HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2002-10-07 MinutesMINUTES OF LEGISLATIVE WORKSHOP OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 7th day of October 2002, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at the Orange
Bowl Athletic Club, 1501 Northwest 3rd Street, Miami, Florida, in special session.
The meeting was called to order at 4:41 p.m. by Chairman Tomas Regalado, with the following
members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4)
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5)
ABSENT
Commissioner Angel Gonzalez (District 1)
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton (District 2)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
ALSO PRESENT:
Carlos Gimenez, City Manager
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk
Fatima Perez, Senior Advisor/Intergovernmental Affairs
Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager/Operations
Robert Nachlinger, Assistant City Manager/Finance & Administration
Laura Billberry, Director, Asset Management
Keith Carswell, Acting Director, Real Estate & Economic Development
October 7, 2002
DIS CUS$I N CON --CERN ITG T'HE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA IF -OR UMAS,- IVE
2003.',
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez will not be able to make it, neither Commissioner
Winton, nor Commissioner Gonzalez. So, that's good news for you, because it'd be short, and
that's good news for us. Then we can divide all the things we want between Commissioner
Teele and myself. Anyway, we are going to start and let's -- Art, do you want to do the pledge
of allegiance?
At this point, Commissioner Teele led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. So, we have an agenda here. Hey, you're here.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Note for the Record: Commissioner Sanchez entered the meeting at 4:43 p.m.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We just began. So, Mr. Manager, if you want to start.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. We're here to discuss our upcoming
legislative agenda for the next legislative session in the year 2003. With us is our lobbyist and
consultant, Ronald Book, who will be giving us an outlook into the state of the State for next
fiscal year. And then we'll facilitate our discussions -- your discussions in terms of what your
legislative priorities will be for next year. We will take the comments from this workshop and
come up with a product, which we will then bring to the Commission for your action which will
tell us and direct our lobbyists in the State as to exactly what it is that the City of Miami is
wishing to pursue in the next legislative session. So, without further ado, I want to introduce
Ron Book, who will help us through this workshop.
Ron Book: Thank you, Mr. Manager, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. I want to
spend, if I could, Mr. Chairman, a little indulgence, a few minutes before we get into the
substance of the proposal, talking a little bit about what I think is facing the Legislature, the
Governor, and local governments, and, for that matter, community based organizations
throughout the State over the next 12, if not 24 months. I just -- I got back here just in time from
a meeting in Ft. Pierce with Senator Kent Pruitt, who is going to be the incoming Appropriations
Chairman in the Senate. And we spent several hours pretty much going through what I thought
the future was and there wasn't much off of the script that I'm about to describe to you that he
disagreed with. First of all, everything's about the budget. The budget opens this year with a
billion dollar ($1,000,000,000) hole from last year. When I left the Governor's office in 1982,
the State budget was just over eighteen billion dollars ($18,000,000,000). The budget today is
just over fifty billion dollars ($50,000,000,000). So, in approximately 20 years, the budget has
tripled. Over the last ten years, we've raised virtually no revenue in this State. The foreseeable
future bodes about the same. For those people who think this Legislature -- no matter who the
Governor is -- is going to raise revenue, I would suggest to them that they take a snapshot of
Representative Johnny Bird, the Speaker Designate, because he will make Speaker Feeney look
2 October 7, 2002
like a George McGovern liberal. Because in the case of Johnny Bird, he's about twelve steps
further to the right on fiscal policy than the prior Speaker's leadership in the Florida House of
Representatives. So I've already described to you that we've got a billion dollar
($1,000,000,000) hole, because what they did was they funded a billion dollars ($1,000,000,000)
of recurring items that will be back in front of them with one-time non-recurring revenue.
Aggravating that problem is you have a billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) of additional issues to
deal with at the front end of the budget, because you've got a billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) of
growth in education and a billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) of growth in Medicaid. When you get
done with that two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) that you've got to fill on the front end of this
budget, you then get to the two issues that we put into the Constitution four years ago. One, is
the bullet train, Commissioner Teele, that you know so very much about, more so than probably
all of the rest of the people in the State of Florida combined. And as each of us knows, they're
trying to do a privatized deal on the bullet train, but it's still going to cost us fifty or a hundred
million dollars ($100,000,000) in general revenue. Then we've got that other issue that
Commissioner Teele also, unlike a lot of people in this room, as he came from the County
knows, we've got new little issue called Article 5. That's also in the Constitution from four
years ago. And it's time to pay the piper, because we've now got to fund the Article 5 issue. In
Dade County alone, when Commissioner Teele left the County Commission, the Article 5 clause
to Dade County was a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000). Today, it's closer to a hundred
and twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000). In Broward County, it's eighty-five million and
growing and in Palm Beach County, it's sixty-five million dollars ($65,000,000) and growing.
And ladies and gentlemen, we can go to the other 64 counties and total it up. It's in excess of a
billion dollars ($1,000,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Book.
Mr. Book: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: What did we come here for?
Mr. Book: What I'm coming for is to tell you --
Commissioner Teele: I mean, it sounds like a funeral.
Mr. Book: It is a funeral, Commissioner Teele. And I think that it's -- I think that you'll see in
the next statement where I am going, because on the Article 5 issue, Commissioner, they're
going to go after revenue sharing for the County, and if the portion of revenue sharing --
Mr. Gimenez: Ron, what is Article 5?
Mr. Book: Article 5 is the court system, Mr. Manager. And it has always been the State's
responsibility to reimburse local governments for their costs of operating the courts. Those are
conflict cases. Those are anything and everything related to the Clerk's budgets that aren't
funded with fees. Those are things related to the judges that aren't covered by fees.
Commissioner Teele: State's Attorney and Public Defender.
3 October 7, 2002
Mr. Book: That's correct. And all those complications, Mr. Manager, all those complications
that the PD (Police Department) doesn't handle, and they go out and they hire outside public
defenders for, and they run up the cost. They're into the hundred million dollar ($100,000,000)
plus range over the course of a combined pot on an annual basis. That's a big problem and it
becomes your problem, because I believe that one of the legislative solutions you're going to see
is they're going to go after revenue sharing that the Counties get. Now, I don't know what the
total revenue sharing pot that the Counties get. But, trust me on this one. If that's not adequate
to save and solve that problem, they're going to come after the City's portion. And nobody
wants to talk about that today, because that's the great secret out there. But you can be assured
they don't have the revenues today to solve the Article 5 problem, and those people who think
that revenue sharing is a sacred cap, and those people who think you're entitled to revenue
sharing, I would only remind you what the Legislature gives by statute, the Legislature can take
away by statute. And that is an issue that we need to be concerned with. So, Commissioner
Teele, that's part of where I was headed. The other part of where I'm heading is that we all need
to be aware of what's happening in November, because an informed public is a smart public.
What people need to understand is although the Pre -K initiative of Mayor Pinellas' may be the
grandest thing since sliced bread and apple pie, it cost four hundred and twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000) this year in the budget, money the State of Florida current does not have.
In addition, you have Senator Meeks, Congressman -elect Meeks' classroom size initiative, which
is twenty-eight billion dollars ($28,000,000,000), with a `B," on the high end of the estimate, ten
billion on the low end, and the first year alone is going to cost you between three and four billion
dollars ($4,000,000,000). Why do I bother to tell you about that? Because, Mr. Chairman,
members of this Commission, it is a bleak future as far as the State of Florida goes. And I think
everybody needs to be aware that we'd all like classroom size to be at 18, 20 and 22 students,
respectively, but if we approve that Constitutional amendment, the future of where local
governments get money from the State, whether we're talking about Jackson Memorial, which is
not your concern, but it certainly is your constituents' concern; where you get transportation
dollars, although a lot of that is protected through the trust fund; where you get money for
everything to eradicate to West Nile mosquito to the storm water money that we've enjoyed such
great success with over the last seven years, all comes out the general revenue pot of money.
And there will not be money -- there will be not money, Chief Bryson, to fund your needs in
emergency management. That, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Teele, Commissioner Sanchez,
that will fall on your ad valorem tax base and that is the problem that I wanted to outline to you
on the front end. I think you need to be aware that the future is not great. With that, Mr.
Chairman, Mr. Manager, members of the Commission, I'd like to turn to the beginning of the
proposal that your staff has prepared and begin to walk you through my thoughts on some of
these.
Chairman Regalado: Ron.
Mr. Book: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: So, I guess what you're saying is that we should look for the priorities, and
among those priorities they should be those who do not cost money to the State. And what I
mean is we probably have more chances of amending laws and trying to get some more power to
4 October 7, 2002
the City than in fighting for a grant that we will never get. Because, remember, you have, in
Dade County alone, five new Representatives, five new State Representatives. Those people
were elected, swearing and promising that they would die before they would raise taxes and that
they would, you know, fight for the people. And they got to be up in two more years. They've
got to come back in two more years. So, you know, these people are going to be reluctant to
provide any funds at all. So I would think that probably you should give us an idea of what are
the priorities that you have that are non -money issues. We have a better chance.
Mr. Book: Mr. Chairman, I will try to do that. I will state a couple of things in addition, and
then we'll start to discuss the matter. First of all, you are one hundred percent right. You stand a
far better chance of taking issues and amending statutes than we do of getting appropriations
issued. I think, as a general statement, we won't really be able to fairly advise you as to what we
think the money situation will be until we get through the November election. I think the goal
today should be to go through this booklet, determine -- and I've been through all of the
proposals. I've spent a good part of last evening going through everything that your staff has put
together. But what we should do is go through those items, say the ones -- tell you the ones I
think have an opportunity, ones that you think you want, whether or not I think it's got a good
chance or it doesn't have a good chance. Because, as you and I just described earlier,
sometimes, even when you don't bring something can pass, you still have to go out and fight for
it, fight like hell. And maybe it doesn't happen this year, but maybe it happens next year. And I
think we must bring those. And I will tell you those. I think there are some issues here -- we've
got, unfortunately, a lot of very good ideas that the staff has put together, but you're going to
come to a list that long, and we don't have the ability to pass a list that long. And so, I think
what we've got to begin to do is determine what issue, first, second, third, fifth, and eighth
priority and sort of move from there, Mr. Chairman. But I would not say "no" to money until
after the November election. And I still think we ought to have a couple of projects ready to go.
Thank you. I think we still should have a couple of projects ready to go should we get to
January, February and we find that the revenue collections went up and that it, in fact, gives us
more of an opportunity to provide for the needs of your citizens. My point over the last 15
minutes really was to put a proper spin on how bad things are in Florida. I think people aren't in
touch, Commissioner, with what's going on out there. And I think when people talk about, you
know, wanting to get this and to get that, I think it's only fair for me to tell you the way I feel,
because you know I play this process 365 days out of the year, and I particularly play the
appropriations process, and it is very depressing as to what I think we've got to look forward to
in the coming months and the coming years. I don't think this is a problem that will be over with
in 2003. I think we're in for it for a while. I might add that revenue collections are actually up
somewhere between twenty-five and thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) a month above what
they had originally projected. But so if we're lucky and that holds, maybe we've got four or five
hundred million dollars ($500,000,000) to spend of additional money, but that gets eaten up with
that growth that I described to you that's in excess of a billion dollars ($1,000,000,000). With
that, if I could, the first page of the booklet deals with the Department of Asset Management.
And their first item deals with a real property tax exemption that exists today that they would
like to fix and solve. And, the fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, this is exactly what you're
talking about, because here is a way, whereas you don't get a direct appropriation, but if you
change this statute, this is real recurring revenue to your City tax base. And this is an idea that I
think will have some difficulty passing, but I think it is a very good proposal to move forward
5 October 7, 2002
and advance. This is the kind of proposal that sometimes takes two years to get done. We ought
to go with this full board. This is one of those that I think has potential. I've not talked to any
staff. I've not talked to the incoming Chairs of those two committees in the House and the
Senate at this point, but this is an issue whereas, Mr. Chairman, the times are changing so the
pitch to the Legislature becomes different. It becomes a pitch to the Legislature about how, with
a diminishing pot of money to fund projects, how you can amend statutes to give relief to local
governments. If you're going to tell local governments they're going to have to increase taxes in
order to pick up services that the State isn't funding, this is the way to do that. So I would
suggest that is a good proposal. And I would -- again, I have to look to the City Attorney to give
us a draft on these items in order to advance them. That might be an item, Mr. Chairman, that
we might do as a bill, as opposed to doing it in the amendatory process, because that is an issue
we would want out there for the world to look at so that it gets debated and committed.
Chairman Regalado: I read that book.
Mr. Book: Pardon me?
Chairman Regalado: That I read this book and this is what I got.
Mr. Book: That's what you have out of it? There you go, Commissioner.
Chairman Regalado: So it's simplified.
Mr. Gimenez: Ron, on that issue -- you know, just talking to Alex -- I mean, I look at this -- you
know, it's a great idea, but isn't this similar to the Sebring issue where it really needs to be an
amendment and it can't be a statute?
Mr. Book: I got to trust your City Attorney to give you that guidance. What I try not to do with
you guys is get into the lawyering part of it because, frankly, I rely on your City Attorney to
make sure I don't make a mistake on your behalf. And if that's the case, then we need to do it in
joint resolution form. That does not mean we should not advance this issue. OK? We can do
that. Alex, if you believe that is a joint resolution issue, let's move it forward in that fashion. I -
- you have another proposal or two in here like that.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): I think Lori has suggested another alternative that goes
directly to the constitutional amendment that was -- the problem that was created by the Sebring
decision --
Mr. Book: I got you.
Mr. Vilarello: -- the Supreme Court decision of Sebring. So it's one of the other issues that's
addressed here and, likewise, at this point, I'm kind of listening to see if the Commission gives
us direction that, with regard --
Mr. Book: OK.
6 October 7, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: -- to any of these particular issues, before we get --
Mr. Book: Very good.
Mr. Vilarello: -- down to the details of the legal issues.
Mr. Book: Next issue is the Value Adjustment Board hearing, which would give you, I guess,
more of a say in the Value Adjustment Board hearings from the City's perspective because of
your state. I read the memo attached to the back. I'm not sure what the Schultz memo means. I
-- because to me, either you have authority to be in or you don't, and just because Steve Schultz
wrote a memo saying he doesn't think you should have standing to be there doesn't mean that
that's what the state of the law is today. I'm -- you know, I stand at the will of the Commission
as to what you want to do on the Value Adjustment Board issue.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioners, in the past you've asked us and we have retained representatives
to be at the Value Adjustment Board. This is where properties -- property owners go down and
try to get their property values reduced, because we felt that there was a lot of money slipping
through our hands and the Value Adjustment Board was giving these reduced evaluations left,
and right and it was really causing us a problem. I guess we got a memo saying -- I guess we can
be present but you can't be adversarial. We can't put our point of view. We can't cross-examine
anybody. So, basically, we're just there to --
Commissioner Sanchez: So, what's the purpose?
Mr. Gimenez: I mean, a nice piece of furniture, I guess.
Laura Billberry (Director of Asset Management): Right now we are providing input to the
Special Master. We can direct questions through the Special Master but there's no requirement
that they listen to us or that we have an opportunity to object to testimony that's being made. So
this -- we're just looking to enhance our ability not only to appear, but actually be able to address
the objector to the value adjustment and be able to present evidence for the Special Master to
consider.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Unidentified speaker: OK. Other questions?
Mr. Book: Next item is the funding for the library in Little Haiti Park. I would just suggest to
you that if we're going to be successful on this item, Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Book, on the Value Adjustment Board item.
Mr. Book: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: One of the observations that I will make is that I think that this City relies
a little bit too heavily on the legislative process and not on the State process. And I think
7 October 7, 2002
Governor Bush has brought, you know, this whole -- to the Governor's credit, to the legislative
process' detriment, the government has moved a lot of things that were always just legislative
into a quasi -executive, you know, budget office, you know. And, you know, it's very difficult to
get things through the legislature today that have not been properly vetted through the executive
or through the administration in some ways. This is not an executive versus legislative issue.
This is a legal judiciary versus legislative issue in my judgment. And I want to reaffirm, Mr.
Book, that it's my understanding that you all are retained -- your team is retained to represent us
in Tallahassee and, you know, I remember using you a lot with the Cabinet and other agencies.
I'm not sure this item should even be here. It is a legislative issue.
Mr. Book: DOR.
Commissioner Teele: I think this is a DOR but I really think is a legal -- lobbyist legal meeting
with the Attorney General. I think the Attorney General could resolve this question. Mr. Schultz
is a fine man. He's been the lawyer for the Value Adjustment Board ever since they've had a
Value Adjustment Board, probably, you know, four or five hundred thousand dollar ($500,000) a
year client to him, and he's a wonderful man. But I don't think he should be making decisions --
Mr. Book: I agree.
Commissioner Teele: -- about the City of Miami's ability to -- you know, and I don't think the
fact that he's ruled that way should mean that it should go to the legislature necessarily. I think
somewhere between the lobbyist, Mr. Book, and the lawyer, and the Manager, somewhere we
ought to figure out -- we've got an Attorney General and an Attorney General's opinion trumps
Mr. Schultz' opinion, I would think.
Mr. Vilarello: The problem we have is it's a standing issue -- whether or not the municipality
has standing. The affected property owner clearly has standing. The County has standing.
Commissioner Teele: Are you suggesting, though, that the standing issue can be resolved by
counsel --
Mr. Vilarello: I think that --
Commissioner Teele: -- to the Adjustment Board, who is not a sworn officer of the state?
Mr. Vilarello: We've done the research on it. We have nothing to the contrary, so a legislative
change would be good. But I agree that administratively, this could be addressed with the
Attorney General, as well.
Commissioner Teele: But don't you think that the Attorney General's opinion would trump Mr.
Schultz' opinion?
Mr. Vilarello: It would be -- I think it would be controlling on that Board.
Unidentified speaker: What if the opinion agrees with his opinion?
8 October 7, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: Then we could always look at the legislative change.
Mr. Book: Well, that would not -- I don't necessarily agree with that. I mean, just because the
Attorney General says something doesn't necessarily make it binding, either. I would suggest to
you that if the Attorney General were to rule adversely, I think you go to the Department of
Revenue and you try to determine if, under Section 193, the Department has any authority to
promulgate a rule, that would then be passed down. I don't know the answer to that one way or
the other.
Commissioner Teele: Doesn't the Cabinet -- I don't know how the change in the law reads --
Mr. Book: It hasn't changed that. Commissioner, they still sit there exactly the way you and I
have always known them to be, and that is the quorum which this issue would ultimately get to if
you did not get satisfaction in meeting with Dr. Zengali.
Commissioner Teele: See, let me -- and I don't want to sidetrack this, because I think this is a
very important issue, and I think staff is doing the right thing in getting the issue before us. And
one of the dirty, ugly secrets of this City -- of this government process has been the fact that
people, as far back as Frank Borman, since he's not around to defend himself, have lived in
houses. And when Frank Borman left, his house was on the rolls for sixty thousand or forty
thousand dollars ($40,000) and he sold his house for three or four million dollars ($4,000,000).
So, I mean, there's always been -- we see it in Park West, which is why, you know, we talked
about taking strong exception from some of the budget and the out year budget estimates on
revenue, because this is what's happening. The Asset Management Office has done a credible
job, I think, of going out now and flushing out properties that are on the tax rolls that are
substantially below the appraised value. But that's a one trick pony. That's a one revenue pony.
Once you put them on the rolls at a reasonable rate, you can't say that the rolls -- you know, just
because the rolls went up 14 percent this year, that does not mean that the rolls are going to go
up 14 percent next year, because a lot of that stuff I can tell you is coming out of Park West. It's
coming out of Park West and some of these other areas. So the point that I'm making, I guess,
Mr. Book, is simply this: I really do believe that this is an important issue, but I think it's an
important issue that we should not -- the counties have more lobbyists, as a general body, than
the municipalities, is that a fair statement?
Mr. Book: That's a true statement.
Commissioner Teele: So I don't think we ought to -- if we're going to have a hard time, we
ought to pick and choose our fights real carefully in the legislative process. Clearly the County
is annoyed that we're being aggressive. Hialeah has been aggressive, too, and they want to get
everybody back under control, and they want to control the value adjustment process. But I
think we need to be very careful, sort of like some of the things that Commissioner Sanchez has
said. We need to be careful about what we're sending forward, and I would prefer that we try to
take this issue and put it on a different tract, because I'm not too optimistic that we want to start
out fighting with the County on issues, although I think the County's wrong.
9 October 7, 2002
Mr. Book: Make me understand just one issue, if you could help me. Why would the County
not want a municipal body's input into what happens at the VAB (Value Adjustment Board)
meeting? I mean, I don't want to drag out the conversation on it but I don't understand why they
would feel that doing something to advance the value of the property is against their interest,
other than it takes more time in the process and I guess drives the fee. That's the only thing I can
think of.
Mr. Gimenez: We don't get it either. I mean, it doesn't make any sense, Ron. I mean,
obviously, if they increase -- we increase the value of the property, it's good for them. So we
don't get it either.
Mr. Book: If I could, Mr. Chairman, in picking up where Mr. Teele left off, I think the way to
deal with this issue --
Commissioner Teele: I want to hear from Commissioner Sanchez before you.
Mr. Book: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I was going to try to answer it, not as eloquently as
Commissioner Teele could answer it for you but I would just say on the matter, the County,
itself, if you look at municipalities and you look at all the municipalities, you look at the City of
Miami, if you see the assessment on properties in the City of Miami -- and Commissioner
Winton brought that up. If you look at the property values in the City of Miami are increasing
and our taxes, when it comes to the County (INAUDIBLE), the taxes -- the value properties are
increasing, because the County, as you know, is going to do everything they can within their
power to try to keep taxes low in incorporated Dade --
Commissioner Teele: Unincorporated.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- unincorporated Dade because what they don't want is more
unincorporated Dade to, you know, incorporate and become a City. So what they're doing now,
and we haven't been able to identify and I know that Commissioner Winton was looking at it and
he was looking at getting assessment notice from all the other different cities to sit down and see
exactly -- there's a pattern where the County, itself with the increase of taxes, of course, they're
making more money at the burden of municipalities. And I not only speak -- I speak for the City
now, but really you're talking about Homestead, Hialeah, Miami Lakes, every other
municipality, and that way, they're able to maintain their taxes low, and you don't have residents
going out there and saying, "Well, we want to incorporate," just like many cities have
incorporated in the past. I hope I was able to answer that.
Mr. Book: You've answered my question and I would just say to you, in response to that, I
won't use the adjective I just mouthed to Commissioner Teele. I'll just say that is irrational. I
don't deny that that is --
Commissioner Teele: That's what's going on.
10 October 7, 2002
Mr. Book: That is an irrational way to look at things and that is the situation, Commissioner.
That's what -- my suggestion is we pick up where Commissioner Teele left off. I think if we ask
the City Attorney to prepare a letter to the Attorney General seeking an opinion, we would be
responsible for following up on that Attorney General's opinion. I don't know whether that
opinion comes out of the current Attorney General or the future Attorney General, but either
which way it comes, we will be involved in trying to help pull that opinion out of there. And
then after that it would be our responsibility to follow up with the Department of Revenue or
come back to you with a suggestion.
Commissioner Teele: You want it out of the current Attorney General. He understands local
government.
Mr. Book: I think the current Attorney General does.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Book, the point here is, you know, we have to pick our fights. We
got to be very, very careful, prudent, on picking our fights. This is something that absolutely the
County's going to go against us, because we're basically going to have the opportunity to go and
basically say, "Hey, our property assessment or whatever." In other words, the County's going
to go against us on this and there's going to be issues -- you don't think the County would go --
Mr. Book: I don't know whether they do or they don't, but I don't think that it will affect this
Attorney General because --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, not based on the Attorney General's opinion, but on the
legislative side, in Tallahassee, the County will go against this bill.
Commissioner Teele: I agree.
Mr. Book: They might. They very well might. I would suggest to you we do what
Commissioner Teele is suggesting, not make this a legislative issue today, make this an
administrative issue, go after the Attorney General's opinion. Short of that, go back to the
agency and by the time we exhaust that, we're going to be in the 2004 session anyway.
Commissioner Teele: I don't want to drag this out, Ronnie, but there's a very important issue
here. Is there a representative of the County here now? Is there a snitch here from the County?
You know, these legislative books get published and all that, and once you say this is an agenda,
you know, there's an element to the fact that you want to have a wink and a nod at some of this
stuff, anyway, because once you put it out there, then you're arming the other side to go against
you on it. And even if it were to be a part of the legislative agenda, I wouldn't want it in writing.
I mean, I'd want it to be something we discussed and if there were an opportunity to put
something on a bill --
Commissioner Sanchez: There's offense and defense.
Mr. Book: Commissioner, you are correct. Commissioner Sanchez, you and I have been
through that several times already in Tallahassee.
1 I October 7, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: And I've learned that in Tallahassee.
Mr. Book: We've had those conversations.
Chairman Regalado: OK. Could we go back to funding for Little Haiti Park?
Mr. Book: Yes, sir. On the Little Haiti Park, I would just suggest to you that we will not get a
direct appropriation for this. This needs to go through the Secretary of State's Library Grant
Program. Mr. Manager, I don't know who on your staff is responsible for that, whether that
comes out of Asset Management or not, but I would suggest, again, we have a very good track
record working with the Secretary of State's office on library grants. This is a perfect
opportunity to go after it, and we ought to do that. But this should not be a legislative priority,
because it will not get funded. And if it got funded, I assure you that the current Governor would
veto this item.
Mr. Gimenez: Ron, we've got -- we've centralized all of our grant functions under Mr.
Espinosa, so any grant initiatives will be funneled through that office.
Mr. Book: OK. Very good. Next item, Mr. Chairman, payment of real property taxes on
County -owned properties not utilized for governmental purposes. You know, again --
Mr. Gimenez: Big fight. I don't think it's going to be worth it on this one.
Mr. Book: I don't -- I mean, you got to decide whether you want to fight. This is a study that,
I've told the Manager before, Willie Logan had a study of this issue. Carlos Lacosta wanted to
do something about this issue. Nothing has happened. You got to make your decision.
Mr. Gimenez: Aren't they protected, though, by the Constitution on this? That was the whole
Sebring case, right?
Mr. Book: I think the counties are certainly protected from it. I don't know whether all of them
are, but the County is certainly is. But again, you got to look at the issue and decide whether you
want to advance a joint resolution on those Constitutional issues. Moving on to the Building
Department, you've got the changes to the Building Code for the historical designated buildings.
Again, to me, that looks like a good thing to do, Mr. Chairman. You've got to decide if it's
something you want to do. This is not an issue that we would do in a proposed bill. This is an
issue we would look for a bill that's got some similarities, and we would tag this on as an
amendment. If it is an issue that you want to move forward with, all I would suggest to you is
that staff of the Building Department get with the City Attorney, come up with the language, get
it to us, and we will work to get that adopted during the session. Finance Department.
Mr. Gimenez: I think you're going to like this one, Commissioner Teele.
Chairman Teele: Sir?
12 October 7, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: I think you're going to like this one from the Finance Department.
Mr. Book: Limitation on the amount that can be charged by a County to its water and sewer
utility and transferred to its General Revenue Fund. I've heard Commissioner Teele on this one,
as well.
Commissioner Teele: Well, that's a fight.
Mr. Book: That's a fight.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, I think we should go forward with it. I'm not sure if for nothing
else but to attempt to reach a compromise on other issues, but it's a little straightforward. I think
that the legislation --
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE) Commissioner Teele, you and I both know what's going to happen.
(INAUDIBLE). If this is an issue that you want to pursue, this is one of those issues where you
need to give us some kind of wink or a nod and tell us you'd like us to place this issue, and this is
an issue (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. I don't think we should -- I think that clearly, all five
Commissioners have expressed frustration about the fact that it's our Water and Sewer
Department, initially; we transferred it. Maybe we didn't get a great deal. But what is
happening now is that it's being double taxed. In other words, they're charging a fee plus
they're charging an indirect cost, which is three times what the FAA (Federal Aviation
Administration) would allow the County to charge for the same service at the airport. In other
words, the FAA limits, at three percent, the indirect charge. At the seaport they're charging four
percent. Water and sewer, they're up to what, nine and a half?
Robert Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager): Eleven.
Commissioner Teele: Eleven percent.
Mr. Nachlinger: For indirect costs.
Mr. Book: And rising.
Commissioner Teele: And they justified it by saying, "We're not charging an indirect. We're
charging a -- quote -- "utility rate of return."
Mr. Nachlinger: No, sir. Commissioner, if I could.
Mr. Gimenez: That's on top of that.
Mr. Nachlinger: The indirect charge to the Water and Sewer Department is eleven percent of
revenues. There's an additional seven and a half percent in the rate of return charge --
13 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Well, I stand totally corrected. That's 18 percent. And the FAA will not
allow a local government to charge more than three percent for providing the identical services.
These are what you call "enterprise funds," same as solid waste used to be when we were
illegally booking it. And with an enterprise fund, you can only charge three percent under the
FAA rules. So the airport of Miami, which is a one point two, one point four billion dollar
($1,400,000,000) -- they charge three percent for water and sewer, which is seven hundred
million. They are charging, effectively, closer to fifteen to eighteen percent. And I think it's
rape of the citizens really.
Mr. Book: Commissioner, on this the legislation that's proposed provides a fee not to exceed ten
percent of revenues or the amount charged to other enterprise operations, whichever is less. And
this would take the -- deal with the FAA --
Commissioner Teele: Well, you have to similar -- other similar sized revenues. I mean, there is
a difference between a billion dollar ($1,000,000,000) revenue -- I mean, a billion dollar
($1,000,000,000) enterprise and a twenty million dollar ($20,000,000) revenue. But, clearly, the
airport and water and sewer are comparable in complexity, in size, et cetera. And the problem is
is that --
Mr. Book: Do we know whether or not this is a problem in other jurisdictions in the State,
outside of Dade County?
Mr. Gimenez: No, we don't.
Mr. Book: So we don't know if this is a league issue as well as our own issue?
Commissioner Teele: It's a unique issue to Dade County.
Mr. Book: To Dade County.
Commissioner Teele: And it's really not unique to Dade County. It's unique to the City of
Miami because, you see, like North Miami, Hialeah, even Coral Gables --
Chairman Regalado: They have their own.
Commissioner Teele: -- they have their own quasi, you know, functions. Coral Gables is
controlling its own sewage, isn't it?
Mr. Gimenez: No, Coral Gables goes through Miami -Dade Water. I used to live in Coral
Gables.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. It's a different -- Mr. Manager, look. Coral Gables and
Hialeah go to Dade County, but they go wholesale. They go wholesale. They go wholesale.
Even Opa Locka goes wholesale. In other words, the distribution for water in Opa Locka, the
distribution for water in Hialeah, is controlled by the City of Hialeah and Opa Locka,
respectively, but they buy the water from Miami -Dade County.
14 October 7, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: I agree with the other ones. I mean, I'm not so sure about Coral Gables, but I'll
check into it.
Commissioner Teele: Coral Gables does something with sewer, because I represented a client
that was looking at doing some creative work for them some years ago.
Mr. Gimenez: I think this is a good one just to throw out and just perk people's -- you know,
perk people up about it.
Chairman Regalado: But, you know, the only --
Commissioner Sanchez: If anything, compromise.
Chairman Regalado: The only other case that you can think of, it would be Jacksonville, which
became the County and the City.
Commissioner Teele: It's the same.
Chairman Regalado: The same thing. But, Commissioner Teele is right. It's a unique situation
in Miami, because Miami, I think -- well, I don't think. I know, because we did some research,
is the only municipality that has given away the water and sewer plus the power to sell.
Commissioner Teele: And the port.
Chairman Regalado: Well, no, I mean, but we gave also the power to sell the water and to set
the prices for the water.
Commissioner Sanchez: We gave away --
Mr. Book: I'm going to just think out loud.
Commissioner Teele: I will tell you this, though, Ronnie, and with all due respect. The fact that
I'm so ignorant on this and I'm being corrected because, obviously, some things changed since I
left the County because it was -- I remember Tony Clemente coming in and making the sale to
change this thing from a direct -indirect to a utility rate of return. And the question was, how
would the City feel about it? And I said, "Why don't we give the City some of the money?"
You know, and that's sort of where I still am. Eleven percent and seven percent you said?
That's 18 percent of what, five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000)? What's the budget?
Mr. Nachlinger: I think the --
Commissioner Teele: Five hundred million? Seven?
Mr. Nachlinger: (INAUDIBLE). It's a ninety million dollar ($90,000,000) charge is what it
covers, which is how much the County is taking out of WASA (Water and Sewer Authority).
15 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Teele: That's what, six mills?
Commissioner Sanchez: Ninety.
Unidentified speaker: Give or take.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're on six mills?
Commissioner Teele: See, that's what I keep saying about this whole thing about the millage
rate and all of that. If we got any of our money back from the County, we'd have our millage
rate down in the six percent where it ought to be. But this is the point. We've got to get
somebody to do a study. There's no reason to talk about going up there with a bill if you don't
have a documented study that lays all this out in one place and one time. Now, Alex, I know
you've been --
Mr. Vilarello: As you all know, you've already directed me and last year we prepared this
litigation. At this point, I'm trying to resolve the outstanding parking surcharge issue and I'm
going to resolve that. I'd like to try to resolve that before we go forward with regard to the water
and sewer litigation. But, to address the issue at hand, the indirect cost issue is a question of the
study. They create their own study and somehow they've gotten to that eleven percent number.
But the other issue, the seven percent, I guess, is the number that has been identified, is an equity
payback of sorts, on improvements to the system that the County never paid for, or were paid for
through bond issues, or were paid for by the City of Miami and donated to the County. So I
can't find any authorization in State law that would allow any utility to authorize those kind of
charge backs. So I think it's a unique issue to Miami -Dade County and if it's not, certainly, I
can't find any authority for them to do so, including any authority that they may have been
granted by our transfer of all the assets to the County back in the early `80s. So, having said that,
I certainly would have no objection to this being part of our legislative package. It certainly
would assist in terms of litigations when we -- once we finally file it. But there's no authority in
State law for this -- for a utility to charge this kind of charge.
Mr. Gimenez: Could that work against us? I mean, if we think that they can't do it then why are
we asking for a --
Mr. Vilarello: Certainly, the County is well --
Mr. Gimenez: -- law which says that they can't do it?
Mr. Vilarello: The County is well aware of the issues. At every time we discuss this issue with
the County, this is the one issue that they have no desire to discuss, compromise on, or even
address. They have no basis or support for this kind of charge. I think the numbers should be
along the lines of what airports charge.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Book --
16 October 7, 2002
Mr. Vilarello: Three to four percent.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Book and Mr. Attorney, I think this also is one of those issues that
you all ought to sit down and look at, because there ought to be some other venues to address
this. There is a clear law that says a fee cannot exceed its cost of the service. In other words, a
fee is a tax. When you're charging more than the cost of providing the service. If the FAA come
in and audit it, as they do, and say three percent is all we're going to do, and they're looking at
the cost of the Secretary of the Board, and the Paymaster, and using the Auditing Management
Office, and the Law Department and all those other things, which by the way they write off as
direct costs in the first instance, and say we're only going to allow you three percent, we ought to
be before the Cabinet, perhaps, or some other agency saying that this is a tax and not a fee. It's
an illegal tax, because you can't have a fee that so exceeds the cost of delivering and providing
the service.
Mr. Book: I would suggest a couple of things, Mr. Chairman, through you to Commissioner
Teele. There may be two ways or three to skin this cat. I don't disagree that we ought to have
some kind of additional information, data, because we don't have enough to be informed. If you
don't have enough information I know I don't have enough information. That's first. Second,
post -November, we may be in a different position on an issue like this. If the County Charter
Amendment passes into the Constitution, Commissioner, this is a bill that could be ripe for a
legislatively approved local bill Charter Amendment to the County. If, in fact, this applies to
multiple cities in Dade County, this is the kind of thing you take to the delegation as a local bill
post -November, when the Constitution is changed, and run it as a local bill and you can pass it.
That's how you do this kind of an issue. Post November --
Commissioner Teele: Everybody in the City of Miami is going to be voting for it to limit the
amount of -- because it's one of the hottest issues -- when you open it up, water and sewer
charges are one of the hottest issues.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, but it's a County Charter Amendment. You got to amend their
Charter.
Mr. Book: You amend their --
Commissioner Sanchez: So, it's never going to pass.
Mr. Book: Pardon?
Commissioner Sanchez: If it's -- you're amending their Charter and it's a County -wide election,
you know --
Mr. Book: I'll take the voters --
Mr. Gimenez: It'll pass.
17 October 7, 2002
Mr. Book: -- here in Miami and the other municipalities, and organize them, Commissioner
Sanchez, on a campaign like that and take my chances.
Commissioner Teele: Even unincorporated Dade County.
Mr. Book: This is a pocketbook issue to the people in this City.
Mr. Gimenez: Everybody's going to vote for a 15 percent reduction in their water.
Mr. Book: You talk about --
Commissioner Teele: You're talking about a 15 percent reduction.
Mr. Book: You're talking about motivating voters. They'll never get the message out the other
way. You'll get your message out there. That's a post -November strategy. The only other way,
Commissioner Teele, is if you -- if we don't want to advance at this point and you believe it's an
illegal tax --
Commissioner Sanchez: Then we challenge it.
Mr. Book: -- we ought to address it to the Department of Revenue. The Attorney General will
go at it in a court. But I've heard the City Attorney say he doesn't want to address it until after
he finishes the parking surcharge litigation anyway.
Commissioner Teele: But can't this go before the Department of Revenue and before the
Cabinet?
Mr. Book: I think it's a proper question potentially, Commissioner. I don't know whether DOR
would advance this to a Cabinet agenda. It is an issue we should address with the department,
and get Dr. Zengali to opine on whether or not he thinks it's an appropriate tax with legislative
authority. Remember you got to have specific legislative approval to tax.
Mr. Vilarello: Again, this Thursday, as I speak with you with regard to the parking surcharge
litigation, you could make a decision one way or the other to resolve that litigation. After that,
we'll be happy to proceed with a lawsuit and send it to the Department of Revenue, et cetera.
We have a variety of different options.
Chairman Regalado: Just a question, Mr. Manger. Do we know if Mayor Penelas vetoed the
increase in tax for properties and municipalities with Fire Departments?
Mr. Gimenez: With Fire Departments? No, sir, I do not. I'll find out, but I know that the
proposed budget that they did pass did just that. It increased taxes in the areas of the County that
had their own Fire Departments.
Chairman Regalado: Right. Because we were told that he was probably going to veto that but I
think the 10 days is over. I don't think he vetoed it.
18 October 7, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: I'll find out, sir.
Chairman Regalado: You know, that's -- you know, the County runs after us and every City,
because, like Commissioner Sanchez said, I mean, you know, they have this thing with the
municipalities. Now they have this new municipality that have to pay them in advance or
whatever. And they are going to do whatever it is in their power, including the County
Commissioners who represent the City of Miami, in order not to give the City a little window.
That's why, you know, I keep saying let's go for a change in statutes and laws that would benefit
the City.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE) special session but it's your call. I don't have a problem moving this
forward. Mr. Nachlinger already has a draft of the cleaned up version. I think there may be
some concerns I might have with some aspects of it, because he's broadened it to apply to some
other jurisdictions, which may create some controversy within the process. But we need to sort
of float it out there if you make the decision to advance it.
Chairman Regalado: Ron, why don't you wait until like next week.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, because --
Commissioner Teele: Why don't we (INAUDIBLE) this item until --
Commissioner Sanchez: This item should be tabled because --
Mr. Book: Works for me.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- pending litigation and possible settlement.
Commissioner Teele: But, Ronnie, going back to your original point, I think items like the
parking surcharge, we need to look at mechanisms to create more revenue at the municipal level.
And parking surcharge should be one of the broader powers that we should ask the legislature to
grant to us. I mean, you know, we've all got the revenue problem and Tallahassee is not going to
ever pass a bill like that statewide to impose a parking surcharge statewide in Tallahassee,
Gainesville, and all that. So they ought to just go ahead and give us that power.
Mr. Book: Commissioner, (INAUDIBLE) that I talked about earlier and you and I have had a
chance to chat about. To me, I think with all the shrinking ability of the State to fund things,
basically turning around and putting the demand on you to pick up their functions as the Fed did
to the State a number of years ago, I think this is a right kind of issue to do that. Part of the
problem, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, Mr. Manager, is the damn League of
Cities --
Commissioner Teele: Is what?
Mr. Book: -- needs to come to the plate.
19 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Teele: Is what?
Mr. Book: The League of Cities. I took it back. I bit my tongue as I said the word. The League
of Cities needs to grasp issues like this, Commissioner, and move them forward, and they're not
doing it.
Commissioner Teele: But the League of Cities, as a body, is made up of (INAUDIBLE) and,
you know, these are issues that really affect the major cities.
Mr. Book: A big city.
Commissioner Teele: Nobody in (INAUDIBLE) is going to be trying to -- or Two Egg, is going
to be trying to do a municipal tax on parking.
Mr. Book: You and I worked in the legislature a long time ago, Commissioner Teele, when it
mattered to have an Urban Coalition. And, you know what? If it takes us organizing with
Orlando, Tampa, St. Pete, Jacksonville, then we should do that. These are issues that affect those
cities. You are right.
Commissioner Teele: But, you know, that may be the smartest thing that comes out of this
meeting. I really think that we ought to get the Mayor's office involved in this. And I really do
think that -- because, you see, the problem with the Urban Coalition concept is at one time the
City, and the County, and Broward, and Palm Beach and the City, we were all one entity.
There's more fighting that goes on among the Urban Coalition than -- and, so we're out here on
our own right now. I think it's -- we ought to look at an initiative in Tampa and Orlando and
Jacksonville and --
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, we don't --
Commissioner Teele: -- Ft. Lauderdale.
Mr. Gimenez: -- we don't -- we have a lot in common with those cities. We do fight -- every
City of that size is fighting with their County.
Commissioner Teele: Every one of them.
Mr. Gimenez: Every one of them. And we can probably bring as much, you know, lobbying
clout, et cetera if we have -- if we join with those big cities as the League of Counties does. I
mean, we can out lobby them and we can out -power them in the State.
Mr. Book: I can rattle off 20 cities that are of comparable size to us or larger that we ought to
want to bond together with and put together that kind of coalition and whether you want to start
with the City of Miami, and go out to Hialeah, and go to Ft. Lauderdale, go to West Palm, and go
to St. Pete, go to Orlando, and go to Tampa. I mean, you've got a lot of cities like that. And,
frankly, I wouldn't leave cities like Gainesville out of the mix, because, frankly, there are some
20 October 7, 2002
very big and growing cities out there, Commissioner Teele, that we do have a lot in common
with.
Commissioner Teele: Sanford. Those are cities that are growing --
Mr. Book: They are.
Commissioner Teele: -- and they got the same problems we got, and they got problems with
their County.
Mr. Book: Head to Palm Bay in Brevard County. Head to Ft. Pierce. Look what's going on in
St. Lucie County. So, I would just suggest to you that's a good approach. The next issue is the
funding for a three --
Mr. Gimenez: Ron, how do we go about doing that?
Mr. Book: I'm sorry.
Mr. Gimenez: I mean, because I think that Commissioner Teele's right. If we can do anything
out of this, is how do we develop that kind of a coalition? You know, and I know that the Mayor
has been -- I know we've been approached by some, but how do we develop that kind of
coalition? Because that's about the only way --
Commissioner Sanchez: Through the Mayor's office.
Mr. Gimenez: -- that we're going to have fire power up there.
Chairman Regalado: The only way to develop -- I'm sorry. The only way to develop that
coalition is through the State Legislature that represents the City of Miami. We need to go to
them. There is no Sunshine Law in the State of Florida, in the State legislature. We need to go
to them and say, "Look. You know, we need you to talk to your friends and colleagues in Tampa
and think about this." And then he'll talk to the elected officials there, and maybe then they want
to get involved. Anyway, you know, always fighting City Hall is the right thing to do politically
for an elected official. And when I mean that, I mean, you know, fighting the County, the big
government. So, we could do it through the Dade Delegation, but, especially, the City of Miami.
We have two Senators and three or four State Representatives.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, I respectfully disagree. I think that we really need to get to those
other cities, and their Mayors, and their Managers and all that, and somehow have a summit,
something where we get them all together, and we band into some kind of a coalition and pursue
our agendas. And then those -- once we are united like that, then each one of us can then go to
our own delegation and say, "Hey, this is what we, the City, and this is what Ft. Lauderdale
wants," and et cetera, et cetera. That gives us a little bit more power than what we've been
getting right now as we go at it alone, because we really do go at it alone. The League of Cities,
like Ron said, is virtually nonexistent up there.
21 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: As the liaison of the City of Miami with Tallahassee, let me just say the
proper way to really accomplish this is through the Mayor's office. The Mayor's office --
through the Mayor's office, the Mayor has -- you know, he represents the City. He could, you
know, call another Mayor of another City and bring all these cities -- we all could agree that we
have a lot of things in common. We could unite our forces and bring them to the table to build
this coalition that we're talking about. The proper thing to do it is through the Mayor's office.
I'll tell you why you don't want to do it through the legal representation that we have. One is
they have a lot of issues.
Commissioner Teele: You're talking about the legislative.
Commissioner Sanchez: The legislative. You're talking about the representatives and the
Senators. They have a lot issues. I mean, on the House side, they only have six bills, and, of
course, you know, as I've always told Ron, it's a 365 day lobbying effort. You've got to get
them to commit to a bill. I've always been an advocate of that. Get them to the Commission and
say, "Hey. Listen, you know, six of those bills, one of them is ours for the City," on the House
side. Of course, Senate side, they're unlimited to bills. But you can't do it through them. I
mean, we could have Dade Delegation and sit down with them and sell them our bill, but the
proper way to do it is to get our Mayor to sit down with the Mayor of Tampa, Orlando,
Gainesville, top ten cities, to sit down and put together that coalition to get our message -- it's
not only our message -- it's our message clear through Tallahassee.
Chairman Regalado: And you're right and Commissioner Teele is right. It should be the Mayor
who has the lead on this, because he has the resources. He has a person that is in charge of
everything in terms of legislation. But the way I see this is, if you get involved --
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, yeah.
Chairman Regalado: -- remember, this is a big media event. If you get involved the State
Legislature, they would want to participate with their colleagues and their colleagues supporting
their local government. I am telling you that only the Mayor's side will get it done, but it would
take more time than getting other elected officials involved. That's why I suggested the State
Legislature. You wanted to add?
Fatima Perez (Senior Advisor/Intergovernmental Affairs): Yeah, I just wanted to say that the
Florida League has created a Coalition of Mayors. It's the Florida Urban Partnership. And
they'll be meeting in November before the legislative conference that the Florida League is
doing. And this is an issue that we'll bring up there. But there is currently a Coalition of
Mayors, Tampa, Orlando --
Mr. Gimenez: How -- what's the process going to be to identify those things that the Coalition is
going to be pushing in the legislative session and what resources, you know, are we looking at to
22 October 7, 2002
bring to the table? Because the way I envision it is that, you know, once you set a -- you're on
consensus then. Then all the resources that those cities have, those folks that -- the lobbyists, et
cetera that they have, are all pointed in the same direction, saying the same thing. Is that the way
it's envisioned?
Fatima: That's exactly why that coalition was created.
Mr. Book: With that, Mr. Chair, I guess we'll go ahead and move on to the 311 call center. All I
can tell you is that I've seen these issues come and go in the process and they don't get adopted
in the process. I don't mind advancing it if it's a priority of the City. I think, again, you've got
to decide what issues are priorities and if the City staff call number is a priority, then I think we
go after it. Next issue is review the immunity of the County from ad valorem taxation if they
lease property to a private or a for profit organization, et cetera. And I think, again, Mr.
Nachlinger --
Mr. Gimenez: It's very similar to the one from Asset Management.
Mr. Book: Right.
Mr. Gimenez: They've got the same.
Mr. Nachlinger: Actually, this is the flip side to that issue that Lori brought up. Essentially, I'm
looking at the Dade County Inter -Modal Center where they've taken a huge chunk of property
off our tax roll, and we will not get any taxes from it. I'm looking at the development they're
planning around their Metrorail stations, all of them within the City of Miami that will be
businesses and that we will not get the benefits from the ad valorem taxation. I don't believe we
can actually do anything about the immunity issue from the County on property taxes, but if we
could do something to get a payment in lieu of taxes mandated, that would certainly be beneficial
to the City.
Chairman Regalado: Anyway, what they're doing is building the HUD (Department of Housing
and Urban Development) or low income, which doesn't pay taxes, anyway.
Mr. Nachlinger: That's another issue.
Chairman Regalado: Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: So, Commissioner, they are building a lot of or have plans to building a lot of
commercial development around the Metrorail stations with mixed use and all that, and we're
going to end up getting zero out of that.
Mr. Book: OK. Moving on to the next section is the section dealing with the Department of
Human Resources. The first proposal is the issue of public employee addresses and phone
numbers, et cetera being a matter of public record. I think it's a good issue. I think we've got
some responsibility to protect your public employees. This is an issue you will not do by
23 October 7, 2002
amendment. This issue, because it deals with a public records issue, requires a substantive bill.
It is no longer legal to do this under the Constitution without a bill. I would suggest to you, it's a
good issue. I would suggest to you it's an appropriate issue. You just have to decide how many
bills and --
Commissioner Teele: Why do we want to push this?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: Why do we want to get every editorial board in the State down on us? I
mean, I understand the value of what you're saying, but why -- if it's such a good issue, why
isn't Dade County pushing it or why isn't --
Mr. Book: I've seen this issue out there before.
Commissioner Teele: -- Gainesville pushing it?
Mr. Book: Commissioner, I'm not arguing that point with you beyond to tell you that I've seen
this issue out there before. I think it's a good issue if you want to push an issue to protect your
employees. But you are one hundred percent right. Miami Herald and the St. Petersburg Times
and the Jacksonville Times Union will come down around our heads.
Commissioner Teele: Are the cities treated differently from the counties on this issue?
Mr. Book: I don't believe so, nor are they treated different than Water Management District or
hospital employees either. Although, we did -- I might say, we did do a local bill in South
Broward County for the hospital to protect their employees' records two years ago,
(INAUDIBLE) their Charter.
Mr. Vilarello: There's a least a dozen exemptions by classification of the jobs where
government employees are either judges, code enforcement, firefighters, police officers --
Commissioner Teele: But police and fire and -- I mean, Mr. Manager or -- I mean, I think we
should be on record as supporting the repeal or the restatement or -- but I don't think we should
make this one of our legislative initiatives. If the League of Cities wants to move this, if the
Association of Counties wants to move it, if the human resources or human relations
professionals want to move it, but I don't think we ought to be out there saying that we're going
to -- because it's just going to get every editorial board upset.
Chairman Regalado: Next.
Mr. Book: I'm on to the next issue, Commissioner Teele.
Chairman Regalado: Next.
Commissioner Teele: I don't want to cut off --
24 October 7, 2002
Chairman Regalado: No, but, I mean, you know, why -- I mean, we've got to leave here in 15
minutes.
Mr. Book: I'm with you, Mr. Chairman. The next issue, which I think I hop scotched one issue.
You have a records retention issue.
Commissioner Teele: A what?
Mr. Book: A records retention issue. You have an issue here where you all are apparently
required to retain personnel records for 50 years. Your staff is suggesting --
Commissioner Teele: Five zero?
Mr. Book: Five zero.
Commissioner Teele: Only applies to the City of Miami?
Mr. Book: No.
Mr. Gimenez: It's a State law, general State law.
Mr. Book: Again, what your staff is saying in the backup is it's a manpower issue, it is a cost
issue, and they want to reduce it to 25 years. To me, if you want to do this, again, it's a public
records issue. You're going to need a substantive bill on it. You can't do it through the
amendment process.
Commissioner Teele: Well, first of all, it's got to be through the normal retirement process,
which is 30 years. I mean, a part of this is --
Mr. Gimenez: That's after. After you retire, you have to keep it for 50 years.
Renee Jones: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Methuselah, the Methuselah Bill.
Ms. Jones: And if you're a member of the Florida Retirement System, you only have to keep
them for 25 years. But since we're not included, we have to keep ours for 50. It used to be 75.
Commissioner Teele: But why does the City of Miami want to take this on? Why?
Chairman Regalado: My question is why do we need to --
Commissioner Sanchez: We'll have the warehouse (INAUDIBLE).
25 October 7, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: I think we've asked the departments to think of, you know, changes in the law
that would make it more efficient for us to do our business. This is going to make it efficient for
everybody to do their business.
Chairman Regalado: But, you know, why don't we give this to this Mayor's Coalition? I mean,
they can --
Mr. Gimenez: We will.
Commissioner Sanchez: Ron, the Warehouse Association will be lobbying against it.
Mr. Gimenez: I think that's also a good idea, also, about the employee, the public records or the
addresses for employees. That's probably a good one for the Coalition, too.
Commissioner Teele: Renee, can it be kept by microfilm or can it be scanned on?
Ms. Jones: It can be done, but that will be costly as well, so it's better if we can just go ahead
and reduce the number of years.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's going to be quick. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Book, you read this.
You're very familiar with this. Tell us where we could identify the funds. Tell us like, you
know, where is money going to be available. You basically said it's a dry well. The County -- I
mean, the State with the Article 5 and the Pre -K and all the budget problems that it has. Tell us
where funding could be available. Is it going to be in the Criminal Justice? Is it going to be in
the Juvenile Justice? Environment?
Mr. Book: At this point, Commissioner --
Commissioner Sanchez: You don't know.
Mr. Book: Until November, until we see whether Pre -K and class size pass, we can't answer that
for you. I will tell you this: If class size doesn't pass, there will be money for you
(INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: But that's if it doesn't pass?
Mr. Book: That is if it doesn't pass. If it passes, we've got problems.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. So you looked --
Mr. Book: And that is part of the reason why your staff is trying to amend statutes that save you
money.
Commissioner Sanchez: You reviewed the package.
Mr. Book: Yes, sir.
26 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: I think the key issue here is to identify bills that -- prioritize them and
find out -- let's say we have five or six bills that we have a good chance of passing them in
Tallahassee benefiting the City. What are those bills here? And I'm very disappointed that the
expansion of the Enterprise Zone is not here.
Mr. Book: It is in there.
Mr. Gimenez: It's there.
Commissioner Sanchez: It is?
Mr. Book: It is in there, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I missed it. Which one is it?
Mr. Gimenez: It's towards the end.
Commissioner Sanchez: Towards the end? Well, I didn't get there, but that's one that's very
important to us. It's very important to the areas that were left out and we are --
Mr. Gimenez: I think it's the last --
Commissioner Sanchez: -- looking at it. And also, we already got a commitment from one of
the representatives that's going to be sponsoring the bill and that's Gustavo Barrero.
Unidentified speaker: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. It's my understanding. I spoke to him.
Unidentified speaker: OK.
Keith Carswell: Commissioner Sanchez, there's one correction with that also. If you notice,
there's an expansion of the Enterprise Zone to all eligible areas within the City, and also one for
expansion to Little Haiti and the Little Havana area. That is actually being handled
administratively by OTED (Office of Trade & Economic Development). So, it does not require
a legislative action. However, the expansion into all other eligible areas within the City, that is
something that would require legislative action.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that should be a priority. I mean, one of the six, I think.
Commissioner Teele: Well, this gives me an opportunity to lead into what I think is missing.
Rhonda, I really want you and -- because we're about to leave, I suppose. The Chairman has
said we're going to leave. I think there is two issues that I want to focus on that are, I think,
27 October 7, 2002
global. The first one is the legislative team and the interaction with the team and how this is
going to work out. Because I really do think that we need to be very clear, and we need to have
some better lines of communication on this process. I would assume that Commissioner Sanchez
will continue to serve as the Commission representative. And, in particular, I am concerned
about the City Attorney's office staffing and role. And one of the things that I'm going to
request is a complete position paper, working paper, to be done between the City Manager and
the City Attorney's office to be presented to the Mayor and Commission on the legislative
process. I want to state for the record that the City Attorney works for the Commission. We
have a Mayor who I think can be extremely helpful in this process, and I don't want to revisit
some of the diffusion that occurred two years ago on some of the issues on, I guess, the Marlins
Stadium. Any time you get a third party involved or another party involved, you have the
potential for some confusion, and I think there needs to be sort of a real working agreement
between the Mayor, Commissioner Sanchez, the City Manager, and the City Attorney. And I
think it's very important that that be reduced to some form of writing, at least in a skeletal form
and that we have some, you know, memorandums of understanding of how this is going to work
out. Again, I'm relying on the City Attorney to keep this Commission. I don't consider
Commissioner Sanchez to be a full-time employee of the City. And I don't think, you know, we
should try to make him a staff. And while the Mayor has a independence and a unique role
under separation of powers, he is more full-time, I guess, than most of us elected, and it will be
up to him how much time he wants to spend. We can't, certainly, put him in a role that he
doesn't want to be in a role. But I think we need to have some clarity on what that role is going
to be and we need to have some clarity on who's going to be doing what. Otherwise, I think
there could be a lot of room for confusion. And, Mr. Attorney, I'm going to tell you, any
confusion, I'm going to lay it right on the City Attorney's desk, because I think, at least as it
relates to Commission initiatives versus Manager's initiatives versus Mayor's initiatives versus
Attorney's initiatives, because I really do think that that's something that we need to try to figure
out how we're going to work through this. Who is the legislative person from the City
Attorney's office?
Mr. Vilarello: I don't have an individual staff person who's assigned to that task.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm going to make a motion at the right time that somebody do it
and be there, because I think it's not fair to everybody else on the team, because, you know, this
isn't about personalities. This is about positions, and we need to have a person whose focus is
legislation, where everybody knows they can go to on that. Mr. Book is, I think, for the first
time since I've known him matured to say, "I ain't trying to be the lawyer." Before he wanted to
be the alpha and omega on everything. So, at least he's saying he doesn't want to be the lawyer
on this and I think that's very important. The second initiative that I think -- the second issue
that I think is important is we've started something that I don't think we ought to stop, and it's
not captioned here, Mr. Manager. The City of Miami, unfortunately, is the poorest city in the
nation, and we should come forth with legislation that relates to the City of Miami as the poorest
city in the nation. Now, the Empowerment Zone is a manner in which --
Commissioner Sanchez: He won't veto it again?
28 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Teele: I don't think he's going to veto it again. I'm going to tell you that right
now. I think that if the Legislature passes something --
Commissioner Sanchez: That's why I think -- Commissioner Teele, sorry for the interruption.
But that's why I think it's very important. I mean, the Enterprise Zone, it's been vetoed in the
past but it's looked at -- it has been vetoed.
Unidentified speaker: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: He vetoed money.
Commissioner Sanchez: The Empowerment Zone, I'm sorry. Yeah. Sorry for -- yeah.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENTS)
Commissioner Teele: But, see, I don't think the issue should be solely the Empowerment Zone.
I think the issue should be the City of Miami, because of Federal and State policies, is in the
position right now of being the poorest city in the nation. And I don't think we ought to try to
sweep that under the rug. And we're asking for the Legislature to provide certain -- a range of
certain activities, and it doesn't all have to be money. And I think we should package something
as a poorest city in the nation initiative. And, for that matter, any city in the State of Florida
that's in the top ten or whatever, the bottom ten should have the same kind of provision. We
ought to try to pass an omnibus legislation that's statewide that relates to any city in the State of
Florida that is deemed to be in the top ten or the top 25 poorest cities in the nation. Say again?
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE) Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Teele, to the Manager, to the City
Attorney, Commissioner Sanchez, in no particular order other than the proper protocol, nothing
that we could do today -- if you thought the League of Cities, Urban Coalition was the big thing
today, Commissioner Teele, with all due respect, you're suggestion just now is the best
suggestion for a legislative package you guys could ever possibly come up with. When we were
in a financial emergency, you know, Mr. Manager, I milked it for everything I could milk it for.
You're now the poorest city in the country. We can milk it for a whole bundle if we put a
package of substantive provisions to come out together, Commissioner Teele. And I think the
way you do that is you can start with the surcharge, and you can move through a series of things.
And I think, Commissioner Teele, you're a hundred percent right on one other point, which is,
you don't do this for the poorest city in the country or the poorest city in Florida. You do it for
the ten poorest cities in the State of Florida, and you throw in the nation's poorest on top of it. I
think you put together a package of relief items and you take it to the leadership, you take it to
the Governor, you take it to the Speaker, you take it to the President, you take it to your
Appropriations and Finance and Tax Committee Chairs, and you get them to bless that in
December and January, and you get the delegation to go with you. That is the right thing to do
and forget -- This is a great package and the staff has done a superb job of putting it together.
And I'm not suggesting we throw it away. I suggest we take those substantive items, you come
up with a package that is a package of relief and that, Mr. Chairman, is the best thing to come out
of that, and that, in and of itself, is worth coming here today.
29 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: As the liaison, what I'm going to do is I'm going to prepare a memo to
all five Commissioners, including the City Manager, asking for them to prioritize a list of the top
ten initiatives that are in this proposed 2003 legislative package. And then what we'll do, I'll put
together a legislative package that will come back to the Commission and get an input from the
Commissioners. So it's important to have the Commissioners provide me -- to respond to that
memo that will basically ask you to prioritize whatever initiative it is, and whatever are
compatible, then I'll sit down with Mr. Book, and the Mayor's staff, and City the staff and we'll
put together a package, because I think if we all agree on one thing, it's to prepare a package that
we could sell to the Governor and whoever may be in Tallahassee, showing that the City is the
poorest city, and that will bring relief to the City. So we'll go ahead and prepare that memo and
then you can respond back. Now, is there any of the initiative or the issues that we could agree
on right now? Maybe we could agree on the expansion of the Enterprise Zone?
Mr. Book: I think the Enterprise Zone is a great idea. I think, for example, if you could do this
(INAUDIBLE) with a chunk of the proceeds for those (INAUDIBLE). I think that's a great
relief item (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Well, the policymakers, the legislative body here will decide. Do
you agree on that?
Chairman Regalado: I think that the Commission voted five to zero on the Enterprise Zone and
extending that. So that's something that --
Commissioner Sanchez: But, Mr. Chairman, if we could identify maybe two or three here that
we -- and then, of course, we'll have the other two Commissioners --
Chairman Regalado: But let me ask, as our liaison to the legislature, let me say to you what I
wrote to Ron. This is a very simple piece of legislation. And I think it's one that some of our
Legislature would take, and it doesn't cost money to the State. What -- the only priority --
actually, I sent two but, the only priority was that the State will give municipalities power to
regulate adult living facilities. The City of Miami has been held hostage by the State statute that,
you know, we have to accept so many, with so many people and they -- these statutes have
destroyed several neighborhoods, because people, trying to make a buck, they come and they
buy a house and bring, you know, social security, or people with mental disabilities, or drug
addicts, or whatever and they do that. That doesn't cost money to the State. And as we
discussed, Ron, I think some of the -- our State legislature will feel good with that, because they
want to come to the people and say, "Look. We gave the City power to regulate that." So that is
one. The other one doesn't have a chance, but it's nice, because the main concern of people
driving or having to pay mortgage and insurance on a home is the rates of insurance. I ask him,
"Well, what do you think we can do to abolish that three-person board?" And he said, "No. It's
not going to pass, because the insurance lobby is too big." But, however, the City should be in
30 October 7, 2002
record saying that we want that abolished, because it's something that the people want in the
City of Miami. Those are --
Commissioner Teele: Which board is that?
Chairman Regalado: The three-person --
Mr. Book: The three person (INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Regalado: It's a final, you know, Secretary -- the Treasurer says, "No, Allstate, you
can't raise your rate," and it goes to the panel, which is two members from the insurance, one
member appointed by the Insurance Commissioner, and it's always two to one. So --
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm on board with that. I think we ought to add --
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Teele: I think we ought to add that. I mean, again, to me, if we are the poorest
city in the nation, then we ought to be fighting for the people. And there -- you know, these
insurances really hurt poor people.
Chairman Regalado: People are losing their homes because of insurance. And people are
driving with no insurance --
Commissioner Teele: Cars.
Chairman Regalado: -- because of the rates, and this is happening in the City of Miami. So
these are my two priorities.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I support both of those.
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner.
Commissioner Sanchez: Which are what?
Chairman Regalado: We're talking about the ALF(Adult Living Facilities), Joe, giving
municipalities more power to regulate adult living facilities. You know, now that the State --
they can do up to six, and nobody can say even nothing. And the other thing is trying to abolish
that board that --
Commissioner Teele: The insurance arbitration.
Chairman Regalado: -- the Insurance Commissioner's -- the Arbitration Board that always
decides by two to one to raise the rates.
31 October 7, 2002
Commissioner Sanchez: Always two to one.
Chairman Regalado: Always two to one.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Why don't you make a motion to second, so we could add those two to
our legislative package?
Chairman Regalado: I'm fine with that. I --
Commissioner Teele: I so move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Regalado: Passes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 01-1099
A MOTION STIPULATING THAT THE STATE OF FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE
LOBBYING TEAM SHALL INCLUDE IN ITS LIST OF PRIORITIES: (1)
GRANTING THE POWER TO MUNICIPALITIES TO REGULATE THE
NUMBER OF ADULT LIVING FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN SAID
MUNICIPALITIES; AND (2) ABOLISHMENT OF THE THREE PERSON
ARBITRATION BOARD REGULATING THE RATES FOR HOMEOWNERS
INSURANCE.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
32 October 7, 2002
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, I've got two suggestions. One, there is a -- the Sports
Development Tax and the ability of this facility to tap into that money. I think that's not -- it's a
non -issue for the State in terms of revenue.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Gimenez: Adding a stadium that houses a, you know, Division I football, you know --
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Sanchez: Well --
Mr. Gimenez: Yeah.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE) issue?
Mr. Gimenez: Yeah.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE).
Mr. Gimenez: No, no, no, no.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Mr. Gimenez: That was actually getting the rebate money back. This is about us being able to
access the Sports Development Tax that the County's sitting on.
Commissioner Teele: I second the motion by Commissioner Sanchez.
Chairman Regalado: OK. We have a motion and a second.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Sanchez: No, but we -- that one's --
Mr. Gimenez: That's not revenue neutral to the State, though. We --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Manager, is it in the package?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, it is.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Regalado: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
33 October 7, 2002
Chairman Regalado: It passes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 01-1100
A MOTION STIPULATING THAT THE STATE OF FLORIDA LEGISLATIVE
LOBBYING TEAM SHALL INCLUDE IN ITS LIST OF PRIORITIES
HAVING THE CITY OF MIAMI GRANTED ACCESS TO THE SPORTS
DEVELOPMENT TAX.
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: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Angel Gonzalez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Chairman Regalado: And what are we going to do with Commissioner --
Commissioner Teele: He said he had two issues.
Mr. Gimenez: The second suggestion I have is -- Commissioner Teele, your suggestion about
leveraging us as the poorest city could leverage us into giving the City some extraordinary
powers. I guess that's what you want to get into.
Commissioner Teele: Exactly.
Mr. Gimenez: Well, we need to know what those extraordinary powers are that we want to get.
So I don't think that we have time today to get into that but we need to -- we need some kind of
process that we think about those kinds of powers that we would like to get and leverage, as
being the poorest city in the country, because I think that's a great idea.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Manager, you'll be getting a memo. Put it down on the memo.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Book: (INAUDIBLE) I think -- I doubt that we're going to get together in another workshop
forum. If we could talk the Commissioners into giving us the benefit of some of their ideas in
either memo form, either Rhonda could come and go and see them, Fatima could go and see
34 October 7, 2002
them from the Mayor's office, but get those ideas out of you quickly. We don't have time, guys.
We've got to have this together --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Book.
Mr. Book: -- in the next 30 days.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Book.
Mr. Book: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: First Commission meeting of November, we will have a package ready
for you. A memo will go off to each Commissioner, the City Manager, with recommendations to
prioritize their items. It'll come to us. We will have a meeting with you, with the City
Manager's representation, the Mayor's representation, and then we'll put together that package
to come back to the Commission for the first week of November.
Mr. Book: Critical --
Commissioner Sanchez: First meeting of November.
Mr. Book: Critical to that -- and I'm going to look right at him, because, frankly, you got a guy
sitting between you in a chair who's got as much Tallahassee experience as just about anybody
else in this town, and he understands. He sat on the Tax Reform Commissions. He understands
the Constitution. He understands legislative authority. He understands when you can tax and
when you got to ask for the authority to tax. I need the benefit of his thoughts going into that
package, and we need them now.
Commissioner Teele: All right.
Mr. Book: And it is -- Commissioner Teele, I can't ask you strong enough.
Commissioner Teele: I hear you and I'll exceed. Mr. Chairman, there's -- I think one of the
areas we really ought to think about broadening, so that this poorest city doesn't lose its
legitimacy, are the kinds of issues that economists, and social engineers and commentators have
said befalls the lot of poor people. One of the things I think that is very clear is technology, and I
think one of the areas that somebody and Mr. Technology, sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: Aldo?
Commissioner Teele: Where is Al? Where is Aldo? OK. But one of the areas that we really
ought to look at are technology applications, particularly through the Parks Department as a way
of packaging this poorest city thing. I mean, you know, it's fine to say we're poor and we ought
to have this, but it ought to also make -- it ought to connect with what people are saying on the
outside really happens to the poor, as a result of being poor, and through no fault of their own.
And so I would really urge us to look especially at technology kinds of issues, and linking
35 October 7, 2002
technology and technology initiatives that could be delivered, perhaps, through the Parks
Department, or perhaps, even through the library system. I mean, I don't -- even though we
don't control the library system, but there would be nothing wrong with doing a carve out of
libraries within the poorest -- the ten poorest cities in the State. So there -- that gives you
leverage to go to Washington to get Federal dollars, et cetera. I know there's a Durante Park
issue that's there, and I particularly wanted to commend the Parks Department, the Facilities and
Marinas, and Human Resources, and Asset Management because even though we didn't discuss
-- and particularly Human Resources, because I think we have to be careful that we don't
frustrate you in your sincere efforts to try to do a job well. And that's true also in Asset
Management's case, that we really do appreciate the time that the staff spent on this, and I really
want to apologize to you, Renee, because you're acting and, you know, we sort of shot your stuff
down. We just don't want to be out in the lead on it. We're not against it. We just don't want to
be on the lead. But I think in the context of the poorest city, we really ought to go back and
retool, and look at some things that have a certain ring to it. Now, some of those extraordinary
powers, for example, may be the stuff that you're talking about, about these abandoned boats or
people that are mooring around and all of that. Maybe those are the kinds of powers that we
would give a city like Miami as -- under that omnibus kind of power that doesn't cost anybody
money. But I do think it gives us the ability to clean up an area. I also think one of the
important areas that no one has brought up, Frank Rollason, if he isn't asleep, or is he here? He
left?
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank never sleeps.
Commissioner Teele: Is the -- that whole issue of code enforcement and the nuisance -- which
one of those boards is it that the County controls on us and we don't have control over?
Mr. Gimenez: That's the Unsafe Structures Board.
Commissioner Teele: The Unsafe Structures Board issue. I don't know if that's totally cleared
up now, but the County is charging us to apply. I mean, you're talking about zapping it to the
poorest city. The County charges us a huge application fee to be able to apply to destroy our
declared structures unsafe structures. Six hundred and fifty -- you know, that's more than the
cost of the staffing of that. So, again, I think there's a whole array of issues that we can package
under that and basically try to get more power, and make also for a more productive City or a
cleaner City, et cetera.
Mr. Rollason: That's what we're asking for, sir, if we can somehow get that together.
Mr. Book: If I could --
Chairman Regalado: Do you want like a time line for that, like five years? Or --
Commissioner Teele: I think it has to sunset. I think it should sunset.
Chairman Regalado: Because that's the key --
36 October 7, 2002
Unidentified speaker: Well, it's got to be ten years, because this goes on every ten years, right?
It's based on a census, right?
Chairman Regalado: But it's still --
Mr. Gimenez: Is that right? We're rated every ten years on this?
Commissioner Teele: They do do a mid -year adjustment, but I think it's a ten-year, I think, from
census to census.
Mr. Book: If I could, Mr. --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENTS)
Mr. Book: If I could, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Regalado: Sure.
Mr. Gimenez: We don't want to do that.
Mr. Book: If I could, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: Speaking of that, did you all note that in Brazil that a hundred and fifteen
million people to come out and vote with new touch screen elections and didn't have any big
problem?
Mr. Book: If I could, Mr. Chairman, I'll try to wrap up. Just briefly to Commissioner Teele's
point on the Dinner Key boat issue. I actually have a way to solve that problem without going
the route that staff has suggested. If somebody will give me some more specific language, Mr.
City Attorney, on that issue, I think we can put that language in the legislative implementing bill
under the derelict vessels appropriation. And even though the language may only last a year, it
will give you an opportunity during that year to solve the problem. You can put it in the
implementing bill under the Derelict Vessels Salavage Money Appropriation and nobody ever
debates that bill, nobody ever reads that bill. You stick it in, in the closing hours of the
conference committee and it's there.
Commissioner Teele: Sort of like the Silver Lake bill?
Mr. Book: Well, we're not going to talk about that, Commissioner Teele. But that's something
like that. Silver Beach was what it was.
Commissioner Teele: Silver what?
Mr. Book: Silver Beach.
Commissioner Teele: Silver Beach.
37 October 7, 2002
Mr. Book: With that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the Commission for the
opportunity to continue to serve. I'd like to recognize Monica Rodriguez from Mike Abrams'
Law Firm. I'd like to thank Rhonda and Fatima for the help and the support that they've given
us. And most importantly, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to thank the staff for all of the work in putting
together this package. I'd like to thank the Manager and his staff for giving us the opportunities
to continue to serve. Thank you very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you. The Anti -- the anti poverty bill, Commissioner Teele, would
you?
Unidentified Speaker: Yeah.
Chairman Regalado: OK. So, that's that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Book and --
Chairman Regalado: And the City Attorney will have --
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank the City staff. Great job on the package.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you all very much.
Chairman Regalado: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Manager.
Mr. Gimenez: You're welcome, sir.
38 October 7, 2002
There being no further business to come before the Miami City Commission, the meeting was
adjourned at 6:17 p.m.
ATTEST:
PRISCILLA A. THOMPSON
City Clerk
SYLVIA SCHEIDER
Assistant City Clerk
(SEAL)
Tomas Regalado
Chairman
39 October 7, 2002