 8:35 P.M. WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE
PRESENT, EXCEPTING COMMISSIONER GONZALEZ.
37. CLOSE, VACATE, ABANDON AND DISCONTINUE FOR PUBLIC USE OF PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY PORTION OF NE 55TH TERRACE BETWEEN NE 4TH COURT AND FEC
RAILROAD.
Chairman Regalado: We have some PZ (Planning &Zoning) items. PZ -2. PZ -2 is a resolution
closing, vacating, abandoning a public right-of-way portion of Northeast 55 Terrace between
Northeast 4 Court and FEC (Florida East Coast) Railroad. Administration, go ahead.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): OK. The Planning and Zoning
Department is recommending denial of this, even though through the technical review of the
Public Works Department, it had been recommended for approval, and let me just go real
quickly over the reasons for the denial. When -- you know, although, in this particular case,
there is no objections to, you know, what the applicant has requested the use of it for, the
abandonment, it's more a potential of what this will do in unifying a large tract of land for a
possible future building that could create a wall effect on this street, and that's a concern because
the size of the blocks there really are not this big, and it could create a building -- like I said, you
know, in effect, puts a wall up on the street. It's more of a concern over the future and a
character issue for this area that the recommendation of denial was made.
Ben Fernandez: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Ben Fernandez, for the record.
I'm an attorney with law offices 200 South Biscayne Boulevard. I'm here representing Mark's
Classic Corp. and Mr. Mark Soyka is here with me. Mark, as you all probably know, is a very
prominent restaurateur in the City of Miami and in Miami Beach. He's the owner and operator
of the News Cafe on Ocean Drive, the Van Dyke on Lincoln Road, and the property that's the
subject of this application, which is located on Biscayne at 55 Terrace. Since Soykas was
opened a couple of years ago, it's become an extremely successful restaurant. It's fair to say that
Soykas was really the leader of the renaissance for this entire area and the Morningside area, and
what we're here doing tonight is requesting that you continue the process that was begun in 1999
by your own resolution, which temporarily closed a segment of 55 Terrace, and the segment's
located right here between Northeast 4 Court and FEC (Florida East Coast) right-of-way.
There's a median that separates Northeast 4 Court from Biscayne Boulevard so that there's no
203 July 25, 2002
access at present onto Biscayne. There's no access to the west side of the FEC right-of-way
because that's been closed and, as I mentioned, the history of this application is very important
because I think it differentiates it from other road closing applications that staff has perhaps
recommended denial on and we, of course, understand the policy that the City has now, that they
do not want to vacate any public rights-of-way, but in order to get this restaurant approved a
couple of years ago, it was necessary to combine the parking lot that's to the south with the
restaurant that's on the north side, and in order to do that, Mr. Soyka came to this Commission in
1999 and applied to temporarily close the street, and I'm going to pass around copies of that
resolution. The resolution recognized that the restriction of vehicular access on the roadway was
in the public benefit. It was to the public benefit. It also conditioned the closure on the applicant
going forward with the replatting of the property and obtaining a final right-of-way vacation for
this segment of 55 Terrace, so that's why I'm saying that we're here actually just completing the
process of closing this road. We think that the Commission has previously indicated through its
resolutions, spoken through the resolution, and indicated this a public benefit and I think it's also
clearly a public benefit because the entire public benefits, when a neighborhood serving
commercial use such as this, is better utilized by the public by having the benefit of valet
parking, which is what this segment of 55 Terrace is used for today, some overflow parking, and
it really serves, as you can see from the picture on the easel on the left hand side, it serves as sort
of an entrance, a gateway, an entrance feature to this project. There was a recent article a couple
of days ago in the business section on Soykas and (UNINTELLIGIBLE), a couple have read --
maybe some of you have read it. It mentions specifically that parking is essential to businesses
on Biscayne Boulevard and many of them don't have this parking. Well, Mr. Soyka went
through great effort to take control of the lot to the south of 55 Terrace so that he could provide
parking to his patrons, and you know, finally, I'd like to just mention that we believe that Mr.
Soyka has relied on representations by this Commission as to the closure of this right-of-way.
He's changed his position, to his detriment, by hiring surveyors, hiring attorneys, and proceeding
with this plat, and for that reason, I believe that his application is somewhat different perhaps
than some of the other road closing applications that are just talking about a new project that you
haven't even seen yet. This is a proven project. This is a restaurateur with a proven track record
and for all those reasons, we would ask that you approve this application. We would be
amenable to a covenant that was brought to my attention earlier at this meeting that would
prohibit any buildings from being placed on the right-of-way area, but it would specifically
permit the area to be continued to be used for parking and for valet and for any other use
associated with the restaurant; perhaps, outdoor seating in the future, anything reasonably related
to the parking, to the restaurant, or to the rest of the shopping center. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE) move the granting of the request and the denial of staff
recommendation, and I'd like to explain to Commissioner Winton -- I'm sure that Commissioner
Winton is going to take offense to the fact that I've made a motion regarding his district, but I
really think there's a much broader principle that we need to also be concerned about. Look at
204 July 25, 2002
this picture. You don't see the sable palms for which none are grown commercially. There's no
nursery that you can go by a sable palm. You go chop them up out of the Everglades. I mean,
there are sable palms everywhere. That's the poor man's palm tree. Those are coconut palm or
some other -- what are those palms, do you know, Mark, Mr. Soyka? Huh? Coconut? But this
parking lot, this entire renaissance that has been created -- that's not royal.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's a royal palm, all of royal palm. Those are -- they're not royal
palm?
Unidentified Speaker: No, they're not royal palm.
Commissioner Teele: Queen, queen palm. Yeah, queen, but in any event, these are upscale --
these are not the palm trees that you see around people's parking lots, especially government
parking lots. This is a committed developer. The most important thing was the proffer that was
made, which, I think, in many ways would hopefully force the staff to accept the proffer and to
reconsider the recommendation, but I think there is a much broader principle here and that is, if
you look at the other side of the building, which is not shown, you have one of the best public
pedestrian promenades in all of Dade County. It's a commitment to public space, so the normal
concerns that we have where you have developers that are coming in trying to grab land to
intensify development, just are not the history of what is being happened here -- what is
happening here, and in many ways the promenade on the other side, on the north side is as big as
the road that's right here, so they've already made a donation to the public of public space. I
think we've got to encourage developers. I think it's not on the record, so I won't put on the
record what the Water and Sewer, for example, fees were to just open this restaurant. Mr. Soyka
do you happen to recall what they were?
Mark Soyka: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Your name and address for the record.
Mr. Soyka: Mark Soyka. I'm 589 Northeast 57 Street. I'm a resident of Morningside. And the
fees, they were in the neighborhood of $200,000 to bring water and sewer. I just want to make
one addition to what you have to say. This is not just Soyka restaurant. Soyka restaurant sits on
the corner and there are four blocks of primarily open space that's parking, with today, 18
tenants that moved into the neighborhood, and they're all my tenants. There's a movie theatre,
there's a gym, there's a hair salon, there's the pizza joint, there's Soyka, there's a sushi that's
opening in two weeks. There's a lot going on, and what encouraged them to come, in addition to
possibly the Soyka restaurant, is really the fact that that particular street, which is just a portion,
is really the entrance to the entire complex. That's where they leave the cars, that's how they
feel comfortable, and it's not Biscayne; it's Northeast 4 Court, and from 54 Street, which was the
funeral home, all the way to 58 Street is three, four buildings that accommodate the 18 tenants
and the rest is all parking. Because you cannot go across the street, park your car, and walk
across Biscayne to go to the restaurant. You have to have the comfort level to come in and, you
know, it's not just about parking. We left a lot of open space. The median in the middle that
really is the City property, we maintain it, we take care of it, and the entire area surrounding
these four blocks is something we maintain. This is a very, very important part of the whole
205 July 25, 2002
complex because when you say just Soyka restaurant, you say, well, it's just one -- it's the entire
complex that I think was instrumental in making the area safer, and I live there for the last 14
years.
Commissioner Teele: The gym you didn't mention, which probably gets as much in and out
traffic as anything.
Mr. Soyka: It's the gym, it's the art galleries.
Commissioner Teele: The art galleries.
Mr. Soyka: The (iJNINTELLIGIBLE) Gilman is there.
Commissioner Teele: But, Mark, I want to just go back to one point.
Mr. Soyka: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: Because this is the point that really has changed a lot of my thinking about
everything in redevelopment. As I watched this, I just went back to 1999. If you had known
what the water and sewer impact fee, which is charged by the county, had been, would you have
-- is it fair to say that you would have thought long and hard about the initial movement on
S oyka' s restaurant?
Mr. Soyka: Probably so, because it was a humungous amount of money and I learned through
the process that there's a reason for everything and, obviously, I was explained the reason why,
in a change of use, there's a large fee. What I was basically wanted to impress upon, at the time
Dade County, the Water and Sewer Department, that when I call myself -- even though it seems
like I have big businesses, but I call myself a small developer or a small entrepreneur and just as
an advice, I wanted to say this to somebody that can inform the people as they come into the area
because Biscayne, in that area, is going to remain a small, narrow Biscayne Boulevard. It's not
going to be torn down like northern part of Biscayne and become five -lane highway, so just to
remind you to work with the County Commissioners to enable people, like myself, to be aware
of what's coming up. In answer to your question, yes, a $200,000 investment. The hydrants, I
had to pay for and put it in, so in order to make it happen, it was a maj or expense, a maj or
development, but at the same time, it's done and now, after two years, I'd like to think that I can
get that portion kind of attached to us so it becomes a permanent thing, and that's basically what
I have to say.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioners, I only wanted to make the point that we have before us a
request from someone who's made a deep commitment to this City, and we keep talking about
Eastward Ho and Urban Infield, and all of those kind of things. Part of what we've got to do, I
think, including working with the county, is work with developers that really are committed to
the redevelopment without incentives and without -- and so that's why -- and I'll be happy to
withdraw my motion, Commissioner, if it offends you. I don't want to get you storming out of
here.
206 July 25, 2002
Mr. Fernandez: Commissioner Teele, I appreciate your contribution.
Vice Chairman Winton: I've done that once.
Mr. Fernandez: If I could add one more thing that may allay some of Commissioner Winton's
concerns is that, for the record, not even Bernard Eskovitch's master plan for the FEC corridor
identifies 55 Terrace as a gateway. It's really not even mentioned. The 54 Street is going to be
the gateway.
Vice Chairman Winton: And I think that the covenant that you all are proffering is exactly the
kind of thing we need, because the real issue isn't today. The real issue is 20 years from now,
when we're all long gone, and you've got a neighborhood that's developed and the right kinds of
things have happened, and we made a decision today to -- and everybody forgets that that used to
be a road, but somebody can suddenly develop something that really would be completely out of
place and out of character because we allowed this 20 years earlier, but with the covenant that
says you're not going to build on that, you're going to continue to use it for whatever your
restaurant kind of related uses are, you know, that saves everybody 20 years from now and still
allows you to continue to do the kinds of things that you want to do there to make it successful.
Mr. Soyka: I'm going to be there 20 years from now.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, all right. You will be; I'm not going to be, so I second
Commissioner Teele's motion and I, too, want to recognize Mark Soyka's contribution as a
pioneer in redeveloping that area, and I'd like to point out something else. There isn't maybe
one entrepreneur in the world that would have picked that site that has no access to Biscayne
Boulevard. You didn't have access to Biscayne Boulevard. You've got to go around here and
around here and -- to get over there, and most of the time those deals fail. The major -- U.S. 1,
when you don't have just the right curb cut, they fail. This guy has been a genius and has turned
a real mess into a total, total gem and so we're pleased to -- we understand that you're going to
appropriately protect the public interest and we'd love to help, so second the motion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. We close the public hearing. All in
favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes. Thank you very much.
207 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-883
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION WITH
ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND
DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF A PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THE PORTION NORTHEAST 55TH TERRACE
BETWEEN NORTHEAST 4TH COURT AND THE F.E.C. RAILROAD, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A."
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much.
Mr. Fernandez: Thank you.
Mr. Soyka: Thank you.
38. RELATED TO NCCJ WALK AS ONE, TO BE HELD AT BAYFRONT PARK ON
SEPTEMBER 11, 2002; AUTHORIZE WAIVER OF FEES AND PERMITS AND
PROVISION OF SERVICES, $3,300.00; AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR
SAID SERVICES, FROM SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT; SAID AUTHORIZATIONS
CONDITIONED UPON ORGANIZERS.
ENDORSE NCCJ WALK AS ONE, AND TO HAVE CITY BE LISTED AS COSPONSOR, IF
APPROPRIATE; DIRECT MANAGER TO SUPPORT AND WORK WITH SAID
ORGANIZATION.
Chairman Regalado: Before we come back to PZ (Planning &Zoning), Commissioner Sanchez
has a --
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have representatives of the National
Conference for Community and Justice here. They will be hosting the Third Annual Walk as
One Community Bridging Walk -A -Thou September 11 at Bayfront Park. Of course, not only
with this be a great venue for the City of Miami to increase its exposure within all sections of our
208 July 25, 2002
community, but it would also be an excellent opportunity for us to assist us in bringing this
community together, so at this time I have Mr. Medina. Would you like to say a few words
before I present the resolution that I have before me?
Angel Medina: Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, Honorable Commissioners, my name is
Angel Medina and I'm here today as chair of the National Conference of Community and Justice
Walk As One Walk-A-Thon. The NCCJ (National Conference of Community and Justice) is a
national organization whose mission is to provide an understanding and respect among all races,
religions and cultures by fighting bias, bigotry and racism through education, and we're fortunate
to have local leaders, such as our executive director, Jim Howe, our chair Alejandro Aguirre and
board members, such as George Knox and many others. This year the NCCJ has chosen
September 11 as the date to celebrate our unity within diversity, while commemorating the tragic
events of September 11. The Walk as One Walk-A-Thon has already been immensely successful
in getting numerous community organizations excited about coming together. On this date, in
addition to a leisurely three-mile walk, we'll display 12 booths at Bayfront Park, which will
showcase the cultures of our Jewish community, our Middle East community, Asian, African-
American, Afro-Caribbean, Latin and South American communities. We'll also have a one-hour
presentation, which will be hosted by Archbishop Favalora, Rabbi Shiff and Iman Nurden. It
will feature dancers, musicians and singers from within our community. It will even have
bagpipers and the Chinese dragon. The event is being supported by our corporate and private
community. It's being supported by television and print media, but let me assure you that the
entire program will be respectful and appropriate to the occasion. We respectfully and humbly
ask that the City participate and assist us in making this event a success by granting the request
before you today. Thank you for this time.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions before I read the resolution?
Chairman Regalado : Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a resolution of the City Miami Commission related to the NCCJ
Walk As One, to be held at Bayfront Park on September 11, 2002; authorizing the waiver of fees
and permits permissible by law and the provision of services in the amount not to exceed $3,300;
authorizing the allocations of funds for said services from the Special Event Account Code
Number 001000921052.298; said authorization condition upon the organizers: (1) Obtaining
insurance to protect the City in the amount as prescribed by the City Manager or designee, (4)
[sic] complying with all conditions and limitations as may be prescribed by the City Manager or
designee. So moved.
Chairman Regalado : OK, we have a motion.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado : We have a second. All in favor, say --
209 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Whoa, whoa, whoa, so -- just so I -- what does this cost us and how
much? Is it $3,300 in all?
Commissioner Sanchez: $3,300.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, and so just my usual pitch, I told Angel, I couldn't -- I said, you
know, I know this is a great deal, that they're all great deals, and I think that -- I'm hoping that
one day we will have a clear-cut policy and a clear-cut budget amount some way or another
somewhere so that I know how much taxpayer money really gets used up on this stuff, and I also
encourage them to find another sponsor that might be able to pay us $3,300.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, just for the record --
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- they've been in front of Bayfront Park, and Bayfront Park has
committed $5,000 in in-kind services. Hearing no other questions, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I do think there's one thing. This is going to happen on
9/11 . right?
Mr. Medina: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And I do think that there should be a separate resolution of the City
requesting to be a co-sponsor of this activity. I think, you know, we don't have a 9/11 focus. I
think there is no place in America where we need greater coming together of our very, very -- as
evidenced today on our dais -- where we need greater coming together of our very diverse
communities, and while I am very concerned about the issue that Commissioner Winton is
raising, I do think that there's an overarching issue in this community, and that is that Christians
and Jews and Muslims and those who have other beliefs, as well as the ethnicity issue, we really
need to be out front and discuss it publicly. There is no better time than 9/11 to make that step
forward, and so I would hope that we'll look deep down inside and asked of it, and do a separate
motion endorsing this by the City, and asking the Manager to further work with the organization
to try to help get groups from our parks, from diverse parks to come down. There are a whole lot
of things that we can do, but 9/11 is a special day; it will go down as a day of infamy in this
country, and I do think that we should not put the budget hat on, but we should put the
community hat on, so --
Mr. Medina: Thank you, Commissioner.
210 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to call the question and then asked if Commissioner Sanchez
would like to offer a second motion after --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Second.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-884
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO THE
NCCJ WALK AS ONE, TO BE HELD AT BAYFRONT PARK ON
SEPTEMBER 11, 2002; AUTHORIZING THE WAIVER OF FEES AND
PERMITS PERMISSIBLE BY LAW AND THE PROVISION OF SERVICES,
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $3,300.00; AUTHORIZING THE
ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES, FROM THE SPECIAL
EVENTS ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000921054.289; SAID
AUTHORIZATIONS CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1)
OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; AND (2)
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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
Mr. Medina: Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez, you need to --
211 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: I would move also or second Commissioner Sanchez' motion that the City
of Miami endorse these and be listed as a co-sponsor, if appropriate, and further request the
Manager to see what other support, particularly through mobilization in our Parks Department
and other community-based organizations -- and no necessary expense to the City, but -- I mean,
cash expense -- but -- in-kind expenses -- to help further bring together our community. I would
so move.
Chairman Regalado: OK, we have a motion and we have a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, on this -- (INAUDIBLE)?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, second.
Chairman Regalado: 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 02-885
A MOTION ENDORSING THE NCCJ WALK AS ONE, TO BE HELD AT
BAYFRONT PARK ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2002 AND TO HAVE THE CITY
OF MIAMI BE LISTED AS A COSPONSOR, IF APPROPRIATE; FURTHER
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUPPORT AND WORK WITH SAID
ORGANIZATION TO TRY TO GET GROUPS FROM OUR PARKS AND
COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS TO PARTICIPATE IN SAID
EVENT.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Mr. Medina: Thank you. You're most generous.
212 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you very much.
39. APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DENY CLOSING, VACATING,
ABANDONING AND DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
PORTION OF SW 14 STREET BETWEEN SW 2 AVENUE AND METRO -RAIL RIGHT-OF-
WAY.
Chairman Regalado: Go back to PZ -3. In a few minutes, we have a presentation on New Year's
Eve, but we need to move on on the PZ (Planning & Zoning) agenda. PZ -3 is a resolution
closing, vacating, abandoning the public right-of-way Southwest 14 Street, between Southwest 2
Avenue and the Metrorail right-of-way.
John Jackson (Director, Public Works): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Mr. Jackson.
Mr. Jackson: John Jackson, Public Works Department. The Plat and Street Committee
recommends denial, as does Public Works for this vacation and closure.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Ms. Burke.
Judith Burke: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. My name is Judy Burke,
practicing law with Shultz & Bowen, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, in Miami. With me this
evening is our architect, Burt Leon of the firm Revuelta Vega Leon, and Scott Kramer,
representative of BVT Development. As you may recall, when this team last appeared before
you, we were seeking approval of a Major Use Special Permit for the Coral Station project. At
that hearing there were a number of questions raised by both audience and the Commissioners
regarding what we were going to do with the excess parking for the Publix store that was
currently located on the Coral Station property. We assured you that we had plans to develop a
new parking area closer to the Publix store and that the issue would be presented to you in the
near future. As promised, we are here tonight seeking that approval. BVT Development is one
of the principals, along with Taylor Development, in the Coral Station property and is also the
owner of a triangle parcel of land located at the northeast intersection of Southwest 14 Street and
Southwest 15 Road. If you look at the sketch of the parking area right here -- I'm talking about
the gray area -- this triangular portion of land is owned by BVT Development. It's a little less
than a third of an acre. This portion of land is owned --
Commissioner Sanchez: Ma'am, excuse me. Let me get oriented a little bit. I'm a little --
Second Avenue and 15 Road.
Ms. Burke: Here is -- If you look at this general --
Commissioner Sanchez: Just point at the building and identify the building, where it is.
Ms. Burke: OK. OK. This is --
213 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: what?
Ms. Burke: -- FP&L (Florida Power &Light).
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Burke: This is Blockbuster, the Publix store.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK, I got it.
Ms. Burke: OK, and the Coral Station project you approved is over here.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Burke: So this triangular parcel is owned by BVT.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right.
Ms. Burke: This parcel is leased by BVT from Rapid Transit for the purpose of building a
parking lot, so we've combined these two parcels together, but what you'll also notice is we have
shown here, south -- this little portion of Southwest 14 Street as part of this overall parking area,
and it's a closure of the street that we're here tonight to request. The reason for our request will
be a little bit easier to understand if I give you a little bit of background information, and this
application, just like the one you heard before, has a long history. You first heard this item in
February of 2001 as a master plan amendment and a rezoning request. The BVT parcel was
originally zoned for office use. Although the office zoning category offers a wide variety of
development alternatives, there's only one thing you can't build on that kind of zoning, and
that's an open free parking lot that does not charge and serves retail uses. Therefore, in order to
develop the property with this kind of a parking area, we had to rezone the property to C-1 and
obtain a master plan amendment. This was approved by the Zoning Board and the Planning
Advisory Board February 22. This Commission approved both of our requests, and all during
that very long public hearing process, we were advised by the residents in the area that they
considered this small portion of Southwest 14 Street, which runs between the Publix
Supermarket and our proposed parking lot, as a serious traffic hazard. Most notably, Torey
Jacobs, of the Brickell Homeowners Association, advised us how dangerous he thought the
situation was, and he asked us to make the closure of that segment of the roadway part of our
plan. I want to better explain the relationship of Southwest 14 Street and the intersection that
we're talking about. Here's the little portion of Southwest 14 Street, and you can see how all of
these roads converge right into that intersection. Based upon the input that we received from all
the residents, we began exploring the possibility of vacating that roadway and utilizing that area
as part of our free parking lot. BVT met with representatives of FP&L and Brickell 13, which is
the owner of the land that is leased to Publix. Both FP&L and Brickell 13 agreed to join in our
tentative plat application, which has been filed with the City, in order to facilitate the closure of
this roadway. In addition, in order to permit the development of a parking lot with a proper
configuration to service the area, both FP&L and Brickell 13 agreed to quit claim their
214 July 25, 2002
reversionary interest in Southwest 14 Street to BVT Development to facilitate the design of the
parking area. As an additional benefit, FP&L and BVT were -- granted BVT an easement along
the eastern edge of their property, which was combined by an easement granted by Brickell 13
on the western edge of their property to form the pedestrian access way from the parking lot to
the supermarket; and let me show you where that is. It's this area right here, so FP&L grant --
gave BVT an easement here, contingent of course on getting the road closed and the plat
approved, and Brickell 13 gave this portion in order for BVT to be able to build an access way
that'll be covered, it'll be landscaped, and it'll be lit so that people coming out of the Publix store
don't have to cross any dangerous area. They come right out the door and right to this
convenient parking. The plan that you see developed also includes a much safer entrance and
exit to the parking lot onto Southwest 15 Road; thereby, eliminating the hazardous situation at
the current entrance at Southwest 14 Street. I had an opportunity to review the Planning and
Zoning Department's analysis of the street closure, which was included in your package, and
which recommends denial. They made four points, which I'd like to address. The first point was
that they found that the general public currently utilizes Southwest 14 Street for access to the
adjacent commercial businesses and the parking area adjacent to Coral Way. The site plan you
see before you for the parking lot being constructed on this property provides for such
convenient public access, but one that is much safer than the current location. The analysis then
states that they found that the Solid Waste Department and the emergency vehicles utilize the
street. As you can see from the drawing, they will still have access to this area in the parking lot,
and the closure will not limit the emergency use of this area, and we would be glad to execute
any kind of easement they wanted to make sure it was in perpetuity. The analysis then found
that there might be unanticipated long-term consequences to the vacation of the street. They
argued that the closure could ultimately facilitate development of a building that is inconsistent
with the character of Southwest 15 Road. BVT Development has responded to that concern. We
have proffered a Declaration of Covenance and Restrictions, which we'll record in the public
records when the plat is recorded, and this was submitted a number of months ago, before we
went to the Zoning Board. The covenant absolutely restricts BVT from utilizing the area within
the vacated roadway for the purposes of FAR (floor area ratio) calculations on their own parcel
and even goes so far as to say that it prohibits any redevelopment on the street, at all. We cannot
encroach on the street, so this area can never be utilized to build any building that wouldn't
otherwise be approved on that property, and I have the executed covenant with us tonight and
we'll proffer it to you. Finally, the analysis found that the property owner failed to demonstrate
any public benefits provided as a result of the street closure. I believe that the creation of this
pedestrian easement area from the Publix store to the parking lot, which will be beautifully
landscaped and lit, is clearly a public benefit. Also, alleviating a situation, which is perceived to
be dangerous, is an additional public benefit. I would like to read into the record a letter dated
January 15, 2002, from the Brickell Homeowners' Association, which was sent to the director of
the City of Miami Planning and Zoning Department, and although I know Mr. Jacobs is here
tonight and would like to address the Commission, I would like to put the contents of his letter
that was sent to this City in June in the record. "Dear Anna, it is come to our attention that a
hearing is scheduled before the Zoning Board on June 17 regarding the vacation of Southwest 14
Street, a short street that runs at a diagonal to Southwest 15 Road, just east to Southwest 2
Avenue. The Brickell Homeowners' Association has been a strong advocate of this road closure,
starting when Jim Kaye was Public Works Director. The street dead-ended less than a half a
block in and was used by FP&L to park its big rigs, until the Publix opening, when the street was
215 July 25, 2002
opened to provide access to the Publix parking lot with no public hearing or notification to the
neighbors. The intersection of Southwest 14 Street, 15 Road, and Southwest 2 Avenue is a
disaster waiting to happen. The five points seem like seven because of the medians. Two of the
approaches are blind. The traffic hazard is already extreme, but when the 2 Avenue bridge opens
and with the continued development of Brickell Village and the proposed traffic circle on 15
Road in Coral Way, just a few short blocks to the west, the dangers will be much magnified.
BHA has supported the David Plummer study that recommended that the access from 15 Road to
the Publix parking lot be through the Metrorail right-of-way that would make for a much safer
perpendicular intersection. Your support of this public safety modifications will be greatly
appreciated."
Chairman Regalado: OK. Commissioner Sanchez, is this --
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there any opposition?
Chairman Regalado: Anybody from --
Commissioner Sanchez: I believe there is.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Ms. Burke: Not opposition.
Joe Wilkins: Not necessarily opposition. Joe Wilkins, secretary, Miami Roads Neighborhood
Civic Association. We met with the BVD [sic] folks on July 1. We heard the presentation. We
recognized the problems, that it's a horrible intersection. It's not a disaster waiting to happen.
It's a disaster. We recognized the need for the parking. No problem there. We're going to need
a lot of parking, especially with the scale of development that's going in there. Our concern was
for the future. Again, what if BVD [sic] folks decide to sell next month? Does the next person
coming in have a bigger parcel of land to build a bigger building? We asked those questions on
July 1. We got the covenant today and we have not had time for our lawyer to look at it or
analyze it, so those are our concerns. We have not had time to take an official position on the
closure because we were waiting for the information, which we got today, but those are our
concerns. Yes, the intersection is dangerous; yes, we need the parking, but no, we don't want to
open the door for some future project that we might have to go to start fighting again. Thank
you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. OK, we close the public hearing. Do we have a motion?
Tory Jacobs: Wait.
Commissioner Sanchez: I believe --
Mr. Jacobs: Don't I have a --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK.
216 July 25, 2002
Mr. Jacobs: Just me.
Chairman Regalado : I thought that you were --
Mr. Jacobs: Excuse me.
Chairman Regalado: -- waiting for some other issues.
Mr. Jacobs: Tory Jacobs, Brickell Homeowner Association. I live at 145 Southeast 25 Road.
My office was in that building -- in that corner from 1986 to the year 2000. Commissioner
Sanchez --
Commissioner Sanchez: I know that area very, very well.
Mr. Jacobs: Well, first of all, I don't know if it was legally opened because the sign "no outlets"
still sits at the entrance of 2 Avenue -- Southwest 2 Avenue and 15 Road, going into 14. There
was no posting of the -- or hearing or announcement. It just -- they removed the barriers when
they built the public lot. We immediately were concerned about the danger because of the nature
of that intersection, and Jim Kaye, we worked with him. He was in favor and then he resigned or
retired, I guess that's what he did, and John Jackson took over. He came over and met with us.
We got the people that owned that property, the investors. We got the people from the county to
agree that it was a good idea to have access from the Metrorail to 15 Road. Everybody was for
it. The problem was, the City could not pay for putting a road in on the county land, so it died at
that time. We have this recommendation from David Plummer, which is pretty much, I think,
like what's there, and we've been in favor for some time for this improvement and safety, and I
hope that the Commissioners will support it because you may be saving some lives. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: I have a question. Since it's been labeled a dangerous intersection, do
we have any actual report of how many accidents have we had at that intersection? I mean, do
you have that as evidence to present to me? because I live in that neighborhood. I go to Publix.
I take that road -- I can't come out of Publix on Coral Way because I can only turn right, so I
have to go around and come out that street onto 2 Avenue and then either go down 15 and take 1
Street all the way back or I have to go all the way around and take Coral Way and head west into
the roads. I would like to see if you did do that, where you can show that that intersection --
because I have -- I don't think I've ever seen an accident at that intersection.
Ms. Burke: I don't have any accidents reports, but as I said, it's perceived to be a hazardous
intersection, and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, it's perceived to be a hazardous intersection because --
Ms. Burke: -- and --
217 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: -- it's a complicated intersection, just like five points is a --
Ms. Burke: Right, right, but coming -- having the entrances and the exits coming into this area
would be so much better and so much safer and, you know, for a company like FP&L and the
owner of Publix to give up this land for this easement area, for this pedestrian crossway,
underscores how -- and give up their right to the road just for us to build this whole parking area,
underscores how important the property owners in the area think it is that this roadway is
accomplished, and we understand the City's reluctance to turn over land to developers who want
to use it to build upon or for increasing the FAR calculations on their own property, but we have
proffered a covenant, which, by the way, was submitted in June, and the City's had a chance to
look at it, which says we will never do it in perpetuity, so you're getting this beautiful access
way --
Commissioner Sanchez: From Publix --
Ms. Burke: You're getting an additional 30 parking spaces -- right now, they could go in -- BVT
can go in and build this part of the parking lot.
Commissioner Sanchez: Sure.
Ms. Burke: If they use the roadway, they can put in 30 additional spaces and they can provide
this pedestrian access way. That's an incredible public benefit.
Commissioner Sanchez: So just for point of clarification, we -- they would have an exit onto
Southwest 15 Road from the parking lot, two of them.
Ms. Burke: Right, because we own here and we own here. The only thing we don't own is this
little piece.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Burke: But this allows the parking lot to open up to the extent that we can get 30 additional
spaces and it allows us to build this. Otherwise, they have to go around here.
Commissioner Sanchez: That area has gained so much rapid growth that every time there is
some type of development -- and you have plenty of development going into that area -- it
triggers off something else. With the addition of the project that's going up that we approved not
long ago, parking became a problem in the Publix area and where the Blockbuster is, and the
Super Cut and all that area there, parking has become a problem, so this would alleviate the
problem of parking, so -- to allow the development to go on, which the development's also going
to have plenty of parking, but we're not -- the development, it's apples and oranges here.
Ms. Burke: Right. Coral Station --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, yes, I know.
218 July 25, 2002
Ms. Burke: -- cannot park in -- this is not to be utilized for a Coral Station project, at all.
Commissioner Sanchez: I understand that.
Ms. Burke: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you for clarifying that.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: You know, I'm not so thrilled about it and I hardly ever go against the
City when they make denials on just about every aspect, Planning and Zoning, Public Works,
Plat and Street Committee, but you know, if the homeowners association feel comfortable with
the caveat that you have presented, I am prepared to go ahead and do something I hardly ever do
and it's to go against the administration on this, because my concerns were that we will not have
exits onto 15 Road, and that way everybody would have to go out to Coral Way and you would
only be forced to go one way and that's east.
Ms. Burke: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, Tory -- I mean -- I'm sorry, Tory, you're here, but also Mr.
Wilkins.
Mr. Wilkins: I would just like to ask, has the City Attorney had a chance to look at the
covenant? Can he give us the assurances that we're looking for that this will protect us in the
ways that we're looking to be protected?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): I haven't personally viewed --
Mr. Wilkins: Because, like I said, we got it today.
Mr. Maxwell: -- the covenant. Ms. Burke, you said that our office had that covenant, which is --
Ms. Burke: Yes, and Lourdes has it --
Commissioner Sanchez: Could you read it?
Ms. Burke: -- and she can --
Commissioner Sanchez: Ma'am -- Ms. Burke, could you read it into the record?
Mr. Maxwell: No, but -- well, let --
Ms. Burke: I certainly could, and Lourdes has had a chance to look at it and she can tell you
what it says also.
219 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: I thought you said that the City Attorney's Office had it.
Ms. Burke: I said I sent it to the City in June. I proffered it at the Zoning Board.
Mr. Maxwell: OK.
Ms. Burke: I've sent --
Mr. Maxwell: Let me say this.
Ms. Burke: -- it three times to the City.
Mr. Maxwell: Let me respond this way, if I may, Mr. Chairman. What's being asked for is not a
major thing. A covenant that would cover what they've proffered, whether we've reviewed it to
this point or not, is not a difficult thing, and if it's the will of the Commission to approve, subject
to such a covenant, we certainly could make sure that the covenant that comports with that would
be -- could be drafted and recorded.
Commissioner Sanchez: Before I turn it over to Commissioner Winton, I just want to make sure
that we have assurance, exactly the same concern that Ms. Wilkins stated, was that the developer
sells the land, he's got what he wanted, and then he does what he wants. We want to have a
protection to make sure that if that's what's going to be built there, we want that to be built there.
Vice Chairman Winton: And --
Ms. Burke: Yeah. It --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- I can tell you, that site gets big enough now to do something with
because, apparently, they're tearing down that office building. It took me, until one minute ago,
to figure out the orientation.
Commissioner Sanchez: Your old office, Tory.
Vice Chairman Winton: So that old office building goes away, is that right?
Ms. Burke: Right, and this becomes a parking lot --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Ms. Burke: -- but this covenant runs with the land and it's binding on all successors and
assigned. It's a typical City language.
Mr. Wilkins: I just want to insure that --
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me.
220 July 25, 2002
Mr. Wilkins: -- if this is not a parking lot --
Ms. Burke: We'll make any changes --
Mr. Wilkins: -- it becomes a street again.
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me.
Mr. Wilkins: It can be nothing but a parking lot.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't know -- this is a very important issue. This site is big enough to
develop on now. They tear the building down, you get rid of the street, and you could do
something there that no one's going to want, and I'm happy they've proffered this covenant, but
I'm not sure, you know, unless the City Attorney can tell us tonight that this covenant gets us all
the protections we want --
Mr. Maxwell: No, sir, I couldn't do that.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- to assure that 15 and 20 and 25 years ago from now or two years
from now, some developer can't come in and build something there that absolutely is -- that
simply couldn't be done if we hadn't have taken this action tonight, and so it seems to me -- I
don't know why we're in a giant hurry to do this. I think we ought to have the City Attorney
work this out so that we get all the protections we want, and if the developer's willing to give
those to us, then I might be inclined to go against all of these denials, but there's a bundle of
them and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Ms. Burke --
Ms. Burke: We --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- short of that, I'm -- I can't support it.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- you've made your representation very eloquently. The only concern
is -- that's the concern, that we want to make sure that there is something on the record that states
that three or four years from now, you're not going to have that developer come in front of us
wanting to put up a building.
Ms. Burke: OK. What I wanted to address what Commissioner Winton said about the site
becoming big. This site is -- this is about --
Chairman Regalado: Excuse me.
221 July 25, 2002
Ms. Burke: -- a third of an acre.
Chairman Regalado: Ms. Burke, why don't you address the --
Ms. Burke: We will.
Chairman Regalado: -- issue of the covenant.
Ms. Burke: We will change the -- if there is anything wrong in the covenant -- and I don't
believe there is; it's City form -- but if there's anything wrong, we will make any change that the
City Attorney asks us to make in order to insure this runs with the land in perpetuity; that we
cannot utilize the street for calculating additional FAR on our property, or build anything upon
the street but this parking lot, and --
Vice Chairman Winton: And --
Ms. Burke: -- it says it in the covenant and we'll do it.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- probably add one more thing, and that is that there's some sort of
reverter clause in here so that somebody down the road -- you know, the United Way thing had
one of these situations in it, exactly like this; caused us all kinds of headaches that we had to deal
with, so maybe we get a reverter clause in there that says any attempt to do any of those kinds of
things, that reverts back to a public road and subject's done. We add that --
Commissioner Sanchez: Are you willing to accept that?
Ms. Burke: We will accept that.
Mr. Wilkins: Pretty much what we're looking for.
Ms. Burke: We'll accept that.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, then, you could -- then I could get much more enthusiastic with
this.
Ms. Burke: OK.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Do we have a motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: I guess the motion is to continue, defer, to do something until you all
can get this language fixed.
222 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: So what you're saying is, you don't want to vote on it tonight, until we -- you
want to see the language.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't --
Mr. Maxwell: You actually want to see the language.
Commissioner Sanchez: We could vote on it today with that language.
Vice Chairman Winton: Huh?
Commissioner Sanchez: We could vote on it, as long as that language is on the record.
Mr. Maxwell: Well, I'm not prepared to make the --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, he --
Mr. Maxwell: -- to assure the Commission that --
Vice Chairman Winton: That this does it.
Mr. Maxwell: -- the document I have right here does that, and I think that's what the
Commissioner said at first.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Well, we can defer the item --
Chairman Regalado : No, but --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- defer the item -- the presentation has been given already. I mean, if it
comes back, there isn't any opposition; it could be quick.
Ms. Burke: That's -- or I could just simply state on the record that I will amend that covenant to
provide that in the event -- and the owner of the property tries to do any of the things prohibited,
that the street would revert back to a public right-of-way, and that I will work with the City
Attorney's Office to draft language comfortable to the City Attorney. If we can't agree upon
language, we will come back. If we agree upon language, we will execute the document.
Vice Chairman Winton: Did you hear that?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Is that enough?
Vice Chairman Winton: So does that mean we could vote tonight?
223 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele is recognized.
Mr. Maxwell: You're voting subject to a covenant that comports with just -- what she just said,
being approved by our office as well, and if that does not occur, our office will ask for this item
to come back, as well.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you all can do what you want to do. Let me tell you
something. And Commissioner Sanchez, I've said this ever since I've sat on this Commission.
There's one area in this town that this Commission is making the next Kendall. I said this in the
context of the Miami Marlins Stadium. This area that is south of the Miami River, that goes all
the way down to U.S. 1 is grossly over capacity in terms of levels of service, grossly. The word
"level of service" has not been uttered tonight by our Public Works Director, by our Planning
staff, and certainly not by the applicant. How, in the name of goodness, are you going to deal
with the level of service problem in this five -corner area and all of that by adding more and more
parking? You're adding more and more, and you're creating -- you know, you've already got a
road problem in this area. I think you all need -- Commissioner Winton and Commissioner
Sanchez, I think you all need to be very careful in what we're doing in this area, and this needs to
be coordinated very carefully, based on levels of service of roads. We need to look at what the
LOS (level of service) is off of each of these roads -- each of these streets in here as we begin to
look at this, and -- I mean, I don't mean to be, you know, a nay sayer here, but I saw this
developing in the County Commission with Kendall. You kept putting in, you kept putting in,
you kept making adjustments, tightening up, making more density, but nobody was doing
anything to solve the road capacity problem. Therefore, everybody that moved to Kendall 12
years ago, 15 years ago is now up in Weston Broward and looking -- you know, and more and
more, and that's where all the growth for Pembroke Pines and west -- that's where this is coming
from. It's coming because we, the public policy makers, did not basically say, we are reaching a
problem with how much more development we can absorb in this area, and we've got a serious
problem south of the Miami River, and you know, everybody -- you know, the homeowners are
pliable on certain issues, but the fact of the matter is, this is not a homeowner issue. This is a
Public Works problem, and I have said it every time we talk about this. Somebody in Public
Works needs to get a traffic consultant and sit down with the Florida DOT (Department of
Transportation) and we need to look at the levels of service in here because it doesn't -- you
don't have to drive it every day to know that we're creating more and more problems, and a part
of it has got to be, we cannot absorb more development unless we deal with the -- you know,
we've got a problem with the bridge. We've got a problem with the river. You know, we keep
adding more and we keep adding more, and I just don't see where it's going to release itself,
other than just -- and people beginning to complain about the quality of life, so I'm very nervous
when you start talking about this area that we're talking about increasing, you know, another 30
parking spaces, another -- which -- I assume that means you've got more cars coming in now.
You don't have more cars coming in?
Vice Chairman Winton: No. It'll probably be the same number because they're going to be
moving parking all around there.
224 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: All around.
Commissioner Teele: I thought she said --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's place is --
Commissioner Teele: -- there wasn't going to be a net of 30 to 40 more. Oh, I didn't hear you
correctly?
Vice Chairman Winton: There's going to be 30 spaces there, but there's -- on the other side,
where they're developing this something station that they're doing, currently there's a bunch of
surface parking over there that's going to disappear, so this is going to --
Commissioner Teele: There's no more net new parking?
Ms. Burke: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Ms. Burke: We're just transferring.
Commissioner Teele: Then I stand corrected.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
Ms. Burke: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: But I still say that the level of service issue is where these projects need to
begin to become evaluated, because I don't know what the level of service is. It's not on the
record. No one's talking about it. What's the level of service out there on that road? What is
that?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, that's probably one of the few ones where it's decent.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Yeah. Actually, it probably is. We're
in the middle of a --
Vice Chairman Winton: 15 Road.
Ms. Slazyk: -- traffic study for the Brickell area. We don't have all the conclusions yet that's
going to look at all the different growth scenarios for the future, so we're going to have much
more information soon, but one thing, though, that when Commissioner Teele was speaking that
makes sense is a circulation study more so than a level of service, and I think that this particular
proposal for this closure and the fact that they want a parking area there, could probably use
some kind of a circulation study and a signage package along with it, so people know how and
225 July 25, 2002
where to get in and out, and that's probably something that should be done in conjunction with
this closure. It's more of a circulation issue, especially with the street being closed in its place.
Ms. Burke: We've already done some of that work. We'd be happy to provide the City with a
circulation study, along with our -- we'll submit it as part --
Ms. Slayzk: With your covenant, yeah.
Ms. Burke: -- as part of our plat application.
Commissioner Teele: I realize, Mr. Chairman, Madam Director -- Madam Manager that in the
past, these street closures have pretty much been a right and they've just sort of gone through,
but I think we need to continue to refine what we need. I mean, a circulation study, if
appropriate, if appropriate, should be written right into our ordinance, that that's one of the
required documents because, you know -- at least the developer was smart enough to realize that
they need to know where the circulation is going to go, but -- I mean, again, it speaks to us now.
We're the ones who really need to understand what the circulation is. I think we're going to be
much better off if we make sure we know what we're doing here. I think we need to go slow in
this whole Brickell area, you know, and I don't mean to take exception with the homeowner
association on this stuff, but I'm telling you, this, in my mind, is becoming more and more of a
problem and -- I mean, you know, we know if it's on Brickell, but it's these interior streets
where, you know, things are beginning to queue themselves up, and I just think we ought to look
at it very closely, but you know, if it's no problem, it's no problem, but I think we ought to know
that it's no problem before we start voting on these kinds of things, and I think we need to send a
signal to the development community, you know, that we've got some concerns, if we have
concerns. If we don't have concerns, then so be it.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm prepared with the motion, Mr. Chairman, and that's a motion to
approve going against the staff recommendation, subject to the covenant stipulating all the
concerns that have been brought and, of course, subject to the City Attorney --
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: And the developer agreeing ultimately on a covenant.
Commissioner Sanchez: If the attorney --
Mr. Maxwell: On the terms of the covenant, as proffer during this meeting.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Mr. Maxwell: And I --
Vice Chairman Winton: And if it doesn't happen --
Commissioner Sanchez: It goes back.
226 July 25, 2002
Mr. Maxwell: You would ask for it to come back.
Vice Chairman Winton: I will second that motion.
Mr. Maxwell: So approval, subject to that.
Chairman Regalado: OK, we have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: One "no."
Chairman Regalado: One no.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-886
]A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT, CLOSING, VACATING, ABANDONING AND
DISCONTINUING FOR PUBLIC USE THAT PORTION OF A PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THE PORTION OF SOUTHWEST 14 STREET
BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 2 AVENUE AND THE METRO -RAIL RIGHT-OF-
WAY, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED
"EXHIBIT A," PER PLANS ON FILE, AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS
CONTAINED IN A COVENANT, TO BE APPROVED IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Ms. Burke: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
227 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Ms. Burke. Thank you.
40. APPROVE LETTER OF INTENT SUPPORTING NEW YEARS EVE MEGA CONCERT
EVENT AND ALLOW COORDINATORS OF SAID EVENT TO PROCEED WITH
NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS.
Chairman Regalado: Before going back to PZ (Planning &Zoning), and we need to -- we are
going to have to defer some of the items that we have here for the 22, but before we go to PZ --
Commissioner Teele: The 22 is a special meeting.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Instead of coming tomorrow, Commissioner Teele suggested that if
we have some items in the agenda that we don't do tonight, instead of coming tomorrow, since
we have to come on the 22 --
Vice Chairman Winton: My vote's to get them all done tonight so the 22 is real short.
Chairman Regalado: Well --
Vice Chairman Winton: Or maybe we could all carry on with all these --
Chairman Regalado: I mean, we could. There's not that much. There's not that much here, but
Vice Chairman Winton: So let's rock and roll.
Chairman Regalado: -- you know, we have the people from the Mayor's concert since 9 a.m.
here, and they have done what the Commission told them to do. They have gone before the
Orange -- the New Year's Eve Committee. They have gone to the Manager. They have gone to
Christina, and since time now --
Vice Chairman Winton: And our committee that we formed. They've been at that committee,
right?
Chairman Regalado: Huh?
Vice Chairman Winton: Haven't they been to the committee we formed, the --
Chairman Regalado: Yeah. Robert is here. You want to -- why don't you come here and tell
what the committee decided. The Commission told them to go to the committee and we have the
chairperson of that committee here.
Robert Parente: Christina Abrams was with me.
Chairman Regalado: Your name.
228 July 25, 2002
Mr. Parente: I'm Robert Parente, Commissioner Sanchez' staff, and with me is Christina
Abrams from -- what department are you with, Christina?
Christina Adams: Public Facilities.
Mr. Parente: Public Facilities. The group did come before us and we had a kind of a lively
meeting.
Vice Chairman Winton: Who was us?
Mr. Parente: The New Years Eve committee, and --
Chairman Regalado: That committee is the one form by the Commission chair, by the Mayor,
and by Commissioner Sanchez, as designated by the City Commission.
Mr. Parent: The committee --
Chairman Regalado: And we need -- wait a minute. We need the City Manager. OK, go ahead.
Mr. Parente: All right. The people from APM came back and gave us some different plans and
different ideas and we liked what we heard. We're hopeful that their enthusiasm can pay off,
and so what we, the committee, voted on unanimously was to ask this body to approve a Letter
of Intent to let them go forward and seek the sponsorship they're going to need to put this event
together. They understand that right now the City's position is that the City's willing to
contribute significant amount of in-kind services; Fire, Police, and the like, but that the City's not
paying any cash or taking on the responsibility of the event. It will be their event that they'll do
with us, the host committee and the City, so with that letter, they can go forward and get the
significant sponsorship dollars they're going to need to pull off their exciting and enthusiastic
event. Christina (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: But the letter -- what the letter says is that this is an event of the City of
Miami. This is cosponsored -- Mr. Manager, is this what -- the intent of the letter that this is an
official event of the City of Miami or the City is cosponsoring this event, and of course, what the
committee recommends is that in-kind services, which, by the way, it's a substantial amount.
Christina Abrams: Christina Abrams, Director of Public Facilities. The Letter of Intent will
support the event, and that's something that they could use to go ahead and secure their
performers, their talent --
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Ms. Abrams: -- and their sponsors. Following that, in the next few months, we'll finalize the
use agreement, which we'll bring back to the City Commission that will outline the exact dollar
amounts that the City will (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Chairman Regalado: But the letter will give them the possibility of getting sponsors.
229 July 25, 2002
Mr. Parente: Absolutely.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: It gives them the green light to go get the sponsor.
Mr. Parente: Without it, they really can't go forward.
Chairman Regalado : OK. Do we have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion. Discussion. Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, when this matter came up, I asked that the Attorney make
sure that this letter contained a side agreement on an indemnification that if this thing falls
through, you know, come October, November, that we don't turn around and get sued because
we induced them, we did this, we did that, and that should not be in the Letter of Intent. I mean,
the Letter of Intent is going to be a marketing document, but we need a side agreement on an
indemnification agreement that they indem -- that the promoters indemnify us. If anything goes
wrong, that we're not going to -- that the City will not be sued because, you know, we didn't
provide something, so I mean, that was the discussion that we had the last time this came up. I
mean, I'm totally in support of what -- as long as there is a component of this that is proactive in
all aspects of the community, particularly the African-American community --
Mr. Parente: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: -- the diversity issue and, you know, I'm surprised that, notwithstanding
this -- because I'm not the kind of guy who's going to call you and tell you, but I would hope
that the next time you all come before us, that the group is more reflective of the community, and
I don't know how many times I've got to say the same thing. When we had the list of the places
that you were going to advertise, the Miami Times was not listed, WMBM was not listed, on and
on and on. There is this chilling effect, based upon some media story, that the -- some segment
of the community's being left out, and I want to make sure that there's a proactive, not on
December 11 or December 15, but on July 25 going forward -- there's a proactive aspect of this
to involve all aspects of the community, both in the people that are standing here before us and
the consultants and the media people and the workforce and the whole nine yards that is going to
be deployed in putting this project forward, but notwithstanding all of that, I think it is critical
that the City have a side indemnification agreement that if you don't raise the money, if
something doesn't go the way we all hope that it will go, that we're not going to wind up in a
lawsuit, and that's happened more times than it hadn't. We need an estoppel or an
indemnification agreement. We need a side agreement, you know, to be done, you know, at least
prior to the next Commission meeting; otherwise, I think, you know, we're not protecting
230 July 25, 2002
ourselves, and I respect the committee and I respect the Mayor's office and all of that, but we
need -- you know, the problem with these gentlemen's agreement is when there's a
disagreement, there are no gentlemen, and so --
Patricia Fuller: Excuse me. Patricia --
Chairman Regalado: OK, and -- let me say -- one second.
Ms. Fuller: Sure.
Chairman Regalado: Let me say that I have met with them and on the first issue that you raised,
the issue of diversity, they have told me their plans and these are really good plans and I am sure
that every community will be happy, will be represented. On the other issue, that's up -- I think
you're right -- and that's up to the City Attorney; they can do that. They can even do that and
bring it on the 22 in terms of -- because, you know, what they really need now is the Letter of
Intent --
Commissioner Teele: -- to go forward.
Chairman Regalado: -- to go forward because they need to go to -- In fact, they are -- now, we
have already, already we have an offer by a network to broadcast this event at least to five
countries, so you know, we're in business. If they can get the sponsors -- Mr. City Attorney,
what you have to do is you at least prepare something to be brought --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: -- to the special Commission meeting on the 22.
Mr. Maxwell: I would suggest to you --
Chairman Regalado: That's easy. That's --
Mr. Maxwell: Right. You direct the Manager to make that one of the items on the agenda for
that special Commission meeting because it is a special meeting, and we will have a document
prepared because it is one that would have to actually be before you for you to vote on. It's not
one where we can accept direction on, so we would ask to have that direction.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
231 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-887
A MOTION APPROVING LETTER OF INTENT SUPPORTING NEW YEARS
EVE MEGA CONCERT EVENT AND ALLOWING THE COORDINATORS
OF SAID EVENT TO PROCEED WITH NECESSARY ARRANGEMENTS.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move that the City Manager and City Attorney be
instructed to prepare a full indemnification agreement to hold the City harmless and to save the
City through estoppels or whatever legal means necessary to ensure that, notwithstanding the
letter going forward and that the City is protected in the event -- in the unlikely event that the
event is not completed for whatever -- successfully completed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: And ask that that item be presented on the 22 of August.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
232 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-888
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A FULL INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT,
NOTWITHSTANDING THE LETTER OF INTENT GOING FORWARD, TO
HOLD THE CITY HARMLESS AND TO PROTECT THE CITY THROUGH
ESTOPPELS OR WHATEVER LEGAL MEANS NECESSARY, IN THE
UNLIKELY EVENT THAT THE NEW YEAR'S EVE MEGA CONCERT
EVENT IS NOT SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED; FURTHER DIRECTING
THE MANAGER TO SCHEDULE CONSIDERATION OF SAID MATTER ON
THE AUGUST 22, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Vice Chairman Winton: Now, Mr. Chairman, there's some concern over here about the first
motion and vote, and apparently -- so I think we need to understand what that is because we
don't get another change to correct it, so I'd like to hear what that is.
Ms. Fuller: OK. Patricia Fuller, Representative APM, 18418 Northwest Pembroke Pines.
Basically, what we are trying to do with the committee and the time is of essence -- that's why
we needed the Letter of Intent. This event, obviously, we're trying to put Miami on the map,
replace and bring a huge event for the New Year's Eve, replacing the (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
cancelled parade. For this we have so many amount of time, and we put ourselves 90 days in
order to determine to raise the money or not, so --
Commissioner Teele: What's the problem?
Ms. Fuller: -- to be a success. Excuse me?
Commissioner Teele: What's the problem?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. What's the concern?
Commissioner Teele: You've already got a motion --
233 July 25, 2002
Ms. Fuller: The concern is that they have -- well, if you would kindly let me finish -- what
they're doing is, in the contract for liability, on the 22, we still don't know the availability --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Ms. Fuller: -- of doing it or not.
Chairman Regalado: But it doesn't matter.
Commissioner Teele: If you would listen, I'm going to explain it to you.
Chairman Regalado: It doesn't matter.
Commissioner Teele: If you would listen. You have a motion by Commissioner Sanchez,
second by Commissioner Winton, that authorizes a letter to go forward today. That's done. Do
you understand that part?
Ms. Fuller: Yes. They're talking about a contract. That's the one I was referring to.
Commissioner Teele: OK. That's a separate issue. That's a separate issue. And on the 22 of
August, when we are brought back in for a special meeting, they are to have a contract prepared
with your signature on it, OK, on a separate tract. That has nothing to do with what you just
talked about. Now, we're talking about now about what I'm talking about. On a separate tract
there will be a letter or a -- a memorandum with certain legal documents, a release, a liability,
estoppel, etcetera, relating to the City and the organizers of this event, in the unlikely event
something goes wrong, but one has nothing to do with the other. Now, obviously, on the 22, if
we don't have that agreement signed and satisfactory, then we're obviously going to look at the
other issue, but you're going to get your letter that you came here for, as I understood the
motion, immediately.
Chairman Regalado: And probably what she meant -- Commissioner Teele, could you yield?
What she meant was the mention of a contract in the future.
Ms. Fuller: That's what I was referring to.
Chairman Regalado: What that -- the word contract was mentioned in the context of the in-kind
services. The in-kind services are a substantial amount of money that the City will pay, and the
in-kind services will be approved by the City Commission as soon as we have a contract, which
will be product of your ability to have the sponsors. When you have the sponsors in late
September, you say to the City "we have the sponsors;" then the City says, "OK, we're going to
bring to the City Commission the final contract with the in-kind services," and we're talking, you
know, how much in terms of whatever the needs are, and that's the contract that they --
Ms. Fuller: That's what I was referring to. Thank you for clarifying.
234 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: So the contract is about two months away from here. Letter is on the 22.
Commissioner Teele: The letter is tomorrow.
Chairman Regalado: No, no. Letter to protect the City or --
Unidentified Speaker: 22.
Chairman Regalado: -- contract to protect the City is on the 22. Letter of Intent is tomorrow.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Fuller: Correct.
Mr. Maxwell: You know, what you talk about on the 22 is a release.
Commissioner Teele: It's a release.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Chairman Regalado: Well -- OK.
Unidentified Speaker: Yes. It's not (UNINTELLIGIBLE) contract.
Chairman Regalado: OK, a release.
Vice Chairman Winton: Next subject, please.
Unidentified Speaker: Right.
Ms. Fuller: OK. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: We need to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Hold on. The indemnification.
Chairman Regalado: We need to vote.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: We need to vote --
Commissioner Teele: On the indemnification.
Vice Chairman Winton: All in favor.
235 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: -- on the indemnification.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Ms. Fuller: Thank you very much.
41. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: IMPOSE ADDITIONAL FORTY-FIVE DAY
DELAY (TO SEPTEMBER 20, 2002) IN ACCEPTANCE, PROCESSING, PLACEMENT,
CONSTRUCTION OR MODIFICATION OF PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY
TOWERS AND MONO -POLES FOR PURPOSE OF REVIEWING ARTICLES 4 AND 6 OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, some of my constituents have been here all morning, too,
and again, I would just like to bring up PZ Item Number 20 because I think it's just putting some
matters on the record.
Chairman Regalado: Cellular Towers.
Commissioner Teele: Cellular telephone, if it's all right with you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Leroy.
Leroy Jones: Hello. How y'all doing, Commissioners?
Chairman Regalado: Hey, Leroy. (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Mr. Jones: Thank you. I promise not to --
Chairman Regalado: You are persistent, that's what --
Mr. Jones: -- I promise not to say the same things twice so they we can get on the ball. That's it,
Commissioner, I'm learning. I'm learning this process. Oh, I want to pass these out. This is
from the fact sheet number 2, and I just want to let you know that it is dated from September 17,
1996, so some -- maybe some of the changes probably have been made, but if you look at the
bottom of the page, I put a mark there, and Mr. Dennis will discuss that. I guess he'll read it off
for the public when he gets up there, but I want to say that, recently, we did have the pleasure in
meeting with -- at the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) office, a representative from one
236 July 25, 2002
company, an attorney who represented one company, and Mr. Gil Pastorises (phonetic). I hope
I'm saying his name right, but --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Pastorises.
Mr. Jones: Pastorises. We met with him, who represents one of the companies, and we met with
Mr. Armando Fernandez, who represented Voice Stream, so those two people did what you
requested, Commissioner, that they meet with us.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Pastorises represents the industry.
Mr. Jones: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And his firm is taking the lead for the entire industry on this.
Mr. Jones: OK
Commissioner Teele: I mean, while he represents a company, he's representing the industry —
Mr. Jones: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: -- and has the lead before the City of Miami, as I understand the way the
way they're organized.
Mr. Jones: OK, but I do want to say, Commissioner, that we -- before we left that meeting, we
had planned to have another meeting before today that never took place. Don't know why.
Maybe both sides was busy. I know I didn't call them. I was expecting a call from them, but
nevertheless, the meeting never took place. In that meeting, we did get a copy from the City of a
list of all the cell phone sites, and I did get a chance to review the map that the City graciously
put together for us, under y' all leadership, given the map that we put together, and we did find
some things on the map that wasn't right. For example, where some of the towers was was in
high residential areas, and the colors from where the residential areas -- homeowners was wasn't
showed on the City map, so I'm hoping that the City will request that they redo that and look
over it again. Another thing I want to say, that we did have two representatives from the
Planning Department come; Ms. Lourdes, as well as Mr. Juan Gonzalez, and at the last
Commission meeting, Commissioner Sanchez, when -- I think you made the motion to -- when
the industry -- when the Planning Advisory Board accepted the 90 -day moratorium and study 45
days, which we think that's a good idea. We appreciate the industry increasing it to 90 days, but
a part of the process was that rooftops wasn't included, and we unclear of how tall the rooftops
is. Do you mean a top of a house, a one-story building? So it wasn't no clarification of how tall
the roof had to be in order for it to qualify for it not to be a part of the moratorium. The second
thing is, it was -- we -- our understanding that it's some applications that was in the process,
because a part of that agreement was that the applications that's in process and sites that was
under construction couldn't be a part of this agreement of the moratorium. We requested a copy
of the sites that was under construction, as well as the applications that was in process, and never
received it and we need to see that because we want to know what areas slated for.
237 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Who did you request that from?
Mr. Jones: From the Planning Department.
Vice Chairman Winton: How long ago?
Mr. Jones: When we had our meeting at the NET office, and they promised me --
Vice Chairman Winton: How long ago was that?
Mr. Jones: -- to give it to us -- two weeks ago.
Vice Chairman Winton: Just a piece of advice for the future. When you have these meetings
and you have action steps that come out of those meetings --
Mr. Jones: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- get deadlines from people.
Mr. Jones: Yes, sir. Well --
Vice Chairman Winton: So everybody has a clearer understanding, when you walk out of there,
not only what, but when, and then you have something to talk about; "They missed the
deadline," so that they don't think two weeks and you're thinking one day, but we're going to
ask "when" tonight, yet.
Mr. Jones: Mr. Chair, it was our understanding that we would have it before today, and I'm not
jumping on the Planning Department because I appreciate the Planning Department coming to
the table and the industry coming to the table, so I'm not here to bash the Planning Department.
I'm really not, but you know, I'm -- like the Commissioner said, I'm thorough. I try to be on top
of things because, you know, when I pick fights, I want to win, you know, so I put all my heart
into it. I don't pick battles I'm going to lose. I try to win all battles that I pick, but I do want to
say, before we met with the Planning Department at the NET office -- and Ms. Cooper was
present at the meeting. It was one, two, three, four, five, six, seven people present -- the
committee to relocate cell phone towers out of residential areas, that's what we call our
committee, where Ms. Range sit on the committee, Hershel Haynes from the homeowners
association sit on the committee, and some of the Brothers of the Same Mind, and another lady
from a homeowners association sit on the committee. We made some requests. We wrote down
some requests that we want the City to consider, is that the information about the moratorium
must be advertised in the Miami Times and the Miami Herald; that all residents in the City of
Miami be notified, within a three-mile radius, before the towers are approved through zoning.
The committee is requesting that no other towers or construction in this designated area, until
they are equally distributed in other parts of the area, in the areas we're looking at. The permits
are to be given -- no permits are to be given to construct cell phone towers in areas of Coconut
Grove to the south of 87 Street -- to the -- yeah, to the north of 87 Street -- right -- uh-uh, I'm
sorry -- area of Coconut Grove, 87 Street north, Biscayne Boulevard east, and Southwest 19
238 July 25, 2002
Avenue west, and the reason why we picked those areas because those are the areas right now
where the cell phone towers is mostly being concentrated in, and the reason why I went all the
way to Southwest 19 Avenue -- and I think that's Commissioner Sanchez' district -- is because
they've got about four or five of them right within a few blocks from each other right in
residential areas, but the difference is, in our neighborhood, they on commercial corridors where
a commercial structure should be, creating jobs. Now, we want to take it all the way to 19
Avenue in the Little Havana area and we want to include the Allapattah area because it's a high
concentration ones in the Allapattah area, but there are also some by I-95, which they doing a
new town complex where the old Miami Stadium used to be, so we're looking at that area, so
we're looking at Coconut Grove south, 87 Street north, Biscayne on the east, and Southwest 19t
Street on the west, coming all the way up to 19 Avenue in the northwest area in Liberty City, and
the reason why we're looking at this area, Commissioner, we're requesting you all to have them
equally distribute them, since these areas that I just mentioned is the dumping ground now, either
have the industry go outside other areas that they're not concentrating in, you know, or stop
doing them. The Planning and Zoning Department should redo the map in order to be more
aware of where the towers is relocated at. I've discussed that. That the City Commission be
notified -- and this is real. I want the City Commissioners to please consider this -- is that the
City Commission be notified of any new structures. I don't care if it's one-story, if it's one -- if
it's 5,000 square feet, if it's 500 square feet, or any new construction in their district. You all
should know of any new construction that's going in your district. You should know that
because you is sitting up there to represent us, the community, and you all should have an idea of
what your community wants and you should be notified of any new structures in your district. I
don't care what kind of structure it is. OK, I did it about the roof. I'm almost finished,
Commissioner. I'm going to close it up with this. We understand that it's eight companies. It's
about seven or eight companies total. My question was -- and I'm going to take full
responsibility for this because I don't bite my tongue. I wanted to know what is the industry
doing to set up some kind of fund or what they doing to invest in our community? And that's
important, because when we have functions in our neighborhood, especially when it comes to the
small stores, I'm usually the one who go and get the donations for the food, whatever people
sponsoring, or whatever activities happen in our community, they come to me to go out to raise
funding from the small businesses to be a part of the programs and activities that's happening in
our community, but where those cell phone towers at, I can't go there, or the community. It
doesn't have to be me. It could be a church member. It could be anybody, you know, because
we looking at businesses in our community contributing back into our neighborhood, in our area,
the area that I called off. Almost 80 percent of them is on a commercial strip where a
commercial structure should be creating jobs and that's not benefiting the people, so the industry
said they don't contribute, they don't donate, they don't create no fund, they don't do nothing, so
I think it's sad because now they sit in our community pumping all the money out, but not
paying nothing, not helping -- not benefiting nobody, and I said that and I mean that. I fight for
low-income people, for poor people every day, and I won't never take that back when I'm asking
for money for poor people to do positive things in our community. If small businesses in our
neighborhood who suffering can contribute, rich people who own cell phone towers in our
community should be able to contribute, too.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you, Leroy.
239 July 25, 2002
Mr. Jones: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado : Go ahead, sir.
Brian Dennis: Commissioner, I'm going to read what's in the letter from number eight, the
zoning issue. The question that it ask was what --
Chairman Regalado: Your name. Your name and address.
Mr. Dennis: Brian Dennis, address 4055 Northwest 17 Avenue. What types of information,
exchanges should occur at the beginning of the local zoning process that would be helpful both
to local and state governments and (UNINTELLIGIBLE) wire service providers? The answer to
that question (UNINTELLIGIBLE). From the perspective of local and state governments, it is
helpful for wireless service providers to supply as much advanced information as possible about
the nature of its service, offerings and the big picture plan for service deployment. Local zoning
authorities have a strong interest in becoming fully informed about exactly what they are
authorizing and what will be the long-term effects of facilities sitting on land used in their
communities. Many personal wireless service providers have found it helpful to organize
seminars aimed at acquainting local zoning authorities with their services. The key point in this
is this here: Community outreach is also a productive way for new wireless service providers,
who pave the way for introduction of this offerings. Personal wireless service providers may be
able to expedite the zoning authorization process if they target where possible site locations that
are compatible with the proposed use, such as industrial zones, utility right-of-way, and pre-
existing structures. From the perspective of the personal wireless service provider, knowing
what to expect in the zoning process is a primary concern. Therefore, state and local authorities
should endeavor to provide wireless service providers with a clear picture of zoning
authorization process. The word that is missing is in advance, so basically, what we're finding
out is that the businesses that was on those corridors never knew what was coming there. They
never found out, up until the point that those who came out to lay the construction was already
out there. By then, it's too late. The application is already determined that these service
providers would have this land to do whatever commercial building or whatever property they
wanted to build. The sad thing about that is that our district Commissioner has a project going
on for $25,000,000 that will build new housing there, and I think that all (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
and look ugly compared to what he is trying to bring into a neighborhood that needs some
revitalization real bad. You know what I'm saying? As spoken earlier, all these service
providers, all these so-called wireless people, you know, they lay these cell phone towers in
mainly concentrated area where there a lot of poor people, but you don't find them out at Doral
Lakes, you don't find them in Miami Lakes, you don't find them over on Star or Palm Island.
You find them in heavily concentrated areas where there are poor folks, so the thing that this is,
when the service providers want to come in and put another cell phone tower up, they should be
able to come into the residential area or that business area and ask those businesses would that be
helpful to them. As something earlier, on the top of the page in number seven, was saying that
the answer was that they should camouflage those towers as far as with trees and different things
like that, and at the end their answer was, they not going to do it because it's costing them
money. Well, the same money that it cost them to camouflage it is no different than the money
that it costing them to hang it up. You taking money out, not bringing none back, and that's not
240 July 25, 2002
fair to the community or the businesses that that tower sits in front of. They're heavily
concentrated along 54 Street, from 7 Avenue all the way back out. You don't see this nowhere
else, so my thing is to the Commission is to be able to regulate this from the zoning standpoint
and who -- from the building and zoning standpoints and to stop anybody from just coming in
here doing it. If you going to come in, please be able to put an advanced notice out, as Leroy
said, in the Miami Times and the Miami Herald, and give the community an opportunity to voice
their opinion, whether they're for or against it. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you. OK. We're closing the public hearing. This is a
second reading ordinance. It is on the moratorium, yes.
Mr. Maxwell: Solely on the moratorium.
Chairman Regalado: Forty-five additional days of moratorium. This is a second reading, so do
we have a motion and a second?
Commissioner Teele: I would move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on discussion.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: The purpose of the moratorium, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Manager, was to
develop new rules and new procedures. I think the testimony that we've heard today from two
individuals that obviously are serious about this; they're following it. They're not just coming
down to Commission meeting. They're putting their time in. They've gone to the FCC (Federal
Communications Commission) to get the background, the details. The purpose of the
moratorium was to develop new rules and new procedures. Among the things that the public is
making, that I want to associate myself with, is the notion of landscaping and how these towers
are built, that is, the buffering, etcetera. The camouflaging, I think, was a term that was also
used, but I think the other issue becomes just -- that I want to associate with is the notice
provision. This problem has been visited upon us because we, the City, allowed the industry --
through their lobbyists and representatives, I assume, or maybe through our own failure to pay
close attention to it -- literally have delegated this down to the Zoning administrator, I guess, to
issue these permits.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning &Zoning): It's in the Building Department.
Commissioner Teele: The Building Department to issue the permits.
Ms. Slayzk: They're allowed.
Commissioner Teele: The NET administrators don't even know they're coming in, and the thing
that I want to be associated with is, I want not only a public hearing process, but I think there
241 July 25, 2002
should be a mandatory kind of hearing that is held either by the Zoning Board below, where this
can be heard and vetted on each one, with an appeal by either party to the Commission. I mean,
I don't know how the other Commissioners feel about it. You do agree, Commissioner Winton?
But I think, you know --
Vice Chairman Winton: Can you imagine one of these things going up in the middle of Coconut
Grove? So, why should -- if it can -- if this community can raise holy bologna, why can't your
community? I mean -- so I agree 100 percent.
Commissioner Teele: And I mean, all of the formalities and necessities of the notice provisions,
of the posting of the area -- you know, we've just made it too easy for the industry to do this and,
obviously, there is a concern, which I'm persuaded, is that these people have done it on a line of
least resistance. I want you to go back and get the study done by the United -- the first study, the
first definitive study that was done was done by the United Church of Christ Commission for
Racial Justice, back in the late 70's, early 80's, and that was the first definitive study that talked
about environmental justice, and what that study proved -- and the EPA (Environmental
Protection Agency) eventually adopted it -- was that garbage dumps -- hazardous dumps, I
should say -- if you did a map across the country of all of the hazardous dump sites, something
like 22 of them, all of them just coincidentally were located in counties where there was extreme
poverty and the populations were overwhelmingly African-American. I'm talking now about the
one in North Carolina, up in (UNINTELLIGIBLE), in Alabama, in Mississippi. You know, you
did a map of all of these solid wastes -- these hazardous waste sites, you know, where toxic
waste was being -- and that, of course, began to be something was studied by the federal
government. It culminated with President Clinton, you know, issuing this executive order
regarding economic justice as it relates to state roads -- federal roads, you know, because the
roads were targeted the same way. This is not a new problem. 95, the problem with 395 that
we're talking about, these roads were targeted through the poor communities, not just in Florida
or Miami, but all over the nation, and the problem that we're being confronted with with this
wireless technology is a problem that is disproportionate. I don't think that other communities
are being -- There's two factors: Number one, you don't have the hi -rise -- and I think there was
a very good question. What do we mean by rooftops? I mean, the rooftop has got to have a
threshold.
Ms. Slazyk: Forty-five feet, I found out, is --
Commissioner Teele: How many stories is that?
Ms. Slayzk: You can only -- it's about a four-story building.
Commissioner Teele: Four-story.
Ms. Slazyk: So it's got to be at least four stories for it to be considered a rooftop. It won't
happen on a one-story or residential. It's got to be four stories.
Commissioner Teele: Well --
242 July 25, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: Well, the ones that are allowed -- you are allowed right now by right up to 100 feet.
Anything over 100 feet has to go through a public hearing process, so anything -- 100 feet or less
is what's allowed with just a building permit. It's got to meet building code.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I would hope, again, that -- that I'm not sure three-mile radius, but I
do think the manner in which to focus on this is within a residential area or within a certain mile
radius of residential areas. I mean --
Ms. Slazyk: But let me clari --
Commissioner Teele: The one on 17 probably is on a commercial -- but you know what? The
backyard is residential. It's one of those kind of deals.
Ms. Slazyk: Well, the whole city is laid out with linear commercial corridors. Every single C-1
in the city is within, you know, 100 feet of residential.
Commissioner Teele: But did you notice what the FCC rules -- he read from the FCC rules.
They don't talk about commercial; they talk about industrial. They said these are appropriate in
industrial areas, so we've got C-1, we've got C-2, and maybe -- one of the issues here is maybe
we need to drop it in C-1 and authorize them in C -2's and industrial, and tract the FCC language
to some extent. The language that was read, which was very well done, and you know, it's under
zoning issues, and it says: "Personal cell providers may be able to expedite the zoning process if
they target where possible sites that are compatible with such uses, such as, industrial zones and
utility right-of-ways and pre-existing structures." Now, that's -- the FCC didn't talk about
commercial.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. I think what they're talking about there is that, in those districts, you don't
make them go through a public hearing process because it's considered appropriate, but there is
no way they're going to meet the necessary grid systems without other commercial districts
being included as a permissible category, but then if -- you know, if they're going to come in C-
1, that's where you say your special exception --
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but this is my point.
Ms. Slazyk: -- or some -- yeah.
Commissioner Teele: If it's residential or within 500 feet or 800 feet or 2,000 feet of a
residential area, it should be not permitted. I mean, we should not let people just get on the --
one foot away from residential.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. What we did -- I don't know if you remember, we recently did an adult
entertainment ordinance and we did 1,000 foot radius of all of our residential districts in the City
just to see -- you know, that was the radius we established for adult entertainment. It knocked
the entire city out, except for about three blocks in the middle of Wynwood. The whole city gets
knocked out because of the way our residential is laid out in the city, so 1,000 feet will knock
everything out.
243 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: No. It would knock out that type. That won't knock out the rooftops.
Ms. Slazyk: Right. In certain districts where it's purely residential for, you know, a mile radius,
they're not going to be able to meet their grid. It's going to be something that that's what we
plan on sitting down with the industry and with our Law Department to determine --
Commissioner Teele: Madam Manager -- Madam Director, let me suggest something to you. I
think our allegiance and loyalty, at this point, should be toward -- we're the -- let me remind you,
supposedly, we're the poorest City in the nation. Our alliance should not be toward helping them
meet their grid, but protecting our zoning laws, and I think, if there's a conflict, we ought to
protect the zoning laws. Because I can assure you that if you're right and they're wrong, then the
very same homeowners that they represent will be down here petitioning to say "My cell doesn't
work over here," OK.
Ms. Slazyk: That's true.
Commissioner Teele: But I'd rather them come in and say "my cell doesn't work over here" --
and by the way, it doesn't work where I live and that's right there on the Miami River, for some
reason.
Vice Chairman Winton: It doesn't work on Bayshore either.
Commissioner Teele: But you know, there are dead areas --
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: -- areas in areas -- I mean, you know, you've got this Metro PCS and it's
got more dead areas than anything, but I mean, if the price is right, so -- I mean, people keep
doing it, but you know, these towers are a function also of use and if people are saying we'd
rather have our neighborhoods protected and our neighborhoods with a less cellular service, if
it's pursuant to a valid zoning standard, I think we can defend it, and so all that I'm telling --
respectfully urging you to do is, if there is a conflict, balance it in favor of the zoning regs
(regulations), not the commercial issues because -- and, unfortunately, I don't want to agree with
everything they're saying, but virtually everything they said makes sense, because there is no
economic value in cellular telephones. What you have is -- and these people are smart. They
don't rent them. They don't go in and buy the land. They get an existing absentee landowner or
a landowner who's right there, who makes a huge amount of money by leasing them the space,
and they put the tower up. Now, show me the economic benefit to the community.
Vice Chairman Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) generally at the expense of the surrounding
community.
Commissioner Teele: Because it's depreciating the values, and who's -- are you going to want to
move next to a cell tower, residential? I mean, you know, at a residential single-family detached
tower? Are you going to move your grandmother next to one? I'm not -- I wouldn't move mine,
244 July 25, 2002
so the point is -- now, those are rhetorical, not directed at you, Madam Director. I don't mean to
make that personal, at all, but the fact of the matter is, I think, you know, this is a very valid
issue. I think, you know, at first, it may sound like the neighborhood is overreacting, but I think
when you really look at it and you're -- we're talking now about residential single, detached
homes largely. This is not compatible. It's just not compatible, and if the neighborhood over
there got the worse cellular service in Miami, I'll take the heat. I'd rather take the heat that they
can't get their cell phones connected or working right than we're creating these little dotted
towers right -- buffering right up against every neighborhood that they can so that we can meet
some commercial value that, candidly, it makes no benefit to our tax base or for any public
policy issue that I know, other than it's just nice to have a nationwide grid, so I just wanted to
make to you, Mr. Manager, the concern because what I don't want is, in 45 days from now, for
the staff to say "we're working on it."
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I want a document. You know, I was the one who said give them another
45 days because I knew that the 45 days was going to be about right about now, and we aren't
going to have it ready and we may as well take all of August and do it, but I would hope that
we'll be on time and we'll have a comprehensive standard which will have gone to the
community and been discussed with the community and all of the communities, so that we have
a standard that we can all live with. Thank you, Mr. Manager, particularly for your focus, and I
would hope that we could also close the loop and get the information to the community.
Ms. Slazyk: Let me respond to that real quick. First of all, the map that was prepared and given
showed the residential zoning classifications. If there are residential projects in commercial
districts, they would not show up on that map. It showed all residential zoning and all public
housing in relation to the cell facilities, so it -- where there's a residential project on commercial
zoning, that's not going to show up. To get all of those would take much, much longer because
we have apartment buildings and condos and things like that all over the city in commercial
zoning, so that we couldn't do. The other thing is that the list that was given to you of all the
facilities, that was inclusive of the ones that were in process. The Building Department ran that
for us using the codes that are used when those facilities come in for a building permit. I'm
going to see if I can get it separated out, but it was an inclusive list, so I need to see how we can
pull out the ones that are in process versus the ones that were done, and then the other answer
was the rooftop was for 45 -foot buildings.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Read the ordinance. Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): The ordinance is approved, 4/0.
245 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION IMPOSES AN
ADDITIONAL FORTY-FIVE DAY DELAY (TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2002) IN
ACCEPTANCE, PROCESSING, PLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION OR
MODIFICATION OF PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY
TOWERS AND MONO -POLES FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF
REVIEWING ARTICLES 4 AND 6 OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS
AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI;
PROVIDING FOR A TERM; 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 July 9, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12262.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Leroy, good work.
42. PRESENTATION OF FRAMED SIGNATURE PLAQUES TO COMMISSION BY
CARLOS HERRERA OF OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS.
Chairman Regalado: Before we proceed, I need at least two minutes. Carlos Herrera, one of our
long-time employees -- and he is the one that does all the broadcasts of City Commission
meetings -- took some signed documents by members of the Commission, the Mayor, the City
Manager and the City Attorney and did this. It's something that is very nice, and we have -- he
did also, of course, for the Mayor, the City Manager, and the City Attorney and we appreciate
what he's done. He did it by himself and it was his idea, so thank you very much. Carlos, I
know you're watching and it's very nice. On behalf of the Mayor --
246 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Carlos. I just need to know if it's more than $25.00, so I
could declare it.
Chairman Regalado: So anybody now can just use those things to sign checks.
43. COMMENTS BY COMMISSION REGARDING WORKFORCE SITUATION IN CITY
AND MEMBERSHIP IN SOUTH FLORIDA EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
CONSORTIUM.
Chairman Regalado: So, on a more serious note, Commissioner Winton and Commissioner
Teele I -- before we proceed, I have something that I think you should know. The administration
is aware because I communicated with the Manager, but I think we have a problem with the
South Florida Workforce, and we have a huge problem. On July 2001, the South Florida
Workforce spent $250,000 with new furniture and painting and enhancing the buildings where
Saber and Youth Co-op are located both in Little Havana. These two agencies have each 34
employees, each of them. Each of these agencies have a caseload of 1,400 welfare -to -work
clients, plus 10,000 clients a year. They have an above performance, so now the lady that is the
director of the Workforce has decided to spend $1,000,000 of the taxpayers' money to
consolidate those two services, and they have rented 20,000 square feet, a place in Southwest 27
Avenue, and they have decided that they're going to move, and they have decided that one of the
two agencies will cease to exist; that they have to bid for the contract either Youth Co -Op or
Saber. We don't know who's going to continue service, but the worst thing that they have done -
- and I think this Commission -- and I have to say that I should have learned more about the
Workforce, but I think that they have gone beyond what they should -- what their role is, because
this is about sensitivity. If they do that, they will be forcing all the clients of the West Grove to
go to Little Havana because they will eliminate one of those office in the West Grove. That is an
attack on sensitivity because, you know, when a person doesn't have a job or when a person is in
trouble, the only thing that that person doesn't need is someone who does not speak their
language or who probably have a different culture, and that would be something that will make
worse the way that that person feels, but not only that, Youth Co-op and Saber, these people have
free parking. They can park in the parking lot of those two places. One of them is in District 4.
I visited with them the other day, and in this new building, all the clients will have to pay $2.50
for the first hour, $0.75 for each half hour. There is no free parking, no validation, and mind
you, these clients have to be there in the computers and with the resumes and searching for jobs
for about four or five hours, do the poorest of the poor will be hit if they go to those places with a
$10.00 parking bill, which, by the way, will be two gallons or three gallons of milk that they
could have bought for their children. It is not only -- because it adds insult to injury that our
representative, Assistant City Manager, Dena Bianchino, couldn't vote or didn't vote on this
transfer because the board was told that the lease was already signed and that they don't care,
and when Dena sent them a letter to send a representative here today, they sent this letter saying
that "Thank you, but no thank you, we will not be able to attend," so you know, I am telling you
that we should do something about -- I should have gotten more involved. I should have been
more aware of this; I wasn't, but I'm asking you, Johnny, that -- you know this issue -- to do
something. These two centers are good centers, are very good centers. They cannot be closed.
If they're closed, people will suffer, people will be hurt. There will be a chaotic situation for
247 July 25, 2002
those people, so I think that we should say something to these people, even if they don't care,
that if they move forward with this, we'll start the process of leaving the workforce and getting
our money because, after all, they are -- they want to -- if they want to misspend the taxpayers'
money, that's a problem that the state of Florida has, but we are liable for 33 percent of the
money that they spend, so I don't know what we can do, but I think we should do something.
Dena.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. You know, it's interesting to me that, you know, we had what I
considered to be really several good meetings with Barbara Jordan from the county, and I felt
that they were very responsive to all of the issues that we expressed, and this kind of maneuver,
which probably, frankly, occurred before we even got into all these negotiations, that if they got
a lease signed, that was probably going on or even happened before we got into the negotiations
with her, but it just kind of swims in the face of the whole commitment that Barbara Jordan was
making from the county, and I don't frankly understand it, and I'm really troubled by their
response, which is "City of Miami, go to hell. I'm going to do what I want to do and we don't
have to send anybody here to talk to you," and that's another troublesome thing. This is a draft
that was prepared for my signature by Dena that has all the facts in it, and frankly, I think that
what we need to figure out is, one, are we sending it to the right person to begin with? Does she
have a boss that we need to be sending it to? Are we copying the right people? Are there other
players that we need to copy? And is there is a punch line we need in here that's different than
this kind -- this, you know, please -give -me -some -consideration line? I'm not -- you know, that -
- I think I already know what they're going to --
Chairman Regalado : I think we should send a copy to the Governor, you know, because you
know what their response is when somebody mention to these people "Well, you know, the
parking lot is going to cost these poor people a lot of money," the response was, that's the same
building where Children and Family Department is located and people go there, and I told them -
- I mean, like do you want to be like Children and Family? I mean, is that what you're trying to
do, to be like that agency? Because I mean, two wrong don't make one right, but I think that we
should be -- I don't know. We should send your letter, but we should copy the Governor. We
should make a little noise because they don't care what we think. They're going to go ahead and
try to do what they want.
Vice Chairman Winton: And this is a gross misuse of dollars. I mean, the fact that they spent
the kind of money they spent a year ago and they're blowing all of that up and spending a new
$1,000,000, I mean, I could tell you, there isn't a person out in the private sector that would take
their money and throw it away like that, but since it's the government's money, this person
decides that she can do whatever she wants, and frankly, I think the board was sitting right there
with her -- and you all ought to poke me in the eye because I'm supposed to be the one that goes
to these meetings and, obviously, I wasn't there when the discussion came up, so --
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager, Planning & Development): Just to clarify something.
They authorized -- the board authorized a search for a new facility, the one that we're talking
about, on July 16. They had already signed a lease on July 5, so that's the kind of --
Vice Chairman Winton: Wow.
248 July 25, 2002
Ms. Bianchino: -- that's how the board is sort of there.
Vice Chairman Winton: Do we say that in here?
Ms. Bianchino: No, I didn't say that in the letter.
Vice Chairman Winton: That needs in this letter. That's a hugely important point.
Ms. Bianchino: We can change that. Sure.
Vice Chairman Winton: Because it points out --
Chairman Regalado: Because they don't care. They don't care.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- the lack of institutional control, you know. They're -- that this board
has a responsibility and staff is just going out willy-nilly and doing things and expecting the
board to rubber stamp it, and that needs to be in here.
Ms. Bianchino: You know, and we get items like two days before and are asked to act upon stuff
like this in two days, and it's just -- it's not a functioning organization that really works with the
board and because we have liability, that's really a problem, I think, so we can change the letter
to add some of the other things here.
Vice Chairman Winton: You all have any other suggestions? Commissioner Teele, you always
have good ones in this regard.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I think you hit the nail on the head. I mean, I sat down with Barbara
Jordan and the entire team, and they made it very clear that there were a series of very painful
changes that were coming down. I strongly objected, two months ago in May, to this co -location
or this restructuring of leases, and the reason was because I did not think, A, that they were
taking into consideration the right public policy. In fact, I raised this with Mayor Peneles, that if
they're going to do one-stop centers and they're going to -- what they're trying to do is use a
Subway -type approach. Subway, as a franchisor, will not let their franchisees sign a lease. They
let the franchisees go in and identify space, and then they come in and sign the lease and then do
a back-to-back with the leasee. That way when they basically say we're withdrawing our
franchise and canceling the franchise, they don't have to worry about, you know, the guy sitting
there with the Subway sign up. You know, they canceled the franchise and canceled the lease, so
that's sort of their "business thinking," but this has been discussed for the very part, I guess, of
about six or seven months and, in fact, I met with the one-stop people in April/May because this
was coming, so this is not exactly the way we're hearing it. The problem has been -- is that we,
the City, have not been represented perhaps at the right levels or in person and certainly, you
know, that is being correct with the Manager, having an assistant manager and that, so we're at
that level. I strongly urge you not to write a letter to a staff person. Elected officials, in my
judgment, should try to write to elected officials, and staff should try to write to staff, and just as
a matter of form, you never put the Manager over the Mayor in terms of cc's (carbon copies) and
249 July 25, 2002
all those kinds of things, so that's sort of the opening of this, but obviously it was done by
somebody that works for the Manager, so -- but as a matter of protocol, you normally cc elected
officials by some degree of decorum and protocol. I think, though, that the real challenge here is
the issue that you've put your finger on, and that is, this sort of -- what Army Generals used to
say, which is the biggest lie ever said -- when I see a soldier, I don't see color; I just see OD
green. Well, you know that's a lie. You see who you see. You see the fat guy. You see the
skinny guy. You see the tall. We all know what we see. But this idea of I don't see a not-for-
profit; I just see an OD green not-for-profit doesn't make any sense in this town, and this
restructuring is going to create more racial turmoil and more ethnic turmoil by this color blind
approach, which defies culture, it defies language, it defies human nature, it defies logic, and I
think that is just a major, major mistake, and as this consolidation goes down and down and
down -- you know, they're talking about even consolidating even more -- it's going to get worse,
and I just think we need to raise a strong objection. I think -- I don't think withdrawing is an
issue, per se. I should say, I don't think -- we researched this issue, Johnny, again. If the City of
Miami were a population of 500,000 or more, we could withdraw and get our own money. If we
withdraw, we lose our voice and we lose "the liability posture of 33 percent," but the fact of the
matter is, how much money have we had to pay up in the last -- since this program's going? You
know, that's nominal or nothing, and so while it's a real issue, it's much more, in my judgment,
of a red herring. They still are obliged to provide the service. To me, I'd rather not be a part of
something -- if they're not going to listen to me. I mean, you know, why go to meetings if
you're not going to be listened to? Why participate if your voice doesn't even matter, and I think
we need, you know, serve a very strong notice that we're taking this under advisement that we're
not just going to sit here and be a potted plant in this process, and I mean that sincerely. I don't
think it's in our best interest to withdraw or to threaten to withdraw, but I do think we've got to
send a very clear message that we're not going to just be a potted plant in this process while they
do it, and I think we should object very strongly to the realignment, the fact that it is
commingling communities that have different interests, different languages, different cultures,
different ethnicities, and while, you know, we are not saying that, you know, we should not work
across cultures, the fact of the matter is, this is going to have, as I see it, a real potential of pitting
group against group because that's what this is going to.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I'll tell you, you know --
Commissioner Teele: And it's unnecessary.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: It's unnecessary.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Commissioner Teele: That's the real point, Johnny. It's unnecessary.
Vice Chairman Winton: So who do we send the letter to?
250 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: The person who is in charge of this, under the law, is the Mayor, the
Mayor of Miami -Dade County. I don't even think he's cc'd on this.
Vice Chairman Winton: Uh-huh.
Commissioner Teele: This whole process operates under the CFR, under the Mayor of the
county. The Mayor has gratuitously invited in the other municipalities, and literally, he is
sharing his power through this board process, but I think we need to make it very, very clear --
and I also think what we should be doing is making our real appeal to the other two
municipalities or jurisdictions that make up the board. Obviously, Key West, but Hia -- isn't it
Hialeah?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes.
Ms. Bianchino: And Miami Beach.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I think, you know, the appeal --
Chairman Regalado: If I may, they went to Hialeah with that plan and Raul Martinez told him
"No way. Here, you're not going to touch anything," and they left.
Commissioner Teele: They left it alone, too, didn't they?
Chairman Regalado : Yeah, they left it alone. That's it. Martinez said, "Here, you're not going
to mess with my programs, so you leave" and that's what they did.
Ms. Bianchino: He's the chairman of the Consortium, Mayor Raul Martinez, so I don't know if
the letter should go to him as chairman of the Consortium, or to --
Commissioner Teele: Well, that would certainly be a starting point, would be the Consortium's
chair. I've never understood the difference between the Consortium and the --
Ms. Bianchino: And the Workforce Board.
Commissioner Teele: -- and the Workforce Board. I mean, you've got these --
Ms. Bianchino: We don't either.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I still -- I got a -- I had a sheet of paper and I could never figure
out which was which, but certainly, if what Commissioner -- the Chairman is saying is right,
that's even worse because now you've got two tiers of membership. You've got, you know, the
guys who meet and make the decisions and everybody else, and you know, Raul is just not -- if
you know Raul Martinez, he's just not going to be told what to do, if it's just strongly in
opposition to what he believes, so I mean, I really think you ought to send the letter, first of all,
251 July 25, 2002
to the, to Mayor Martinez as chairman of the board, but also, I think we should ask to meet with
him and the other cities because I think, you know, obviously, this is not going to work to
anyone's -- What are the other cities? Miami, Hialeah --
Ms. Bianchino: Hialeah, Monroe County, and the Dade County, and us.
Commissioner Teele: I thought it was five.
Ms. Bianchino: Us, Dade County, Hialeah, Monroe County, Miami Beach. There's one other
thing that's going to be -- that's five -- We are being asked right now -- to your point about the
Workforce Board versus the Consortium. We're being asked now to appoint members to the
Workforce Board, where we have a pretty large number of slots. They have to be nominated
from an organization, like the Chamber of Commerce, but that's an opportunity, I feel, to get
really good representation from the City, if we can get people onto the Workforce Board who are
willing to participate and spend their time, which is -- you know, they have to spend some time
on this, but that's important.
Commissioner Teele: But we've always made appointments. The problem has been those board
appointments that we make are just sort of lone --
Vice Chairman Winton: Don't go.
Commissioner Teele: No. Most of them will. They're just lone rangers. I mean, there's nobody
coordinating that. They vote their own conscience. I mean -- you know, and it's not just making
appointments. They're by classification; education, labor unions, business. I mean, there's a
category of that and --
Ms. Bianchino: Most of ours are business, by the way, private sector. That's the majority of our
appointees.
Commissioner Teele: When are we to make those appointments by?
Ms. Bianchino: We need to do it. I was going to meet with Commissioner Winton next week,
and then we would bring something to the Commission in September, we would hope.
Vice Chairman Winton: But we need to --
Ms. Bianchino: It's a self -nomination. You can't nominate people. The nomination process has
to be through an organization. For example, the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce has to
nominate 10 people. It's very, sort of, complicated, so we have to go to organizations, tell them
we need five recommendations, then they come to us, and then you pick who you want to
represent you.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we ought to be able to do some pre -thinking about -- because
using the Chamber's a perfect example. If I went to Bill Cullem and said, you all need to make
10 appointments. We've been thinking about the kinds of companies or organizations that we'd
like you to go pick from. We'd like you to pick from this kind of organization, this kind of
252 July 25, 2002
organization, rather than some corporate something. I mean, maybe it's people more involved in
social services or some way or another that have a clear attachment to this whole --
Ms. Bianchino: I know, I know.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- Workforce Development thing that would be better --
Ms. Bianchino: Well ours are --
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't know.
Ms. Bianchino: -- private sector.
Vice Chairman Winton: Huh?
Ms. Bianchino: Our appointments, 10 are from the private sector. That means businesses, so
what I would think we would try to do is get --
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, there's not -for -profits that belong to the Chamber, so they're
considered businesses.
Ms. Bianchino: They're considered private sector?
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: We don't have labor union appointees? Last year --
Ms. Bianchino: We have one. One labor union, we have one public education, one agency for
workforce innovation, one (UNINTELLIGIBLE) rehab, one public assistance, and that's it, and I
don't know if the labor was appointed or not yet.
Commissioner Teele: It couldn't be appointed because the Commission makes the appointment.
Ms. Bianchino: Yeah, I know, but -- the one thing we were thinking was to get businesses who
might employed some of the people who are being trained here so that they could contribute
meaningfully to the process. If we have industries in Miami that would hire people to get them
involved on the Workforce Board, would be a good thing.
Vice Chairman Winton: Does it make any sense -- because I think Raul Martinez is a friend of
the City and he understands how this thing works. He understands how to make it work for his
community. Does it make any sense for us to try to set up a meeting with a couple of staff
people and somebody from here to just go sit down with him --you know, we'll write this letter,
but sit down with him to get some guidance and advice from him, in terms of what -- how --
what our ultimate long-term approach ought to be?
Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE) the City Attorney.
253 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank God for (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. You (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Ok, So we'll send a letter, but we're
also going to set up a meeting with Mayor Martinez.
Ms. Bianchino: And I'll revise the letter --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, OK.
Ms. Bianchino: -- pursuant to what the Commissioner said.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. Thank you.
44. RELATED TO MIAMI MUSIC FESTIVAL, TO BE HELD AT BAYFRONT PARK
FROM AUGUST 31ST TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2002; AUTHORIZE WAIVER OF FEES AND
PERMITS AND PROVISION OF SERVICES, $46,000.00; AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF
FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES FROM SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT; SAID
AUTHORIZATIONS CONDITIONED UPON ORGANIZERS.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Some PZ (Planning &Zoning) items and then we are out of here. We
are going to defer all the regular agenda for the 22'
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, Mr. Chairman. I've just asked -- Commissioner Carey' s been here
for the better part of three hours, I guess, and I'd like to try to get her out of here. She here on
the music fest thing. The Mayor's office has coordinated --
Chairman Regalado: Where is she?
Commissioner Teele: -- this and I'm going to try to get that item up --
Chairman Regalado: Where is she?
Commissioner Teele -- out of respect for her because -- she's in the back.
Chairman Regalado: Is she here?
Commissioner Teele: I just asked that she come out.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, we didn't know that and we apologize.
(COMMENTS OFF THE RECORD)
Commissioner Teele: PZ item, what's the next one? Here is the Commissioner.
254 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. I --
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner, it wasn't me who got you out here. It wasn't me, I
swear.
Chairman Regalado: We apologize. We didn't know that you were here, but now that we have
you, we are very happy and maybe we can -- what is it, the Miami Music Fest? That's --
Commissioner, do you want to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Miami Music Fest.
Vice Chairman Winton: He's waiting for something from his office? Commissioner Teele's
waiting for something from his office.
Chairman Regalado: Do you want to come and give us your --
Commissioner Barbara Carey -Schuler: Good evening, Chairman, Commissioners, staff. It's
great to be here after being at my Commission meeting all day and coming to yours. I'm just
here to request your support for City services for Music Fest. Miami that's held on Labor Day
weekend in Bayfront Park, and I think Commissioner Teele, who has certainly been at the
forefront of helping us strive for City services, has the budget and, hopefully, I can get your
support. All of you have been very supportive of the Miami Music Fest because it is a
collaborative effort between the City of Miami and the county, and the corporate community of
Miami for the working class on Labor Day weekend. This is our second year. The first year we
had over 25,000 people in the park of all cultures and it's really not a festival; it's a celebration
of our diversity, which is our strength in this community, and so we ask for your support, and all
of you have been very supportive of this in the past.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I don't know why my staff can't get the resolution out here. I've asked
them three times to bring it out.
Chairman Regalado: That's OK. We'll ad lib.
Commissioner Teele: But this item has also been coordinated through the Mayor's office, as
well and I spoke to the Mayor and he's indicated his support for this event. It's a truly
multicultural activity that happens over Labor Day weekend in all of the communities. Do you
have it?
Commissioner Schuler: I want to thank Commissioner Teele for mentioning that the Mayor has
been very supportive of this effort and was certainly an integral part of it.
255 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: It's a resolution of the City of Miami Commission -- I apologize. It
should have been out here. I signed it -- related to the Miami Music Festival, to be held at
Bayfront Park, from August 31 to September 1 -- it says 2003, but this is 2002, Mr. Attorney --
authorizing the waiver of fees permissible by law, the provision of services in an amount not to
exceed 46,000 for the provision of services; authorizing the allocation of said services from
Special Events Account Code, as stated, .289, and said authorizations conditioned upon the
organizers obtaining insurance to protect the City in the amount prescribed by the City Manager
or his designee, and it says 1 and then it says 4, so -- by complying with all conditions and
limitations as may be prescribed by the City Manager, and this is passed out now as Pocket Item
Number 2. I will so move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second, and Commissioner, I was there last year
and I think it touched every community.
Commissioner Schuler: That's great.
Chairman Regalado: And we thank you and thank Commissioner Teele and Commissioner
Sanchez and everybody who was involved in that. We really enjoyed and we will --
Commissioner Schuler: Look forward to you being there this year.
Chairman Regalado: -- look forward. Absolutely.
Vice Chairman Winton: And last year was its first year?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, and it was very --
Commissioner Schuler: Last year was the first year.
Vice Chairman Winton: So it was an augural event. Really went off.
Chairman Regalado: It was great and -- so we have a motion and a second. All in favor, say
aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
256 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-889
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO THE
MIAMI MUSIC FESTIVAL, TO BE HELD AT BAYFRONT PARK FROM
AUGUST 31" TO SEPTEMBER 1, 2002; AUTHORIZING THE WAIVER OF
FEES AND PERMITS PERMISSIBLE BY LAW AND THE PROVISION OF
SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $46,000.00; AUTHORIZING
THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES, FROM THE
SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000921054.289; SAID
AUTHORIZATIONS CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1)
OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; AND (2)
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Teele: I want to put on the record, Mr. Chairman, that I have conferred with
Commissioner Carey -- and I think we both agree -- you know, there are a lot of events that we
have, but this event is in every community; the Puerto Rican community, the Columbian
community, Haitian, Cuban, African-American, the Grove, etcetera, I mean, the way the venues
are sort of put together. We'd like -- I think, Commissioner Carey, I'm speaking for you. I think
this is what we've agreed on -- to see if this is something that MSEA, the Miami Exhibition and
Sports Authority [sic], which has its -- one of its missions is the promotion of events. If they can
look at this event, sort of monitor it this year, and see if it's an event that they would like to work
as sort of the permanent co-sponsor of -- we need one signature event that goes all over this city
that involves everything. I will -- last year, for example, we opened up the Caribbean
Marketplace in Haiti, cleaned it up. I mean, you know, there are -- those are the kinds of things -
- so that there could be an experience in the Haitian community and the same thing in the Puerto
Rican/Wynwood communities, etcetera, so Commissioner Carey, I do think it would be helpful if
you would indicate your support for us asking MSEA to monitor this event, and then to see if
they could work closely with the Mayor's office and your office in seeing if there's a more
permanent role because right now, this is being done largely through the -- your office's good
257 July 25, 2002
graces. I know the Mayor's office, Mayor Manny Diaz' office, has played a very significant role
in this, but it really needs a more permanent kind of structure, I think you and I discussed.
Commissioner Schuler: That's right, we did, and I certainly would like to say that we would
love the City of Miami to play a more permanent role and have this as their signature event
because this is about the cultural diversity of this town, and so I welcome that at any time.
Commissioner Teele: I know Manny Diaz -- Mayor Diaz is the Chairman of MSEA, but I just
want to put on the record that I've been urging the Director of MSEA -- I don't get a lot of
response from him.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner, MSEA --
Vice Chairman Winton: Is that going to be the new MSEA or the old MSEA?
Chairman Regalado: Any MSEA will do, if they give `em the money, but let me say, we did
support this year, Miami's Ports and Exhibition --
Commissioner Schuler: Yes, you did.
Chairman Regalado: -- this event, and -- but I think what Commissioner Teele is asking is a
little more than to monitor and to become part -- staffing and everything, so I would recommend
that we ask the Mayor, as the chairman of MSEA, to request that the executive director will be
monitoring -- I don't know if we have a meeting -- I think we do have a meeting before this
festival at MSEA, so I think there we can --
Commissioner Sanchez: All I can say is, I'll see you there.
Commissioner Schuler: And I've discussed this with the Mayor because the Mayor was one of
the co-founders of Miami Music Fest, and we discussed this and we think we need to have this
kind of celebration of our diversity, and that the City needs to take a more permanent part in this.
It started at the county, but you know, basically, I'm the one who's taken the leadership at the
county to keep this going, but since it's in the City of Miami, since the City of Miami -- the
venue's in the City of Miami, we think that the City should play a greater role in promoting this
and furthering the cause of celebrating our diversity and having it as a signature event in this
City every year for the working people on Labor Day weekend. We have nothing here on Labor
Day weekend and this certainly is a three-day event. First day, we take the artists in the schools
to talk about culture and diversity. The second day, we do the community experience tours in all
of the communities, and the big Labor Day festival on Sunday in the park, so we welcome that,
Mr. Teele, and we've talked to the Mayor and I think he would be very supportive of that idea.
He's indicated his support for the idea, and I'd also like to thank the City Manager for his role in
helping us get through this with this project. He's -- his staff has been very supportive and
worked with us to look at the kind of City services we need and how we could get your support,
and of course, we'd like to thank him and his staff, along with the rest of you and Mr. Teele,
especially you and your staff, and of course --
258 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner, we look forward to hearing from Ms. Spence regarding the
venues as this gets closer and so that we get the appropriate credentials throughout the venues.
Commissioner Schuler: We will certainly get that to you. The first night is in the Miami Arena.
We have Al Jarreau, who's a great jazz artist, and the second Saturday night, we have an activity
at the Caleb Center with the Winan sisters and Bobby Jones, and at the Miccosukee Indian
Center. We have --
Commissioner Sanchez: Isaac.
Commissioner Schuler: Commissioner Sanchez, we have Isaac Hayes, and on Saturday we have
about 15 different artists representing all the cultures in this community, so I can't tell you who
they are because I'm not that in tune with all these artists, but we do have an artist representing
every community -- every segment of this community in the park on that Sunday. Last year we
had 40 different artists. This year we don't have that many because we kind of reduced the
number of artists. We've had three stages. This year, we only have two stages, with half the
number of artists, but they represent every major group in this town, and we'll get you those
venues and those times and those activities so that you can take a part.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Schuler: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you so much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Good night.
Commissioner Schuler: Good night.
Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ (Planning &Zoning) -- Yes?
Commissioner Schuler: No. I was just hoping that you adjourn your meeting before midnight
tonight, and thank you for taking me before midnight.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm planning for 2 a.m.
Chairman Regalado: No. He wants to stay.
Vice Chairman Winton: 2 a.m. Did we vote?
Commissioner Teele: Did we vote?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, we didn't.
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't think so.
259 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: We did? Yeah, we did.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, we did.
Commissioner Sanchez: You know, I --
Commissioner Schuler: Thank you, Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: Did we vote?
Commissioner Schuler: Thank you, Commissioner Winton. I forgot to thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, we did.
Commissioner Schuler: I want to thank you personally because you've been there with us.
Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: 4 to 0.
Vice Chairman Winton: No need.
Commissioner Sanchez: Once we pass 10 o'clock, we don't know if we voted or we voted or --
45. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH
DENIED VARIANCES TO WAIVE 48 OF REQUIRED 185 PARKING SPACES AND TO
WAIVE FOUR OF REQUIRED LOADING DOCKS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT AT 1501-1551 N.W. 15 STREET ROAD TO COMMISSION MEETING
CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -4. PZ -4 is a resolution appeal of a Zoning Board decision of variances,
1505-1551 Northwest 15 Street Road, Jubilee/Rio Del Sol, Inc. Lourdes.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. This is an appeal of a
Zoning Board decision which denied variances. The Planning and Zoning Department has also
recommended denial of the appeal and denial of the variances. The review of the project for the
Planning and Zoning Department found that the omission -- first of all, it's for a variance for 48 -
- a waiver of 48 parking spaces and four of the four required loading births. We believe that this
is an overbuilding of the subject property that will have an overall adverse impact on the
neighborhood in the ad j acent areas and that's what kicked in the variances. Although we think
the use is compatible with the area and would be beneficial -- because it is a residential project
and it is in an area where it's much needed -- the deficit of the parking spaces and the loading
having to be accommodated on the adjacent streets could have an overall adverse effect, so we
recommend denial. It has not -- there's no hardship to justify this.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
260 July 25, 2002
Frank Gudorf: Good evening. My name is Frank Gudorf. I'm the vice resident of Jubilee/Rio
Del Sol, Inc., which is a subsidiary corporation of Jubilee Community Development Corporation.
As I think most of you know, we are a non-profit, affordable housing development organization.
This property is located on 15 Street Road and 14 Avenue, just west of Jackson Hospital. By the
way also, I have with me here this evening Mr. Bob Chisolm, who is the architect for this
project. The project at the present time -- or what we would like to have this project consist of is
88 affordable condominium units. This is not rental. This is home ownership. There are
projected to be 56 two-bedroom, two bath units and 32 three-bedroom, two bath units. The City
has allocated $593,000 for this project. We have $1,000,000 allocated by Miami -Dade County
for the project, $500,000 pre -development loan from the Florida Housing Finance Corporation,
and $100,000 pre -development loan from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, with a
balance of the construction financing being provided by Bank Atlantic. Sixty-three of the units
will be marketed to families, and 80 percent or less area median income, which is essentially a
family of four making about $38,000 a year. The balance of the units we would like to market to
families with somewhat higher incomes than that, probably in the 80 to 120 percent of AMI
income range to try to meet some of which we have heard from you all before, is that you'd like
to see some mixed -income properties, and that's what we're trying to do here. As was
mentioned, the City zoning code requires 185 parking spaces. We are asking to have a 48
parking space reduction, so we will be providing 137 spaces, which is a 26 percent reduction.
There's also an issue concerning the loading docks. You know, we have three off-site areas that
we consider loading docks, so in effect, from our position, we're asking for a one loading dock
reduction, not a four loading dock reduction. As I'm sure you're all aware, there's a City
resolution which states, in effect, that a project which serves low income residents can be granted
a 50 percent reduction in the required off-street parking by special exception, so long as space is
set aside for future parking needs. Unfortunately, because we have a fairly tight, small site here,
we will not be able to set aside any reserve parking in the future. Therefore, we are approaching
this by a variance. Once again, we are asking for a 26 percent reduction, not a 50 percent
reduction, which would -- you know, which would be available under the special exception, if
that applied here. I would like to --
Commissioner Teele: This is in Commissioner Gonzalez' district, right?
Mr. Gudorf: That's correct, this is in Commissioner Gonzalez' district.
Commissioner Teele: Why don't you ask for a deferral?
Mr. Gudorf: OK. We've had -- OK. I personally don't have a problem with that. Can I discuss
this with my architect because he's been here for nine hours?
Commissioner Teele: Let me tell you why, and I'm just one person. I'm not going to support
reducing anybody's parking in anybody's district because I don't want any parking reduced in a
district I represent, and I will tell you -- I've said this consistently -- the reason that the poor
communities look so poor -- and I take you -- urge you to go to 11 Street, right across from the
Miami -Dade Water & Sewer yard there that they've got, you know, about half a block from the
Winn-Dixie on 12 Avenue, look at that building. I lived in that building. The building is a
261 July 25, 2002
wonderful building, structurally, but the parking is a calamity because they went out and they
sold it as a one -bedroom, one study. You know what I mean?
Mr. Gudorf: We're not doing that here.
Commissioner Teele: And there's parking all around that area. The whole place is just a parking
nightmare, and I don't want to inflict that on Commissioner Gonzalez' district without him being
here.
Mr. Gudorf: We are --
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I -- you know, is the -- the staff's recommending no, right?
Mr. Gudorf: That's correct.
Commissioner Teele: And I think, in fairness to Commissioner Gonzalez -- I mean, he may be
more willing to understand what is being done here, but I could not support it. I'm just going to
be very honest with you, unless you show me that this is going to be used, you know, as like an
ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), you know, handi -- it's strictly going to be for ADA or
some unique use, but --
Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- and these are narrow streets over there, too, Commissioner
Teele.
Commissioner Teele: I know.
Vice Chairman Winton: This isn't one of those -- this is --
Mr. Gudorf: Let me say that although we are prepared -- and I appreciate and I certainly respect
your opinion on that -- we are prepared to address some of those issues, but I do agree that, in all
fairness to Commissioner Gonzalez, you know, we are certainly willing to defer this to the next
Commission meeting.
Chairman Regalado: OK. September --
Vice Chairman Winton: Just so you know, it may not help because I'm in -- absolutely in
concert with Commissioner Teele. I looked at this thing and I just didn't get it, and I -- you
know, build fewer units, then you don't have a parking problem, and I don't know why you
wouldn't build fewer units and then you don't have a parking problem. On this loading dock
issue, I didn't understand why we would make you have four, but I certainly didn't understand
either you wanting zero.
Mr. Gudorf: Well, as I said -- and I don't know if we're going -- when would be the next time
this could be (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Commissioner Teele: The 12.
262 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It would be late in September.
Unidentified Speaker: September 26.
Chairman Regalado: September 26, that's the earliest that we can accommodate you.
Mr. Gudorf: And is it fairly certain that it would be on the agenda for that --
Commissioner Teele: Well, it would be on the agenda because they would defer it to that
moment. You wouldn't have to re -advertise on anything.
Chairman Regalado: Well, we can defer. I mean, we'll be there. That's no problem, but it
would be on September.
Commissioner Teele: I just want to be fair, because I'm not at all prepared to vote for this, and I
don't want to put you in an unfair position. If Commissioner Gonzalez were here, you might
have an opportunity to win or something like that. I don't know, but --
Mr. Gudorf: And I appreciate your comment on that, Commissioner, so if it's OK with you,
we'll defer this to September.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move that the item be deferred --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: -- to September 26.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Continued.
Chairman Regalado: -- and a second to defer --
Mr. Maxwell: It's continued. Continued.
Chairman Regalado: -- to the 26 of --
Commissioner Teele: Continue, continued.
Chairman Regalado: -- continued to the 26 of September.
Vice Chairman Winton: Continued and go back to the drawing board?
Commissioner Teele: Well, he --
263 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: 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. 02-890
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING
BOARD DECISION WHICH DENIED VARIANCES TO WAIVE 48 OF THE
REQUIRED 185 PARKING SPACES AND TO WAIVE FOUR OF THE
REQUIRED LOADING DOCKS FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT AT APPROXIMATELY 1501-1551 N.W. 15 STREET ROAD, TO
THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR
SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, motion 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
Chairman Regalado: We have a cake. We cannot offer Johnny the Cuban coffee for your hype,
but we do have a shot of sugar if you want a cake. This cake is for the birthday of the City of
Miami, 106 years old, and we are, by the way, having several events that starts with the Cultural
Friday's on Friday night, tomorrow, and then at the Lyric Theater on Saturday, and on the cake
now, so if you all want a cut and have a piece of a cake. Mr. Manager, would you --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Who wants some, (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Chairman Regalado: Oh, yeah, of course. Hey, why not?
Commissioner Sanchez: You could have the honors, Mr. City Manager.
264 July 25, 2002
46. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION
FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL"
AT 42-140 NW 41 AVENUE.
Chairman Regalado: So, meanwhile, PZ -7. PZ -7 is 42-140 Northwest 41 Avenue. It's a second
reading ordinance and --
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): As you may recall, this was
approved on first reading by the City Commissioner accepting a proffered covenant. The request
was modified from arequest -- it was originally from duplex residential to restricted commercial.
It has been modified to R-4. This is the one that the neighbors were here and they were --
Commissioner Teele: Everybody (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. The only thing is, what the Planning and Zoning Department had requested at
the time at first reading in the covenant was a series of like, you know, liner residential units on
41, which is the back end of this. The neighbors did not want that. They want their wall to
remain. They don't want units back there. They don't want anything that is going to intrude any
kind of use back there, whether it be residential or commercial, so they said that they would --
they were more comfortable with the R-4 as long as the wall remained, so this new covenant
proffers the wall to remain, six-foot wall, and if it were to come down during construction, they
would replace it with a six-foot wall set back to 20 feet. Yes, this is PZ -7 and 8.
Chairman Regalado: OK, OK.
Commissioner Teele: Is there opponents here?
Chairman Regalado: Are there any opponents to --
Ms. Slazyk: No, I don't --
Chairman Regalado: -- this item?
Ms. Slazyk: They didn't show up tonight.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: OK. They didn't show up or there aren't?
Ms. Slazyk: They didn't call or anything, that I know.
Chairman Regalado: Oh.
265 July 25, 2002
Lucia Dougherty: Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Lucia Dougherty,
with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I just have one revision to the covenant. Lourdes -- and I
think the Planning Department is in support of this one revision. We had agreed not to have
anything other than a garage for the first 85 feet from the base building line going west and then
have the R-4 for the next 20 feet. However, we'd like to have a garage no higher than 25 feet
with residential amenities, like a pool deck.
Ms. Slazyk: Right, a pool deck on top of the garage, that would be fine.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Could you chair so I can move this? This is in district that I
represent. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman, you're recognized by the Vice Chair.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Thank you very much. I move to approve, in second reading, PZ -7.
Ms. Slazyk: The covenant would go with PZ -8.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: That's me.
Mr. Maxwell: This is a public meeting.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, I'm sorry, so excuse me. Mr. Chairman, that's not acting as
Chairman at the moment --
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- this is a public hearing, so do we have any comments from the public
on PZ -7? Being none, we will close the public hearing, and Mr. Chairman, you're now
recognized by the substitute Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much, and my comment is, the cake is good, I mean, but
other than that, I move to approve PZ -7.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion and a second on PZ -7. This is an ordinance?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: Read the ordinance, please. Roll call, Madam Clerk.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. The ordinance is passed on second reading.
266 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 42-140 NORTHWEST 41 IT AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "HIGH DENSITY
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL;" 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 July 9, 2002, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Chairman Regalado, seconded by
Commissioner Gonzalez, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title,
and was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12263.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
47. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND PAGE NO. 32 OF ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF
DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2
TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND SD -12 BUFFER OVERLAY SPECIAL ZONING
DISTRICT TO R-4 MULTIFAMILY HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT 42-140 NW 41
AVENUE.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -7. Mr. Chairman, I move PZ -7.
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Public hearing.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
267 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: I mean, PZ -8.
Vice Chairman Winton: PZ -8.
Chairman Regalado: With a covenant.
Vice Chairman Winton: So -- is his a public hearing?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second on PZ -8. We'd like to open this to
public hearing. Anyone from the public would like to comment on PZ -8? It looks like there's
no one from the public who would like to comment on PZ -8, so we'll close the public hearing.
Mr. City Attorney, would you read the ordinance, please? Roll call, Madam Clerk.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT, APPROVING THE CHANGE OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AMENDING PAGE 32, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY CHANGING
ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND
SD -12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT TO R-4 MULTIFAMILY HIGH-
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 42-140 NORTHWEST 41 AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A."
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of July 9, 2002, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Chairman Regalado, 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12264.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
268 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Lucia Dougherty: Thank you very much.
48. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO
"RECREATION" AT 601 NW 7th Street Road.
Chairman Regalado: OK. PZ -9. This is 601 Northwest 7 Street Road, second reading.
Commissioner Teele, any comments?
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to ask for an explanation.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Susan Cambridge (Planner I, Planning & Zoning): This is a land use change for the Spring
Gardens Point Park to change the land use designation from medium density multifamily
residential to recreation, and staff is recommending approval; the Planning Advisory Board
approved, and you approved on first reading.
Commissioner Teele: This is a public hearing. Mr. Chairman, is there anybody here on this
item? You in opposition?
Unidentified Speaker: No.
Commissioner Teele: I would move the item, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. It's a second reading ordinance.
This is a public hearing. Another call to anyone. There being none, we close the public hearing.
Read the ordinance. Roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 10544, AS AMENDED, FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE
OF THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED
AT APPROXIMATELY 601 NORTHWEST 7TH STREET ROAD, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL"
TO "RECREATION;" MAKING FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS
TO AFFECTED AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
269 July 25, 2002
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of June 27, 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
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12265.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Deputy City Attorney.
49. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND PAGE NO. 35 OF CITY'S ZONING
ATLAS BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-3 MULTIFAMILY
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PR PARKS AND RECREATION AT 601 NW 7th
Street Road.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -10 is a companion, second reading ordinance, 601 Northwest 7 Street
Road. It's a public hearing. We invite the public to address the board on this item PZ -10, 601
Northwest 7 Street Road. Being none --
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: -- we close the public hearing. It's been moved and second. All in -- read
the ordinance. Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call. Ordinance is passed on second reading.
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING PAGE
NO. 35 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS
AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, BY CHANGING ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-3
"MULTFAMILY MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "PR PARKS AND
RECREATION" FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
601 NORTHWEST 7 STREET ROAD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, MAKING
FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
270 July 25, 2002
was passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of June 27, 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
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12266.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -11, it's an administration ordinance, second reading.
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager, Planning &Development): Mr. Chairman, that item
was withdrawn.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
50. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO
MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES
AT 105 N.W. 5 STREET, TO COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR
SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
Commissioner Teele: Next item.
Chairman Regalado: Next item, Item 12, 105 Northwest 5 Street. The applicant is the Planning
and Zoning Department, first reading ordinance. It's in Commissioner Teele's district.
Susan Cambridge (Planner I, Planning &Zoning): This item is a land use change.
Chairman Regalado: Your name.
Ms. Cambridge: Susan Cambridge, Planning and Zoning Department. This item is a land use
change. It's a parking garage owned by the state of Florida. We're changing the land use
designation from major institutional public facilities to -- we're changing it from restricted
commercial to major institutional public facilities.
271 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: What happens if we don't approve?
Ms. Cambridge: Then our zoning atlas and our comprehensive plan will not be consistent.
Commissioner Teele: Public hearing, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir, this is a public hearing. We invite the public to address the board.
Commissioner Teele: No one's come forward, Mr. Chairman. I would move approval of the
item.
Chairman Regalado: OK. No one --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We close the public hearing. We have a motion and a second.
Commissioner Winton.
Vice Chairman Winton: And so the only reason we're changing this is because?
Ms. Cambridge: We have a discrepancy between our comprehensive plan and our zoning atlas.
Our zoning right now is GI, Government and Institutional. We're changing the land use to
match the zoning.
Vice Chairman Winton: But when you looked at your map here and you change this from
restricted commercial to major public facilities, you kind of create this funny little carve -out here
that where you have a nice squared off area of restricted commercial seems to be logical and neat
and clean; suddenly, you've got this little saw -out piece there that isn't as nice and neat and
clean, so you know, if the state of Florida gets rid of their parking garage one of these days,
that's a perfect spot for restricted commercial.
Lourdes Slazyk: (Assistant Director, Planning &Zoning): Right now that job exists in the
zoning atlas, and what we do in these clean-up items --
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh.
Ms. Slazyk: -- is we take a look at what's actually on the property and look at the designations,
and we're going to change one or the other to match it. To change it to restricted commercial
opens up the possibility for it to be used for many, many more things, so since the use is a
government-owned parking facility, the GI category was seen as more appropriate for this spot.
Vice Chairman Winton: But if you're in a really a commercial -- in a restricted commercial
zone, what's wrong with it opening up to many other potential things if it's in a corridor where
we want those things anyhow?
272 July 25, 2002
Ms. Slazyk: The way we've been doing this is we look at what the actual use is and which
designation best matches it and because they're cleaning up, we have to make them match.
Right now, it's a discrepancy.
Vice Chairman Winton: I under --
Ms. Slazyk: It could be changed the other way.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah. Well, that's what I'm struggling with. I'm not sure why we
wouldn't change it the other way. Frankly, I would love to see somebody -- the State figure out
that there's a better use that fits restricted commercial, which gets this back on the tax roll and
we get some commercial property built there that's in keeping with the restricted commercial
zoning and they're not-for-profit, non -tax paying facility goes away, and that thrill me to death.
Ms. Slazyk: Why don't we continue this item and let's take a closer look at it.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: The GI category is in the entire area, just to the south of it --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, but --
Ms. Slazyk: -- Government Center, so --
Commissioner Sanchez: Withdraw the second.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion to continue.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second.
Ms. Slazyk: September 26.
Chairman Regalado: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
273 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-891
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED
ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND ORDINANCE 10544, THE
MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING
LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL TO
MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL, PUBLIC FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND
UTILITIES AT APPROXIMATELY 105 N.W. 5 STREET, TO THE
COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER
26, 2002.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): It's continued to the September meeting, Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Teele: September 26.
Mr. Maxwell: The 26 meeting.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
51. TABLED: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION
FROM "INDUSTRIAL" TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL" AT 610 SW IST AVENUE.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -13, 610 Southwest 1 Avenue. The applicant is the Planning and
Zoning Department. Does this have the same problem?
Commissioner Teele: Move to continue.
Chairman Regalado: Move to continue. We have a motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: This doesn't have the same problem.
274 July 25, 2002
Susan Cambridge (Planner I, Planning and Zoning Dept.): Not 13.
Lourdes Slazyk: (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): Oh, this isn't the companion.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Chairman Regalado: No, no, but it's -- no, no, no, no, no, no. I know it's not a companion.
Vice Chairman Winton: They weren't watching. They almost --
Chairman Regalado: I said does this have the same problem?
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Ms. Cambridge: No.
Chairman Regalado: Why not?
Ms. Cambridge: This is a --
Chairman Regalado: It's a similar -- what you're trying to do is similar and the same scenario
that Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Winton: I asked all the same questions on this sheet as I asked -- oh, that's not
my handwriting.
Chairman Regalado: The same scenario can be applied to this one, that's what I'm saying.
Ms. Slazyk: All right. This is one where a private application -- y' all remember the application
on the river that came before you several months ago for -- to change to SD -7? It's the property
kitty-corner from the Miami Riverside Center, the City administration -- the Brickell Shipyard
property. It was recently changed from SD -4 to SD -7 in order to expand the SD -7 category
down the river in that direction. There was a remnant parcel in between there and the SD -7 to
the east, which is this FP&L (Florida Power & Light) property, and that private application left
this little remnant parcel that was almost a reverse spot zoning. In order to clean that up and
have the category consistent -- it left a remnant parcel, but made no sense. It was 4,500 square
feet in an SD -4 category, and this is a clean-up to get a consistent zoning along the river through
the Brickell Shipyard property.
Vice Chairman Winton: Why don't you bring us a map that shows us the SD whatever it is so
that -- because I can't -- I don't -- you know, the map I've got doesn't show anything.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, it's 11:30 --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah.
275 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: -- and let me tell you something.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, just continue this. Bring us the map next time so I --
Chairman Regalado: That's what I said. That's what I said.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- so that what you're explaining to me is understandable.
Chairman Regalado: I mean, it's the same question that he asked you can be applied to this one,
same exact question because it's the same situation.
Ms. Slazyk: OK. I'll bring up a blow-up color one so you can see --
Commissioner Teele: These are all internal issues. There's no reason for us to rack our brain
with this tonight. I move the balance of the Planning and Zoning agenda, with the exception of
the following items -- Now, who's got somebody here that wants to be heard tonight?
Chairman Regalado: OK. Which item --
Commissioner Teele: What item you want to be heard?
Unidentified Speaker: 21.
Chairman Regalado: 21. OK.
Commissioner Teele: Anybody else?
Chairman Regalado: Let's do 21.
Commissioner Teele: Anybody else? Because I would like to move the balance of the Planning
and Zoning agenda to be continued to the 26 of September, unless there's somebody here, and 21
is the one.
Chairman Regalado: 21. It's the appeal --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, we've got the -- we have -- on the regular agenda, we do
have to set the mileage. I don't think we can defer that item. It's really bad form to take an item
like that up at 11 o'clock because if you do something crazy, then people are going to say, "Well,
you did it at 11 o'clock at night." I mean, the mileage items should be something we take up,
you know, at a normal timeframe because it's a very important document.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we're not going to take it up at 11. It's going to be midnight.
Chairman Regalado: Well --
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, and so I just want to make sure we (INAUDIBLE).
276 July 25, 2002
52. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION WHICH
DENIED APPEAL BY MR. ANDRE. J. ZAMORANO OF CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT
APPLICATION TO ALLOW PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT
PARK IN ASSOCIATION WITH TEMPORARY EVENT (RACEWORKS) TO
COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
Chairman Regalado: OK, let's do this PZ (Planning & Zoning) item. This will be the last PZ
item, and then we'll proceed to the mileage. PZ -21.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Are you going to vote on the motion for --
Commissioner Teele: I didn't make the motion, yet.
Ms. Thompson: Oh.
Commissioner Teele: I just said which ones are going to come forward.
Chairman Regalado: PZ -21. We don't have a motion on continuing all the others. We're going
to do PZ -21 and then we'll do the motion.
Commissioner Teele: And then we'll do it.
Chairman Regalado: Lourdes.
Lourdes Slazyk: (Assist Director, Planning & Zoning): Thank you. PZ -21 is an appeal of the
Zoning Board decision, which denied an appeal of a Class II Special Permit application number
02-007. The applicant is Raceworks, LLC and the City of Miami is the owner of the property.
The Class II Special Permit in this case was for the physical improvements associated with the
use of the park. One of the issues that was critical in the appeal in the Zoning Board issue, when
this appeared before the Zoning Board, was the actual use of the park. That was not a subject of
the appeal because the Class II Special Permit did not issue any approvals for the use in the park.
The use -- the race use of the park is something that the City Commission approved. The Class
II Special Permit for the park was because there were permanent improvements located on a
piece of property between the water and the first right-of-way. The Planning and Zoning
Department reviewed the proposal for those physical improvements for the park, which included
some roadway improvements, relocation of trees, some work on the fountain, and found that
work was appropriate and consistent with the nature of Bayfront Park, and the Class II Special
Permit was granted. The Class II Special Permit was then appealed. It was denied -- the appeal
was denied by the Zoning Board and the appellant has appealed it here before you, so we
recommend upholding the Class II Special Permit and denial of the appeal.
Garbriel Nieto: Gabriel Nieto, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, on behalf of the appellant,
Homestead Miami Speedway. It's been a long night. I'll try to keep --
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead.
277 July 25, 2002
Mr. Nieto: -- my comments as brief as I can. Before I begin, I have a few items. I just want to
clarify the record as a housekeeping matter. We have a book that will be passed out to you
containing the transcripts of the prior hearings on this matter, as well as some of the other items
that were before the Zoning Board. I was trying to make sure that everything is clear on the
record. The argument's essentially been made that this permit is solely for permanent
improvements to the park that are divorced from the use for a racecourse. Mr. Al Garcia from
International Speedway Corporation will address you in a few minutes and explain essentially
this issue, that the improvements that were made are highly specialized. They serve no other
purpose but to facilitate racing in the park, and therefore, I do not believe that you can, in good
conscience, separate those improvements from the racing use, and I realize that the City has
issued a racing permit recently to Raceworks. That's an issue that, although we raised it before,
we're not going to raise it here tonight because we intend to take separate court action on that
matter, but I think, as it relates to the Class II, you still have to consider it, in light of the racing
use, which is the sole purpose for the improvements existing, and let me walk you through.
Essentially, we have five arguments, now four, since we're not going to raise the issue of the
Chapter 549 permit before you. The first of which is that it was improper to use a Class II
Special Permit for this purpose and there are several reasons for this. First of all, Section 1500 of
your Zoning Code provides that a Class II permit can only be used if regulations for the use
appear in the official Schedule of District Regulations or elsewhere in the zoning ordinance.
That simply is not the case. Section 1303 of the Zoning Code, no application for a Special
Permit may be accepted unless specific provisions appear; essentially, the same requirement.
Again, there is nothing in -- anywhere in the Zoning Code that could contemplate this type of
racing use, and that leads to a very fundamental problem; that's that there were no standards
applied. There's nothing in the code that tells you how to judge this type of use, how to apply it,
how to measure the impacts to the City. Essentially, what you had is a rubber stamp from the
Department because there was nothing for them to apply, and they did this incredibly cursory
Class II review when you have an intensive use -- and again, Mr. Al Garcia will address that
point -- but you have a use that's going to have citywide impacts, that's going to change the
character of the existing park, and that should have received a much higher level of review, and
if you look -- and I believe the other board up there has language from Section 401, which is the
designation of the Parks and Recreation District. The approved uses, which are listed up there,
are nowhere near a racecourse. They're passive, semi -passive uses of a park open to the public.
Certainly, they do not relate to taking a park and converting it to private use, running
automobiles through it at 100 miles an hour, etcetera, and if you look forward -- and what's not
up there are the conditional principal uses. They allow some -- more intensive uses, such as art
centers, museums, art galleries and exhibition spaces, but even for those, they made clear that
you have to approve the use through a Major Use Special Permit. You can't do it through this
very cursory Class II review and, you know, even those uses are not close enough to a
racecourse, in good conscience, be used to approve this permit. The only possibility within the
zoning classification is a provision which allows you to approve -- I'll quote it -- "other activities
which further City purposes as determined by this Commission." The problem again is that that
also has to be done through a Major Use Special Permit, not this Class II process, so I think that
the staff dropped the ball -- the director dropped the ball by using this process. They let
Raceworks come in; essentially have no review, and get their use approved and, you know, I
would urge you to grant the appeal and send it back to staff to be done correctly.
278 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Say that again.
Mr. Nieto: I would urge you to grant the appeal and if they want to apply for a Maj or Use
Special Permit, there are other issues involved with that that can be looked at
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) a different day, but I think the way this was done is clearly incorrect, and
I'd also point out that when you look at a Class II Special Permit, you need to make specific
written findings, a director does, on, you know, matters such as ingress and egress, off-street
parking, etcetera; none of those are in the permit here, so even if a Class II permit was proper,
which I think it clearly is not, you don't -- they didn't even follow that process and, you know,
the way this was done procedurally is defective. The way it was done is inconsistent with the
Zoning Code. It's inconsistent with the length of the classification and, you know, regardless of
whether or not they could have done this through a Major Use Special Permit, I think that you
need to grant the appeal and send this back. Let them reapply, if they want to, but it cannot be
done the way it was done. I'd like to bring up Mr. Garcia.
Al Garcia: Good evening. I guess Mr. Chairman's not here. Commissioners, my name is Al
Garcia with a business address of 1 Speedway Boulevard, Homestead, Florida. To begin with, to
talk about the construction, what our attorney alluded to, that it's pretty clear that the
improvements or the so-called improvements, the modification made to the park were to be able
to develop that parcel into a racecourse. I mean, I don't think you could call improvements
relocating or removing trees, you're reducing green space by thousands of square feet, you're
doubling the width of sidewalks. I don't know of any park in this city or county that has a 40 -
foot wide walkways as the walkways there around the fountain, just north and south of it were
widened. Another clear indicator is paving over the decorative keystone that surrounded the
fountain. The fountain, as I noticed, is working these days, but they did pave over the decorative
keystone, so personally, my opinion is, I do not consider that an improvement. As far as the
course itself, when you look at the pubic safety aspect of this thing, we do not believe that this
park will support the type of event that they are proposing. It's certainly suitable if you plan to
have an event with 10 or 15,000 people, but I've heard plans that they're going to have over
100,000 people there and when you do the math, the square footage available, after you erect the
grandstands, hospitality villages, display areas, what's left to accommodate 100,000 people?
And I know that there's public safety codes and issues; that there's requirements, square footage
per person for assemblies and things like that, those are some issues that really need to be
addressed and discussed. I think that the life safety folks, the emergency medical services,
they're going to have a tough time moving in and around that park, with only two ways in and
out, if you're able to fit the 100,000 people into Bayfront Park after the racecourse is built. To
get them in and out safely on the two or three bridges that are going to be there is certainly not
acceptable. When it comes to the course itself, there's been a lot of compromises made. I think
they had a race in Washington, D.C. last weekend or the weekend before, and what they kept
commenting on over and over was how the best thing about this course was that it was 45 -foot
wide at the narrowest point, and that's what made it a very competitive and a very good venue to
race these cars on. I don't think there's any part of this course that's 45 -foot wide. As a matter
of fact, when it goes underneath the Peoplemover, it goes from about 36 or 38 feet wide down to
18, so of course, the more concessions and compromises you make in order to put this event in a
place where it doesn't belong, the more you're exposing the City and the spectators to dangerous
situations.
279 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Mr. Garcia: Thank you.
Mr. Nieto: If I could wrap --
Chairman Regalado: Anybody -- go ahead.
Mr. Nieto: -- up briefly. Adding to one consistent theme here is that regardless of whether the
course is well designed, poorly designed, whether impacts -- you know, what the effect of the
impacts is going to be, the key theme here is that none of this was looked at. It was just passed
through a very cursory review process that's clearly improper, and I would also point out one
additional thing that I failed to mention in my prior presentation, and that's that under Section
401 of the Zoning Code, if the use will take up more than 3,000 square feet or over 10 percent of
an existing park, it also has to be a Major Use Special Permit, so that's one more reason why that
process should have been followed, as opposed to the Class II. Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: OK. This -- it's very late. We have listened to one of the parts involved in
this PZ item. I personally would like to bring this back, in the near future, to make a decision on
this appeal, so -- but if you all wanted to go ahead and vote, it's fine. If you ask me, I would ask
this to be continued until September 26. I think, 20 -- what is it?
Commissioner Teele: Twenty-sixth.
Vice Chairman Winton: Twenty-sixth.
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-sixth.
Vice Chairman Winton: Is that a motion?
Chairman Regalado: Well --
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll make that motion.
Chairman Regalado: If you want to make the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll make that motion --
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Nieto: Commissioner, before you go --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- because --
Mr. Nieto: --if I could add, Mr. Chairman --
280 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Excuse me. I think I have the floor.
Mr. Nieto: Yes. Yes, sir. I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Vice Chairman Winton: It is -- there's a lot of -- it's crystal clear that the folks in Homestead are
going to do every single thing in their power to block this race. He's already mentioned the fact
that some other part of this is the subject of a lawsuit and, you know, there's letters going to the
county, and Lord knows what other legal maneuvers that they may take, and it seems to me that
as it related to this issue, we might be best served by taking the more cautious route, and that is
continuing this till the 22 so that we make sure that we've got all of our is crossed and all of our
I's dotted and have no room for error on our part here.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Mr. Nieto: Mr. Chairman, may I make one comment before you vote, please?
Chairman Regalado: I'm sorry?
Mr. Nieto: May I make one comment before you vote?
Chairman Regalado: Oh, sure. I just think --
Mr. Nieto: And that's that that date is just about a week before the race, so you know, to the
extent that we wanted to take an appeal of whatever decision you make --
Vice Chairman Winton: September 26.
Mr. Nieto: -- it would essentially cut off our rights by having it deferred that long.
Chairman Regalado: Why don't we do it on the first meeting in September, if that is --
Mr. Nieto: If that's the earliest date, I mean -- I'd prefer it to be the earliest date possible just
because of the fact that we're pushing up very close to the race at this point.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I think counsel knows that we're -- today's the 25. We don't have any
meetings in August, at all. We may have a special called meeting on certain financial matters, as
governed by federal law, but essentially, we're on holiday for the month of August. If the 26 is
not convenient, perhaps we could entertain taking this up as the only planning and zoning issue
on the 12.
Chairman Regalado: On the 11.
281 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: On the 11 or --
Mr. Nieto: That'll be fine.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well -- but do we have to ask him when it's best for us to take that
issue up?
Chairman Regalado: No, because he was saying, you know, the 25 is only less than a month
before the race, so what Commissioner Teele is trying to do is trying to give them, you know, all
the courtesy, but the earliest that we can do this is on September 11. That's all we can do. As a
matter of fact, this is an extraordinary decision because, you know, we have the budget hearing
on the 11, so I think that they need to see that this Commission is willing to, you know,
accommodate --
Vice Chairman Winton: To make a decision on the 26. That's probably what they need to see,
that we're really willing to make a decision on the 26.
Chairman Regalado : Or the 11.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, no, I think the 11 too early.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I -- you know, these things have a way of getting a judge
to review them. I mean, we -- all of us are subject to the law and all of our decisions in zoning,
while we may not be aware of it, but every time somebody gets disappointed -- and Johnny, you
know this and several of the issues relating to Biscayne Boulevard. People have a right to seek
judicial review and I think that's their right. I mean, I think they've raised some issues that I
candidly -- the reason I want a delay is that I want to see the director. You kept referring to the
director. Which director are you talking about, the -- in your pre --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): She's talking about the Plan --
Commissioner Teele: No, no.
Mr. Maxwell: -- he's talking about the Planning Director.
Mr. Nieto: That's -- when the code says "director," that's my understanding.
Commissioner Teele: And the director issued the Class II, and candidly, I'd like for the director
to be put on as an expert in, at least, responding to many of the things that you have put on the
record. I think it's important, you know, that the director at least be asked to come forth, and I'd
like for the director to be able to review the discussion, to review the record, the transcript and to
prepare that, because I think the one thing that is very, very clear is that the testimony and the
282 July 25, 2002
debate, you clearly are conferring our right to issue a special use permit -- or a Class II permit,
and so -- I mean, I think that's some progress because before, you've always indicated that, you
know, we were maybe operating outside of our legal authority, so -- I mean, I'm --
Mr. Nieto: Just so I'm clear, Commissioner Teele, I don't believe that you can issue a Class II
permit, and you know, my argument was that, at the very least, it should be a major use permit
and that would have to be reviewed in the context (UNINTELLIGIBLE) permanent application.
Commissioner Teele: So you're saying that at the very -- you're acknowledging or conceding
that we could issue a major use permit?
Mr. Nieto: I think that if there was an application for a major use permit, there would have to be
a review as to whether that's consistent with your comprehensive plan, consistent with the
zoning district, and that hasn't been done. Do I think that they can get a major use? Probably
not, but the point is that, at the very least, that review should have been done.
Vice Chairman Winton: That seems to be inconsistent with a number of comments he made
earlier, so --
Mr. Nieto: Well, I was making --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- I guess, sometimes I get confused.
Commissioner Teele: Well, see --
Mr. Nieto: -- procedural comments before that. At the very least, the review should have been
done in the first place, and at that point, you can look at that issue more carefully.
Commissioner Teele: And my point -- that's my point precisely. I think we need to hear from
the director to determine what type of review the director did, and I think you've raised the
issues that need to be at least -- I mean, I'm not comfortable with it. Ms. Dougherty should be
refuting what you're saying. I don't think this should be an argument among lawyers. I mean,
what I think is we need to have enough -- at least enough competent evidence on the record to at
least sustain your appeal or to deny your appeal, and so I'm just simply alerting the staff that I
would hope that they would be prepared to review the transcript very carefully and to come back
either on the 26 or the 11, whatever date the Chairman so designates, and we can continue this. I
think this is extremely helpful in terms of understanding the major use argument as compared to
the Class II argument, but I think the thing that gives me a lot of comfort at this point is, at least,
we're down to determining what is the best instrument, as opposed to challenging the right to
issue and those other things that had been the issue before.
Mr. Nieto: And, again, just so we're clear, you know, my point was (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the
review wasn't done, so I'm not conceding that after you do that review, it will proper to issue the
major use permit.
283 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado : OK, so when do you want this back, the 11, the 26, the maker of the
motion?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, my motion was the 26. If someone wants to offer up a
modification to that, I guess we would have to consider it.
Chairman Regalado : OK. Do we have a second --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado : -- with any amendment or no amendment?
Commissioner Teele: Well, I would ask that if we're going to do it on the 26, could we agree to
take it up as the first item after lunch on the 26?
Vice Chairman Winton: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: So that we can at least give --
Vice Chairman Winton: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: All right.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Time certain, 3 o'clock -- 3 p.m., on September 26. That's the
motion, continue to that date. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-892
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ZONING
BOARD DECISION WHICH DENIED APPEAL BY MR. ANDRE. J.
ZAMORANO OF CLASS II SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW
PERMANENT ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN BAYFRONT PARD IN
ASSOCIATION WITH A TEMPORARY EVENT (RACEWORKS) TO THE
COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER
26, 2002.
284 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
53. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF: PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, BY CHANGING LAND USE
DESIGNATION FROM INDUSTRIAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AT 610 S.W. 1
AVENUE; PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE BY
CHANGING CLASSIFICATION FROM SD -4 WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO
SD -7 CENTRAL BRICKELL RAPID TRANSIT COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
AT 610 S.W. 1 AVENUE; PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, TO ADD NEW LAND USE CATEGORY
ENTITLED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL; PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY'S
ZONING ORDINANCE TO MODIFY EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROVISIONS RELATED TO
SURFACE PARKING LOTS; PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, TO UPDATE FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY
CHANGING FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM
DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN DESIGNATED AREAS PROPOSED
ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO UPDATE ZONING ATLAS
BY CHANGING FROM CBD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO G/I GOVERNMENT
AND INSTITUTIONAL AT 73 W. FLAGLER STREET TO COMMISSION MEETING
CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 26, 2002.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Mr. Manager, we go to --
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): And you'll continue --
Chairman Regalado: -- the millage. To continue.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, are you going to continue the balance of the --
Chairman Regalado: Oh, yes.
Mr. Maxwell: -- PZ (Planning &Zoning) agenda?
Chairman Regalado: We need to continue the balance of the PZ agenda to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, so move the balance.
285 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: The 26 of September.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move the balance of the agenda to September 26.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
286 July 25, 2002
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-893
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING
ITEMS TO THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR
SEPTEMBER 26,2002:
PZ -13 — PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 10544, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN, BY CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM
INDUSTRIAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AT APPROXIMATELY 610
S.W. 1 AVENUE;
PZ -14 — PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 BY CHANGING CLASSIFICATION FROM
SD -4 WATERFRONT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO SD -7 CENTRAL
BRICKELL RAPID TRANSIT COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AT
APPROXIMATELY 610 S.W. 1 AVENUE;
PZ -15 — PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 10544, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN, BY AMENDING THE INTERPRETATION OF THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP SECTION OF THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES, IN
ORDER TO ADD NEW LAND USE CATEGORY ENTITLED LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL;
PZ -16 — PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 11000, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, TO MODIFY THE
EFFECTIVE DATE OF PROVISIONS RELATED TO SURFACE PARKING
LOTS;
PZ -17 — PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 10544, THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLAN, TO ALLOW A CLEAN UP AND UPDATE TO THE FUTURE LAND
USE MAP BY CHANGING FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN
DESIGNATED AREAS;
PZ -18 - PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING TO AMEND
ORDINANCE 11000, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, TO ALLOW A CLEAN
UP AND UPDATE TO ZONING ATLAS BY CHANGING FROM CBD
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TO G/I GOVERNMENT AND
INSTITUTIONAL AT APPROXIMATELY 73 W. FLAGLER STREET.
287 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Regalado: We also need to continue other items, not taken today, to the meeting of
the 22. There's not that many, but there are some resolutions.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that we go through this whole agenda
now and take up all of the ones that are non -controversial and just get them out of the way so at
least we're not lugging around all the(UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Vice Chairman Winton: Amen.
Chairman Regalado: That is fine with me.
54. RATIFY, APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF EMERGENCY,
WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES, AND
ACCEPT BID OF HARD J. CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION FOR PROJECT ENTITLED
"CITYWIDE LOCAL DRAINAGE PROJECT E-77, B-5648", $673,250.
Chairman Regalado: I -- as long -- OK. Item 4 was done. Item 6 and Item 5 was not done
because it required a four -fifth approval.
Commercial Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman, Item Number 5.
Chairman Regalado: Item Number 5 is a resolution. We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: Second. This is a public hearing. We invited the public to address the
board on this resolution, Item 5. Being none, we close the public hearing. All in favor, say
aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: It passes, four-fifths.
288 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) four to zero.
Chairman Regalado: Four to zero.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-894
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RATIFYING,
APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF
AN EMERGENCY, WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE
SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES, AND ACCEPTING THE BID OF HARD
J. CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, (BLACK/MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
VENDOR, 99 N.W. 183RD STREET, SUITE 108, MIAMI, FLORIDA) THE
LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR INFORMAL BIDS, DATED JUNE 7, 20021 FOR THE
PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE LOCAL DRAINAGE PROJECT E-77,
B-5648", IN THE AMOUNT OF $673,250; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
PROJECT NO. 3522161 AS APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES, AS
AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $6731250 FOR THE CONTRACT COSTS
AND $88,750 FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF
$762,000; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR
SAID PURPOSE.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
289 July 25, 2002
55. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH INITIAL RESOURCES AND
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FUND ENTITLED "LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK
GRANT VII PROGRAM FUND," AND APPROPRIATE $1,828,690 CONSISTING OF
GRANT FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF
MATCHING FUNDS, $203,188 FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUNDS.
Chairman Regalado: We have --
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved Item 6.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: No, it's -- Item 6 is done.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh.
Chairman Regalado: We did --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): No, it's not.
Chairman Regalado: We did 5 --
Vice Chairman Winton: No, 6 is still open.
Commissioner Teele: 6 is still open. Second the motion on Item Number 6, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK. We have a motion and a second. It's a public hearing. Being
none that wishes to address the board, all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Mr. Vilarello: It's an ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: It's an ordinance.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Second roll call, emergency ordinance. The ordinance is
passed on emergency ordinance.
290 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ESTABLISHING
INITIAL RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR A FUND ENTITLED
"LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT VII PROGRAM FUND,"
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,828,690, AND
ANY INTEREST EARNED FROM FISCAL YEARS 2002-2003 AND 2003-
2004, CONSISTING OF A GRANT FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE; AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF MATCHING FUNDS, IN
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $203,188, FROM PROJECT NO. 690001,
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUNDS, SUCH EXPENDITURE 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"; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ACCEPT SAID GRANT AND TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY;
AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF THE GRANT FOR THE
OPERATION OF THE PROGRAM; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Teele, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispending 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12267.
291 July 25, 2002
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
56. CONTINUE COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 25, 2002 TO AUGUST 22, 200212:30
P.M. AT JAMES L. KNIGHT CENTER.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, very quickly.
Chairman Regalado: We need to establish a time of the special meeting of August 22nd and the
site. Mr. Manager —
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I would move Item Number 11 be deferred to the meeting — be deferred be
continued to — I think we're better off cleaning this thing up, everything that's left over, as
opposed to a special meeting alley. So, what I'm proposing is that we continue this meeting to
August 22nd, at 2:30 p.m., at City Hall.
Chairman Regalado: No, we cannot not do it at City Hall.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, it can't be here.
Chairman Regalado: We have to do it at the Miami Arena site, or the Knight Center.
Commissioner Teele: Let's do it at the Knight Center.
Chairman Regalado: You want to do it at the Knight Center?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. It's a nice place.
Chairman Regalado: OK, Knight Center, August 22nd
Commissioner Sanchez: Time?
Commissioner Teele: 2:30?
Chairman Regalado: 2:30 in the afternoon.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Also, Mr. Chairman --
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
292 July 25, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: -- at that meeting, I'd also want to have a budget workshop, with all — the head
counts, the numbers, et cetera, represented at that time, so that you could consider that and make
recommendations prior to the first budget hearing on the 11 th.
Commissioner Teele: The reason that I'm doing — recommending a continuance is it keeps
everything open so that you can bring up whatever you need to.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I think it's helpful that you would do that budget thing, because we're
going to get into that in the millage issue tonight. But that would be my motion, to continue Item
Number 11 to 2:30 to the Knight Center, at a — with a notice — further notice being provided by
the Miami Herald and others. This is the AT&T (American Telegram & Telegraph) item.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It's 11 and 11A.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): I'm sorry. That was deferred this morning, according to
our agenda.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, it was.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Thompson: To the meeting of 8/22/02.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, but we didn't have the time or the site.
Commissioner Teele: We didn't have the time or the place.
Chairman Regalado: Or the place.
Commissioner Teele: And the way it was being done, is being done as a special meeting, and
what I'm trying to avoid is a special meeting on that item. But — so that if there are some clean-
up issues that need to take place, particularly for the budget and other things that we're able to
deal with at that time.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Regalado: OK. You want to say —
Albert Milo: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask, if it's possible —
Chairman Regalado: Name?
293 July 25, 2002
Mr. Milo: Albert Milo, from the Urban Development Group, 301 Southwest 17th Road. I'd like
to ask, if it's possible here, Item Number 25. I flew in our attorney from Washington, DC for the
item. It's in regard to —
Commissioner Teele: You're talking about on the regularly agenda?
Mr. Milo: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: You don't want to defer it, do you?
Mr. Milo: No.
Commissioner Teele: This is a motion on deferral. Why don't you just stay where you are for a
minute? Call the question on the motion to defer.
Ms. Thompson: I need a second.
Commissioner Teele: Or continue.
Chairman Regalado : We need a second.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-895
A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 25,
2002 TO AUGUST 22, 200212:30 P.M. AT THE JAMES L. KNIGHT CENTER.
294 July 25, 2002
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
57. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER TEELE REGARDING PROPOSED RESOLUTION
RELATING TO RELOCATION OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS UNIT OF POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
Chairman Regalado: OK. On Item 25. Item 25.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Before you take that Item 25, while the Chief is here, there's two matters
that I'd like to raise that are on the agenda. First, apparently, there is a pocket item regarding the
Internal Affairs. I would ask that that item be brought up on the 22, and let me just tell you why.
I don't know where you're going to locate it, Internal Affairs, but I think wherever Internal
Affairs is located, it needs to be in a clearly accessible public transportation -- you know, I don't
think it should be in Little Haiti. I don't think it should be in Little Havana. I think it should be -
- or necessarily in Edgewater. I think it should be in a main area, and I'm strongly of the opinion
that it should either in downtown Miami or some other place. I think the Grove -- you know,
Coconut Grove -- I just think we need to be very careful about the signal that we send, as well as
the public access and all of those other kinds of things. Obviously, you know, looking at the
discussion that Commissioner Sanchez had -- and I commend you, Commissioner Sanchez, for
focusing in on one issue during the workshop that I was not here, and Mr. Chairman, as I said
this morning, I appreciate both the courtesies that the Mayor and you showed to me, and I was
not able to be present, but I think it's really important to keep in mind everything that
Commissioner Sanchez said. It's not so much about what you're doing right or wrong; it's about
the perception. Where Internal Affairs is located is as important as anything else, and it clearly
needs to be in an area that is accessible, that is not the heart of the black community, or a heart of
the Cuban committee, or the Haitian community. It needs to be in a Miami venue, in a -- so I
don't know where you're going with it, but I want to make sure that we don't get into another
round of discussion about that, and I -- that's the kind of thing that I would hope that you would
take to the CRB (Community Relations Board) and get their advice before you bring it to us. I
don't know if you all have done that, but you know, we need to make sure that we vet this thing
properly. That's all that I'm saying, and it ought to be on a major bus route, OK, if it's going to
be somewhere, so I mean, I don't --
295 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Chief, just for the record, why don't you put the address, where your --
Chief Raul Martinez (Chief of Police, City of Miami): Yes, Commissioner. Raul Martinez.
This location is where the Workforce Development used to be at on Northwest 36 Street and 13
Avenue. There is a Metrorail stop about a block east of it. 36 Street (UNINTELLIGIBLE) a
major bus route. It's got plenty of parking. I mean, we feel it's pretty accessible as far as, you
know, for the public to go from anywhere and get there.
Commissioner Teele: I think 36 Street is a very good east/west street. I don't have any problem
with it being on 36 Street, you know. I mean, 36 Street is a great street. Biscayne Boulevard is a
great street.
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: You know, but I'm just saying it needs to be open to everybody and not --
I think it would be very helpful if you took it -- Did it go before the CRB?
Chief Martinez: No, sir, we didn't do that.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): We'll be happy to take it before the CRB. One of the other
considerations was that --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but the other issue is --
Mr. Gimenez: -- infrastructure -wise, it's already set up to go with the City, and so we wouldn't
have to set up -- make all those connections, etcetera, because that's where --
Commissioner Teele: Is this Workforce Development space and (UNINTELLIGIBLE)?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes.
Chief Martinez: Yes.
Mr. Gimenez: That's where it was.
Commissioner Sanchez: And my concern is, I want to get them out of there as quick as possible.
Commissioner Teele: I think that's a great idea. I think it's a great idea. I think you ought to
run it by them and see if they object.
Chief Martinez: We will, sir. We will.
Commissioner Teele: But I think having it at Workforce Development space is a win-win for a
lot of reasons and I -- you know, obviously, you've not discussed it with me. I don't need to be,
but I just wanted to be on the record on that. The other thing that I wanted to make in this regard
296 July 25, 2002
relating to the workshop, if I could, just very quickly. There's one issue that really bothers me
that is not one of these community issues. It's an efficiency issue. I would hope that the Police
Department will go out and get a private Contractor Facility's Manager or Manager Consultant.
I would very much like to do a walk-through in August with the Mayor and the Manager of the
Police Department. It is a 1970's --
Chief Martinez: `76.
Commissioner Teele: -- structure and facility and operation. I mean, the cameras are toy
cameras. I mean, they're not -- you know, if we ever had a major incident sort of like, you
know, what happened in the O.J., where they realized that the Coroner's Office was a disaster in
L.A. (Los Angeles) -- you know, one of the things that came out of the O.J. Simpson trial was
that the Coroner's Office was a disaster. I think we have a real problem with helping the Police
Department have a first-class facility while it's there, so that's the one thing that I would hope,
that coming out of this budget process, that we would, you know, go out and get a consultant
who's a facilities, you know, manager, consulting engineer strictly for the police facilities that
specializes in that and begin to work on upgrading that facility, as well as all the other things,
and I don't want to get into a whole lot of discussions because it's late, but Chief, I appreciate
very much the fact that you did come forth, and I would hope that we could institutionalize a
workshop twice a year maybe with the Police Department, maybe in lieu of one Commission
meeting, Mr. Chairman, because I think it's very helpful. Because after all, the Police
Department is about 50 percent of the City budget; is that a fair statement?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: About? And I think it does us well and it does the Department well, it
does the public well, and I just wanted to commend the Commission and the Manager and you
all for beginning this process. Thank you.
Chief Martinez: Thank you, sir.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
58. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT WITH WAGNER SQUARE,
LLC, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MIXED INCOME, HOME OWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
TO INCLUDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT ON 2.7 ACRES LOCATED
BETWEEN NORTHWEST 17TH AND 18TH STREETS AND NORTHWEST 14TH AND 15TH
AVENUES.
Commissioner Teele: You wanted to take up 25, Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Regalado: Twenty-five. He's got attorneys that came from Washington, he said. OK.
Item 25. This is —
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): This is the Environmental Remediation and
Affordable Housing Project for Allapattah. At your last Commission meeting, you authorized us
297 July 25, 2002
to join with the developer and apply for a special grant from Washington. They worked very
diligently, I will say, and helped us with that grant. We're asking your approval now, for the
Manager to negotiate an agreement with this group, and come back to you, probably, in late
September, early October, with a proposed contract.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-896
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH WAGNER
SQUARE, LLC, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED INCOME, HOME
OWNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
COMPONENT ON APPROXIMATELY 2.7 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN
NORTHWEST 17TH AND 18TH STREETS AND NORTHWEST 14TH AND 15TH
AVENUES, MIAMI, FLORIDA; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER
TO PRESENT THE NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY
COMMISSION FOR ITS CONSIDERATION
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Chairman Regalado: Thank you very much.
298 July 25, 2002
Mr. Milo: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Great presentation. Those lawyers from Washington did you a lot of
good.
Chairman Regalado: Millage.
Commissioner Teele: I hope you're staying in a hotel in Miami, though, not in Coral Gables.
Mr. Milo: Absolutely.
Vice Chairman Winton: Very good.
59. AUTHORIZE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA) TO ESTABLISH
PROPOSED MILEAGE RATE OF ONE-HALF (1/2) MILL FOR DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2002 AND
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2003.
Chairman Regalado: Millage. What's the item number?
Commissioner Teele: 26.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Item Number 26 is a DDA (Downtown Development
Authority) millage rate.
Chairman Regalado: Downtown Development.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: It's been moved and second. It's a resolution. This is a public hearing.
Anybody from the public is invited to address the board. Being none, we close the public
hearing. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes three to zero.
299 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-897
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ("DDA") TO ESTABLISH A
PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE OF ONE-HALF (1/2) MILL FOR THE
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2002 AND
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2003; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
DDA TO SUBMIT SAID PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE TO THE MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR, TOGETHER WITH THE DATE, TIME
AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AT WHICH THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE AND
THE DDA TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR SAID FISCAL YEAR.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
60. COMPUTE PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE FOR CITY FOR FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING
OCTOBER 1, 2002 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2003.
RESCHEDULE SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING TO SEPTEMBER 11,
2002 AT MANUEL ARTIME CENTER, 900 SOUTHWEST 1 STREET.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Item 27 is the proposed millage rate for the City of Miami, and
this is for purposes of the trim bill.
Commissioner Teele: What's the last day we can do this? Isn't it -- doesn't this information
have to be with the County Property Appraiser or whoever (UNINTELLIGIBLE) assessor by
August 1 ?
Chairman Regalado: Well, yes.
300 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Somebody here must know.
Mr. Gimenez: We can get you that information, but it's right around the corner.
Commissioner Teele: Trust me, this can't be deferred until August 22.
Mr. Gimenez: No, it cannot.
Chairman Regalado : OK, so --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, this is the first time, since I've been, you know, in office,
that we're being asked to do a millage rate without the benefit of any of the normal information.
I mean, I'm not going to, you know, ad nauseam, ad nauseam, but I think we're clearly behind in
the budget process.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I think we are.
Commissioner Teele: And I think it's very unfair to ask us to approve a millage rate, because the
rollback rate, under the state law -- and state constitution and the law is very, very clear.
Anything above the rollback rate is an increase in taxes, and what's the rollback rate?
Vice Chairman Winton: Eight two, didn't he say? Eight one nine.
Marcello Penha (Acting Director, Management &Budget): It's approximately 8.2.
Commissioner Teele: And that's my beginning point, Mr. Manager. This document that we
have before us, I mean, it doesn't even tell us what the rollback rate is. I mean, we cannot raise
taxes here tonight or at least send a signal that we're raising taxes -- and I'm well aware of the
fact that the computed millage rate that you're asking us for the trim bill is the highest number
and it is not the setting of the millage rate.
Mr. Gimenez: That's correct, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And this is the highest number. This goes on the trim notice and you can
go below it, but you can't go above it.
Mr. Gimenez: That's correct, and we're not asking for the rate to be raised beyond last year's
rate, so we're asking that the rate remain the same and for purposes of the trim bill. In terms of
the budget, we are a little bit behind, but we have got some issues that are not finalized and
there's some questions that need to be answered. Those questions all will be answered before
the 22. That's why I want to have a full, complete budget hearing on the 22 with all the
positions, the organization, and the numbers so that you can, for the September 11 meeting, be
much more informed and also give us some direction on that meeting so that we'll have it
finalized by the 11, give us three more weeks to do the final numbers. I strongly urge that we
pass the trim millage at 8.995. You can always reduce it in your budget hearings in September.
301 July 25, 2002
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, the proposed general operating millage rate
of 8.995 is 9.72 percent above the rollback rate. That's the language that's required by the
Statute. It's 9.72 percent.
Commissioner Teele: But, again, the notice, the memo -- I mean, none of this is being disclosed,
that we're going above the rollback rate. The statute requires that this be noticed. The statute
requires that on the first day of the budget hearing, you read into the record that -- I mean, this
isn't something -- because they know how government operates, and so they wrote a statute that
says, when you take up the budget at 5:01, you must read into the law, as the first item, so that
there's no hanky-panky, what the rollback rate is and the increase of taxes that you're asking for.
This represents a nine percent increase over last year.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner --
Commissioner Teele: This represents a nine percent increase in taxes over last year, in
accordance with the state statute. If I'm wrong, correct me, Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. This is -- However, today's announcement of the proposed millage rate is
for the purposes of complying with the trim notice and providing the notice to every property
owner, but you're correct, it's a 9.72 percent increase over the rollback rate.
Commissioner Teele: I have conferred with the Mayor's office on this matter and I think there's
an important issue that we need to be very clear on. This Commission, in the past, has been split
three to two on the rates and on taxes. We're unanimous on spending. We can't spend the
money fast enough, Joe. We can't spend it fast enough. I mean, as soon as we get past the 3/2,
3/2, 3/2 -- and that was 3/2 with Commissioner Gort -- we were spending money for new fire
stations and for new this and for new that, even though we were all voting no 3/2 on the fire fee
and anything else, so what I would like to propose is something -- and unfortunately, the Miami
Herald's gone to bed, because I think that the business news that this City can give is that we're
sending a signal that we are going to continue to lower taxes. I would like to move that the
millage rate for the trim notice be at 8.895. That is a token, a kick down of one-tenth of one mill,
but I think it sends a very strong signal to the media, to the press, and the public that we are
serious about reducing taxes, and reducing the millage by one-tenth of one mill, we will have
reduced the taxes again to the lowest level in 25 years, and that should be the news story, you
know, that the City of Miami, for the second year in a row, has indicated a very clear signal, that
we're going to reduce taxes. One-tenth of a mill -- one-tenth of a mill equals -- well, one mill
equals how much, Mr. Director?
Commissioner Sanchez: Six million?
Chairman Regalado: Six million.
Commissioner Teele: 1715?
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
302 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: One mill equals blank.
Mr. Penha: One mill is about sixteen.
Commissioner Teele: Sixteen million.
Mr. Vilarello: It's about $1.6 million.
Vice Chairman Winton: One mill equals 16 what?
Commissioner Teele: Million.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, OK.
Commissioner Teele: One-tenth of a mill equals 1.6 million, and I'm telling you that I think we
need to send that signal, so my motion on this would be to move the trim notice to the lowest
level in the history of Miami, again in 25 years, by reducing our authority to raise taxes up to 1.9
mills, but to 1.8 -- I mean, to 8.995, but to put a ceiling on ourselves at 8.895, which again,
represents about a nine percent increase in taxes.
Vice Chairman Winton: And we still may decide at budget time that we're going to drive it
lower.
Commissioner Teele: And we still may decide at budget time that we're going to drive it lower.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second the motion.
Commissioner Teele: I think it's very important that we send a signal to the public that we are
serious about reducing taxes in this community.
Commissioner Sanchez: I wish the county would --
Chairman Regalado : And not only that --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- follow our footsteps because you know what the -- you know, the
property values are going up. It went up 13 percent --
Chairman Regalado : That's right. Not only that, because you know, the -- even if we say that
we are reducing taxes if the property values are up, people are going to have to dig deeper in
their pockets and they won't believe that, so this, at least, is a message that we are sending and
probably will not hit the people as much as it would if we hadn't done this, so --
Vice Chairman Winton: So we have a motion and a second.
Chairman Regalado: -- we have a motion and a second. Anymore discussion?
Mr. Gimenez: Before you do that --
303 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Mr. Gimenez: -- I would like to make a recommendation. I still think that we need to trim on
8.995. You can also reduce your tax rate when it's -- at your -- at the budget hearings in
September. If you do this now, then you cannot go further than the 8.8895.
Chairman Regalado: That's what we are doing, is controlling ourselves, you know. The urge is
888.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I can tell you this, during budget hearing, my motion is going to be -
- the first motion that I'm going to make will be 8.2. If there's three votes for that, that's where
we stop. I'm going to go from 8.1 from the rollback rate, going up until there's three votes, but I
think we need to start at the lowest number. I mean, that was what I had planned to do today, but
I just think --
Vice Chairman Winton: We need numbers.
Commissioner Teele: I fear that there might be three votes at 8.1.
Chairman Regalado: Of course.
Commissioner Teele: I fear that there might be three votes at 8. 1, so I don't want to get --
Vice Chairman Winton: It would be three to one.
Commissioner Teele: I don't want to get caught in that trap because --
Chairman Regalado: Why don't you -- at least, why don't you make my day.
Commissioner Teele: I'm not prepared --
Chairman Regalado: There are three votes.
Commissioner Teele: -- I'm not prepared to do that.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, as your Manager, I would strongly recommend against doing that,
and that's my professional, you know, opinion. I could probably -- again, I recommend that we
do the 8.995. I'm not so vehemently opposed to an 8.885, but a full rollback rate would have
some serious consequences.
Commissioner Sanchez: But you're comfortable at the 8.895?
Mr. Gimenez: I'm comfortable at 8.995. I can live with 8.895.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, when will the tax rates in the City of Miami have been at
the rate that we're talking about now? When's the last time? What year?
304 July 25, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: None. There's no -- we can't go back that far, so we don't know -- we say it's in
the last 50 years because that's all the records we've got, so this will be the lowest in the last 50
years.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well --
Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean, I just think --
Vice Chairman Winton: So go to 8.2.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I just think we need to send the signal and -- I mean, I think the
Manager needs to be requested, if this passes, to issue a press statement tomorrow, with a full
background as to where we are going, because I really do think that if we're going to build
public confidence in what we've done -- I mean, look, folks, let's don't lick the plate. We just
passed at the taxpayers' -- with taxpayers' support, a $255,000,000 bond issue, and the reason
we're able to do that is because we've been saying we're going to reduce taxes. Now, obviously,
it doesn't cost the taxpayers any more, but I think we've got to continue to build on the fact that
we have $255,000,000 of capital money that we never had. We've got right now a hundred and -
- about $130,000,000. No, but it's $130,000,000 of money for new projects. Let me tell you, it's
really simple, Mr. Manager. The biggest concern that your staff had about the bond issue of
whether or not, you know, it was 116,000,000, and your recommendation was that we go for
112, I think, when we sat over there -- is the ability to spend it. Well, you know what? I'm not
recommending this, but if you can't take now one million -- $1.1 million out of your capital plan
for next year and use bond dollars to do it, I mean, you know --
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, that's in the plan. That's in the budget. Unfortunately, I don't
have -- I want to show you that on the 22. We are doing that (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: How much -- what's your capital budget for next year? What's your
capital budget for this year, non -bond dollars? Ms. Haskins, do you know? You're the former
budget czar?
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, I think the more important question is what his plan is next year.
Linda Haskins: Linda Haskins, Advisor of the Mayor. It's 9.6 million, and --
Commissioner Teele: How much?
Ms. Haskins: -- my understanding is, where the budget is right now is 9.6 million again.
Commissioner Teele: In capital.
Ms. Haskins: Most of -- yeah, in capital.
305 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: But don't be -- I wouldn't be so quick to just, you know, give them that
quickie out. I mean, this needs some work through.
Mr. Gimenez: He isn't giving me something that I already haven't thought about. Like I said,
it's already -- it's going to be part of the budget, and we need to start moving CIP (Capital
Improvement Project) expenditures over to CIP, which right now --
Vice Chairman Winton: Right.
Mr. Gimenez: -- we've been funding out of general fund.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, before you do call the question, I will say one thing,
gratuitously, for the Manager. You know, everybody's talking about the stock market and
everybody's talking about the little old lady who's now -- all the networks are interviewing
people who retired and now they're going back to work. Well, those things are called retirement
funds. We are going to get hit real big in our pension funds.
Commissioner Sanchez: Pension funds.
Commissioner Teele: And I'm not unmindful of that and so, you know, that's one of the areas
that I think, you know, we're really going to have to be careful about in our reserves and all of
that, because you know, that stuff about what's going on in Wall Street is going to trickle right
down to our pension funds and we have to make up -- what did we put in, $9,000,000 this year?
Mr. Gimenez: We're going to have to put -- we're going to up -- actually, what I've asked
Budget to do is -- our normal allocation was $7,000,000 a year. I'm going to up that allocation
to $10,000,000 a year, but actually, this year it's a $17,000,000 contribution coming up for next
year's budget. Now, that's precisely why I'm very conservative on the millage rate, because I'm
not so much worried about this year's budget; it's next year's budget that I'm worried about
because this will be the third year of a bad year, I think, in the stock market, so I don't know
what's going to happen with those pension funds. That's why I'm a little bit conservative on the
rate. However, 8.895 is something we can always -- you know, we can get -- we can deal with
that. The rollback rate, however, is going to be extremely difficult.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, finally. I just think if you would lock arms with us and see
this as good news to the people who are paying the tabs and seeing this as a way to go out with a
strong message that the City is clearly committed to continuing this march that we began three --
two yeas ago of reducing taxes, for the first time now we cannot go above 8.89 and so, for the
first time, we'll have a lower rate than we've had ever even before, and I just think --
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
306 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: -- that's a message that we need to be trying to send out.
Commissioner Sanchez: But in a prudent manner.
Commissioner Teele: In a prudent manner.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I understand that, and we will put out the word that this is the lowest tax
rate in the City's, at least 50 years, as far as we know. It's the lowest tax rate
(UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado : OK. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, Madam City Clerk.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, before the roll call. The percentage at this millage rate exceeds
the rollback rate as 8.5.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would like to make a comment and it's -- I think I've talked for six
months now about the need for us to hire whatever consultants we need to hire to work with
whatever staff we need to work with to do a long-term actuarial analysis of the impact of two
things on our budget: pension costs and personnel costs, and I asked Linda Haskins because I
thought she was working on that. I asked her just now where we are on that. She says, we still
don't have a consultant hired, and I mean -- so --
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, the consultants are part of fiscal year '02P03 budget and the
reason being, that we want to have fresh information for when we go back to the negotiations,
which will be in April of fiscal year `04. That's when we go back to negotiations, and we want
to get that study done so that when it's time to negotiate, we have all that information in hand.
Vice Chairman Winton: But I want to get the study done now so that when we're working on
budget, budget will have -- this will impact a lot of things and it will -- armed with that
information, we can make a lot of decisions very differently, not just contract negotiations; it
could impact all kinds of things that we're thinking about and talking about, either positively or
negatively, and I don't know which it is, and so the sooner we get it done, the better I'm going to
be able to sleep at night in terms of thinking about where we're going.
Mr. Gimenez: It's in the budget for the next fiscal year.
Vice Chairman Winton: But --
Chairman Regalado : OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, when's that, sir? So --
Mr. Gimenez: If you want, we can start the process and I'll -- and have it ready -- running by
October 1.
307 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Perfect.
Mr. Gimenez: I mean, we have to issue RFPs (Requets for Proposals) and all those things
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
Vice Chairman Winton: Yeah, yeah, yeah, good.
Mr. Gimenez: -- so we can start doing that now.
Vice Chairman Winton: I would be very -- I'd be satisfied with that, given where we are. Thank
you.
Mr. Gimenez: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So that the record is correct, I am moving Item 27 with the following
amendment: The general operating trim notice is 8.895, in lieu of the Manager's
recommendation of 8.995, with the debt service at 1.218, as recommended by the Manager, with
the total millage rate being --
Mr. Penha: 10.113.
Commissioner Teele: -- 10.113. I want to make sure that the numbers all added up and we did it
so that it's exactly right. I would so move.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. This motion also directs the City
Manager to issue a press release regarding the actions of this Commission. Madam City Clerk,
roll call, please.
308 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-898
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION COMPUTING A
PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2002 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER
30, 2003; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID
PROPOSED MILLAGE RATE TO THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
PROPERTY APPRAISER AND THE TAX COLLECTOR TOGETHER WITH
THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AT WHICH
THE CITY COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THE PROPOSED MILLAGE
RATE AND THE CITY'S TENTATIVE BUDGET FOR SAID FISCAL YEAR.
(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
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, there's a technical issue, which the Attorney should have --
should correct because the law also requires that we announce, with the trim notice, the time,
place, etcetera, of the first budget hearing.
Chairman Regalado: We don't have that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we have to do -- I thought the law require that you set the time and
place of the budget hearing at the time you do the trim notice.
Chairman Regalado: We should have -- we should be doing this in --
Mr. Vilarello: You did set it, September 11.
Chairman Regalado: -- the Artime.
Commissioner Teele: Have we done that?
Chairman Regalado: 11 --
309 July 25, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: That's why we changed the entire meeting to the 11. You're going to have the
budget meeting also on the 11.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but we don't know the place.
Mr. Vilarello: Oh.
Chairman Regalado: No, we cannot do it --
Mr. Gimenez: No, the 11 was at the Manuel Artime.
Chairman Regalado: We cannot do it here.
Mr. Gimenez: It was at Manuel Artime and it's open.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, it's open.
Mr. Vilarello: We can have it there.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, OK. I didn't know that. Because since we changed the date, we didn't
-- I didn't know about the Artime, so it is in the Manuel Artime, 900 Southwest 1 Street, on 9
a.m., on September 11, 202 [sic].
Priscilla Thompson (City Clerk): Chairman, I'm sorry. We never had a motion or anything on
that, so does the Commission --
Chairman Regalado: No, it's included on --
Commissioner Teele: No.
Chairman Regalado: It's just --
Commissioner Teele: No, no. Mr. Chairman, let's just -- at the Chairman's request, I would
move that the Commission meeting scheduled -- previously scheduled for September --
Commissioner Sanchez: September 11.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: -- the 12 be moved --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, 11.
Ms. Thompson: No.
310 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: No, no. The previously scheduled meeting (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: -- meeting for September 12 be moved to September 11; further provide --
at what location?
Commissioner Sanchez: Artime.
Mr. Vilarello: The Manuel Artime Center.
Commissioner Teele: And what's the address?
Chairman Regalado: 900 Southwest 1 Street.
Commissioner Teele: And further that the budget hearing -- first budget hearing be set for 5:01
p.m., at the same place and date, at the same address; and further instructing the Manager to
transmit same as outlined in your memo because your memo says we have to set all of that.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-899
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RESCHEDULING
THE FIRST REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER,
ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 12, 2002, TO TAKE PLACE
ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2002, COMMENCING AT 9 A.M., AT THE MANUEL
ARTIME CENTER, 900 SOUTHWEST 1 STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA.
311 July 25, 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
61. DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF THE ISLAND GARDENS PROJECT
ON WATSON ISLAND.
Commissioner Teele: Is this Watson Island thing time sensitive, Item 22? I just didn't want to
lose something that was time sensitive.
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): No. We can defer that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there anything that's time certain, that might jeopardize the process —
Ms. Bianchino: On Watson Island?
Commissioner Sanchez: On any of the issues in the agenda, the remaining issues.
Ms. Bianchino: I can only respond to the Watson Island one.
Vice Chairman Winton: Somebody from staff needs to go through the remaining agenda items
here and see if, while we're doing pocket items, and see if we have to get some things dealt with.
Commissioner Sanchez: What are we going to do with the Internal Affairs?
Commissioner Teele: Nothing. No. Let's go ahead and approve the Internal Affairs thing. Mr.
Chairman, I would like to make one observation regarding Watson Island. Mr. Manager?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I think, in light of the stock market, in light of everything, we need to be
very careful. Now, I'm advised that we shut down a marina at Watson Island. I know this
gentleman has been waiting here all day, and he gets up and makes a lot of statements of pure
concern, without the Gucci lobbyists and all of that. But I don't think we ought to shut down
anybody's business on Watson Island, unless and until we're ready to start construction. But I
think we should take all of the legal rights, Mr. Attorney, to get them to agree to releases, and
waivers and all of those kinds of things, so that we can pull the trigger. But I'm going to tell you
312 July 25, 2002
something: If we really shut down a marina over there, and a year from now, we're right where
we are, we're going to look real silly. And, you know — and there's no reason to shut down a
bait shop, if there is a way to get a release or waivers, the thing where the guy has waived his
rights to bankruptcy and waived all of his rights, then we can pull the trigger. But, I mean, I can
understanding shutting people down and moving them out, if we don't know if we're going to be
in a nine-month litigation, or a one-year litigation, but just --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): That's exactly the posture we're in.
Commissioner Teele: Well -- but I think there ought to be a way --
Mr. Vilarello: And it's a cloud on title.
Commissioner Teele: Say again.
Mr. Vilarello: And it's a cloud on title. But, Commissioner, you're correct, if there was — if
there can be an accommodation, if this Commission instructs us to so accommodate, we will
consider that. However, that's not what we've been proposed.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but -- excuse me. There was no litigation, at all, regarding the
marina. The reason to close down the marina is because -- at least the excuse -- that these people
needed to take measures or something, the one that won the bid or -- that's what the Manager
said in a memo sent to me, when I asked, that these people will take possession of the area, and
they need to take some measurements. That's why the marina was closed. The marina did not
accept boats for months and months and months. And I tell you, everybody's eager to get a
marina, to have his or her boat, because there are no marinas available here. So. I don't know. I
think that Commissioner Teele is right. And I think that, if we were to discuss with these people
that, you know, that — a reality check, you're going to be out of here, and -- but we don't know
exactly when. But if you sign an agreement, that, in 90 days, a notice, you've got to leave this
place or --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no, Mr. Chairman. Thirty -day --
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no, no. No.
Commissioner Teele: Thirty -day notice.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, 30 days, or whatever. You know, I don't --
Commissioner Winton: And give up all your rights.
Commissioner Teele: And waive all rights.
Chairman Regalado: And give up all your rights. You can be there until this thing begins.
mean, you know, it's a reality check. They're going to have to do it.
313 July 25, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, I --
Chairman Regalado : That's what I think. I mean, I don't know anything about the law.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman —
Mr. Vilarello : I'm not trying to
Commissioner Teele: -- I don't know anything about any of the particular cases.
Chairman Regalado : I don't.
Commissioner Teele: I think the staff is doing the right thing, if they are preempting people
from going in filing bankruptcy, filing, you know, all kinds of lawsuits. But I think there is a
way reasonable people ought to be able to do this. If we can get everybody to agree to give us
waivers of notice and waivers of this and waivers in bankruptcy and dah, dah, dah, dah, and
they're there on a 30 -day, you know, month-to-month basis, which they agree to it -- as far as I'm
concerned, I hope we break ground on Watson Island in six months or 90 days, but I'm willing to
bet a thousand dollars ($1,000), one year from now, you know, given where the stock market --
given all of the things that we have no control over, you know, it's a 50150 chance we'll break
ground in 180 days, as compared to 365 days. That's all that I'm saying. And I'm not asking for
any special favors for anybody, but I think we ought to try to work with the people and develop
that kind of posture.
Commissioner Winton: But I also think that, to protect our interest, we need to put that kind of
commitment, on our part, on a very short leash.
Commissioner Teele: On a very short leash, yes.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner
Commissioner Winton: I mean, they need to agree to this kind of thing fast, not drag out --
Commissioner Teele: And if they can't agree to it, Mr. Attorney --
Commissioner Sanchez: So be it.
Commissioner Teele: -- if they can't agree to it, then so be it. They've got to go now.
Commissioner Winton: By the 22nd
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, he's on a 30 -day permit.
Martin Tritt: No, I'm on a 60 -day. Sixty-day is reasonable. I have no --
Mr. Gimenez: He's on a 30 -day permit.
314 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Winton: Well, there you go.
Commissioner Teele: But I'm not saying a 30 -day. I'm talking about waivers. I'm talking about
waivers of notice, waivers of this, waivers of even -- you can get with a bankruptcy lawyer and
draft it up. Even if you file bankruptcy, you can avoid.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if I can. I'm not going to chime in on the policy issue, and I
understand your policy issue. My concern is clearing that title at the appropriate time. And the
nature of many of the people -- I'm not talking about this gentleman, in particular -- many
people are -- they're very litigious. It's going to take me a long period of time, unless they agree
to some quick way out, once construction commences, something that I can go into court and I
can enforce. I'm certainly happy to look at that, but that's not the kind of cooperation we've
gotten. The cooperation we've gotten is ongoing litigation and recalcitrant tenants who refuse to
even address or talk to us.
Commissioner Teele: Well, maybe just -- we can cut through this, sir. I don't know you. Your
name is Mr. --
Mr. Tritt: Tritt.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Martin Tritt?
Mr. Tritt: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Would you be willing to sign such an agreement?
Mr. Tritt: Yes, sir. Sixty days would be reasonable. That's what I've been living on --
Commissioner Teele: With releases and waivers of notice and waivers of everything?
Mr. Tritt: Yes. That's what I've been living on for 24 years. I've been a tenant of this City for
24 years.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Well, you know, then you don't need to say any more. Then, now
you need to meet with the lawyer and see if we can work it out.
Mr. Tritt: All right. But I'm hoping that you will reconsider giving away a fuel facility, when it's
so hard to put one back, and giving up the sale of a half a million dollars ($500,000) debt --
Chairman Regalado: No, no. But this is not the issue. Martin, this is not the issue here.
Mr. Tritt: I understand that.
Chairman Regalado: You know what's coming there. You know what's coming.
315 July 25, 2002
Mr. Tritt: Yes, I know what's coming, and I will be very happy --
Chairman Regalado: So, he's offering --
Mr. Tritt: Sixty days is a reasonable time. I had 60 days. The first notice was 45. "Help me,
Howard" got them to give me another 15. Then we decided that you have to start the thing over
again. I am now living under August the 30. I will be happy to sign anything you want me to
sign.
Chairman Regalado: Did you just say that you will sign all --
Mr. Tritt: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'd kick him out today.
Commissioner Winton: Right after he finishes with "Help me, Howard."
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, I don't think we would have any problem. If he signs something
that says, if we give him 30 -day notice, he'll vacate within 30 days, that's not a problem. But we
did this in order to make sure that -- you know, we've got to be ahead of this curve.
Commissioner Teele: And, further, the understanding is, we're not going to give notice until
permits have been pulled or are in process, and it's a reasonable period of time. I mean, I just
don't think -- I think we're going to look real silly if we just vacate everybody, and then nothing
happens for a year or nothing happens for 6 months. So --
Mr. Tritt: My tanks don't have to be replaced until 2009.
Unidentified Speaker: If I may just —
Mr. Carlos: Yes, sir. We'll see if we can work it out.
Chairman Regalado: OK. That's it.
Commissioner Teele: If you can't work it out, then just let us know on August 22.
Mr. Tritt: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: That's it. OK.
Mr. Tritt: Thank you.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Tritt: I invite you all to come over and see my facility.
316 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: The guy you ought to be talking to is the guy who won the bid.
Chairman Regalado: Not -- we will not be able to go between August the 5th and August the 8.
Mr. Tritt: No, you won't.
Commissioner Teele: What?
Chairman Regalado: We will not be able to go between August the 5 and August the 8, because
the causeway will be closed east and west. And I had a question. Whoever gave that permit —
it's Bad Boys II. Whoever gave that permit -- is that the County or the State or the City?
Commissioner Teele: Florida DOT (Department of Transportation).
Chairman Regalado: Florida DOT. Did the City have anything to do with that? I don't know.
What is the ...
Commissioner Winton: Now, if we're going to take up other items here, --
Chairman Regalado: No, no. No. Johnny, since --
Commissioner Winton: -- then let's go back to the agenda.
Commissioner Teele: It's a pocket item.
Chairman Regalado: No, no. I'm just making a point, one simple thing. My point on this is that
these things should go before the Cultural and Entertainment Board, because I'll tell you what:
You know Bad Boys I, Bad Boys, was filmed on the same spot. But you know what squad cars
and uniforms appeared in the movie?
Commissioner Teele: What?
Commissioner Winton: Metro -Dade.
Chairman Regalado: Metro -Dade, OK? That's my point. That's all I wanted to say.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I want to say one other thing. Whoever gave the permit, we ought
to make them an honorary citizen of the City. Look, this thing is going to bring millions and
millions of dollars to this City. You know, "Miami Vice" may have given us a bad image, but it
created an image.
Commissioner Winton: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: And, you know, I think everything that Commissioner --
317 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Winton: The people still talk about it.
Chairman Regalado: I agree.
Commissioner Teele: And people still -- I think Commissioner Regalado is right. We ought to
be trying to work with them to make sure that they -- I don't know if we're doing it, but we ought
to make sure that we're working with the producers to make sure that the uniforms are right.
Chairman Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Teele: Are these good cops or bad cops, by the way?
Mr. Gimenez: They're good cops.
Commissioner Teele: I'm talking about -- I didn't see Bad Boy I, so I don't --
Mr. Gimenez: No. They're good cops. They're good. They're good, funny cops.
Commissioner Teele: But I will say this to you, Commissioner Regalado, with all due respect:
The one thing that the film industry wants is expedited approvals. They don't want to have to go
before boards and Commissions and --
Chairman Regalado: No, no, no, no.
Commissioner Sanchez: Pocket items. Let's go.
Commissioner Teele: But my -- Arthur, my point was not that. As a matter of fact, my point is
that the Board should expedite those permits, and should subsidize those permits, but that's my
idea.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
62. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GOLDEN
SANDS ALLAPATTAH CORPORATION, FOR THE USE OF 91000 SQUARE FEET OF
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1313 N.W. 36TH STREET FOR PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
OFFICE SPACE FOR INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION OF POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH
MONTHLY FEE OF $111250.00 ($15.00) PSF; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right, Mr. Chairman, let's go.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Pocket items. Commissioner Sanchez.
318 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have several items, but I'll be very brief. Pocket item
respectfully requesting the City Commission consider the following resolution authorizing the
City Manager to execute a lease agreement for office space to house the City Manager Police
Department Internal Affairs office, located at 1330 Northwest 36 Street. So move.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: What's it cost?
Chief Raul Martinez (Chief of Police, City of Miami): Commissioner, Chief Martinez. There's
a little correction. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) doing the annual cost, it went down slightly. Total
annual cost is $155,880.
Commissioner Teele: How much is the square foot, that's what he wants --
Vice Chairman Winton: No. The principal here. Why are we doing an economic item as a
pocket item that's not noticed for the public, nobody knows, and I thought, frankly, that we
weren't -- we don't do those, you know. Very seldom do we do pocket items that have real
dollars tied to them.
Commissioner Teele: But if it's coming up, it's coming up from the request of the management.
Vice Chairman Winton: No, I understand that, but that doesn't mean we have to respond.
Commissioner Teele: But, Johnny, you know, we tell them to jump through their fanny, they
jump --
Vice Chairman Winton: I know, I know. I'm just --
Commissioner Teele: -- and then we --
Unidentified Speaker: It's not a general fund impact, at all.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, explain that to me so I understand.
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, we're funding this out of the Law Enforcement Trust Fund, is
paying for this rental fee.
Commissioner Sanchez: And we basically have been on their tail to try to (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: And we get on them for like six months to get a ticket --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- to get them from under the Police Department and separate them,
which is probably the best thing they could do and a step in the right direction, to restore trust.
319 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: I don't disagree that, but why couldn't it get on the agenda? I mean,
they knew it was coming.
Commissioner Sanchez: I think the City Manager needs to respond to that, not me.
Mr. Martinez: And, Commissioner, we have been negotiating with the lessor for a long time,
back and forth.
Vice Chairman Winton: Right, right. That's my whole point. I mean, what they did takes time,
so what they did didn't just occur yesterday; it's been going on, so I just -- why couldn't it get on
the damn regular agenda so it gets noticed to the public we're going to spend that kind of
money?
Commissioner Teele: Good point.
Vice Chairman Winton: Call the question.
Chairman Regalado: OK. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
320 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-900
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
LEASE AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, WITH GOLDEN SANDS ALLAPATTAH CORPORATION,
(THE "LESSOR"), FOR THE USE OF APPROXIMATELY 9,000 SQUARE
FEET OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1313 N.W. 36TH STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA (THE "AREA"), FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING OFFICE
SPACE FOR THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS DIVISION OF THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT WITH A MONTHLY FEE OF $11,250.00 ($15.00) PSF FOR
THE PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR AND A $15.00 CHARGE PER HOUR FOR
OVERTIME AIR CONDITIONING USAGE; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND (LETF) PROJECT
NOS. 690011 69002, 69003, WITH ALL TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS
MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH IN SAID AGREEMENT.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
63. INSTRUCT MANAGER TO DIRECT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT TO WORK WITH ST. JUAN BOSCO HOMEOWNERSHIP CENTER, IN
UTILIZATION OF FUNDS SET ASIDE FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
Chairman Regalado : Another pocket item.
Commissioner Sanchez: Pocket item. It's a Community Development reference. Community
Development respectfully requests Department of Community Development work with St. Juan
Bosco Homeownership Center in the utilization of the funds. I have set aside money from
economic development. I would like the results of their meeting to be ready for presentation at
the next scheduled City Commission meeting in October.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
321 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-901
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT TO WORK WITH THE ST. JUAN BOSCO
HOMEOWNERSHIP CENTER, IN THE UTILIZATION OF
FUNDS SET ASIDE FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO COME BACK
WITH A RECOMMENDATION AT THE COMMISSION
MEETING CURRENTLY SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 101
2002.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
64. ACCEPT BID OF UNITECH BUILDERS, CORP., PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR
BIDS NO. 01-02-136, FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "JOSE MARTI PARK RECREATION
BUILDING, B-3258" $1,518,720; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT.
Commissioner Sanchez: Resolution of City of Miami Commission accepting the bid of Unitech
Builders, Corp., the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, pursuant to invitation for bid
number 01-02-136, dated June 4, 2002 for the project entitled "Jose Marti Park Recreational
Building" in the amount of 1.50 -- no, 1,518,720; allocating funds therefore from Capital
Improvement project number 331385, as appropriated by the annual appropriation and capital
improvement project ordinance, as amended, in the amount of 1,518,720 for the contract costs
322 July 25, 2002
and $450,773.20 for expenses; for a total estimate cost of $1,976,393.20, and authorizing the
City Manager to execute an agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney for said
purpose. All this is is the money's there and they have the bid and we need to move forward
with this project. So moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: But again, this is a pocket item, so the public hasn't seen anything
about it. It's something everybody in the City's known about for months. This didn't just
happen. How the --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, it --
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I'll --
Vice Chairman Winton: I mean -- but --
Mr. Gimenez: The bids --
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, please.
Albert Ruder (Director, Parks &Recreation): We just got the bids a few days ago. We don't
want to lose the whole month of August. It's funded from Safe Neighborhood and from the bond
(UNINTELLIGIBLE). It's a very important project for Little Havana.
Vice Chairman Winton: And you just got the bids?
Mr. Ruder: The bids came in. There was -- the low bid was a non -city vendor. We had to give
an opportunity to a City vendor to match it. They matched it and we just got the results. We
couldn't get it on the agenda.
Vice Chairman Winton: But -- yes, you could. You could have put it on the agenda, anticipating
that it was coming and defer it, pull it, like you do four or five things every meeting because you
didn't get it done, and then that way, we're not announcing to the public that "close your eyes.
We're going to spend $1,500,000" and nobody knows about it, and that's the only thing. It's not
-- it isn't as though we've done anything wrong.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Vice Chairman Winton: We've done everything right, but the principle to the public is that
when we're spending money, unless it's a real emergency where you had no other alternative to
think about it, you don't -- it's -- so --
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, I'm --
Vice Chairman Winton: But I'm still in favor.
323 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: No. I'm presenting this at the advice of the City administration --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- and Mr. Al Ruder. I mean, this is one of the pocket items that just --
Vice Chairman Winton: That's right. No, I understand completely.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right, so there's a motion. I move. Is there a second?
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
324 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-902
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING THE
BID OF UNITECH BUILDERS, CORP., THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE AND
RESPONSIBLE BIDDER PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 01-
02-136, DATED JUNE 4, 2002, FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "JOSE
MARTI PARK RECREATION BUILDING, B-3258" IN THE AMOUNT OF
$1,518,720; ALLOCATING FUND THEREFOR FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 3313851 AS APPROPRIATED BY THE
ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
ORDINANCES, AS AMENDED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,518,720 FOR THE
CONTRACT COSTS, AND $457,673.20 FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL
ESTIMATED COST OF $1,976,393.20; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE
TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
65. APPROVE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF SOUTH FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL AUTO
SHOW SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 8 THROUGH 17, 2002; AUTHORIZE
PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED THROUGHOUT CITY
THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: Pocket items.
Commissioner Sanchez: I have a banner. It's a request that the City Commission consider
cosponsoring the South Florida International Auto Show, which will be held November 8
through the 17. The South Florid Auto Truck --
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
325 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
10 Eel R[IX1 AMIX
A MOTION APPROVING THE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE SOUTH
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL AUTO SHOW SCHEDULED FOR
NOVEMBER 8 THROUGH 17, 2002; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED THROUGHOUT
CITY OF MIAMI THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
66. DIRECT MANAGER TO SCHEDULE ON AUGUST 22, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING
STATUS REPORT ON CONCERNS REGARDING SARMIENTO BUS BENCHES AND TO
MAKE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT FOR
PAYMENT BOND REQUIREMENTS.
Commissioner Sanchez: And this is directing the City Manager to present a status report on
concerns regarding Sarmiento bus benches raised by the City Commission at the July 25, 2002
meeting, and to recommend a modification of the agreement for the payment bond requirements.
So moved.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): That's for it to be put on the 22 agenda.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Winton: So is that what that just said?
326 July 25, 2002
Mr. Rollason: Well, the reason we were having a special meeting, we need that item to be on the
22 agenda and that's why it was given to him to be put on the special agenda.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Sanchez: I think that does it.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-904
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SCHEDULE ON THE
AUGUST 22, 2002 COMMISSION MEETING A STATUS REPORT ON
CONCERNS REGARDING SARMIENTO BUS BENCHES RAISED BY THE
CITY COMMISSION DURING TODAY'S MEETING AND TO MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION REGARDING MODIFICATION TO THE
AGREEMENT FOR THE PAYMENT BOND REQUIREMENTS.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
67. RELATED TO PEACE IN THE HOOD FESTIVAL, TO BE HELD ON STREETS OF
MIAMI ON AUGUST 17, 2002; AUTHORIZE WAIVER OF FEES AND PERMITS AND
PROVISION OF SERVICES, $10,200.00; AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR
SAID SERVICES, FROM SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT; SAID AUTHORIZATIONS
CONDITIONED UPON ORGANIZERS.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Would anybody --
Commissioner Teele: I have one item.
327 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: I have --
Chairman Regalado: Would you --
Vice Chairman Winton: -- five.
Chairman Regalado: -- do this pocket item?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I have one item, and I ask the Attorney -- the Police to pay
attention to this. This is a resolution of the Miami City Commission related to the Peace In The
Hood Festival, to take place on Saturday, August 17, authorizing fee waivers and permits
permissible by law, and providing provision of services, a non-cash provision of services, for
City functions, not to exceed $10,200 and allocating from said special events account as noted.
The funds are available, and I would note that this is on 15 Street. 15 Street is where the John
Doe boys were, and this is one of the most difficult areas in the entire City of Miami. We had a
famous DJ (Disc Jockey) who was gunned down a year ago and the community out there really
wants to honor him and to get the Police Chief involved in having a very peaceful, you know --
We've taken that area back. This is adjacent to public housing, between 54 and 79. Really
between 62, I guess, and 79, and it's a very difficult area, and I would particularly ask the Police
Department and the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office to work closely with this
Albert Moss Foundation in trying to really bring about more stability in that neighborhood. I
would so move.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
328 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 02-905
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO THE
PEACE IN THE HOOD FESTIVAL, TO BE HELD ON THE STREETS OF
MIAMI ON AUGUST 17, 2002; AUTHORIZING THE WAIVER OF FEES
AND PERMITS PERMISSIBLE BY LAW AND THE PROVISION OF
SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,200.00; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR SAID SERVICES,
FROM THE SPECIAL EVENTS ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000921054.289;
SAID AUTHORIZATIONS CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1)
OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; AND (2)
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by 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
68. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 12128, ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE TO REVISE CERTAIN OPERATIONAL AND
BUDGETARY APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 20021
AND TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
"SOLID WASTE REMOVAL PILOT PROGRAM".
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Teele, would you do this pocket item?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Chairman Regalado: It's about the One -Armed Bandit. It's to implement the --
Commissioner Teele: This is an emergency ordinance of the City of Miami, amending ordinance
-- do you really want to do this? -- Ordinance Number 12128, as amended, the annual
appropriations ordinance to --
329 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: I can tell already.
Commissioner Teele: I can't do this. I'll move it if the Attorney will read it into the record, but
this is like major league, changing everything around at 1 o'clock in the morning.
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): We need a second, please.
Chairman Regalado: It's been second.
Vice Chairman Winton: How much are we spending?
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): 5.5 total.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): $5.5 million --
Chairman Regalado: It was --
Mr. Gimenez: -- in order to convert to the One -Armed Bandit system citywide in order for us to
get ahead of it and not have to wait till September to start the process. I mean, it's something
that the Commission wanted us to do. This was -- supposedly -- initially, created as a three-year
project, but you all wanted to get it done now so that's -- we need to appropriate the money.
Mr. Rollason: Four million would come out of this year; 1.5 out of next year's budget, the
capital budget.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion --
Vice Chairman Winton: We're only pressing on close to 7,000,000 in pocket items in five
minutes. We're doing good tonight.
Commissioner Teele: I knew you were going to say something. I move the item out of respect
for the Chairman.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'll second it out of the same respect.
Chairman Regalado: OK, thank you very much. I mean, it wasn't --
Commissioner Teele: I hope they're saying nice things about you (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Flores
right now.
330 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It wasn't even me. I mean, I wasn't supposed to do that, but anyway, roll
call. Before we leave --
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Sir, I'm sorry.
Mr. Rollason: Second, second.
Vice Chairman Winton: Second roll call.
Chairman Regalado: Second roll call.
Vice Chairman Winton: I have plenty of pocket items, so don't go away.
Ms. Thompson: The ordinance has been adopted as emergency.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 121281 AS
AMENDED, THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE
TO REVISE CERTAIN OPERATIONAL AND BUDGETARY
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 20021 AND TO INCREASE
APPROPRIATIONS IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 353019, "SOLID WASTE REMOVAL PILOT PROGRAM";
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman Winton for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispending 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
331 July 25, 2002
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12268.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
69. APPOINT SYLVANO BIGNON, ANDY LOUIS CHARLES, ELENA CARPENTER,
ALLEN SWEENY, ROBERT MASRIEH, JOHN HOLCOMBE, KATHLEEN MORRIS AND
VALERIE RICORDI AS MEMBERS OF COCONUT GROVE PARKING ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Johnny, would -- in your pocket items, would you do the Coconut
Grove Parking Advisory Committee? We need to appoint the members and --
Commissioner Teele: That's Item 31 ?
Chairman Regalado: Item 31.
Vice Chairman Winton: Would you like me to Chair? Is that what you're asking?
Chairman Regalado: Yes, please.
Vice Chairman Winton: Yes. You're recognized Chairman Regalado.
Chairman Regalado: OK. I move that the Commission reappoint the seats currently held by the
following persons: Sylvano Bignon, Andy Louis Charles, Elena Carpenter, Allen Sweeny. The
Commission at large is request to confirm reappointment of four individuals recommended by
the Coconut Grove Village Council; Frank Balzebre, John Holcombe, Kathleen Morris and
Valerie Ricordi and the Commission at large is requested to confirm the reappointment of Robert
Masrieh, recommended by the Off -Street Parking Authority, so in all, the motion is to confirm
nine members of the Coconut Grove Parking Advisory Committee.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have a motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
332 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: Second. Now, Commissioner Regalado, we need to make a
modification. Frank Balzebre, who has been a very, very active community person in Coconut
Grove for a long, long time and serves on a number of these boards, is resigning from all of these
boards because he has joined my staff.
Chairman Regalado: Well, I can --
Vice Chairman Winton: And he's standing right back here, Frank Balzebre.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, but can -- can he be -- well --
Vice Chairman Winton: Can he be on this?
Chairman Regalado: -- he can be a member of -- I think he could.
Vice Chairman Winton: We have to ask the City Attorney. He doesn't want to be.
Chairman Regalado: Oh, that's another thing. He doesn't want to be.
Vice Chairman Winton: I'm not sure why he wouldn't want to be.
Chairman Regalado: But I don't have any other name here, other than his.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, why wouldn't you want to? Well --
Commissioner Teele: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
Vice Chairman Winton: He's on my -- huh?
Frank Balzebre: I have enough to do with your agenda.
Vice Chairman Winton: He has enough to do with my agenda, so he declines.
Chairman Regalado: Yeah, OK, but I don't have a name.
Vice Chairman Winton: Well, we'll have to get one next time, so you're going to move to
appoint -- we're going to move eight of the nine. Frank Balzebre will come off. We have -- so -
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: So --
Chairman Regalado: That's my motion.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, and accept the modification. Mr. Second?
333 July 25, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Winton: OK, got a motion and a second on the eight. All in -- any further
discussion? Being none, all in favor, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye
Vice Chairman Winton: Like sign opposed. Motion carries.
The following resolution was introduced by Chairman Regalado, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-906
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE COCONUT GROVE
PARKING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED
HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
70. APPROVE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF KNIGHT CENTER TRIBUTE TO AMERICA;
AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED THROUGHOUT
CITY THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, Johnny, on your pocket items.
Vice Chairman Winton: I have a number of -- I'll do the two banner ones first. Banner, co-
sponsorship, James L. Knight Center, a patriotic event. What is it? A Tribute to America. So
move.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
334 July 25, 2002
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved for its adoption:
10EelR[IX1 AMIYl
A MOTION APPROVING THE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE KNIGHT
CENTER TRIBUTE TO AMERICA; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED THROUGHOUT
THE CITY OF MIAMI THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
71. AUTHORIZE MANGER TO EXECUTE GRANT OF EASEMENT TO FLORIDA
POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AT DAVID KENNEDY PARK LOCATED AT 2476 SOUTH
BAYSHORE DRIVE, TWELVE FOOT STRIP EASEMENT OF PERPETUAL, NON-
EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT ON PROPERTY, FOR CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UTILITY FACILITIES, WITH RIGHT
TO RECONSTRUCT, IMPROVE, CHANGE VOLTAGE, AND REMOVE SUCH
FACILITIES OR ANY OF THEM WITHIN EASEMENT.
Vice Chairman Winton: Code bannership creative camps advertise banners for promotion of
haunted house at Shops at -- Shops at Sunset Place? Why are we doing that? No way.
Chairman Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Winton: It says promotion of haunted house at the Shops at Sunset Place. I'm
reading it right there in front of me.
Chairman Regalado: Well, we can annex South Miami.
Vice Chairman Winton: A resolution -- next one is a resolution authorizing the City Manager to
execute a grant of easement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, to Florida Power and
Light, at the David Kennedy Park, located at 2476 South Bayshore Drive. This is recommended
from Laura Billberry. So moved.
335 July 25, 2002
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have 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. 02-908
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANGER TO
EXECUTE A GRANT OF EASEMENT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO FLORIDA
POWER & LIGHT COMPANY AT DAVID KENNEDY PARK
LOCATED AT 2476 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, A TWELVE
(12) FOOT STRIP EASEMENT, AS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND
MADE A PART HEREOF, OF PERPETUAL, NON-
EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT ON THE PROPERTY, FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UTILITY FACILITIES, WITH
THE RIGHT TO RECONSTRUCT, IMPROVE, CHANGE THE
VOLTAGE, AND REMOVE SUCH FACILITIES OR ANY OF
THEM WITHIN THE EASEMENT.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
72. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ACENTECH, INC. TO PROVIDE AIRPORT NOISE
REDUCTION AND ABATEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES, $25,000.
336 July 25, 2002
Vice Chairman Winton: We also have a resolution authorizing negotiation and execution of a
professional services agreement with a consultant for airport noise. Now, this is a crucial issue.
Commissioner Teele: (INAUDIBLE) pocket item?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: But that's important.
Vice Chairman Winton: But you see, we talked about -- here's the point. We talked about this
some time ago with the Manager and they were supposed to get this done some time ago. We
had already agreed that we were going to hire a noise consultant.
Commissioner Teele: Why isn't it on the agenda?
Vice Chairman Winton: That's a good question. You should ask the Manager. He should have
had it on the agenda.
Commissioner Teele: Now you know how we feel.
Vice Chairman Winton: No, no. You were -- No, I've got another one, yet, so we ain't done, so
-- but the reason this has to get done now -- should have been on the agenda before; should have
been on this agenda; should have been on three agendas ago, but the county is about to make
some serious decisions moving into the fall. As Commissioner Regalado pointed out at the last
Commission meeting, we are without expertise at the table. I've had meetings with them.
They're running right over us like we don't even exist. It's a steamroller (UNINTELLIGIBLE),
so this is to get us a consultant that can argue with those folks toe -to -toe on all the technical blah,
blah, blah, blah that they're really good at pointing out. So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
337 July 25, 2002
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 02-909
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND
EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH ACENTECH, INC. TO PROVIDE AIRPORT NOISE
REDUCTION AND ABATEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES,
FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM ACCOUNT CODE
001000.921002,6.270.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
73. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO RETAIN OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO DEFEND CITY
IN ANY CHALLENGE OF CITY'S INTEREST IN ITS AGREEMENT WITH RACEWORKS
LLC, ALLOCATE $25,000 FROM NON -DEPARTMENTAL SERVICES ACCOUNT.
Vice Chairman Winton: Two more. Another $25,000.
Commissioner Sanchez: What?
Vice Chairman Winton: Another $25,000. At least it wasn't 5,000,000. A resolution of the City
Miami Commission authorizing the City Attorney to retain outside counsel, as may be necessary
may be, may not be -- that may be necessary to defend the City of Miami in any challenge to the
City's interest in its agreement with Raceworks LLC; allocating funds in an amount not to
exceed $25,000 from non -departmental services, and the point here is that, as we all know, there
is an absolute full core press on the part of the folks in Homestead to do anything and everything
that they can think of at any particular time to blow this race up, including during August when
we're at break, so if there's some sort of shenanigan pulled during August while we're at break,
this simply authorizes the City Attorney to hire whatever outside legal counsel that he may need.
338 July 25, 2002
This simply loads his guns. It doesn't mean that he has to pull the trigger, but his gun is loaded
if he needs --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Winton: -- to pull the trigger. So moved.
Chairman Regalado: We have 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. 02-910
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
CITY ATTORNEY TO RETAIN OUTSIDE COUNSEL AS MAY BE
NECESSARY TO DEFEND THE CITY OF MIAMI IN ANY CHALLENGE TO
THE CITY'S INTEREST IN ITS AGREEMENT WITH RACEWORKS, LLC;
ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000, FROM
NON-DEPARTMENTAL/LEGAL SERVICES FUND FOR SUCH SERVICES.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
74. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 11557, WHICH
ESTABLISHED INITIAL RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR SPECIAL
REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN", TO INCREASE
APPROPRIATIONS, $211,938, CONSISTING OF GRANT FROM FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, $158,953, AND IN-KIND SERVICES
MATCH, $52,985.
Vice Chairman Winton: Last one. We need to accept a grant -- "Stop Violence Against
Women" grant renewal in the amount of $158,000?
339 July 25, 2002
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Joe Longueira: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: So moved.
Mr. Longueira: He's got to read the ordinance.
Vice Chairman Winton: Oh, sorry.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion --
Commissioner Sanchez: See, you're accepting money.
Chairman Regalado: -- and a second.
Vice Chairman Winton: I think accepting money's a pretty good idea at night.
Chairman Regalado: A motion and a second. Read the ordinance.
Priscilla A. Thompson (City Clerk): Roll call.
Chairman Regalado: Roll call.
Ms. Thompson: Second roll call. The emergency ordinance passes.
340 July 25, 2002
An Ordinance Entitled --
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11557, AS AMENDED, ADOPTED
OCTOBER 14, 1997, WHICH ESTABLISHED INITIAL RESOURCES AND
APPROPRIATED FUND FOR A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED:
"STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN", TO INCREASE
APPROPRIATIONS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $211,938, CONSISTING OF A
GRANT FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $158,953 AND IN-KIND SERVICES
MATCH IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,985; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO: (1) ACCEPT SAID GRANT AND EXECUTE THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, (2) EXPEND MONIES FROM THIS FUND FOR NECESSARY
EXPENSES TO CONTINUE THE OPERATION OF THE PROGRAM; AND
(3) EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS WITH
INDIVIDUALS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY,
FOR THE PROVISION OF VICTIM ADVOCATE SERVICES AND A VICTIM
ADVOCATE ADMINISTRATOR, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $150,500, FOR A ONE-YEAR PERIOD, WITH THE OPTION TO
RENEW FOR TWO ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; FURTHER
ALLOCATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $41,619 FROM THE POLICE
GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE REQUIRED IN-KIND
MATCHING FUNDS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
341 July 25, 2002
was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, seconded by Commissioner Teele, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispending 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12269.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
75. APPROVE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF HAUNTED HOUSE AT SHOPS AT SUNSET
PLACE; AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED
THROUGHOUT CITY THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Vice Chairman Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Vice Chairman Winton: The one thing that I said no to -- I just received additional information.
The additional information is that the group that wants to -- co-sponsorship of the banners is a
City of Miami not-for-profit group that's trying to do fundraising and they're not asking us for
any money; they're going somewhere else to raise the funds, so so moved.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor, say "aye."
342 July 25, 2002
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Winton, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 02-911
A MOTION APPROVING THE CO-SPONSORSHIP OF THE
HAUNTED HOUSE AT THE SHOPS AT SUNSET PLACE;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE PLACEMENT OF BANNERS
ON LIGHT POLES LOCATED THROUGHOUT CITY OF
MIAMI THOROUGHFARES TO PROMOTE SAID EVENT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: If I just may. As we celebrate the City of Miami's birthday in such a
beautiful and diversified community, tomorrow we invite each and every one of you to go to the
viernes culturales on 8th Street and Saturday to attend the Lyric Theater, where we will celebrate
the City of Miami's -- or as J.L. Plummer used to say, the City of Miami birthday, so we hope to
see you there.
Chairman Regalado: OK, thank you.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, this is -- you can go into recess until August
22.
Chairman Regalado: We are. Thank you.
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:57 A.M. AND
RECONVENED AUGUST 22, 20021 AT 2:43 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COMMISSION PRESENT, EXCEPTING COMMISSIONER TEELE.
343 July 25, 2002