Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2000-05-18 MinutesCITY O'F MIAMI COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 18, 2000 (Special) PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING MAY 18, -2000 ITEM NO. . SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. CONFIRM CARLOS GIMENEZ AS CITY MANAGER. 5/18/00 R 00-432 M 00-433 2-36 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 18th day of May 2000, the City Commission of Miami, Florida, met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in special session. The meeting was called to order at 10:15 a.m. by Presiding OfficerNice Chairman Wifredo Gort. (hereinafter referred to as Vice Chairman Gort), with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort (District 1) Commissioner Johnny L. Winton (District 2) Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3) Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4) Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5) ALSO PRESENT: Carlos Gimenez, City Manager Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Sylvia Lowman, Assistant City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Sanchez, followed by Commissioner Teele leading those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. iCU CAOSGTME ZS C ANAGI , .33. .._. Vice Chairman Gort: The Mayor should be here in five minutes. Commissioner Sanchez: Rise, please. Vice Chairman Gort: We'll have the invocation by Commissioner Sanchez and pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Teele. Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, Commissioner. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Good morning. First of all, if we could go ahead and start with the discussion on the item today on the order of the day. The resolution in front of me today was presented to me last night around 8 o'clock at night, which clearly, after getting back from out of town, I had an opportunity to review it and put some notes and a lot of questions that I have pertaining to it. First of all, May 18, 2000 0 � 0 I -- not to offend anybody, but I think it was -poorly written in a way where, I think, we should basically go down the resolution, item by item and paragraph by paragraph, just to verify some of the questions that I surely have pertaining to the resolution. Vice Chairman Gort: Well, we might as well as start out asking a different question so, since you begin, go right ahead, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. How do you -- how would you like to proceed, Mr. Vice Chair? Vice Chairman Gort: Well, the -- I think each one of us had a meeting with the Manager and we discussed it personally. I think, if you have any questions, they should be brought up now, any doubts, any questions you want to ask and then we'll start with you. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. On the 15 percent increase, retroactive for one year, as a matter of compensation, where I found out in the attachment number one, totaled-- and I was just given another one. This is the new one now? Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir. I think that's a comparison with what offer Managers got Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. Well, I have it. I just have to find it. Oh, here it is. Well, that includes 18,325. Could you explain that for me, that 15 percent, Mr. City Manager? Mr. Gimenez: Sure. My intention has always been to work to October of 2001 and -- as Fire Chief -- and then take advantage of the DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) Program. The eighteen thousand dollar ($18,000) retroactive will take my pension to that level. What you see is that the eighteen thousand retroactive, then is reduced from the one hundred and forty thousand dollar ($140,000) base and my first year's salary would be a hundred and twenty-two thousand. So, for the City, it doesn't amount to -- there's no more payment for me, but it does assure me that my pension will be at the level that I intend to retire at. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. There's another question that I had. On Paragraph B, where it states -- and this for the legal -- the City Attorney. Where it says, "Committing an act of gross malfeasance." Mr. City Attorney, can you identify or explain truly what malfeasance is? I know that, in the term of legal, it is very hard to prove malfeasance. Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, sir. Perhaps, the best way to describe it is just give you the definitions in Black's Law Dictionary of exactly what malfeasance is.. And it is defined as "evil doing or ill conduct; the commission of some act, which is positively unlawful; the doing of an act which is wholly wrongful an unlawful." Essentially, it is more than just negligence. It's an act of evil doing. For someone who is in a position to act, to act unlawfully with the intention to act in an evil and an unlawful way. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Pertaining to the same paragraph, I have a question. What does that clause mean "If terminated for something that is not for cause," what does he get? Mr. Vilarello: Well, cause -- if he's terminated for cause and cause is specifically defined... Commissioner Sanchez: What does he get? Mr. Vilarello: ...then he gets nothing. If he's terminated without cause, then he gets the benefit of the severance package, as defined. 2 May 18, 2000 Commissioner Sanchez: Is it one year or two years? Mr. Vilarello: If he's terminated within the first two years, he receives a salary-- a compensation of salary -- a one full year's salary but, in no event, less than a hundred and forty thousand seven hundred sixty dollars ($140,760). Commissioner Sanchez: Now, we... Mr. Vilarello: And after the second year, if he's terminated in the third year or thereafter, it's six months or one-half of the figure that I just mentioned. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Gimenez would still continue to hold both positions, which will be the Manager and the City Manager until rectified or... Mr. Vilarello: No. The provision of the resolution is very specific. Commissioner Sanchez: The last position held both positions for a time. Mr. Vilarello: The last City Manager was a different situation, where we had not corrected the 10 -days between the date of termination and the Manager's stay in office. The way this resolution was written is exactly the same way it was written for Manager Warshaw and that was, that he continues to serve in both positions, which does technically create a dual office holding position for a short period of time. But he remains in that position until this resolution is adopted and the Financial Oversight Board approves the resolution in its entirety, and that would be the effective date of the resolution. And, at that point, he would no longer be the Fire Chief. He would only be the City Manager. . Commissioner Sanchez: Now, here's the sixty-four thousand dollar question ($64,000): Seventeen months from today or in the next couple of days, they'll be an election in the City of Miami, Year 2000, whatever the turnout -- the outcome would be, that the Mayor is re-elected or not elected, what would happen if we get a new Mayor and he decides to bring in another City Manager? What happens here, under this contract, is that we would have to pay him a hundred and ninety-six thousand dollars six hundred and ninety-one dollars (196,619). Mr. Vilarello: No. It would be a hundred and forty thousand, plus any COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) increases that would take place over that 17 -month period. But under any circumstances, either Mayor Carollo or another Mayor, after the election in November of 2001, would have the right, under our Charter, to remove the City Manager. So, if it's a termination -- unless the termination is for cause, as defined within the resolution, he would get one -year's salary. Commissioner Sanchez: Now, after comparing... Mr. Vilarello: Plus his accrued vacation and sick days. Commissioner Sanchez: After comparing the past three City Managers, which I'm not going to compare Mr. Gimenez, because I have the utmost respect for him and I am going to give him the benefit of doubt and allow him, with his professionalism, to run the City as the City Manager. I do have a concern that has been brought to me by my constituents is that we continue to pass the burden on the taxpayers. Every time that -- whatever instability that we have in this city, we -- you know, through the mishaps that we've had in the City, the taxpayers have had to end up paying close to about, if I'm not mistaken, two hundred and ninety some thousand dollars and thank God that the Oversight Board did not allow Pedrosa to receive his benefits May 18, 2000 because of the financial situation we were in. So, that's a concern that I've had in my community, where people have... [AT THIS POINT, MAYOR CAROLLO ENTERED THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 10:24 A.M.] Commissioner Sanchez: Let me just switch mikes. This is the Mayor's seat. Mayor Carollo: Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez: That's just the concern that I have, that I have been talked to by my many of my constituents that says that, you know -- wherever the problem may lie, if we happen to dismiss the City Manager, for whatever reasons or he decides to leave, I believe that the taxpayers will once again have the burden of paying the severance package and it's -- looking at the numbers, comparing the packages -- and I'm being very honest. I think it's a lucrative package. I would like to see some type of reduction in that package. I think that a hundred and ninety-six thousand dollars ($196,000) is a lot of money. That's just my feelings. It's got nothing against Mr. Gimenez. 1, once again, state that I am-- you know, he's very capable of doing the job. But it's a concern that I have to -- once again, if we were to, through whatever happens, whether it be the Mayor or the Commissioners, to ask him -- to dismiss him again, once again, we would have to pay that money. And we're following a pattern that, in the long run -- I mean, the taxpayers are saying, "Hey, we're fed up with this. You know, your mistakes are costing us money." Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought that, first, we were to discuss the style and the plans of the Manager, but it seems that first we get to the money issue. So, I have several questions on the style, on the plans of the City Manager, and I would start asking-- because the minute that the new City Manager accepted the appointment from the Mayor, I'm sure that he realized that, you know, money or packages were going to be controversial according to the history of the City. So, I would rather ask, first, some questions about the plans of the City Manager and his style. Mr. City Manager, when you were appointed and we met, I asked you about your ideas in terms of the budget and the fees and the taxes. And your commitment is to look into the budget and try to either reduce or not to raise taxes. First question is about the fire fee. There is a program increase on the fire fee for next year. This year we did not increase that. With your experience and knowing that we only use that for fire equipment, do we need-- do we really need the increase of the fire fee for next year? Mr. Gimenez: Well, the fire fee is not just used for equipment. A portion of the Fire Fee is used for equipment. The Oversight Board, we have given them a five-year plan, which has a program increase. I've spoken to our financial people. I've spoken to Bertha Henry to see if there is a way that we can use other monies to offset the increase in the fees. I agree that, you know, one of my major points would be to try to not increase fees; maybe reduce fees, and also, eventually -- and I'm talking -- and I'm saying eventually -- even reduce the tax rate. But at this point in time, I can't commit to making that promise. I can only say that I will look at it and if the City can afford it, thenwe can do that. And if we can't, then we're going to have to go through the program increases. Commissioner Regalado: In terms of your view of the City's budget, I remember that when we discussed this year's budget, you came forward. As a matter of fact, you were the only department director that came forward and said "I don't need that amount" because you looked at your department. Would you look at every department to see if you don't need to operate those departments, certain amounts or certain tudgets, in order to reduce the costs of the City of Miami. 4 May 18, 2000 0 . 0 Mr. Gimenez: I'll answer it in this fashion: I believe that one of the problems that we have in the City is that we don't have a clear mission statement for the City that everybody understands and that mission statement needs to come from you, the elected officials. Once we have a clear mission statement, then every department and every program within the department will be looked at to see how it benefits the mission statement and if it doesn't benefit the mission of the City, those programs, even departments, may be eliminated and that's how you can get some of the cost -savings you're looking for. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, another question on your style and plans. We're being attacked with the fact that we are the fourth poorest city in the United States and maybe we're not or,maybe we are. But one of the main issues for the Commission is the social programs, the housing, the federal dollars that we disperse to help the community. And I would like to ask you about your ideas about Community Development Department, the fact that some CBO's (Community Based Organizations) and some social programs are nervous about the way that we are organizing the funds and the grants. Would you look at that department and that department -- and I mean it -- a closer look to see that it functions; that it brings the organization; that it brings the input of the people in order for us to understand better the needs of these organizations? Mr. Gimenez: I look forward to having community input on all types of different programs; all types of different departments. My view on Community Development is that we need to use those dollars wisely to generate more economic development in the City. In that way, bring up the standard of living for all the citizens in the City. But I certainly will welcome any participation from community groups in looking at our Community Development Program. Commissioner Regalado: My last question has to do with rmney for now because all the members of the Commission -- you said that you wanted to stay as Fire Chief until the Year 2001 and you could because you have been a good Fire Chief and I'm sure that any Manager would see that. If we were to give you a 15 percent increase in your salary, that would put you up to May of 2001 on your salary, is that correct? Mr. Gimenez: What it does, it gets me -- it gets my pension to the point it would be on October 1 of the Year 2001. Commissioner Regalado: Right. So, if we were to give you 15 percent increase in your salary to bring your pension up to the minute that you wanted to retire, you don't need a severance pay because if you're fired tomorrow, you'll leave with what you're going to leave anyway under Year 2001. Mr. Gimenez: I didn't say I was leaving in the Year 2001. 1 said that I was dropping in the Year 2001. And the DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) Program allows me to work another three years after that. So, that's my -- that was my long-term goal. I was not going to leave in the Year 2001. My pension -- if you understand the DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) Program, you go to a certain point; then you DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan), and then you can work three more years and that's what I was planning to do. Commissioner Regalado: So -- but what I meant is that -- I mean, if you were to be fired tomorrow or the next month or whatever or before two years, then you will leave with the amount of pension that you would have, had you leave or stayed in the Year 2001-- in May 2001? That... Mr. Gimenez: That's true. But, again, I was not planning to leave on the Year 2001. I was planning to leave more in the Year 2004. May 18, 2000 • Commissioner Regalado: And that would include your pension? That would increase your pension? Mr. Gimenez: My pension would have been set as of October 2001, but my DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) account would have been significantly higher after three years of accumulation in my account. So, there is a big difference there. Commissioner Winton: What's a DROP (Deferred Retirement Option Plan) Account? Mr. Gimenez: That's a Deferred Retirement Option Plan that Police and Fire have negotiated. And what it means is that you, for the purposes of pension, are retired. Your retirement monies go into a separate account; you do not take constructive receipt, but you continue to work for three years. And, then, after you leave in three years, then you can do whatever with those monies that went into that retirement account. Commissioner Regalado: But the fact of the matter is... Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if I can? And the City-- at that point, the City does not contribute further to the pension on behalf of that employee. That's the rest of equation. Commissioner Regalado: OK. So, that's 2001. I understand now. So, what it means is that, if the Commission will grant you the 15 percent raise and you will go up to the maximum of your pension, if, for any reason, you leave the City Manager job, you won't have to go through the unemployment line. I mean, you will have a nice retirement. Mr. Gimenez: The pension is my -- is the greatest benefit that I have. I have worked 25 years for that pension. Commissioner Regalado: Absolutely. Mr. Gimenez: And that's what I'm going to live for -- live on for the rest of my life. No, I'm not going to be in an unemployment line. I plan to work, you know, pass my tenure here with the City so-- but that's 25 years that I've invested in the City and the pension and that's very important to me. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. OK. I don't -- Mr. Chairman, I don't have other questions right now. But I just want to make sure that the 15 percent is something important for the Gty Manager and we could consider that. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Winton. Commissioner Winton: I have a number of technical questions first. I just don't understand the salary and benefits part, so I don't know who will answer these questions. Mr. Manager -- and I guess I have to say also that I'm a bit uncomfortable asking these kind of questions because, typically, when I ask these questions, it's behind some closed door somewhere and you're negotiating a deal with somebody that's gang to go to work for you and so, I'm not real comfortable negotiating this kind of stuff in public, but I guess that's the way -- clearly, that's the rules. And I don't mean any of this personally. I'm just trying to understand and make decisions for the benefit of our community. So, you told us what your current salary is. What did you say that was again, in the Fire Department? Mr. Gimenez: I think my current salary is somewhere in the hundred twent}4two thousand dollar range. Commissioner Winton: OK. And then the 15 percent on top of that, if-- fine. And it says here "Vacation 6 May 18, 2000 time, 38 days per year. Then there's initial credit of six months vacation. What does that mean? Mr. Gimenez: That means that if I'm confirmed, that I will lave a bank of six months of vacation that I can utilize without having to wait, you know, on a month to month basis. If I don't get a bank initially, then, basically, I'm going -- I have one -- couple of days per month that I can take for vacation. Commissioner Winton: And, so, is it typical with employees of your length of service that 38 vacation days is the norm? Is that... Mr. Gimenez: Actually, employees in my length of service, I have more than that for vacation. Commissioner Winton: Man, I should have gone to work for the City. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if I can? That six month vacation equals approximately 18 days. It's not six months of vacation. It's the amount that he would accumulate over six months or 18 days. Commissioner Winton: Oh. Thank you. Mr. Gimenez: You thought I was going to get six months vacation? Oh, no. Commissioner Winton: I thought the 38 days was pretty damned good. Six months, I knew I had chosen the wrong career path. Mr. Gimenez: I'll take that deal, six months vacation. I'm going to start vacation tomorrow, then. Commissioner Winton: In the health insurance part, the ten thousand four hundred and forgone on Health and the fifteen hundred on Life, is that just simply a cost; s that what those numbers reflect? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Winton: Thank you. And deferred compensation, again, that eight thousand dollars ($8,000) is a cost the City pays? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Winton; OK. And the 401(a) (22.24 percent of salary) up to a maximum of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000),. who pays that? Mr. Gimenez: The City, sir. Commissioner Winton: OK. That answers technical questions. Now, to the resolution and I'm -- at the moment, I'm specifically focused on the cause for termination and there are two causes: one's conviction of a crime by any state or federal agency and then the other's committing an act of gross malfeasance. In the first one, "conviction of a crime by state or federal agency," I'm very uncomfortable with that because it seems to me -- and I'm not sure what the right technical term ought to be. But, certainly, if, for some reason, any member of the City was indicted for a crime, I'm not sure that it's in the best interest of the City of Miami that, if a person's been indicted, they may not have been convicted, but they've certainly been indicted and that's a big, ugly cloud and I'm not -- and I'm very uncomfortable having someone sit in the position of Manager for the City of Miami that's been indicted. So, I couldn't support this clause written as strictly as conviction. Number Two, "committing an act of gross malfeasance." It also dawns on me-- and, May 18, 2000 again, I don't mean this personally, so -- and would much rather be discussing this somewhere else. But there's also a question, Mr. Manager, of the issue over whether or not you can do this job. And, so, what happens if we get six months down the road and it's determined that, for whatever reasons-- and I don't feel that you can't do the job, by the way. But something happens and you simply can't get this job done. And, unfortunately, in the city, we don't have a good system or any system, as far as I can tell, for measuring the performance of the Manager. You know, we don't have good performance measures so that I can sit here and check off: did you get this done, this done, this done, this done and know, from a goals and objective standpoint, whether you're succeeding. But there are other performance measures that we all just kind of clearly understand and we have certain deadlines for getting things done particularly related to budget and issues related to getting funds from federal government and those kinds of things. And there are issues related to leadership capabilities. So, if you begin to have high turnover in top management, middle management positions, you know, you begin to question the leadership of the Manager. So, if you're missing deadlines or have high turnover, we could have some serious budget problems cropping up in individual departments. That may or may not be the fault of the Manager but the accountability certainly stops with the Manager. So, I'm concerned that, if we have those kinds of problems, which are real kinds of problems, potentially real kinds of problems in any senior management level position, we don't have a mechanism -- we have a mechanism for removing the Manager but I'm not comfortable providing a severance, package if the Manager's removed for specific performance related issues. Then I'd have to go back to the point on your side that says, "Well, we don't have those performance measures so how do we define those?" And it seems to me that we need to figure out some specific performance measures that we can define because it certainly isn't fair to the tax payers, if we do happen to run into those kind of problems, that we remove the Manager for real performance related issues and then we have to provide a severance package to do that. So, I'm uncomfortable with that piece of the puzzle in that regard. In addition, piggybacking on what Commissioner Regalado said, it seems to me that certainly at the --you know, you've walked into this job with your eyes wide open. You know the history --and we've had an interesting history -- you know the circumstance surrounding how you got here; you know the environment that you've walked into, and you also know that, in November of 2001, there will be a new election for a Mayor. And, so, I also -- piggy backing on Commissioner Regalado's thoughts here -- don't feel that it's appropriate for this community to provide a severance package to a Manager that may, after the election in November of 2001. That's something you're walking into eyes open and we may or may not have the same Mayor and the Mayor may or may not want to keep the same Manager at that point. So, I'm very uncomfortable providing any severance beyond the 2001 point for the election. And then a question that I have to you and it, again, piggy backs on a comment that Commissioner --'or a question that Commissioner Regalado had. When the City nearly went bankrupt, the Blue Ribbon Task Forces brought in and they had a lot of really good recommendations to help get the city out of the mess that it was in, but all of tlnse recommendations dealt with revenue sides of the formula. All of them. And those decisions, which were important decisions and decisions that we simply had to make at the time to bring the City out of its near bankruptcy status, all required new fees, new taxes to be placed on the backs of our citizens and our businesses within this community, which has put us clearly, head and shoulders, from a tax and fee standpoint, well•above all of our competition in, frankly, all of South Florida. And there was nothing focused on the expense side of the formula. And I said this at another Commission meeting: One of the things that we really have to do, from a city standpoint -- and businesses have been doing it for the last -- well, for the last 10 years certainly -- and that is, stepping back, looking at how they run their business, re-engineering how they run their business, particularly in this kind of high-technology world we're living in; figuring out if that's the right business segment, not right business segment and making moves to reduce expenses to become more competitive. Well, we're in a competitive environment as well and our competition is Coral Gables, is Blue Lagoon, is Miami Beach, is Broward County, frankly, in a very, very large extent, and we know how many of our employees don't live in the City of Miami. For two reasons: Schools are lousy and fees and expenses are very high, so they choose to live in Broward County and Palm Beach County and commute to the City of Miami. So, we've got to make ourselves more competitive so that those folks want to move back down here. 8 May 18, 2000 We can't do anything yet about schools but we can do a lot about the expense side in cleaning up our neighborhoods. So, my question is: will you have a plan for looking in depth at the expense side of the formula within the City of Miami so that we can attack that side of the formula as well and maybe get ourselves in a better competitive position? Mr. Gimenez: Like I stated before, I will look at-- we do need to determine what it is the City-- the kinds of services and what is the City here to do and we may not have done that in the past. We need to do that in the future, determine what it is that we want to do as a city and, then, those departments and programs that do not fit that definition, those -- that's how you can cut some expenses. There are also some expenses that can be cut simply due to re-engineering a process. There may be waste. And those things will be looked at also. But there are also, you know, increases in revenue that do not -- are not on the taxpayer -- do not burden the taxpayer. And we need to look at all of our leases and all of our lands and make better use of those and make sure that we are -- from a business perspective, it makes sense, you know, how we do business, you know, in the City. Commissioner Winton: One last question. Again -- and I have no experience negotiating somebody's package in public, with a whole bunch of other folks sitting at the table. I've made some specific comments relative to my level of discomfort for the -- particularly, the severance package and the removal for cause. What's the -- I don't know how to negotiate this in public. I've made my comments. What's the next step that I do about this? Vice Chairman Gort: Johnny, you do it just like you do in the private sector, except you have an audience that are looking at all the things you're doing and you're saying. What we'll do is, I'm allowing each of the Commissioners and then T'll allow the Mayor to express their opinions and come up with the questions. Then, as a group, we'll make a decision. What should be the -- after we listen to all the arguments on the issues -- and I'm sure the Manager, after we all speak, he probably want to speak himself and set up his plans. And then we'll make a decision among ourselves. Commissioner Winton: Thank you. Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, Willy -- if you would yield, Commissioner Teele, so you could be the last. My questions were clearly pertaining to the severance package. I would direct some questions to the City Manager or Mr. Gimenez. Being that we're the legislative body and the Mayor's the executive branch of our government and, you know, we come up -- the Mayor will come up with the ideas and we will approve them and sometimes we could come up with the ideas, as long as we have three votes of the Commission. However, you run the day-to-day operation of the City and I just wanted to see how you -- what changes are you going to make or what changes are you going to provide in the areas of Parks, Solid Waste? What creative idea are you going to follow with economical development? And I don't want to continue on because I just want you to answer just those three to start off with. Mr. Gimenez: In the area of Parks, I'm a firm believer that we need more programs for our youth in the parks and we'll be working with the Parks Director to put those programs in place and make sure that the -- as much as possible. I mean, we have budgetary constraints -- that we develop maybe more sports programs, more educational programs in our parks to keep our youth busy during the day. Commissioner Sanchez: How do you feel about a four percent -- the four percent that's allocated budget to Parks? Would you like to see an increase on that? 9 May 18, 2000 Mr. Gimenez: Is that to the Parks Department? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Mr. Gimenez: Like I said, I think the Parks Department is a vital, you know, link to hebing us to revitalize the neighborhoods; to get our youth, you know, involved in programs. And, you know, I'm a firm believer that -- you know, that an idle mind may lead to trouble and so, to put them -- to put our youth and to give them activities to do after school, et cetera, I think it would be, you know, a tremendous benefit to the City. Commissioner Sanchez: On the recurring revenue, which is the most important key factor here. I mean, we can't continue to raise fees and taxes, as we've done in the past. I think we need to focus on bringing in recurring revenue. Elaborate a little bit on what your thoughts are of bringing in recurring revenue. Mr. Gimenez: Well, we need to look at some of the properties that we have available. Some of the waterfront property. I mean, all the types of properties that we have, to see what we can do to develop those and get, you know, recurring revenues from the assets that we do have. Certainly want to continue what's going on in downtown, in Brickell in trying the attract new businesses and new development, again, which will lead to, you know, increasing recurring revenues to the City. And, also, you know-- I mean, what we really need to do is to try to revitalize the neighborhoods as much as possible; lying back more of a middle class and, in that way, raise the properties values, you know, throughout the City, which will bring again recurring revenues and, then, after that, you can start, you know, thinking about reducing the tax rate, which, again, will be even more of an incentive to, you know, basically start the ball rolling here to get more recurring revenue. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, let me begin by saying how much I appreciate Mr. Gimenez -- Carlos Gimenez being accessible and available, I think, to the Oversight Board, to the Mayor, to Commissioners. I want to apologize to you publicly. I've not had an opportunity to spend much time with you, not nearly as much as I would have liked. But I really enjoyed watching you be roasted or questioned by the Oversight Board and I think you handled yourself extremely well. And I think it's very, very helpful that you understand the parameters and the pressure that the City of Miami and this Commission are under, particularly, as it relates to the budget and budget issues. And I've said repeatedly, I think the Oversight Board process has been extremely helpful to the longterm of the City. I am looking forward to the day that we can remove the Oversight Board, but I think we, as a Commission, most of all, have got to mature and to create the kinds of checks and balances, the dual check and balance that, quite candidly, we've been afraid to put in place. If the Oversight Board leaves tomorrow, who's going to do estimating? We can't have the budget office or the Manager doing it. You're estimating to yourself? That's what got us -- before. I think, you know, the whole quarterly estimating process that the Governor and the legislature and now the City and the Oversight Board go through is extremely helpful. And I believe that we need to begin to develop a process that puts us in a position that we can begin to move to eliminate to Oversight Board, which means the Commission, as a body, must assume our rightful responsibilities that we, quite candidly, have not discharged over the last twenty years, which is why the Oversight Board is there. And I think, you know, the kinds of discussions that you have entered into are helpful. Let me just say this, that I would hope that one of the things that you would do is take a department director or two to each Oversight Board, rotate, so that that culture can begin to be understood. This isn't juit one or two Commissioners doing something. Because there's a tendency to just want to do things the way we've always done it. This Commission, going from a unicameral structure, that is, where we were the executive and the 10 May 18, 2000 legislative, with the Manager reporting to us -- and three years ago, going to a two-tier of government, where we have a legislative body and an executive body. The executive body is clearly headed by the Mayor and the -- followed up by the Manager and the Commission, which has some policy responsibilities, has never been -- we've not made the change yet and I'm really hoping that you will work with us, as we continue to refine and define what our Charter is and what our procedures are. And I'd like to just know, will you work with this Commission in sort of breaking, cutting the umbilical cord of what used to be a Mayor and Commission with a Manager form of government to the current form of government we have, which is a Mayor operating as a Chief Executive Officer, with a Manager who is the Chief Administrative Officer, with a Commission that is now the legislative body. And I'd like to know if you're committed to working with us to further refine and develop that process. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I am. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I note the presence of the Mayor and I'd like to pause and yield to the Mayor, if he would... Vice Chairman Gort: I appreciate it if you would yield to me first and I'd like to get a chance to speak. Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean-- I haven't even started but I... Mayor Carollo: I appreciate it, but I prefer for all the members of the Commission to speak first and to express yourselves and then I will happily address this body. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to ask for approximately 10 to 15 min-- 15 to -- 15 minutes, similar to what Commissioner Winton has used, and I'll be-- I'll try to go through this very quickly. Vice Chairman Gort: Go right ahead, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, first and foremost, the anti -deficiency, which is the law of the City of Miami, is binding on you, in certain unique ways, in addition to being binding on each department head. As you know, the previous Manager resisted the anti -deficiency. It took us four months to pass it, but I think the one thing that the previous Manager would say openly and publicly is that the antideficiency has been a tremendous assistance to him as Manager, as the Oversight Board has acknowledged publicly, that the anti -deficiency is of real assistance in managing the City. I would like to know one thing: Have you read the Anti -Deficiency Act from cover to cover carefully and do you understand clearly the duties and the obligations that are placed on you, that you cannot delegate, that you ate personally, civilly liable for violations, intentional or unintentional, knowing or unknowing? Have you read the antideficiency recently in this context? Mr. Gimenez: To be honest with you, no, sir, but I will become familiar with it and I will be, you know, very familiar with the aspects. I am familiar with the aspects as far as the director is concerned and I understand that I am civilly liable if I do go over budget. Commissioner Teele: All right. Well, I would specifically ask you to be aware of your obligations in presenting the monthly report, except in the month of September and, specifically, that you cannot delegate your responsibilities of this. And the notification requires that you immediately notify the Mayor and the Commission of any anti -deficiency, as well as any department directors are required to notify you, of any -- in writing. So, this is not something that can be done, you know, in the bathroom or it's something-- it's a very formal process and I would urge you to become -- acquaint yourself in that connection. Relating to the organizational issue. As you know, the City of Miami is extremely flat. We have a lot of departments. I 1 I May 18, 2000 don't think there's any question for us to be a three hundred million dollar ($300,000,000) government as compared to the County, say a four, billion dollar ($4,000,000,000) government. And if you want to compare it city to city, Phoenix, I guess, is one of the cities that everybody-- if you read books -- is one of the best managed, best model cities. Will you commit, before you prepare the budget -- and, see, what happens is these budgets gets prepared and then everybody goes to look. Before we prepare the budget, will you look at trying to right -size this government, inconsistent with yotr views, not the Commission views, but whatever your views are as to what the appropriate size of a government of the City-- of Miami size, not based upon what we have now or what we've always had, but looking at comparable cities, whether it be Tampa or Phoenix or San Jose, California. It's really doesn't matter. Will you do that? And will you also commit to use an outside consultant, such as our external auditor, to help you come together and pull that kind of information together? So that we can get back to what Commissioner Winton says. We spend all of our time talking about revenue, but we don't talk about efficiency. Will you look at that issue before you presentthe budget and prepare the budget? Mr. Gimenez: I'll answer that, yes, but -- and, you know, I'll give you an example. As director of the Fire Department, I lead the largest reorganization in the department's history in 1995. So, I'm not afraid of change and I'm not afraid to take a look at anything and if it makes sense, we'll do it better and more efficiently. I'll certainly pursue it. Outside help will be great and I'd like to look at other cities to see how they're organized and some of the well-run cities and take -- you know, I'm not afraid to steal ideas either. Commissioner Teele: And I'm very encouraged by your remarks and I'm also encouraged by what you've done in the past. But, again, I want to be very clear. I, as one Commissioner, think that for the size of our budget, we have far too many departments in this City and there needs to be some effort to right size this. Similarly, one of the most frustrating things that I have, as a Commissioner and I'm sure the public and even the employees have this, is that there are many departments that don't have a deputy, someone who's number two. Whether it's one deputy or two deputy. But I think it's almost unbelievable, coming from the military -- and I'll admit I'm biased. Do you think having a number two in charge or do you think, you know, this idea of having the Round Robin, Acting Director and, you know, that's politically good and it gives everybody a good -- but that doesn't really create any of ability for somebody to act in the absence of someone. Do you believe that each department should have a deputy or something like that? Mr. Gimenez: Sir, I tried the flat organization after I was Fire Chief for a couple of years and I found that didn't work and I created that -- and I recreated deputy positions, so I'm very much in favor of that. Commissioner Teele: Well, I would hope that you would -- as part of that organizational view, that you would ask each department to have at least somebody -- it makes no sense in government if somebody's sick, if somebody has death in their family or whatever, that the worth has to stop until that person comes back. Somebody ought to be able to make decisions and be empowered to make decisions in departments. And, again, I'm encouraged by your answer. Before I go into the taxes and the fees and millage issue, I want to make just make one observation. I was very, very -- and I respect my colleagues and your rights to make your decision. But I was very, very concerned when I read in the paper that there are three people who are going to vote for your confirmation because, quite candidly, if there's three people going to vote for it, why have a hearing? Why don't we all just vote and go home? And I really do think that it does-- and I don't -- I'm not quarreling with anyone. But I really do think that, if we're going tohave a confirmation process and we may not if the -- if my form of government is sustained by the court, we would not have the right to confirm the Manager. The Mayor would appoint; we would have a hearing to discuss his vision, and we would never vote. But I really do think that we undermine our own authority when everybody's declaring their vote before you have a hearing. Because I may be persuaded by something someone says in the process and, quite frankly, I don't think we're treating each other fairly. Similarly, I want to put on the record that the Miami Herald, in a very strong editorial today, has urged that we reject your appointment. 12 May 18, 2000 And I want to say, publicly, that I do read the Miami Herald editorials and I am guided, from time to time, when I find that they are right. I know the Mayor reads their editorials because they've generally sided with him on everything against me on everything. So, some days you're right and some days you're wrong. But I must say this: I don't quarrel with their editorial in their opinion, but I do quarrel with their conclusion. Our Charter gives the Mayor and only the Mayor the authority to appoint a Manager and I believe our view should be, first, a view to determine whether or not the Mayor has exercised his authority legally and properly, and whether or not there is a reason not to confirm you. And based upon everything that I've had brought to me by people and everything that I've discussed and where I am going now, I've not found any reason yet not to confirm you. So, I mean, I really do think that the media needs to be very, very careful in what we're saying about our form of government. Because I think the biggest problem that this community has, quite frankly, is not understanding the form of government. In that regard, there's an oath of office that you swore on 9th day of May. "I, Carlos Gimenez, so solemnly swear that I will support and protect and defend the constitution and laws of the United States of America." Now, it goes on. That's the fist thing that it says. I want an assurance from you that you will, in fact, support and defend the constitution and the laws of the United States and those persons acting under color of law for this country, first and foremost, in your duties as the Manager of the City of Miami. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I will. Commissioner Teele: Well, we've had discussions, privately, about requests from government officials, requests from the Governor, et cetera, but I really do think that it's important that everybody in this community understand that this is a united --this is not a city/state in the old Italian, Mediterranean notion of the city/states; that this is a federalized United States, and that your first duty is to protect and defend the law -- the constitution and laws of the United States. And it goes on to the Charter. At no point does it mention the Commission or the Mayor. It talks to the Charter. Nor does it talk about the Attorney General or the President. But I do think that it's very, very important to put on the record that when you raise your hand to protect and defend the constitution and the laws of the United States, in a federal system, those laws are superior to local laws and those laws take precedent over local laws and they have every since this country was founded. I would like to know, very candidly, that will you seek a positive and cooperative relationship with the Federal Government in the aftermath of where we are today, recognizing that the Federal Government has given this City over a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) in law enforcement grants over the last five to seven years? Mr. Gimenez: Sir, I believe in building bridges and I think we need to build those bridges and, you know, what happened in the past is in the past and we need to move forward. Commissioner Teele: Will you seek to create a positive working relationship with the Federal Government and, particularly, those agencies that give this community grant funds? And, contrary to popular opinion, we get more money from the federal -- Attorney General's Office than we do from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) dollars. So, whether it be HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) or HHS (Department of Health and Human Services) or the Attorney General, I'd like to know, will you seek to work cooperatively with them and to repair whatever damages be done? Because I'm going to tell you this the next time we send a grant request up to Washington to the Attorney General, don't you believe that the bureaucrats won't all be trying to shine up to the next guy up or the next woman up and they'll be saying not only "no" but "Ino." And it's going wind up costing the citizens of this county a lot of money if we don't continue to get those grants. Will you work to establish a relationship with the Attorney General, the Department of Housing and Urban Affairs and those other agencies that have historically given us funds. Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. 13 May 18, 2000 Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, the taxes versus fees, I'm very concerned about your answer to Commissioner Winton and Commissioner Regalado. This Commission has debated for three years and, for the first time this past year, we decided we were going to reduce taxes. Before the policy was to keep taxes high and fees low. We reversed that policy last year. Today you've come in and said you want to keep the fees low and then you'll work on the taxes. Is your priority going to be to lower taxes or to lower fees? You can't do both. One or the other. Mr. Gimenez: My priority is to try to lower, you know, both taxes and fees. I know you say you can't do both. But that's going to be very difficult. Commissioner Teele: We don't need to pol -- we don't need six, seven politicians. We've got six. We need professional straight answers. I mean -- and I'm being very serious, Carlos, because that's -- it's a big policy distinction between taxes and fees. This Commission, for the first time last year, voted to lower taxes and increase fees. Now, I'm going to tell you, my next question is, what is your target millage? Right now we're at nine point -- what is it, nine point five? What is your target millage-- let me ask you the easy question. What is your target millage -- where would you like to see us be -- without regard to all the budget, where would you, as the Manager, like to see us be for next budget year, at nine point five mills or at the rollback rate -- the rollback rate is the millage rate that it would take to raise the same amount ofmoney -- or would you like to see us lower taxes? Mr. Gimenez: What I'd like to see and what I can and can't do may be two different things. Commissioner Teele: I'm only asking about what you'd like to see. Mr. Gimenez: OK. At this point, you know, we're moving forward with the same tax rate, nine point five. And we're... Commissioner Teele: That means we're going to increase taxes, next year. Because when you go with the same number, you adjust from your rollback rate. That is the same millage that it takes to raise the same amount of dollars. The rollback rate is going to probably be around nine point two five. So, you're going to ask us to -- nine point two five. You're going to ask us to increase from the roll -- and that's an increase, is that correct, Mr. Attorney? You need to say it on the record. Mr. Vilarello: Any tax rate that is over the rollback rate, which will be given to us, will be a tax increase. Commissioner Teele: Are you proposing -- are you stating now that you're going increase taxes next year or you're going try to keep us at the rollback rate, that is, the same rate that it takes to collect the same amount of dollars? Mr. Gimenez: Our plan calls for the tax rate to be nine point five. I can't sit here and tell you that I'm going go to the roll back rate. That would not be fair to you or anybody else. Commissioner Teele: Well, unfortunately, the way the state constitution and the state laws are written, the rollback rate is where you have to start from. So, it's not like go back to that. That's the starting point. So, the state law requires that you start your budget from the rollback rate. Anything above that is an increase. And I just want to be very clear: Are you saying, on the record, that you are going to go above the rollback rate for taxes, which means you're going to increase taxes next year? Mr. Gimenez: What I'm saying is... 14 May 18, 2000 • 0 Commissioner Teele: I'm saying, as a vision, not you're going to do it but that's your recommendatbn. Mr. Gimenez: What I'm saying is, I need to look at this budget and see if there are any expenses that can be reduced and, obviously, if we can, then that will come off the nine point five. But I can't sit here and promise anything at this point. Commissioner Teele: All right. I wanted you to know, it's my intention to vote against any budget, any budget that increases taxes. And an increase in taxes is what's read into the law as a first thing that must be discussed in 5:O1p.m. and, that is, an increase from the rollback rate. I am supporting a budget-- and I've bailed this City out on four times on this vote and it was a, you know, four/one vote the first time and, then, the Oversight Board stuck it back. I'm not going beyond the rollback rate. And that's just me speaking. Commissioner Winton, you may want to say something on that. Commissioner Winton: Well, actually-- and I wanted to hear the Manager's answer. But, again, being the new guy here, it seems to me that the question you asked him ought to be a policy issue that this Commission deals with. Commissioner Teele: It is but, unfortunately, this Commission has not passed a resolution. I'll put e resolution on. Because we -- see, the trick -- the "chicken and the.egg" fight that we've been -- and it's been unfair to the Manager and previous Managers -- is that this Commission does not set a policy. But even before that, the Charter requires for the Mayor to set a policy. The Mayor is the person who is supposed to send out a budget. Mr. Attorney... Mayor Carollo: No, no, no, no, no. I wish that would be the case. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, what are the responsibilities of the Mayor? And I may be confusing the Charter... Mayor Carollo: You are. Commissioner Teele: ...of the County with the Charter of City. And maybe we need to put in the Budgetary Responsibility Act that I passed in the County. But, clearly, the responsibility of initiating a budget should come from the Mayor. Now, does the Charter say that? Mr. Vilarello: The Charter simply states that "the Mayor shall prepare and deliver a budgetary address annually to the people of the City between July and September 30th of each year," and that report will be done with consultation with the City Manager. Commissioner Teele: OK. So, the Mayor is the person responsible for submitting the budgetary message, is that what the Charter says? Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. It simply says, he submits a budgetary address to the people of the Cityof Miami. Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean -- OK. Well... Mayor Carollo: It's the same Charter that your approved in the County. Commissioner Teele: Well, I'll tell you what we need to do. Would you get the Budget Responsibility Act that I passed of 1993 that basically takes the same language and requires that the Mayor submit a budget 15 May 18, 2000 0 .0 target to the Manager by some date, using that Charter provision? Because the problem is this: nobody wants to go first and everybody wants to criticize whatever happens. I don't mind going first, OK, and I'll put it on the next agenda meeting that we ought to have a discussion on the target millage rate. Because how can he prepare a budget if there is no direction? If the Mayor doesn't give direction, if w don't give direction... Commissioner Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: ...then, you know, the thing's on automatic pilot. But, in any event, Mr. Manager, one of the things that I think Miami is destined to be is a major city. Being a major ciy in the United States has certain privileges and, quite frankly, benefits. First, you get different criteria for federal grants; your formula's different; your Community Development formula increases. There are only so many major cities -- Mr. Mayor might be interested to know -- they get a direct one on one meeting with the President annually, and that's reserved for Mayors of major cities. In addition to the fact that every Cabinet member is directed to work with every major Mayor of major cities. The major city definition, by federal law, starts at five hundred thousand population. It's not how big you are or how loud you can talk. It's how many people you represent. I believe that this City should have, as a policy, of becoming a major city. Thtt is, a population of five hundred thousand. To do that, Mr. Manager, means very simply one thing. We've got to get our tax rate comparable with the County. Nobody is going to want to vote to become a part of the City of Miami if they're going to pay more taxes than fees. Comparable. Do you think that is a goal that you could work with the Mayor of the City, if he adopts and the Commission, in trying to get Miami up to a population of five hundred thousand? I think we're about three hundred and twenty thousand now. Three sixty. Is that a goal that you think you could work with us on? Mr. Gimenez: Yes. It's going to take a lot of different facets to make it happen, but I definitely think it's a workable goal. Commissioner Teele: Very quickly, I asked the previous Manager the question. I have the transcript here. Suffice it to say, that the one thing that I'm personally disappointed with the previous Manager in is that he misled me and the Commission on one thing -- and I'm going to ask you directly -- if you're confirmed as Manager, can you give up your control, your influence, your sticky little fingers out of the Fire Department? Can you let the Fire Department Director, whoever you name, run the department, without having to check with you? You know, the last time -- you know, I asked the Chief of Police this and every other day there was -- I mean, you know, it was -- you know, he wouldn't address anybody's budget but the Police's budget. But the Chief of Police never got to talk about his issues. He addressed them because he was comfortable. And that's a normal tendency. I think you need to say, on the Fire issues, you're not going to deal with them for a year. Let one of your deputies deal with them. Imean -- but the fact is, people tend to hang on to what they know and that means they don't grow in what they don't know. Simple question: Will you assure this Commission that, if you're confirmed, that you will give up the direct control, influence and indirect control and influence over the Fire Department and will allow the Fire Director to run the Department? Mr. Gimenez: I will maintain the same control and influence over the Fire Department as I will over every other department. My management philosophy is to get good pecple to surround me and let them do their job. I will not interfere in the da�,to-day operations of the Fire Department. Commissioner Teele: So, you won't be transferring -- what did we transfer the other day, the Internal Review of Police to the Manager's Office? Didn't we -- didn't that happen recently? We had transferred some office that was previously in the Police Department to the-- Mr. Clerk, pull that up and let's read it into the record next. Unions: Do you have a positive working relationship with the unions? And have you spent time talking -- I know you work with the Fire Unions, but I'm really concerned about the Police and the -- 16 May 18, 2000 most of all, I'm concerned about AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) because I think, you know, when you get all these firefighters in here, it's really good to see so many people come in and I commend you for coming out, but it also has the effect of making people who are not firefighters feel like, "Well, where do we fit into this?" Do you have -- have you talked to Charlie Cox? I mean, as distasteful as it may be sometime. But have you had the opportunity to talk to Mr. Cox? Mayor Carollo: Charlie, you'll have equal time. Don't worry. Commissioner Teele: Have you had the opportunity to talk to Mr. Cox since Mayor designated you as Manager and do you feel that you can give the other unions equal access and work positively and creatively with them? Mr. Gimenez: Sir, part of my Manager style is to have participating management and that includes very much having the unions have a great say in how the department, at least the department that I was over, run. I had a very good working relationship with the IFF. I have a very good relationship with AFSCME. I have spoken to both individuals since my appointment, as recently as this morning. Commissioner Teele: You have talked to Mr. Cox? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, I have. Commissioner Teele: Well, that great. Mr. Gimenez: This morning, prior to meeting withyou. Commissioner Teele: I think it's very good that they know --I mean, we don't need them running the city or helping to run the City, but I think it's very important that the unions know that they have access and I'm encouraged by that. Let me go to one of the most sensitive issues. And, Mr. Chairman, I only need five more minutes, if you'll allow me? The most serious issue that this community has is of community relations and affirmative action. Let me just read to you, very briefly -- I think this is a serious problem, Mr. Manager. With your sensitivity to women and then I go on to talk about the fact that you don't have a great reputation in appointing women. This is from the transcript of Garci&Pedrosa, when I -- my questions to him. And, so, I want to -- I'm putting that in the context that I've asked the same question repeatedly. Can you give the public a commitment that you will work -- particularly, at this point in time, as one of your highest priorities -- first, to actually ensure that women, African Americans, Anglos, as well as Hispanics, receive equal and fair opportunity for a promotion and for a consideration when they occur, that are qualified? Mr. Gimenez: Absolutely, sir. You have my commitment on that. Commissioner Teele: There's a resent story in "The Herald" and I'm going to pass it out to the Commission, and I think -- it says -- speaks in volumes about how well the City is doing, and I don't want to get into this. The City is doing a lot better -- and this is a "Herald" story of Monday -- that compares the City of Miami police lieutenants in the County in 1980 to 2000 and in the City. And just to use an example: There were four percent blacks lieutenants and above in the City in 1980. In the County, there wre four percent. In the year 2000, in the County, there's 11 percent blacks and in the City, there's 22 percent blacks. I mean, you know, we've done double what the County has done as it relates to -- this is their Charter. I mean, they -- I didn't pick this out. They did. But there's this perception that the City is very racist; that the City is very anti -black. I think a lot of it has to do with that we've not gotten our message out-- and I mean the facts. I don't mean the spin, the sail. Can you commit to me that you will work with the Mayor's office and with the 17 May 18, 2000 appropriate offices in getting out a message, even if it's a paid message in the media, that what the real City facts are -- I don't we think we ought to give names and talk that, but Ae need to get our story out because there's a very poor perception right now in this City that blacks are being discriminated against. Will you commit to work with the Mayor and the Commission in getting out the facts on the image, once this thing has -- once your appointments have been made and we know what we're doing? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: How long have we had a City, Mr. Manager? How long has our City been incorporated? It's about a hundred five -- four years, hundred and three years. Mr. Gimenez: Eighteen ninety-six. Commissioner Teele: OK. Well, whatever that comes to. I'm not good in math. How many black police chiefs have we had in that hundred plus years? I mean, black Fire Chiefs have we had that hundred plus years? How many African American Fire Chiefs have we had? Mr. Gimenez: Directors in departments, none that I know of, sir. Commissioner Teele: OK. Maybe Mr. Flagler may have had one back then, you think? Mr. Gimenez: No, sir. I don't... Commissioner Teele: Is there any particular reason, from your professional, why an African American has not been named Chief or Director of the Fire Department? Is there some unique quality that is necessary that African Americans don't have or need more assistance or training in? Mr. Gimenez: No. There is no reason why. Commissioner Teele: So, in your opinion, an African American or a woman or an Anglo or a Hispanic are equally qualified -- that are equally qualified could assume that position? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Moving on to Police. You've committed already to doing an internal review of certain areas. Will you reconfirm that so the Law Enforcement Trust Fund that you discussed with the Commission before? Mr. Gimenez: I'm sorry, sir. I didn't that. Commissioner Teele: You committed previously that there would be an internal review-- I'm sorry. The internal auditor would review the Law Enforcement Trust Fund over the last 10 or 12 years, going back to Clarence Dixon coming forward. Are you prepared to go forward with that, as well? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: And in the context of Commissioner Winton and others, one of the main problems with Law Enforcement Trust, I think, is that they don't talk to the departments, the Parks Department indirect. Will you assure us that the Chief of Police and the Parks Director will have a meeting and let's look first at how we can enhance some of our City programs in that area? 18 1May 18, 2000 Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to yield. But I did want to talk about City/County relationships, which I think is a real problem, and major developments. I am very concerned about the Convention Center, the Watson Island, the Shake -a -Leg; I'm concerned about the City taking 18 months, in the Community Development Office, to carry out an ordinance directing-- and that ordinance still has been complied with -- and I want your assurance that you will look at the ordinance and ensure that the Community Development Department complies with the Commission directive before the end of this year, as it relates to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: And, finally -- and I also want you to work with the Mayor's initiative in improving City Hall. I also want to mention- things that I think each district should have a major economic in tourist activity. Commissioner Gort has expressed his concern about the vegetable market or wh1ever that -- Allapattah... Vice Chairman Gort: The produce market. Commissioner Teele: The produce market. Vice Chairman Gort: It's coming along. Commissioner Teele: I mean, it's the kind of thing that, if you all would take it and make it the same kind of initiative as we do some of these other things, I believe that there should be a major tourist economic activity in each of the five districts. I want to support the farmer's market as an example of one and I really would hope that you could do that. But the final thing that I would like to know, in this context, is this: can you assure this Commission that you will be professional and give us your best professional recommendation without regard to the vote or where you think the vote is; that you will instruct your department directors don't count votes in making recommendations, but to give professional recommendations without regard to where, you know, the outcome of this, as the first priority, and that you will be a professional adninistrator and give us your best professional view? Mr. Gimenez: Sir, I will always try to be, you know, a professional and I will not be counting votes. I will give you my best opinion. Then, it's all up to you to decide which way you want to go n the policy and direction that you give to the administration. Commissioner Teele: One final Economic Development question. The last time the Fire Department --you all run the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) emergency preparedness issues, right? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele:' Have we been able to find -- this is a very important question. My vote hinges on this. I'm going to be honest. Have you all been able to find local restaurants and barbecue stands that are n the City of Miami to buy the food for the people working around the clock and can you give me some assurance that you won't forget where those restaurants and barbeque stands are? Mr. Gimenez: I recall now that Tony Romas burned down or it's not available. And I also happy to report that, during the last time we activated the EOC, we used People's Barbecue. 19 May 18, 2000 Commissioner Teele: That's a swing vote for me. Thank you very much. Mayor Carollo: You like barbecue, too? Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Mayor Carollo: I'm good a barbequer. I've got to invite you over. Try my barbecue hut. Commissioner Teele: I'd like that, Mr. Mayor. Vice Chairman Gort: Being last, that would be a good idea. Being last... Mayor Carollo: Now, that I have a little more time. Vice Chairman Gort: Most of the questions have been asked but there's a couple of things. When I first ran in November'93, I used to have black hair. I was the young guy, the kid on the block, and in six years, I've become a vet and I've gone through a lot of situations, a lot of changes the City has gone through. And one of the problems that we have, the news media only reports the negative things and I think Arthur Teele is very correct in this: we've done a lot of good things. And one thing a lot of people do not understand -- and I stress this all the time -- the evolution that has taken place in this City in the last 30 years have not taken place in any city in the United States. So, we -- sure, we have problems. We should be very proud of it. We've done very good, but we can do a lot better. Now, one of the things I'd like to ask you. I've had the experience in working with you and the unions and everyone during the crisis and we all teamed up together and that's why we were able to resolve some of the problems that we had in the past. I'd like for you to give us some descriptions -- and you've done work beyond the Chief of Fire Department. I'd like for you to address some of the responsibilities that you had in the past, particularly, when we worked on the budget back in -- when we reduced the budget, just before the crisis, by twenty -- we were target to reduce the budget by twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) and I think we reduced it by thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) at that time. And the other activities that you had, I'd like for you to address those. Mr. Gimenez: Well, you know, that was back in 1995, and I refer to their largest biggest reorganizational in the department's history. We're able to reduce the number of firefighters by 10 percent and we increased revenue just from that department. But I also was working, you know, in conjunction with you in reviewing all the departments and making suggestions for how to, you know, reduce the expenditures and you're right, we were able to, I think, reduce it between twent},six million and thirty million after we saw that that crisis was coming forward. There have been several departments that have been placed under the Fire Department over the years. I've been over the Risk Management Department; I've been over Group Health; the Hurricane Andrew Recovery Task Force, which Chief Rollason lead, was under the Fire Department; I was given the charge to move all the employees from various City buiidings into the MRC (Miami Riverside Center); I was the project coordinator for that, made sure that the construction was on time and that the people were, you know, moved in; I acquired the computers, acquired all the furniture and that was a pretty big task. Totally, had nothing to do with my job as the Fire Chief. I also was-- during the 1996 crisis -- and I guess we have to name and which year it was. I mean, the '92, the '96, the '95. 1 was given the responsibility to oversee the Revenue Task Force that had Solid Waste inspectors, NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) people, etcetera, and we generated, you know, an additional five million dollars ($5,000,000), you know, to the City by securing all the outstanding Certificates of Use to people that did not have Certificate of Use. Also, by updating all our occupational licenses; by updating the number of billing units for garbage. There were about five thousand -- who were picking up five thousand more units than we were charging for and -- you know, those are just some of the things that I've done outside of the Fire 20 May 18, 2000 Department. Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. My second question is, we've all addressed the economic development of our neighborhoods. Let's face it. I don't care how much we bring into downtown Miami, but if we don't really get the economic development in our neighborhoods, we'll never bring our tax base up and we'll never get the young individuals to come back and live within the City of Miami and I think that's something we should work on. And since you had that experience that we went through in the reconstruction, 1995, I think the one thing that I believe people should understand, especially the news media and everyone listening to us right now -- and I always tell this to people. I think Warshaw did a great job in bringing people and professionals into his administration and I think you will do the same thing. Now, it's very important: Commissioners, Mayors and City Managers come and go. Professionals stay and they're the ones that run this City. So, I want your assurance -- and one of the biggest problems that we had is -- not a problem but we had some vacancies within the Finance Department, which is what's had everybody worried. Especially, we're going to start working with the budget at this time a commitment from you that we're going to hire the best person for those jobs because that's going to be very important. And the reason being: when you look at every one of us and the Commission, that we're going to request "x" different things. The economic development -- and I like what you stated. You're going to get together with us and we're going to set short-term goals, long-term goals, because that's the way it should go and we're going to be able to measure how those are being accomplished. I'm pretty sure, once we get to the goals -- and I think every one of us would like to see the restructure of our neighborhoods, the economic development in our neighborhoods, and we have experienced that one way is security, by assurance that we have the right police protection. We have been able to do. Improved our parks, so the families with kids understand there's parks in this program. And I'd like for you to work very closely with the Law Enforcement Trust. I think thcse funds -- and to be utilized, my understanding, for crime prevention. And, to me, the greatest crime prevention that we can represent is programs in our parks for our kids. So, I'd like for you to really get into it and work with the police, and they've done a great job. I'd like to tell you that the produce market has changed in the last four months tremendously. You can go through that place right now. And the reason it's been done so is because the police, the NET inspectors, they have worked as a team. I would like for you to bring together, make sure that we all work as a team and we communicate with each other. We spend enough money in computers, where now we can talk to each other in computers. So, I hope we can organize itself. My biggest problem is the time that it takes from us taking a decision here to that decision to being implemented. That gap is so large that sometimes the decision we make today, if it's implement ayear-and a half, does not have the same effect, and that's a commitment that I'd like to get from you. You have to put all of our departments together and work as a team. Mr. Gimenez: You have that commitment. And in terms of the neighborhoods, you know, I'd like to see, you know, the entire city, once they know what is important -- we communicate what's important, to help and improving all the neighborhoods and that's one of my -- that's my main goal, is to improve the neighborhoods. Vice Chairman Gort: When I got elected, my commitment was, we need to bring allour neighborhoods to the same standards. We have some neighborhoods that are there. We have to work on the others to make sure we bring them up to this. My other question is in this -- my understanding, if you retire in 19 -- in 2001, you will get your pension and it's called DROP -3 (Deferred Retirement Option Plan). You can work for an additional three years? Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Gort: What is your salary? 21 May 18, 2000 Mr. Gimenez: What is -- what will be my salary? Vice Chairman Gort: Your salary. Mr. Gimenez: My salary now is in the hundred a twenty-two, hundred and twenty-three thousand dollars range. Vice Chairman Gort: In other words, if you were not to accept this job and you were stay where you're at, you would have received -- you would have been able to retire next year, put those funds aside, and you'll still be chief for another three years, and collect an additional hundred and twenty-two thousand? Commissioner Winton: Plus 15, Mr. Gimenez: Per year. Vice Chairman Gort: Plus the 15. OK. Thank you. I don't have any further questions. Mr. Mayor. Mayor Carollo: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Mayor, could I just get one thing... Mayor Carollo: Yes, go ahead. , Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chair -- Mr. Mayor, thank you very much. Mr. Charles, Norman Charles, I apologize that I did not mention you with Mr. Cox. But I also, Mr. Manager, would hope that you would give Mr. Charles and the union that they represent access to you. And I had my notes here, Norman. I didn't say it, but I really do think that union is very important. And I'm very interested in seeing, Mr. Manager, a percentage, not by names, but percentages of people that live in the City by departments and percentages that live in the City by unions, et cetera. And I really want to commend Commissioner Winton. I hope that we can move to providing positive, financial incentives to this-- people that work in this city to buy homes and be homeowners in the City of Miami, as well as other incentives. I think that's very critical. Having people live in our city that work here will do so much for neighborhoods. More than we'll ever know. So, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Manager, I hope you will give Mr. Charles that access that I spoke about with Mr. Cox and the other unions. Mr. Gimenez: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Thank you. Mayor Carollo: Thank you. Mr. Teele, I think the Vice Chair stepped out. If I could get the gavel, Commissioner? Thank you. And we'll let you chair the meeting while I speak. Gortis out. Mayor Carollo: So that I won't be in violations of.our rules and regulations by having the gavel as chairman as I speak. I was taking so many notes of what my colleague had expressed that I'm not sure where to start, but let me begin by going over the package that was presented, and I'm talking about dollars and cents. I think that's maybe a good point to start off. The total cash value of salary and benefits that is being proposed for Mr. Gimenez is a total of a hundred and ninety-seven thousand six hundred and nineteen dollars ($197,619). Commissioner Winton: Something different. 22 May 18, 2000 Mayor Carollo: You might have had just a slight difference, Johnny, because I made sure that we would have cellular phone included there. Commissioner Winton: So, what's the number? Mayor Carollo: Hundred and ninety-seven thousand six hundred and nineteen. And that's the only difference. I wanted every last area to be included. Commissioner Sanchez: A hundred and ninety-seven thousand? Mayor Carollo: Yeah. A hundred and ninety-seven thousand six hundred nineteen. Now, let's go back historically, and these are present day dollars. Back when Caesar Odio was manager -- and we're talking four years back -- his total package came to somewhere in the neighborhood of two hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars ($226,000) or more. Present day value, that will be well over, well over two hundred and fifty, two hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($260,000). If we go back to Mr. Jose Garcia Pedrosa, you've been given something here that is not fully accurate. It showed two hundred and twenty-six thousand, plus, but he had a caveat of getting up to twenty-four thousand in bonus, which we all know he would have gotten it. So, the real package was two hundred and fifty thousand five hundred and thirty-three dollars ($250,533). That was about two years ago. Present day value of this will be somewhere in the neighborhood of two sixty. A little over two sixty. Mr. Warshaw's package was a hundred and ninety-nine thousand five hundred and fifty-six dollars ($199,556). Mr. Warshaw also had a police pension of about a hundred and twenty thousand, somewhere in that neighborhood. Again, Mr. Gimenez' full package was a hundred and ninety-seven thousand six hundred and nineteen dollars ($197,619). This is the package that's being presented to all of you here. I think that it's important that we keep things in perspective to what others were making; to the packages that others had compared to the package that's being presented for him today. The truth is that, for a city of this size in American today, we would be hard pressed to bring any manager for anything less than this amount or somewhere in this neighborhood. What we're really talking about -- and his salary will be -- is a hundred and forty thousand seven hundred and sixty dollars ($140,760). You see here that it's one twenty, one sixty-nine but -- and effective May 18 of 2001, it would go to one forty-seven sixty. The difference is that, as you can see in the package, there is eighteen thousand three hundred and twenty-five going into the fifteen percent one-year retroactive pay of Fire Chief salary. But the full amount is the one that I described before that includes everything. In even days off, Mr. Pedrosa had a total of -- including vacation time, sick time, holidays, personal leaves-- 78 days. Mr. Warshaw had 63. In the package that Mr. Gimenez has, it's the same 63, but thz's included in the full amount that I described. So, I don't see a major difference up here -- at least, you know, I don't think there might be -- in the package that's being presented, as far as the dollars and cents go. I think that there is some que!tion, that is legitimate, as far as the severance pay, what it should be. And I think that we have to find-- if the amount that he has placed, which was what was included for the previous Manager -- if that is not acceptable to this Commission, then we have to find a medium ground that would be fair. So, I will say this to all of you here that, you're not going to find anyone that's a real professional that's going to come in and not have some kind, some kind of severance pay guarantee. It's not to say that it's got to be what's presented here, but anyone that we would bring in has got to have some type of guarantee. That is the norm, not just for Miami but in any major American city. A lot of questions that were raised today-- and I think many of them were good, and I think that what this would do is give us the opportunity to separate the facts from fiction. Too many times what we get it's fiction and not the reality of things. For instance, one of the topics that was brought up -- and I think very rightly so -- was about the breakdown of the City of Miami workforce. According to the July 1998 U.S. Census Report, City of Miami had an estimated population of three hundred and sixty-eight thousand six hundred and twenty-four residents. Out of that population, the breakdown was as follows: sixty-six percent Hispanic; 21 percent black; 12 percent white; one percent other. The total 23 May 18, 2000 breakdown of the employee work force, which, as of today, is three thousand five hundred and ninet}-four is in white, the so-called Anglo: Six hundred and sixty-five, 19 percent; black, African Americans is a thousand one sixty-three, 32 percent; Hispanics, a thousand seven hundred and sixty-six, 49 percent. Out of 18 department directors -- and I'll address that issue because I do agree with you, there are too many departments. They need to be consolidated. And it was never 25, what was being presented to us, because they were counting offices as departments when they were never departments. That's why we kept being told 25 when there were never 25. In fact, if we remember, there was a Charter violation that you all decided to let it go after it brought to the attention of the Commission in one meeting; in the creation of a department that had never been approved, like the Charter says it should have been, by this Commission. But out of 18 department directors -- and there are presently two vacancies -- you have three that are held by Anglos, white. That's eighteen and three quarter percent. Seven by blacks, African Americans; forty three and three quarters percent. Six by Hispanics; thirty seven and a half percent. In fact, I will go -- well, I won't waste the time in going department by department, but you have some very key departments that have some very long-time experienced professionals leading them in the city. Police department: Out of a thousand ninety-seven sworn officers, not including the 17 senior management staff, the breakdown is as follows: white Anglos, two hundred and nine, for 19.1 percent; black, African Americans 298, for 27.2 percent; Hispanics, 590 for 53.7 percent. We go to the senior management staff of the City of Miami Police Department: Out of 17 individuals, including the Police Chief, you have a total of white Anglos, four. That's 24 percent. Black, African Americans, six for 35 percent; Hispanics, 7 for 41 percent. Fire Department: Out of 604 sworn firefighters, not including the senior management staff, the breakdown is: White Anglos, 235, 38.7 percent; black, African Americans 92. That's 15.1 percent; Hispanics is 280, 46.1 percent. Now, traditionally, in departments across the country, the changing of firefighters is a lot slower than you find in other positions and this is why here you might find some groups are higher, sora just slightly lower. The attrition of a department is probably the one department that has the lowest attrition in the City. That's probably why we have one of the best Fire Departments in the whole Country because of the experience level that we have. The senior management staff of the City of Miami Fire Department consist of 11 individuals. The Chief, there is a vacancy in that position. Out of the additional 10 other positions, you have white Anglos is 1, 10 percent; black African Americans 3 for 30 percent; Hispanics is six for 60 percent. And, of course, the appointments of the Mayor and/or the Commission, your City Manager is Hispanic; City Attorney is Hispanic; City Clerk is African American. And I think it's important to bring this out because there has been a lot of this information that's been put forward as what the breakdowns of this City are and I think that, if anything, the breakdowns that we have from the senior management levels, department directors, the overall work force is an extremely fair breakdown that I dare any other city in Miami -Dade County, any other government in Miami -Dade County or anywhere else in this state to have such a fair breakdown. In fact, I think that the record that I have read here is one that few cities, if any, across American can show. Going to some of the questions that were asked-- and I agree with Commissioner Teele, that we should consolidate some departments; that there is no need to have this many. Obviously, we're not talking about Police and Fire. Those are two -- to themselves, but you have other departments that can be offices within a department and they can be consolidated. You're going to keep the same employees. You're just are going to consolidate them into one department. The issuethat I think this city has to answer -- and we should look at other cities of comparable size -- is, do we really have more employees or less employees than a city of this size should have? And I dare to say that, if we look at other comparable sized cities, we have less employees, less employees than other similar sized cities have. For instance, you know, when the rest of America, the rest of the world thinks of the City of Miami, they think that we have all these thousands and thousands of employees and, ladies and gentlemen, what the whole City of Miami has, as of today, is approximately 3,594 employees. Out of which, if you include Police, Fire, and little over 200 employees in the Solid Waste Department, what we're left for all the other positions aid departments in this city, for all the other service that this City has to provide, outside of Police, Fire and Solid Waste, you're left with some nine hundred or so employees. Now, if people think that those are too many employees, that we could actually have less employees for that to provide all those other services, 24 May 18, 2000 outside of Fire, Police and Solid Waste, I'd like for someone to show me how in a city of this size, of some four hundred thousand people. One of the areas that was brought out -- and I think that we should include some kind of caveat in this contract. And the City Attorney can guide us in how to include that in the final resolution/contract -- should be a guarantee to the City and to the Manager that if, between now and November of 2001, there is any change in the form of government -- Commissioner Teele mentioned that the -- what was called by some as a strong Mayor, what others considered that it was not a strong Mayor, the Supreme Court has not ruled upon it yet. There might be talks of some additional styles of government that people might want to look at, such as New York's. If a change would come, where you would have a strong Mayor or a different form of Mayor that would have some additional powers than now, where the position of the City Manager, as it is today, would not be there, that it would be understood that the present City Manager would roll into whatever new position is created, whether it be called Manager, Administrator, First Deputy Mayor, and that, in no way, would preclude him from having the guarantees that would be approved upon by this Commission, whatever they might be, or, at the same time, would not place this City in jeopardy, where it could be said "Well, since the position is no longer there, I'm entitled to receive whatever benefits that were given." And I think that protection needs to be there for both parties. Commissioner Teele touched upon a very important area, that we have a very distinct responsibility in dealing with, not once a year, but on an every day situation, and that's in reducing taxes and/or fees in the City. It's not an easy task. Unfortunately, from the past administration, there was very little leadership and guidance. What fees have been lower, what taxes have been reduced, the ideas have come from up here, from this body. In fact, if it weren't from the ideas that came from this body up here, we would not have had been able to lower property taxes to 9.5 percent in the regular millage and, in the overall millage, we would not have the lowest that we have had in the City of Miami in the last couple of decades or more. The problem with the roll back rate -- and Commissioner Teele mentioned a nine and a quarter possibly would be what the rollback rate would be if we go in the rollback amount from 9.5 that we are today. The problem with the rollback rate is that, if you go with a rollback rate every year, eventually, it's not going to be that far down the road before you're left with no millage rate. Zero. That's a reality. That's mt to mean that I don't agree with you, if we've got to roll it back to some level that will give people even less taxes to pay. And I'm not happy in what I pay; Tomas is not happy in what he pays; Commissioner Sanchez; Commissioner Gort, Winton, yourself. None of us are happy with paying higher taxes. But in order for us to go back to roll back rates, at least where you level it off to an area that can be acceptable, whether that's seven anda-half percent, eight percent, eventually -- seven percent -- we have to either find dollars in one or two ways or a combination of them. Reducing our budget by lowering services or cutting back in different areas, and while there's still some areas to do it, it's very challenging. And that's why I brought out thesituation with the workforce that we have employees, that it's very low in comparison to other cities of similar size. Or you find new and recurring revenue. And I think that's where we're going to be finding the dollars to be able to reduce our millage even further into the future. Now, to go back in this year's budget to the rollback rate, approximately -- you know, don't hold us to it. This is an approximate amount of 9.25. It could be a little higher. It could be a little lower. But I think you're basically right. It's in that ballpark. what that means is, that we have to find, of recurring revenue in the five-year plan, an additional two million seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($2,750,000). That's what it comes to in dollars and cents Mr. Manager, for the record, I'm going to go over areas that we could easily find those dollars in. The Off -Street Parking Authority. It's about time that we stopped talking about it. It's about time that we stopped humoring some people. The Off -Street Parking Authority has to be brought into the full control of this City, whether the best way to run it is to be run by the City as a department or to bid it out and see which private firm could do the best job for this City. I don't care which way it is. And that needs to be studied. But you know what? This will bring to this City several million dollars more every year of revenue if it would be taken from the way that it is now. If it hadn't been that I came back as Mayor, we wouldn't have even have gotten the 2.3 plus millions of dollars that we're getting today. And we were told back then, they couldn't give us that. Well, the truth is, that if you compare how that department has been run to other departments, other agencies like this around the country, you're going to find that there's a lot more money that could be brought in 25 May 18, 2000 without hurting the average tourist, without hurting the average business person that comes to Miami, without hurting the average resident of this City. And we have an obligation, whether people agree with my statement or not, to find out truly if this can be done. And there's no doubt in my mind that we could be bringing in two million or more dollars every year to the City of Miami. Part of the reason the City has ben in the financial mess that it's been -- no matter how much of bad administration some might say that we've had -- the truth is, that if we would have had the cash flows that other cities have had but we gave away, even with bad administration, this Citywould have had no problems whatsoever. There hasn't been a single city, that I know of in America, in any major city, that wasn't receiving any direct dollars for their parking meters, their parking garages, like Miami. It wasn't until two years ago what I threw ??? down -- and I thank my colleagues in backing me in that -- that we received the dollars we were getting, and that's nowhere near what this City should be receiving from them, if it's run in an efficient way. Orange Bowl. By selling naming rights. Still keeping the name Orange Bowl but with another name. That could get for this City maybe as much as three quarters of a million dollars ($750,000), maybe eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000). Somewhere between six hundred thousand to a million dollars. Seven fifty is probably more on target. The LETF (Law Enforcement Trust Fund) funds. Well, this is a prime example. We are getting millions upon millions of dollars in Law Enforcement Trust Funds every year and for those that are not familiar with what we're talking about. These are dollars that the Police Department assigns officers that are paid by the Miami Police Department to work with task forces of other agencies. When dollars are confiscated, we get a percentage of those and they come to the City's coffers and there's something like eighteen, twenty million dollars that, right now, is in the courts, that this City will be getting throughout the next years to come. And every month, every year, there's more that's being brought in. There's no reason in the world why the Police Chief cannot work more with the City administration, with the budgeting people, to make sure that as many of these dollars as possible are going to be able to be used for the type of things that we should use general fund dollars for. Prime example that I'll give you was last Commission meeting. It was put as a pocket item. Some close to fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) or so of MP -5 sub -machine guns, 14 of them, for the S. W.A.T. team. Commissioner Sanchez: No. It was a CA (Consent Agenda) item. Mayor Carollo: Excuse me? Commissioner Sanchez: CA item. Mayor Carollo: What kind of item? Commissioner Sanchez: It was a CA item. Consent agenda item. Mayor Carollo: Oh, consent agenda item. Well, it was in the consent agenda. The dollars are coming from the General Fund. That's a prime example of where Law Enforcement Trust Fund dollars should be used for. And that's why, on that particular item, you're going to see a veto from me coming down, not because I'm questioning whether there's a need for those weapons or not. If they're saying that they have a need for it, so be it. But I'm questioning where the money should come from. If we have all of these dollars, millions, in the Law Enforcement Trust Fund, that fund should be used for the benefit of this City's general fund, as it's allowed to be used, by law, and not to be used, frankly, for, you know, public relations. No matter how well -intended it might be. Another area that we could pick up anywhere from three hundred, four hundred thousand or more, depending on whether the City of Miami thinks it should run it yourself or bid it out, is the parking between the slip and Biscayne Boulevard, that is under a 3Uay revocable permit. I mean, I ran the numbers. I went there myself to see how many cars were being parked, and the City of Miami could be making -- if we run it ourselves and the administration thinks it's the way to go, some four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000.00) dollars or more. If we bid it out, I don't know. Two, three hundred 26 May 18, 2000 thousand dollars. These are real dollars that we're giving away and we shouldn't. We have a contract that's expired last month -- well, actually, March. Some time in March. It's a fine organization. It's the Coconut Grove Sailing Club. Commissioner Teele: Who? Mayor Carollo: The Coconut Grove Sailing Club. Right next door. It's a fine organization. I have no problem with them. I have many friends there. The problem that I have is that there are 18 acres of waterfront land, bay bottom, that you have hundreds, hundreds of sailboats that are parked there. They're paying them rent. I don't know three, four hundred, maybe more. You know, all you've got to do is go and look out there. This is 18 acres of bay bottom, where hundreds of sailboats are paying rent. In the upland, they have over an acre of land, where they have a two-story structure. And in the year that this City has gotten paid the most out of that contract has been some forty-three thousand dollars ($43,000). Now, this City will never be able to make it, no matter what, if we don't start running the City in a businesslike manner in every which way and, particularly, with the best assets that we have, whidl is our waterfront, our valuable real estate, whether it's waterfront or not. And I'm not bringing them up to be picking on them. On the contrary. I think they -- it's a fine organization. They've done a great job. But we have to get market value dollars for any contract that we enter into. Virginia Key, we have another similar one for a hundred dollars ($100) a year. These are the things that we have to change, the culture that we've had in this city. And just by the ones that I've read out here, there are many more that I will share with my colleagues in the weeks to come, with you, Mr. Manager. We have the rollback rate with the guarantee recurring revenue into the future that Commissioner Teele has talked about, that all of you would like to ser. Commissioner Teele talked about something that is very important for this City and we need to see how we could find a way to bring the population of the City to that half million point because there is a major difference in dollars that a City can get when you're at half a million or more. And it's going to be a fight because Miami•Dade County is not going to want to let anymore of our lands be incorporated into the City. And, then, we also have to show that it's going to be better for residents in other areas to be part of Miami. If they're going to be part of Miami, to pay higher taxes, no one's going to be -- want to be part of Miami. One thing that I could assure everyone is that there's no doubt that this City gives the best services, above and beyond what the County gives. And, in fact, above and beyond what even other cities give in this county. But even without not being over half a million, I did get in the last three and a half years or so about twenty invitations to meet with the President at one time or another. Out of which, I took advantage of seven, eight, nine. So, we didn't do too bad, Art. Commissioner Teele: I'm sure they've updated that mailing list. Mayor Carollo: I'm sure that this December I'm not going to get two Christmas cards from the White House, like I got last year. But that's all right. There are changes coming in January there also. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Mayor, gentlemen, you have to tell me -- it's 12:08 -- if we guys are ready to make a decision? Commissioner Sanchez: A confirmation. Vice Chairman Gort: I have -- a confirmation. Commissioner Sanchez: Let's go with the confirmation. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman? 27 May 18, 2000 • Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. • Commissioner Regalado: I am -- I'm ready to vote but, of course, I have many questions on the package. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Let me tell you what my problem is. Winton have a problem. I have a problem. I'm traveling tomorrow, on behalf of the City, there's several things that I lave to do and there's a lot of things I have to take care of today because I travel tomorrow real early. I didn't count on this going beyond 12 o'clock. If you want to, we can break and we can come back at three or four and I can stay here all night. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move the confir -- I would like the privilege of moving the confirmation of Carlos Gimenez as the City Manager, as recommended by Mayor Carollo. Commissioner Sanchez: Second. Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Second. Further discussion? Under discussion. Commissioner Regalado: Yes. I want to make sure -- because the Mayor mentioned something about the severance package. Commissioner Teele: I ain't move that. Commissioner Sanchez: No, we're not -- this is just the confirmation. Commissioner Regalado: What we're voting... Mayor Carollo: Two separate things. Commissioner Regalado: What we're voting is on the confirmation. Commissioner Teele: That's all I moved. Commissioner Regalado: But not on your salary package, is that correct, Mr... Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Commissioner Teele: That's my motion. Commissioner Sanchez: That's the motion. Commissioner Teele: I'll make the motion. Commissioner Regalado: That is your motion. That Mr. City Attorney... Mayor Carollo: They have to be two separate resolutions. One is for a confirmation. The other... Commissioner Sanchez: Severance package. Commissioner Regalado: No. Mayor Carollo ...is for the severance package. 28 May 18, 2000 • Commissioner Regalado: We only have one and it includes the package and confirmation. Commissioner Teele: I mean, I'm prepared to make a second motion, but let's-- what I'm saying is, I'd like to call a point of order. This is on the confirmation of Carlos Gimenez, as recommended by Mayor Carollo, to be the City Manager of the City of Miami. Commissioner Regalado: But let's understand. It's the confirmation only, not... Commissioner Teele: Well, we're going tJ deal with the other issues secondly. I mean... Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but this resolution. Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Gort: That's my understanding. Commissioner Teele: That's my motion, unless... Vice Chairman Gort: That's the motion that's on the floor, the confirmation. Commissioner Winton: And been seconded. Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Any further... Mayor Carollo: What is being said is that it's going to be done in confirming the Manager first and then you're going to deal... Vice Chairman Gort: With the salary. Mayor Carollo: ...with the rest of it right after. Commissioner Sanchez: Severance package. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor state... Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Hold on. Commissioner Regalado: Call the roll. Call the roll. Commissioner Teele: Call the roll. Mr. Vilarello: Hold on. Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call. Mr. Vilarello: Under discussion, please. On the motion that's presented to you, it's a confirmation of the City Manager and there is not an attached compensation package or a severance package that does put the 29 May 18, 2000 • City Manager at risk with regard to his pension and that's why I believe it was... Commissioner Teele: Until he accepts it... Mayor Carollo: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Until he accepts it, he's not at risk. He's got to accept the job, I would assure. Well, let me say this. Let me revise the motion to amend... Mayor Carollo: We'll find out soon enough here. Commissioner Teele: ...to amend it, if you will, to confirm Carlos Gimenez, as nominated by Mayor Carollo, to be the City Manager; further providing that he shall have 10 days to accept or reject the confirmation. Does that meet your approval? Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, the language that I would require would be the --or I would suggest, I should say, that during -- it's Sections 2, 3 and 4 of your resolution, which essentially provide that, during this period of time and prior to his acceptance and prior to the Oversight Board's approval, that he would essentially hold both the positions of Fire Chief and City Manager and temporrily in the dual office holding position. Commissioner Teele: It's exactly my motion and it's exactly the way the previous manager was handled. Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: His confirmation is not complete, under our contractwith the Oversight Board, until they accept that and I think that doesn't need to be stated. But if it does, it is. So, I mean, this issue of working through all of these things needs to get slowed down. I would so move. Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second? Commissioner Sanchez: Second, with the amendment. Vice Chairman Gort: With the amendments that have been made. Any further discussion? Being none, call the roll. [COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL] Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Gimenez, they're going to question your professionalism; they're going to question your background, and they're going to question your independence and there are going to be times that you're going to feel like the skunk in the family picnic; but I am willing to -- yes, I'll move -- I'll second. Vote yes. 30 May 18, 2000 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 00-432 A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING MAYOR JOE CAROLLO'S APPOINTMENT OF CARLOS A. GIMENEZ AS CITY MANAGER OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, EFFECTIVE UPON FINAL APPROVAL BY THE FINANCIAL EMERGENCY OVERSIGHT BOARD OF A COMPENSATION PACKAGE. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Commissioner Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Now, the severance package. (Applause). Thank you. All right. The second item. We have to go. Compensation. Excuse me. We have a meeting to fnish. We have a meeting to finish. Commissioner Winton: What's the next... Vice Chairman Gort: The next item is on the severance package on the salary. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: I think that City Manager Gimenez will do a great job as the new City Manager. I feel that, you know, we're all going to question him and everybody will probably second guess some of his actions but, you know, he has made commitments that we all respect and I don't see many problems with his salary or benefits. I do see a problem with the severance and if we were to approve a severance payment, at all, that will be perceived that this City Commission, and probably this Mayor, believe that this isa very temporary position and I -- you know, it's like offering comeback pay to Mr. Gimenez when people go to work. So, I'm ready to move the salary and benefits but without think severance. Because it will show that the Manager is willing to work until he feels that he has the pleasure of the Mayor and the Commission, and he would probably free the Mayor if he has any problem because, after all, all the firings and goings have cost the City close to four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000.00) dollars in the last two years, with the 31 May 18, 2000 Manager that had been fired. Commissioner Winton: I'll second the motion. Commissioner Regalado: So, that would be my motion, to approve salary and benefits, but no severance pay. Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. There's a second. Under discussion. Discussion? Commissioner Sanchez: Is there a -- there's a second? Commissioner Winton: I seconded it. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, just to elaborate a little bit. I just got back into town, just likeI stated. I got in from Atlanta and I was given this last night. I looked at it. I do have some concerns. You know, I'm going to be fair and, basically, cut through the "donkey dust" here. I'm not prepared to vote on this today and if I were to vote on it, I would vote against the severance package. You know, I would rather that we all get back -- and I would like sit down with you, Mr. City Manager, and see how we could come to an agreement, on what I think, where we could reduce some of the severance that you're -- some of the money you're asking for. So, as of now, I am either, one, prepared not to vote or support the amendment made or the motion put on the table. Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I move that the item be deferred until the first item on the agenda, as appropriate, for the meeting of May the 25th. I don't -- I think everybody ought to -- if a Commissioner's not ready to vote... Commissioner Sanchez: I'm not ready to vote. Commissioner Teele: I don't think it's fair to Carlos-- the Manager to do that. I think, if we could just have about four -- a week, I think we may be able to come to some unanimity. I don't know what -- I want to speak to Carlos to see where he is on this. I'd like to understand. Because I really would like to give him the benefit of the doubt. Commissioner Winton: And there's one more issue that we want to make sure that we... Commissioner Teele: I mean, in that one Commissioner has already said... Commissioner Winton: Right. Commissioner Teele: ... that if it comes to a vote, he's going to wrote no. Is that what you just said? Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Commissioner Winton: On the severance package, you said. But one last point that we want to make sure -- and even though I seconded the motion, we do want to make sure that... 32 May 18, 2000 Commissioner Regalado: But, Johnny, my motion does not have a severance issue. Commissioner Winton: That's right. Commissioner Regalado: At all. Commissioner Winton: Right. I understand. Commissioner Regalado: That's what I want to clarify. Commissioner Teele: But it's my understanding, in my discussions with the ManTer, that he views some form of severance package to be very, very essential in his own mind. And I want to just be able to have that discussion with him privately and I think each of us should. Vice Chairman Gort: To follow that up, let me make sure we all understand to bring someone in here to work as City Manager or any other place, they're going to require quite a bit. At the same time, you need to analyze that this gentleman, by become City Manager, he's sacrificing, I think it's about three hundted and sixty some thousand dollars that he could make if he would stay as the Chief of Police and -- I mean, as Chief of Fire. I'm sorry. Well, you're the Chief of everything now. That's going to be responsibilities. So, this is the thing we need sit down and we need to look at the numbers and compare numbers. And I agree, I think -- I received all of this today myself. I was away and I have to travel again tomorrow. I think we should give a chance for him to sit down with each one of us and find out what could be a fair severance pay. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you make a very good point, but I think there's an even bigger point that needs to be put on the table and, that is, and again, the independence and the responsiveness to this Commission and to the Mayor. I am of the opinion right now, Mr. Chairman, that for us, under this form of government, to hire any Manager, whether it be Carlos or someone else, and not give them some form of severance, clearly puts that person in a position that they may not be as inclined to give us the true, honest, hard, unpopular recommendations that I want him to give, if that's how he or she-- if that's how they really feel. So, I think, as a matter of policy under this form of government, we have to provide some form of safe landing to ensure the independence -- the relative independence of the Manager. So, I want to... Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele-- Commissioner Regalado, will you take away your motion and accept the motion for defer until the 25th? Commissioner Regalado: Sure, absolutely. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion... Commissioner Teele: Early on the agenda. Commissioner Regalado: I would also like to ask the Mayor to tell us what he feels is fair in tams of salary and, if any, severance. And you don't have to do that today, but just... Mayor Carollo: Well, I will give it to you today because I thought about this for quite some time, and I think it's fair that you have as much time to think about i as you could. The total package of one ninety-seven six nineteen, based upon what others were getting before, he is the Manager that would have been making the least amount of dollars in the last 15 years, at least, in the City of Miami, and we're not eren including 33 May 18, 2000 present day value of what others were getting before. If we were to include that, I mean, he's way below. So, in this package, I feel extremely comfortable with it because I don't think this City would be able to get a real professional for much less than this amount. If not, much more. In as far as guarantees -- and what Commissioner Teele mentioned, it's really the bottom line. If you're going to want to independence in a Manager, you have to give certain guarantees. That's not to say that it's got to be the whole two years. I think, though, that you have to give a guarantee at least until November of 2001, when the term of Mayor expires, and go maybe thirty days beyond that because if there is any kind of change, it's only fair to have a thirty -day transition period between one Manager to another. So, that would be my suggestions for this Commission to think about in approving this package, as presented, and to give some thought to a severance pay package that would go until the end of November, early part of December -- middle December for a severance package. Vice Chairman Gort: I think that's the-- motion on the table is to defer until the first. Mayor Carollo: Last but not least, and I'm sorry. The 25th, I'm concerned that it's getting too far into the future. I would much rather prefer to have this Commission have a hearing on Tuesday. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Mayor, I'm not going to be here. I'm leaving tomorrow. I'm not going to be here until Wednesday morning, so... Mayor Carollo: Well... Commissioner Teele: Mr. Mayor? Mayor Carollo: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Oh, OK. Mayor Carollo: Well, would Wednesday early evening, late afternoon... Vice Chairman Gort: Wednesday, early morning, is fine with me. But I have to leave. I have a... Commissioner Winton: Well, if it's Wednesday, what's wrong with Thursday? Commissioner Sanchez: Wednesday's good. Tuesday, I can't, but Wednesday is good. Mayor Carollo: OK. Wednesday? Commissioner Winton: I mean... Mayor Carollo: Can we do it on Wednesday, then? Commissioner Winton: ...what's the difference in Wednesday versus Thursday? Commissioner Regalado: None. Commissioner Winton: There's none. Mayor Carollo: Well... 34 May 18, 2000 Commissioner Winton: And we just have to take one more step. These meetings never go a short period of time. There's always a lot of discussion that have to do and, you know, there's -- and I'm sorry. And I understand what you're trying to do and, frankly, I even agree with it, except from a practical standpoint. I've got a lot of other things that I've got on my schedule, so that one more day I struggle with. Mayor Carollo: Johnny, I understand that and I could appreciate that, but what I retrying to do is to separate this from anything else on the agenda. Because I think this is about the most important decision that we need to make, and he needs to get on with his life if what is going to be presented is not going to be fair to him. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chair -- Mr. Mayor, why don't we call a special meeting for Thursday morning at 9:30 to do this. Before -- well, we've got Commissioner Regalado. Before anything else is done, as a special meeting on this. Mayor Carollo: And only for this. Commissioner Winton: And only for this. Commissioner Teele: And only for this. Mayor Carollo: OK. We will call a special meeting for Thursday morning at... Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute. We need to vote on this. Commissbner Teele made the motion, Commissioner Sanchez second, to defer. Commissioner Winton: And I have a question still. Vice Chairman Gort: What's the question? Commissioner Winton: I want to understand what it is that we're doing between now andthen, each of us? Are we meeting with... Commissioner Teele: We're going to meet with the Manager... Mayor Carollo: Yeah, you should meet with him. Commissioner Winton: And each of us negotiate our own deal? Commissioner Teele: Well, I think there's only one issue. That's the severance -- I mean, there's only one issue now. That's the severance package. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Let's go, please. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Manager, I'm going to ask that you have somerne talk to the Oversight Board and get a sense of -- because, remember, this action is not the final action. It must be approved by the Oversight Board. Vice Chairman Gort: The Oversight Board has to wait for the finance package. Mayor Carollo: Well, the Oversight Board -- that's a very good point. The Oversight Board approved one 35 May 18, 2000 �r • that had more dollars overall and a similar package. So, anything else, you would think they would approve, but I agree you, that should be discussed regardless. Vice Chairman Gort: OK. All in favor state by saying "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 00-433 MOTION DEFERRING CONSIDERATION OF CITY MANAGER CARLOS GIMENEZ' PROPOSED SALARY, BENEFITS AND SEVERANCE PAY TO A SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2000 AT 9:30 A.M. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Commissioner Johnny L. Winton NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Manager, you want to say... Mr. Gimenez: Yes. I'd like to thank the Commission for showing the confidence in me, but I also-- I would like to thank greatly the members of the Miami Fire Department that were here showing me my support. It really -- that means a heck of a lot to me. Thank you. (applause) 36 May 18, 2000 THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 12:26 P.M. ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Sylvia Lowman ASSISTANT CITY CLERK 37 JOE CAROLLO MAYOR May 18, 2000