HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2000-05-25 Minutest
CITY.OF MIAMI
COMMISSION
MEETING
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 25, 2000
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL
Walter J. Foeman/Chty Clerk
INDEX
MINUTES OF COMMISSION MEETING
MAY 25, 2000
ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION
1. 1. ROBERTO GONZALEZ - ELDERLY PROGRAMS 5/25/00
IN LUMMUS PARK. PRESENTATION
2. JOSE M. MIJARES – CUBAN PAINTER/ARTIST 2
2. (A) DISCUSSION CONCERNING CITY MANAGER 5/25/00
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ'S SALARY, BENEFITS, R-00-434
AND SEVERANCE PACKAGE.—APPROVE 3-17
SALARY AND BENEFITS (See #4-b)
(B) INQUIRIES BY COMMISSION TO MANAGER
GIMENEZ OF HIS PHILOSOPHY AND VIEWS TO
SEVERAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES
(C) COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER
REGALADO REGARDING BREAKING THE
CYCLE OF SEVERANCE PAYMENTS
MENTIONING SEVERAL PAST CITY
MANAGERS.
3. VETO OF RESOLUTION 00-375 WHICH ACCEPTED 5/25/00
BID OF SOUTHERN PRECISION ARMORY FOR DISCUSSION
PROCUREMENT OF SUBMACHINE GUNS, FOR 18
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE S.W.A.T. TEAM,
$14,357.50.
Q
(A) CONSENT AGENDA.
(B) ABSENT DURING ROLL CALL, COMMISSIONER
REQUESTED CITY CLERK. TO SHOW IN
AGREEMENT WITH MOTION CONFIRMING
MANAGER'S APPOINTMENT.
(C) DISCUSS PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
AND REMOVAL OF DERELICT VESSELS.
5/25/00
DISCUSSION
19-23
4.1 ACCEPT BID OF WEATHERTROL 5/25/00
MAINTENANCE FOR PROCUREMENT AND R-00-435
INSTALLATION OF AIR CONDITIONING 24
CHILLER FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE,
$36,400; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM E-911
OPERATING BUDGET.
4.2. ACCEPT BID OF COMP USA FOR 5/25/00
PROCUREMENT OF TONER CARTRIDGES FOR R-00-436
PRINTERS, $139,301.78, FOR DEPARTMENT OF 25
PURCHASING; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM VARIOUS
USER DEPARTMENTS.
4.3 ACCEPT BID OF CARPET BOUTIQUE, INC. FOR 5/25/00
PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF R-00-437
CARPET AT THE NORTH DISTRICT 25
SUBSTATION, FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE,
$38,101.60; ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
4.4 APPROVE PURCHASE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT 5/25/00
WELDING FABRICATION FROM VARIOUS R-00-438
VENDORS, $54,500, FOR DEPARTMENTS OF 25
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND
FIRE -RESCUE.
4.5
ACCEPT BID OF AFTER HOURS CLEANING,
5/25/00
FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR FIRE
R-00-439
FACILITIES, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
27
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION TO BE
UTILIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF FIRE -
RESCUE, $18,624; WITH FUNDS ALLOCATED
FROM GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
CUSTODIAL MAINTENANCE AND FIRE -RESCUE.
4.6
ACCEPT BIDS OF EMILY LAWN SERVICE,
5/25/00
$15,600, AND J.R. ALVAREZ LAND CLEARING,
R-00-440
$48,478, FOR PROCUREMENT OF GROUNDS
28
MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT VARIOUS CITY
PARKS AND FIRE STATIONS, FOR
DEPARTMENTS OF PARKS AND RECREATION,
OPERATIONS DIVISION AND FIRE -RESCUE,
ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECREATION, OPERATIONS
DIVISION, AND FROM FIRE -RESCUE
DEPARTMENT FIRE TRAINING CENTER (See #4-c).
4.7
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
5/25/00
AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY AND F.L.T., INC.,
R-00-441
FOR PURPOSE OF PRESENTING FIFTEEN TO
29
THIRTY HOME PROFESSIONAL SOCCER
GAMES; $15,000 PER EVENT.
4.8
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SUBMIT
5/25/00
APPLICATION TO FLORIDA INLAND
R-00-442
NAVIGATION DISTRICT WATERWAYS
30
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR GRANT FUNDING,
$34,127.50, FOR DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCE,
CONVENTIONS, AND PUBLIC FACILITIES, FOR
REMOVAL OF 17 IDENTIFIED DERELICT
VESSELS FROM DINNER KEY ANCHORAGE
AREA, ALLOCATE FUNDS FROM FY 2001 FUNDS
(See #4-c).
4.9
AUTHORIZE CONTRIBUTION TO MENTAL
5/25/00
HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF DADE COUNTY,
R-00-443
INC., "A WOMAN'S PLACE PROGRAM,"
30
ALLOCATE $10,000, FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRUST FUND.
5. (A) DISCUSSION CONCERNING A PROPOSED 5/25/00
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE ALLOCATION M-00-444
OF TWENTY-SIXTH YEAR (26TH) COMMUNITY 31-69
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS
BY CATEGORY.
(B) ANY AGENCY WHICH SEEKS TO BE FUNDED
IN MORE THAN ONE CATEGORICAL AREA,
WITH RESPECT TO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS, MUST
FIRST HAVE MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
FOR SAME AND SUPPORT OF MAJORITY OF
COMMISSION, TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL
FUNDING ALLOCATION (S) (See #29 & 42).
(C) DISCUSS: FA(rADE PROGRAM
EFFECTIVENESS, SCATTERED HOUSING,
NUMBER OF CITY DEPARTMENTS NEEDED.
6. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED 5/25/00
VACATION AND CLOSURE OF PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- M-00-445
WAY, N.W. 4TH STREET BETWEEN NORTH MIAMI 70-71
AVENUE AND N.W. 1 R AVENUE.
7. DISCUSSION CONCERNING PRESENTATION BY 5/25/00
MATTHEW LEIBOWITZ, REPRESENTING DISCUSSION
LEIBOWITZ AND ASSOCIATES, REGARDING THE 72-73
AT&T AND MEDIAONE MERGER (CABLE
TELEVISION).
8. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 5/25/00
40-105 (c). OF THE CODE "PERSONNEL/CIVIL FIRST READING
SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS," BY ORDINANCE
INCREASING ANNUAL VACATION ACCRUAL 74-75
RANGES FOR CLASSIFIED MANAGERIAL AND
CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES FROM AN
ADDITIONAL EIGHT TO SIXTY HOURS.
9.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION
5/25/00
6 OF ORDINANCE NO. 11705, AND ORDINANCE
FIRST READING
NO. 11839, TO CORRECT ERROR IN
ORDINANCE
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CAPITAL
76
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND ADD NEW
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.
10.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH
5/25/00
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED "CITY OF
FIRST READING
MIAMI PROGRAMS FOR PERSONS WITH
ORDINANCE
DISABILITIES MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ADA
77-78
GRANT" AND APPROPRIATING $46,453.41 FROM
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, OFFICE OF AMERICANS
WITH DISABILITIES ACT ("ADA")
COORDINATION 1999-2000 GRANT FUND.
11.
(WITHDRAW) PROPOSED FIRST READING
5/25/00
ORDINANCE: TO AMEND AMENDING SECTION
WITHDRAWN
38-69 OF THE CODE "PARKS AND
79
RECREATION" TO PERMIT SALE OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT ALLEN MORRIS
BRICKELL PARK.
12.
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE QUIT
5/25/00
CLAIM DEED TO STATE OF FLORIDA
R-00-446
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("FDOT")
80-81
3,278 SQUARE FEET OF CITY -OWNED LAND
LOCATED ON WATSON ISLAND.
13.
ACCEPT BID OF M.E.F. CORPORATION, INC.
5/25/00
FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "COCONUT
R-00-447
GROVE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT /
82-83
IMPACT FEE, ' B-4623", $465,000; ALLOCATE
FUNDS AS APPROPRIATED BY ORDINANCE NOS.
11705 AND 11839; TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
$510,200.
14.
ACCEPT BID OF M. VILA AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
5/25/00
FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "LE JEUNE STORM
R-00-448
SEWER PROJECT - PHASE III, B-5641", $384,719;
84-86
ALLOCATE FUNDS AS APPROPRIATED BY
ORDINANCE NOS. 11705 AND 11839, THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS ORDINANCES; $439,022.60.
15.
DIRECT MANAGER TO FILE REPORT WITH STATE
5/25/00
AND COUNTY PUBLIC OFFICIALS DOCUMENTING
R-00-449
CITY'S COMPLIANCE WITH MANDATES SET FORTH
87-88
IN §218.503(5) FLA. STAT. (1999), RELATED TO
CITY'S USE OF FUNDS GENERATED BY PARKING
FACILITIES SURCHARGE.
16.
AUTHORIZE LAW FIRM OF WEISS, SEROTA &
5/25/00
HELFMAN, P.A. FOR LEGAL SERVICES TO
R-00-450
CITY LAWSUITS CONCERNING
89-90
IMPLEMENTATION AND COLLECTION OF
PARKING FACILITIES SURCHARGE, PATRICK
MCGRATH, III VS. CITY; PUBLIC HEALTH
TRUST OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND
LAUREEN VARGA VS. CITY, AUTHORIZED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 11813;
ALLOCATE $70,000, FROM PARKING
SURCHARGE ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNT.
17.
APPOINT MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL
5/25/00
STEERING COMMITTEE (RODOLFO CAMPS,
R-00-451
ARTHUR HERTZ, ADOLFO HENRIQUEZ, PAUL
91-93
DAVIS AND AL DATSON, JR.); WAIVE RESIDENCY
REQUIREMENT.
18.
APPOINT MEMBERS OF THE BUDGET AND
5/25/00
FINANCES REVIEW COMMITTEE (MARY ANN
R-00-452
DAVID, STEVE KNEAPLER, STANLEY GETTIS
94-95
AND MANOLO REYES)
19.
APPOINT MEMBERS OF THE COCONUT
5/25/00
GROVE STANDING FESTIVAL COMMITTEE
R-00-453
(SILVIA MORALES-CEJAS, TED STAHL AND SUE
96-97
BILLIG)
20.
APPOINT MEMBERS OF MIAMI STREET
5/25/00
CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE
R-00-454
(MANUEL CHAMIZO, YVES FORTUNE AND
98-99
PLACIDO DEBESA)
21. APPOINT MEMBERS OF LATIN QUARTER 5/25/00
REVIEW BOARD (HELENA DEL MONTE, R-00-455
LUCRECIA MACHADO, ELOY APARICIO, LUIS 100-101
SABINES, JR., MARIA DEL CARMEN-
CASTELLANOS, DAVID CABARROCAS AND
HECTOR GASCA.
22. APPOINT MEMBERS OF MIAMI AUDIT 5/25/00
ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MARY ANN; DAVID, R-00-456
MIRTHA GUERRA AGUIRRE, RICHARD BER 102-103
ROWITZ AND MONICA FERNANDEZ).
23. APPOINT MEMBERS OF NUISANCE 5/25/00
ABATEMENT BOARD (ROBERT VALLEDOR, R-00-457
MONIQUE TAYLOR, GUILLERMO REVUELTA AND 104-105
CAROLYN COPE).
24. APPOINT PETER ANDOLINA AS MEMBER OF 5/25/00
PROPERTY AND ASSET REVIEW COMMITTEE. R-00-458
106-107
25. APPOINT ANITA MAGRUDA AS MEMBER OF 5/25/00
THE COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF R-00-459
WOMEN. 108
26. BRIEF COMMENTS REGARDING CHARTER 5/25/00
REVIEW COMMITTEE (See #49) DISCUSSION
109
27. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW 5/25/00
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED "SUMMER ORDINANCE
FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN NO. 11929
2000" $431,814 CONSISTING OF - GRANT FROM 110-111
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
THROUGH FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION.
28. AUTHORIZE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ON
5/25/00
BEHALF OF CITY TO ADVERTISE, EVALUATE,
R-00-460
AND ACCEPT BID (S) OF VENDOR (S) TO
112-113
PROVIDE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE (USDA) APPROVED MEALS TO
ELIGIBLE CHILDREN FOR THE CITY'S
SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM 2000;
SUBJECT TO CITY'S ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT
($431,814) FROM USDA THROUGH FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND UPON
APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR CITY'S SUMMER
FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM 2000.
29. TABLE DISCUSSION CONCERNING PROPOSED
5/25/00
RECOMMENDATION FOR ALLOCATION OF
DISCUSSION
TWENTY-SIXTH YEAR (26TH) COMMUNITY
114
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS
BY CATEGORY (See #5 & 42)
30. BRIEF COMMENTS BY MANUEL DIAZ 5/25/00
REGARDING ROOTS & CULTURE FESTIVAL 2000" DISCUSSION
(See #40) 115
31. COMMENTS BY MARIA CHIARO REGARDING 5/25/00
PROPOSED PRESENTATION BY MR. RONALD J. DISCUSSION
COHEN, P.A. FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEYS' 116
FEES FOR FOP, MIAMI LODGE 20, PABLO
CAMACHO, AND MILTON HIRSCH, P.A. V. CITY OF
MIAMI.
32. CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED 5/25/00
CLOSURE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING DISCUSSION
THAT PORTION OF NORTHWEST 4TH STREET 117-118
BETWEEN NORTH MIAMI. AVENUE AND
NORTHWEST 1ST AVENUE.
33. DISCUSSED AND TABLED — PROPOSED APPEAL 5/25/00
OF ZONING BOARD DECISION APPROVING M-00-461
VARIANCE FROM ZONING ORDINANCE 11000 119-120
TO ALLOW STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK OF
6'-2. 6" (15' REQUIRED) FOR AN ELIGIBLE
HISTORIC HOME FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
401 NW 3' STREET. (See #37)
34. DISCUSSED AND TABLED - CONSIDERATION OF
PROPOSED AMENDING ORDINANCE 10544, THE
COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY
AMENDING FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY
CHANGING LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 5100 AND 5110-5112
NW 1sT STREET AND 40 NW 51sT AVENUE FROM
"DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "MEDIUM
DENSITY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL". (See
#36)
35. APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO ALLOW
DRIVE THROUGH FACILITY FOR
FINANCIAL INSTITUTION FOR PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT 37-49 SW 12TH STREET AND
1150 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE. (Applicant:
UCB Property Corp.)
36. DENY PROPOSED CHANGE OF LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF COMPREHENSIVE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FOR PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT 5100 AND 5110-5112 NORTHWEST
1ST STREET AND 40 NORTHWEST 51ST
AVENUE FROM "DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO
"MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL." (Applicant: Carlos M. Hernandez)
(See #34)
37. DENY APPEAL OF ZONING BOARD DECISION
APPROVING VARIANCE FROM ZONING
ORDINANCE 11000 TO ALLOW STREET SIDE
YARD SETBACK OF 6'-2.6" (15' REQUIRED) FOR
AN ELIGIBLE HISTORIC HOME FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 401 NW 3RD STREET. (Applicant:
Gatehouse Development Corp.)
5/25/00
DISCUSSION
121-123
5/25/00
R-00-462
124-126
5/25/00
M-00-463
127-135
5/25/00
R-00-464
136-144
38.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE:
5/25/00
APPROVE CHANGE OF ZONING AS
ORDINANCE
LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000 TO ADD SD-
NO. 11930
12 BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR
145-146
PROPERTIES LOCATED AREAS OF NW.
16 AVE AND NW 55TH STREET, NW 55TH
TERRACE, NW 56TH STREET, NW 57TH
STREET, NW 58TH STREET AND NW 58TH
TERRACE, NW 17TH AVENUE AND NW
61ST STREET TO FACILITATE FUTURE
SURFACE PARKING FOR COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT BY SPECIAL
EXCEPTION. (Applicant: City of Miami
Planning and Zoning Department)
39.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND
5/25/00
SECTION 35-224 OF THE CODE "SCHEDULE OF
ORDINANCE
FEES AND CHARGES", TO CLARIFY
NO. 11931
LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE ORIGINAL
147-148
INTENT AND ACTUAL BILLING PRACTICES
REGARDING FEES FOR THE COCONUT GROVE
PARKING IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND.
(Applicant: City of Miami Planning and Zoning
Department)
40.
ROOTS AND CULTURE FESTIVAL 2000, TO
5/25/00
BE HELD IN LITTLE HAITI AREA ON MAY 27
R-00-465
— 28, 2000; WAIVE CERTAIN FEES. (See #30)
149-165
41.
AUTHORIZE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
5/25/00
($24,998) FROM 25TH YEAR COMMUNITY
R-00-466
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
166-167
FUNDS TO FLORIDA HOUSING
COOPERATIVE, INC. FOR HOUSING
ADMINISTRATION ACTIVITIES.
42. ACCEPTING RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY 5/25/00
ADMINISTRATION IN CONNECTION WITH 26TH M-00-467
YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK 168-173
GRANT (CDBG) ALLOCATIONS BY CATEGORY.
(See #5, 29)
43. (A) SCHEDULING A SPECIAL COMMISSION 5/25/00
MEETING RELATED TO 26" YEAR COMMUNITY M-00-468
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS R-00-468.1
FOR JULY 11, 2000. M-00-469
174-182
(B) DIRECT COMMISSION TO FILE IN WRITING
WITH CLERK, DATE, TIME AND PLACE OF
DISTRICT PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD IN
THEIR RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS IN
CONNECTION WITH 26TH YEAR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS.
44.
DIRECTION TO RESEARCH U.S. CONSTITUTION
5/25/00
AND FLORIDA LEGISLATURE AND PREPARE A
DISCUSSION
WHITE PAPER DOCUMENT WITH HIS
183
RECOMMENDATION FOR A SERGEANT IN
ARMS TO CONDUCT COMMISSION MEETINGS.
45.
DEFERRED - PRESENTATION BY PUBLIC
5/25/00
WORKS DEPARTMENT.
DISCUSSION
184
46.
DIRECT MANAGER TO REQUEST
5/25/00
REIMBURSEMENT FROM APPROPRIATE
R-00-470
FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCY FOR EXPENSES
185-186
INCURRED BY CITY TO MAINTAIN PUBLIC PEACE,
ORDER AND GENERAL WELFARE OF CITIZENS
OF MIAMI CONCERNING ELIAN GONZALEZ
DEMONSTRATIONS.
47.
EXPRESS COOPERATION IN CREATING A
5/25/00
TIER ONE NETWORK ACCESS POINT (NAP)
R-00-471
IN SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST
187-188
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA IN
THE CITY AND ENCOURAGE
TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS TO
LOCATE FACILITIES IN THE NETWORK
ACCESS POINT; FURTHER DIRECT
MANAGER TO EXPEDITE PERMITTING
PROCESS TO A SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION.
48. NAMING COMMISSIONER WINTON AS 5/25/00
LIAISON FOR NETWORK ACCESS POINT R-00-472
("NAP") WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH 189-190
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY.
49. DIRECT COMMISSION TO SUBMIT TO CITY 5/25/00
CLERK IN WRITING, NAME, ADDRESS AND M-00-473
PHONE NUMBER OF THEIR . RESPECTIVE 191-196
APPOINTMENTS TO THE CHARTER REVIEW
AND REFORM COMMITTEE (See #26)
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 25th 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
regular session.
The meeting was called to order at 9:36 a.m. by Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort, with the
following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Wifredo Gort (District 1)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4)
ABSENT:
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton (District 2)
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
Vice Chairman Gort: Good morning. First of all, we'll have the invocation by
Commissioner Regalado and the pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Sanchez.
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Regalado, followed by Commissioner
Sanchez leading those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
1 May 25, 2000
j � 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Winton has a presentation. Did we check with his
office? Where is Johnny? Is Johnny in his office? Is Johnny here?
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 9:38 A.M.
AND RECONVENED AT 9:42 A.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY
COMMISSION, EXCEPT COMMISSIONER TEELE, FOUND TO BE PRESENT.
Note For The Record: COMMISSIONER WINTON ENTERED THE
COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 9:40 A.M.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding -- I received a notice from Commissioner Teele.
His plane is going to be 45 minutes late. He's at the airport. You all want to make the
presentations first, or you want to take the special meeting first?
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, let's do the presentation, if the people are here,
and then we'll go on with it.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Winton, you have a presentation?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, I do.
Vice Chairman Gort: In the following meetings, we're going to bring other artists. In
every meeting we're going to bring one artist from the different groups that we have here.
We have a lot of good people here in Miami, and that's very important. We bring the
good things that have being done here in Miami. We have a lot of good people. Actors,
actresses, painters.
2 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: First item of business, we have veto from the Mayor's office. My
understanding is the veto was concerning the item that we approved. And the veto was
not on the issue itself. The veto was on the funding that was utilized and they would like
to see the change of funding. Chief.
Mr. Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yeah. Raul Martinez, Chief of Police. We are
requesting from this Commission not to consider the veto at this point. I will reconsider
the funding. I will bring it back in front of the Commission after I have more time to
assess whether that's the appropriate funding or not.
Commissioner Sanchez: I have -- Mr. Chairman, I have a question on that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Chief, first of all, could the money come out of the Law
Enforcement Trust Fund?
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, my understanding right now is that it can't but I want to
make sure whether it can or it cannot. It is my understanding that -- if we were starting a
brand new SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) team, then we could buy the
equipment. This is replacement equipment. But I want to be hundred percent sure that
what I'm telling you.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, they cannot replace equipment?
Mr. Martinez: That is my understanding, as I know right now. It's not supposed to be
made for replacements. It's supposed to be made for new equipment. If we're buying a
new type or we're starting a new unit, we could do it. But I want to make sure when I
bring it back, that I have looked at all those angles and I gave you the right information.
Commissioner Sanchez: I just needed that for clarification.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. OK.
18 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Now we go to the consent agenda. Is any one item on the
consent agenda any Commissioners would like to deal with?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, sir. CA -6.
Vice Chairman Gort: CA -6. Is it -- do you want to pull it or just a question?
Commissioner Winton: Well, I probably -- it may end up being both because on the CA -
6 agenda, it's for procurement of ground maintenance services, and the vendor -- and I'll
tell you, I'll bet I've seen five hundred lawn service vendors that do business.in the City
of Miami and live in the City of Miami and their business is in the City of Miami and
we've chosen a business that's outside the City of Miami. So...
Ms. Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Sir, I'd like to speak toward that, if I might.
Commissioner Winton: Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
Ms. Carter: I'm Judy Carter.
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: COMMISSIONER TEELE ENTERED THE
CHAMBERS AT 10:30 A.M.
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Mr. Chairman, would you allow me to express my
apologies to the Commission and the staff that I was not here -- you have not voted on
any other item -- Mr. Clerk, Mr. Attorney, isn't it still my privilege, before any so the
their item is taken up and voted on to cast a vote?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): I believe the special meeting has been closed,
which was the discussion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, we can open right over again.
Commissioner Teele: I would just like the privilege of casting a vote in the affirmative.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move to open.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
19 May 25, 2000
l�
Commissioner Regalado: The special meeting.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. OK.
Commissioner Teele.
•
Special meeting is open again.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to instruct the Clerk to cast my vote, if
no other business has been taken up, as a yes vote, in favor of the package.
Commissioner Winton: In favor of what?
Vice Chairman Gort: The package.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Thank you, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir. I am Judy Carter, Director of Purchasing, and I very much like to
make a comment on your comments as it relates to CA -6. First of all, do know that we
have a City of Miami local vendor outreach program. They are actively involved in
recruiting outreaching in this community, the City of Miami, local vendors. In fact, we
outreached and identified 13 local vendors, whom had never registered with the City of
Miami, but that didn't matter. We went out into the streets, identified them, let them
know about this bid, and asked them to respond. Unfortunately, all of them did not
respond. Well, my staff has a responsibility that, when they don't, I want to know why.
Why didn't you respond? We told you that this was a good opportunity for you to get
involved with the City of Miami. What are the reasons? And we have a notation of why
these particular vendors did not bid, and most of them said things such as, " schedule will
not permit or insufficient time to respond. Now, keep in mind, our bids are out for at
least fifteen days. Now, what excuse is that? I'm not prepared to address what the
legitimacy of that, but do know legitimacy that we did find out that these are some of the
reasons that they did not bid. Now, do note on this particular CA -6 item, you had a Dade
County vendor who is being awarded a part of the contract, and a local vendor being
awarded the contract, in the name of J. R. Alvarez Land Clearing. So, we awarded this
contract by item based upon by site, and whoever was the lowest and responsive bidder
did, in fact, get the recommendation. So, we did issue bids out to 13 local vendors.
Three or four responded and fortunately, J. R. Alvarez was the lowest for a certain sites
of this contract.
20 May 25, 2000
•
Commissioner Winton: There are two other real agenda items later on in the agenda, that
are already procurement items, and the same question is going to come up. Would you
rather me ask the questions just about process now or wait until later?
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no. Lets get rid of the consent agenda.
Commissioner Winton: Fine. Because I'll talk more about just process when we get to
these other items.
Ms. Carter: Sure. And I'll be more than happy to assist:
Commissioner Winton: Thank you. OK. I don't want to pull.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other items? Any other items?
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, we need to pull item number 8 --
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, let us know all the items you're going to pull from the regular
agenda?
Mr. Gimenez: Item number 8 and PZ -3. Eight and PZ -3. OK. Yes, sir. You're going to
address the consent agenda?
Mr. Brett Bibeau: Yes, sir. Good morning. My name is Brett Bibeau, 1263 S.W. 181h
Street, Miami, Florida 33145. I'm speaking on CA -9. I applaud the Commissioners'
applications for grants to remove derelict vessels from our waters. It's a project, which
deserves our attention. I would like to respectfully ask the Commission to slightly amend
the application to include some, if not all, of the 12 identified derelict vessels on the
Miami River. I volunteer for the Miami River Commission Grants Investigation
Subcommittee, and would like to bring another applicable grants program to the attention
of the Commission. The derelict vessel removal grants program is, and I quote, to
provide financial assistance to coastal local governments for the purpose of removing and
disposing of designated derelict vessels that pose a threat to public health or safety of the
environment, navigation or the aesthetic condition. The Florida Inland Navigation
District grants you're currently applying for has a 50 percent match requirement, but the
derelict vessel removal grants program, which I mentioned, has no matching
requirements. One final point. According to my records, the grant you're moving to
apply for is deadlined passed on April 1st. Thanks for your time.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. Is staff aware of that?
21 May 25, 2000
Ms. Christina Abrams (Director, Public Facilities): Application deadline is June 2nd, and
that's why we're before you today, so that we can get the matching funds to apply for that
grant.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding he's making a statement that we don't need to
match funds. We don't need to provide matching funds for that grant.
Commissioner Winton: For the other grant.
Vice Chairman Gort: For the other grant.
Mr. Bibeau: No. For a different one. No matching is needed for the derelict vessel
removal grants program. Matching of 50 percent is required for the one you're moving
into.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We got it. We got it.
Ms. Ruth Robinson: OK. I -- my name is Ruth Robinson, assistant to the director for
Conferences, Conventions and Public Facilities. I spoke with Mark Crossly, who is the
executive director for the Florida Inland Navigational District Program, the Waterways
Assistance Program. He told me that this particular grant is a 50/50 matching fund.
However, there is a fifteen percent in-kind service that, you know, could be a part of this
grant, but at this time, our department does not have the in-kind services to offer. So,
therefore, we're seeking the matching funds of, you know, 50 percent.
Vice Chairman Gort: The question is, -- let's see if we can understand. We're talking
about two different places where we can apply for grants. My understanding is, there is a
place called -- there is a grant called Derelict Vessels, where you can apply for the grant
there and that grant says you don't need matching funds.
Ms. Robinson: That deadline has passed, and because -- yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: That one has passed?
Ms. Robinson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, can we know for next year, please?
Ms. Robinson: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Any other questions? Consent agenda, ma'am. Which
item on the consent agenda?
22 May 25, 2000
Ms. Mary Hill: Oh, it's the consent agenda?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Hill: OK. Well, it's important to the community --
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Ms. Hill: -- also in what we need to do.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am. Thank you. OK. Do I have a motion for the
consent agenda?
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move the consent agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: And second. Is there any further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Note For The Record: CODE SEC. 2-33 .(J) STIPULATES THAT
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS , THAT ARE REMOVED FROM THE
AGENDA PRIOR TO CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERATION SHALL
AUTOMATICALLY BE SCHEDULED AS A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM
AT THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE CITY
COMMISSION.
23 May 25, 2000
Thereupon, motion duly made by Commissioner Sanchez and seconded by
Commissioner Winton, the Consent Agenda items were passed by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Got
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
(Here follows the body of resolutions, omitted here and on file in the
Office of the City Clerk.)
RESOLUTION NO. 00-435
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ACCEPTING THE BID OF WEATHERTROL MAINTENANCE,
FOR THE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF AN AIR
CONDITIONING CHILLER FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE,
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $36,400; ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE E-911 OPERATING BUDGET,
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 196002.290461.6.840.
24 May 25, 2000
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-436
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ACCEPTING THE BID OF COMP USA, PURSUANT TO
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 99-00-112, TO BE USED CITYWIDE
FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF TONER CARTRIDGES FOR
PRINTERS, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$139,301.78, ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, FOR ONE (1)
YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL
ONE (1) YEAR PERIODS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
PURCHASING; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM
VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS AND REQUIRING BUDGETARY
APPROVAL OF FUNDS FROM INDIVIDUAL DEPARTMENTAL
ACCOUNTS PRIOR TO USAGE.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-437
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ACCEPTING THE BID OF THE CARPET BOUTIQUE, INC., FOR
THE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF CARPET AT
THE NORTH DISTRICT SUBSTATION, FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $38,101.60;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
312025.299301.6.830.
25 May 25, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-438
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT
WELDING FABRICATION FROM VARIOUS VENDORS, UNDER
EXISTING MIAMI -DARE COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 0439-0/00-4,
AT AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$54,500, ON A SPOT MARKET BASIS, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1)
YEAR, WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND ON A YEAR-TO-YEAR
BASIS, EFFECTIVE UNTIL JANUARY 31, 2001, SUBJECT TO
FURTHER EXTENSIONS BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND
AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS, FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE -RESCUE;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM ACCOUNT CODE NOS.
509000.420901.6.670 ($50,000) AND 001000.280701.6.670 ($4,500).
26 May 25, 2000
RESOLUTION NO. 00-439
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ACCEPTING THE BID OF AFTER HOURS CLEANING, FOR
THE PROVISION OF CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR FIRE
FACILITIES, PURSUANT TO INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 99-00-
069, ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE (1) YEAR, WITH THE
OPTION TO EXTEND FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR
PERIODS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION TO BE UTILIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
FIRE -RESCUE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $18,624; WITH
FUNDS THEREFOR HEREBY ALLOCATED FROM GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, CUSTODIAL MAINTENANCE
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 513000.421001.6.340, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$7,760, AND FIRE -RESCUE ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.28060.1.6.340, IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,864, FOR
SUBSEQUENT CONTRACT RENEWAL PERIODS, FUNDING IS
AVAILABLE FROM FIRE RESCUE ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.280601.6.340
27 May 25, 2000
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-440
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ACCEPTING THE BIDS OF EMILY LAWN SERVICE A
HISPANIC/MIAMI/DADE COUNTY VENDOR, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $15,600, AND J.R. ALVAREZ LAND
CLEARING, A HISPANIC/LOCAL VENDOR, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $48,478, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT VARIOUS CITY
PARKS AND FIRE STATIONS, ON AN AS NEEDED CONTRACT
BASIS FOR ONE (1) YEAR WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR
TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR PERIODS, FOR THE
DEPARTMENTS OF PARKS AND RECREATION, OPERATIONS
DIVISION, AND FIRE -RESCUE, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $64,068; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND . RECREATION, OPERATIONS
DIVISION, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.580302.6.340 AND FROM
THE FIRE -RESCUE DEPARTMENT, FIRE TRAINING CENTER
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.280601.6.670.
28 May 25, 2000
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-441
•
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION,
WITH ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A USE AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, BETWEEN THE CITY
OF MIAMI ("CITY") AND F.L.T., INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PRESENTING FIFTEEN (15) TO THIRTY (30) HOME
PROFESSIONAL SOCCER GAMES FOR A PERIOD OF THREE
(3) YEARS COMMENCING MARCH 1, 2001, WITH AN OPTION
TO EXTEND FOR AN ADDITIONAL FIVE (5) YEAR PERIOD;
AUTHORIZING THE USER FEE TO BE CAPPED AT $15,000 PER
EVENT; FURTHER CONDITIONING SAID AUTHORIZATION
UPON THE ORGANIZERS PAYING ALL NECESSARY COSTS OF
CITY SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH
ANY EVENT, OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY
IN AN AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER, AND
COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS
MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.
a
29 May 25, 2000
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-442
0
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN
APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION
DISTRICT WATERWAYS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR GRANT
FUNDING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $34,127.50, FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF CONFERENCE, CONVENTIONS, AND
PUBLIC FACILITIES, FOR THE REMOVAL OF 17 IDENTIFIED
DERELICT VESSELS FROM THE DINNER KEY ANCHORAGE
AREA, AND AUTHORIZING THE REQUIRED MATCHING FUNDS,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $34,127.50; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM FY 2001 FUNDS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-443
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING A CONTRIBUTION TO THE MENTAL HEALTH
ASSOCIATION OF DADE COUNTY, INC., "A WOMAN'S PLACE
PROGRAM," AND ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED - $10,000, FROM THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NUMBERS 690001,
690002, AND 690003, SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVING BEEN
APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO
EQUITABLE SHARING" AND FLORIDA STATE STATUTES,
CHAPTER 932.7055, AS AMENDED.
30 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 2. Twenty-sixth Year CDBG (Community
Development Block Grant) prototype allocation by categories.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: I have a question on CDBG. I have a problem
with one decision that your department took, I think, several days ago,
regarding the facade program. Some people -- some CBO (Community
Based Organization) have been told that the facade will not be handled by
the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office, but it would be
handled by your office directly, that your office would approve. Is that a
major change, Gwen?
Ms. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): That's not
correct. We're not changing the facade program at all.
Commissioner Regalado: You did send a letter.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is, the NET Administrator -- the
feedback that I received, the NET Administrator did not want the NET
individuals to deal with the facade and the CDBG funds says, if they don't
want to do it, then we're willing to do it. I don't know if that has taken
place or not, but my understanding, letters went out to the...
Ms. Warren: You're talking about the code compliance with the -- that
goes through the NETS for businesses. There has been some discussion
about insuring that the City can be reimbursed for the City. There has
been no discussion about changing the program. Currently, the way the
program operates, the businesses go to the NET Offices; they review the
paperwork; then it's submitted for reimbursement. To our knowledge, to
the exception of a few problems, the program is working excellently, and
we have no intention of making -- and if we were to make any changes in
31 May 25, 2000
•
the program, it would require Commission approval. We're not
recommending any changes to the system.
Commissioner Regalado: But, Gwen, a letter was sent --
Ms. Warren: Not from me.
Commissioner Regalado: -- to the CBOs regarding that change that would
take place on today, I think.
Ms. Warren: I'm the Director of the Department of Community
Development. I have issued no letter. I have made know requests from
administration or the Commission to change the program. So, I don't
know any -- I haven't seen the letter. I didn't write it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Did that maybe come out from the NET
headquarters, the (inaudible).
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Commissioner Winton: Does he have a copy of the letter?
Vice Chairman Gort: Do you have a copy of the letter?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Sanchez have a copy of the letter. He
went -- Commissioner Sanchez went to get it. He said he have a copy of
the letter in his office. And I don't understand. Because...
Ms. Warren: Perhaps, you would want to take to Mr. Diaz, who is in
charge of NETS. I did -- Community Development did not issue a letter
changing the facade program. And.Mr. Diaz is indicating that the NET
did not either. So, I'm not sure who wrote the letter.
Commissioner Teele: Who signed the letter?
Commissioner Regalado: She did.
Commissioner Teele: Who signed the letter? Why doesn't the letter speak
for itself?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: Let's just see the letter.
32 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Regalado: I'm -- Sanchez, I think, he went to get --
Commissioner Sanchez went to get the letter.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We'll wait until the letter gets here.
Commissioner Regalado: But it's important, when we have the letter -- I
saw the letter. Unfortunately, I didn't bring the letter. It is important that
we say that, I think, -- I feel that the facade program is working very
well; that it's helping a lot of businesses; that the decision of this
Commission to extend the facade program to S.W. 8th Street, it was
important because around 60 businesses in S.W. 8th Street, west of 27th
Avenue, have been helped. Next year we have Coral Way reconstruction,
and I'm sure that the Commission will agree that we need to expand that
to Coral Way and Flagler because not the whole City is eligible for the
facade program. But my concern was -- I read that letter. I mean, it came
from the City.
Commissioner Winton: But, Commissioner, it seems to me that there isn't
a discussion to be held until we know who wrote the letter, because you're
talking to people who say they didn't write it, so...
Ms. Warren: Or the nature of the letter.
Commissioner Winton: Until we figure out who wrote the letter, there
isn't a discussion to go back and forth.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, let's get a copy of the letter.
Ms. Warren: What I can assure you is that we have not cancelled the
facade program.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Excuse me. Let get a copy...
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. It's not about canceling. What the
letter said is that the NET Offices will not be handling the facade
program. Rather, it would be your department. And something -- I have
the letter.
Vice Chairman Gort: Look, gentlemen, let's -- until the letter gets here,
you have to two main bodies here --
Commissioner Sanchez: Who's got a copy of the letter?
33 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: -- they are saying they are not going to change.
They say you have the copy.
Commissioner Sanchez: I couldn't find it.
Commissioner Regalado: I have it but I didn't bring it.
Commissioner Sanchez: I -- this was one -- one was sent to me but I
couldn't find it.
Mr. Manuel Diaz: Manuel Diaz, NET Coordinator. There was some
discussion of the facade program -- the management of the facade
program going back to the Community Development at one of the NET
coordinator's meetings -- one of my division staff meetings, but I
explained to the administrators that there was nothing final. It was only
in discussion phase, and the only purpose of this discussion that I was
having with Ms. Warren would be to improve the accountability within the
facade program, and that's all it was. NET did not send out any
correspondence and...
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. So, you're saying you didn't send it;
somebody else sent it. When we get the letter, then we can address it.
Let's go on with the business. That's not going to change. It's going to
stay the way it is.
Mr. Diaz : Right. Exactly. This was only a discussion item.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. If any change is going to take place, it's going
to come to us. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Diaz : Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 2.
Ms. Warren: Mr. Chairperson, at the May Ilth meeting the Commission
directed staff to come back with a proposed prototype for funding
allocations to go in the RFP (Request for Proposal) and you wanted to
discussion some minimum funding levels, and what staff's
recommendations, and, again, to get Commission approval. Staff has
reviewed the CDBG entitlement for this year, and we've made
recommendations. The -- as you're aware in your letter, we're indicating
that the allowable administrative costs is 20 percent. We've also
indicated that administrative costs goes for both direct and indirect costs
34 May 25, 2000
•
for the City's administration; other federal grants. The public service
cap, under legislatively, there is a 15 percent entitlement provision for
public service funds. The City was successful in getting a three-year
waiver for public service, to increase it to 10 -- to 25 percent. The
Commission is currently, in your 25th year, the percentage of public
service allocation was 23 percent. Staff is recommending that it remain at
the 23 percent, and that we will have two years to phase back down and,
again, to avoid any crisis at the end, that we maintain the current funding
level. In the area of Economic Development, the funding allocation is
currently at 11 percent or one million three ninety-seven. We're
recommending that the funding level for Economic Development activities
remain the same. Housing administrative activity is 12 percent of the
entitlement grant: one million five -two four. We're recommending that it
remain at the same level. For City funded projects or Commission
legislative activities, we're recommending that the amount of a million
five, which is the current allocation for Code Enforcement related
activities, that's both at the NET, Housing, Building and Zoning, and the like,
that it remain at the current year funding level. In the area of demolition,
the Commission recommended 300 -- approved three hundred thousand
last year. Staff is recommending an increase to five hundred thousand.
The Building Department used its whole budget up by March 30th and then
was in need of an additional allocation. This year we're recommending
that the next year funding level be at the five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000) level because of the amount of demolition that's going on. Lot
Clearing this year was funded at two hundred and seventy-five thousand.
We're recommending that it remain at that level. The Commission has an
interlocal agreement with the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency)
that requires base line funding of four hundred and seventy-nine thousand.
We're recommending obviously that -- that's a part of a Commission
mandated funding allocation. We also have a Section 108 debt service for
the Wynwood Free Trade Zone, which is three hundred and seventy-five
thousand dollars ($375,000) annual. Obviously, we're recommending that
we, by law, have to set aside resources to pay that debt while we go
through the legal process. The interlocal agreement, again, with our
CRA, our redevelopment agency, we have guaranteed the payment of the
108 debt service. That's six hundred and twenty-four thousand six
hundred and seventy-eight thousand dollars ($624,678). This next year,
again, we would have to set aside resources to make that debt payment.
That would give us a balance of five hundred and sixty-three thousand
three hundred and twenty-two dollars ($563,322) that would go to Public
Facilities. We are anticipating carry over from our current CIP (Capital
Improvement Program) or public facility allocation. An we're also
recommending that any unspent funds in the CIP or public facility
category be rolled over and added to that fund balance for next year.
Additionally, several of the Commissioners have indicated, over the past
year, an interest in our CBOs or our community based organizations doing
35 May 25, 2000
0 0
more capacity building, and I think the conversation is that several of our
organizations have received funding in multiple categories, social service,
Housing and Economic Development. The Commission has stressed a
concern that agencies specialize and that they expand their skills in
specialty areas, so we're recommending that there be some policy
consideration, that areas -- agencies that are successful, be funded in one
category only, instead of multiple categories. So, if you're a housing
agency, that we fund them at the capacity -- at the level necessary for
them to do housing, and, again, the agencies over the years have applied
for multiple pots in order to maintain their administrative structure.
We're suggesting that agencies are generally good at one thing and that
we need to fund them sufficiently to be good at Housing good at
Economic Development, or to provide social services, but when we fund
them on all three categories, it dilutes their ability to really be successful
and that we're stressing that we assist the agencies in getting the proper
administrative support to specialize. It will bet better for us, better for
the agency in the long run, and, again, that's a policy consideration.
Additionally, what the Commissioners have indicated an interest in is
providing some minimum funding recommendations for Commission
district, and, again, that would be a discussion that we would be having
now.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Questions.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, she said a whole lot. I mean, I kind
of wish she could start from the beginning.
Ms. Warren: I will.
Commissioner Teele: You know, -- you're not a lawyer, are you? Are
you? Are you a lawyer?
Ms. Warren: No, I'm not.
Vice Chairman Gort: She's pretty good.
Commissioner Teele: I swear, we ought to pay her to go to law school.
She can talk faster and run more big stuff through you and -- you know,
and says it so blandly like it's nothing, but you know, you've said some
very, very major, significant things. I mean, we need to slow down and --
at least I need to slow down and try to get you to walk us through this
because I have a number of concerns. I have one or two actions that I
would like for the Commission to consider. But I think we need to try to
clear up the air on some of these issues over the year that we've been
hearing. This is the time for us to sort of have our over site hearings,
36 May 25, 2000
•
which we are -- you know, we have never really had. We had them, I
think, one time. That was during different a Mayor, and the result of that
was very unfortunate, I think. But the fact of the matter is that is that you
need to slow down for me, sat least, and walk us through this because
whatever decisions we make today, we're going to live with it for -- see,
we get caught up on the grant awards. The policy that precedes the
notices going out is more important than the grant awards, in many ways,
because that determines what we're going to be doing. So, if you could
slow down. Mr. Chairman, I know I want to get out of here today by
5:30, 6 o'clock, if I can.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele, if we look at the last page --
and my understanding is -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- what's being
drawn in here is the request for next year's funding, and how the funds are
going to be allocated. I think, if we go to the last page, she can really
explain the percentage, where is it going in.
Ms. Warren: Commissioner, do you --
Commissioner Teele: But before we get -- I mean, I'll go to the
percentage in the last -- could I get a copy? Mine -- I got the wrong book.
I brought the evening book in and I need my morning book. But...
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, you're a night person.
Commissioner Teele: No, this isn't it.
Commissioner Regalado: Mean while...
Vice Chairman Gort: Here. Give him this.
Commissioner Regalado: Meanwhile, if you just yield, Commissioner
Teele, just one second.
Commissioner Tcele: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go right ahead.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. This correspondence serves to inform you
that, effective May 22"d, 2000, the City of Miami Department of
Community Development will sign all letters of interest from business
participating in the Commercial Facade Program, to avoid delays in
signing the letters of interest current occupational licenses and certificate
of occupancy must accompany each letter. Also, please be informed that
37 May 25, 2000
this department will also conduct an inspection, previously performed by
the Neighborhood Enhancement Team NET Inspector. However, this does
not exempt contractors from obtaining the necessary inspection required
by the City of Miami, Department of Building and Zoning. That is the
letter that brought...
Commissioner Teele: Make a copy of it. Who signed the letter?
Commissioner Regalado: No, I'll -- it's signed by you.
Ms. Warren: OK. The letter is basically saying that we're signing off on
invoices. It's not a change in the system.
Commissioner Regalado: It changed because it -- see, the confusion is
that you're saying that the NET Inspector used to make the inspection.
Now, it would be made by your department. When you do that, people get
confused because it's very difficult to understand all the proceedings, and
this is why I raised the issue. And, you know, people are confused.
When you say on the letter that things will be changed, things will be
changed, and people see that as a change. Maybe as a major change.
Maybe as a non -important change, but it's a change, and the letter was
sent. And the letter -- actually, it got to the people on May 23�d, effective
May 22nd, that it's -- and that is the issue that I wanted to raise.
Ms. Warren: Again, it was our intent to expedite the payments and
basically to identify the person who is reviewing the paperwork, but we
are not changing the system.
Commissioner Regalado: It is a good intent, but it created confusion.
Ms. Warren: We're not changing the system. OK. Just...
Commissioner Regalado: It may be a good intent, but it created
confusion.
Ms. Warren: OK. We'll try to clarify it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if -- could I get that for a minute?
The people aren't -- people don't accept changes, no matter what -- how
small are have. People don't accept changes. Now, the changes that
you're -- Gwendolyn,
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
38 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Sanchez: Gwendolyn, the changes that you want to do
here, do you think they are going to speed up the process? It is going to
make it more efficient? Is it going to make it better?
Ms. Warren: It's going to make it better and allow us to pay people
faster. That's our intent.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So, now, -- well, if that's your intent, that's
fine. The question that we have is, you know, we don't want to continue
to add, you know, red tape and, you know, make things worse. I mean, I
am very content with the facade program in my area. I mean, you could
drive all Overtown and see the differences...
Ms. Warren: We love the facade program. The problem that we've had is
businesses calling about the delays in payments because of the inspection
review process. We're basically saying, our staff will go to the NET
review so we can expedite, and Rafael will be signing off. We're trying to
expedite payments.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So we would cut through the bureaucracy
and make it a more efficient?
Ms. Warren: That's our intent.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Do we have anybody here from the facade
program?
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gimenez: If I may, I'd like to get that and get my chief of my -- ACM
(Assistant City Manager) of Operations to look at the program and see if
it will actually help. I'm like you; I don't want to see anymore red tapes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. If it's not broken, don't fix it. Leave it
alone. Now, if it's broken, fix it.
Mr. Gimenez: (Inaudible) review it and come back to you with a
recommendation of -- if it's a good idea or not a good idea, but I certainly
would like to take a look at it and come up with a recommendation.
Vice Chairman Gort: But let me tell you what the problem is -- and you've
done this very well intended. And let me tell you -- I've had the
experience, where I've sat on the committee and we had a committee that
made a decision to write a letter to another group to try to bring things
39 May 25, 2000
9 •
together, and when the recipient of the other group received the letter,
they were insulted, and sometimes it's the lack of communication. You
have CBOs received the letters; they don't understand it because they have
not checked with them, and I think any changes that be taken place, we
should sit down with the people and explain to them so they understand it.
Because a lot of times, you send a letter stating something without
explaining the benefit. Because I'm sure if they think that they are going
to get paid a lot sooner, they'll agree with it, but they might not
understand it. So, my recommendation is, why don't you all get together,
make sure you go over it, and come up with a plan. What we want is to
expedite it. And that's what they want also.
Mr. Angel Gonzalez: May I allow the opportunity for a minute?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez: There hasn't been any problems...
Commissioner Teele: What's your name and address?
Mr. Gonzalez: I'm sorry. Angel Gonzalez, 3280 West Flagler Street, City
of Miami, 40 years resident and tax payer. There hasn't been any
problems. There are no problems with any delays in payments that I have
heard of. The program has worked. When I started working this program
ten years ago, this was the procedure, and it was changed because it didn't
work at that time. For ten years it has worked, OK. I have spoken to my
NET Administrator. My NET Administrator have expressed to me that he
has no problem of continuing approving the letter of interesting. By this
being handled by the NET Offices, even the City has an advantage, and
that is that we have became collectors, tax collectors, for the City of
Miami, and licenses and fees for the City of Miami. Why? Because when
we put in a letter of interest to the NET Office, the NET Office checks
and see if that business has its license and CU (Certificate of Use) up-to-
date. If it doesn't, then we go back to the business and we collect the
money for the City of Miami. We'll bring the check to the NET Office,
and, at that time, the NET Administrator signs off on the letter of interest.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much has your office collected for the City?
Mr. Gonzalez: So far, this month, we have collected over six thousand
dollars ($6,000). This month.
Commissioner Sanchez: Six thousand dollars ($6,000)?
Mr. Gonzalez: Six thousand, this month. Every month we collect an
average of four or five thousand, six thousand, three thousand. OK. And
40 May 25, 2000
also, on top of that, there are new businesses that we go out there and we
provide them the service of completing the application for the CU,
I ompleting the application for the occupational licenses, and that's
another way that we also bring revenue to the City and to the NET Office.
Now, as far as the job -- as soon as the job is completed -- we take a
picture before the doing the job and we bring it to the NET Administrator.
Once the project is completed, we take an after picture, which will bring
to the NET Administrator, with the authorization for final payment; the
NET Administrator goes out there. He checks the building. It's painted,
it's done and he approves it. I mean...
Commissioner Teele: What is it about Ms. Warren saying that we're
continuing to do it the same way you don't understand? I mean, if she just
says we're going to do it the same way, are you objecting to doing it the
same way?
Mr. Gonzalez: No.
Commissioner Teele: Then you all are saying the same...
Mr. Gonzalez: We want to continue doing it the same way that we have
been doing it up to this point --
Commissioner Teele: Then aren't you all...
Mr. Gonzalez: -- because it's the way that it's working. The problem is --
Commissioner Teele:, Angel, Angel, Angel.
Mr. Gonzalez: -- if this goes into a bureaucratic process...
Commissioner Teele: Angel, Angel, what is it about her saying they are
going to revoke this letter and do it the same way that you...
Mr. Gonzalez: We have no problem with that.
Commissioner Teele: Isn't that what I...
Mr. Gonzalez: If that's what it's going to take, we have no problem with
that. If it's going to be done the same way that has been done for the last
10 years up to now...
Commissioner Teele: I have a problem with it, but I don't understand why
you're objecting to it. I strongly object to doing it the same way. But I
don't understand why you don't want to do it the same way. She said --
I'm in the wrong meeting? What's going on here? I mean, you guys are
41 May 25, 2000
so up tight that you can't even hear somebody -- you can't hear Ms.
Warren trying to agree with you. I thought she said that was not the
intent of the, letter; that the letter -- the procedures are going to stay the
same. What they are trying to do is expedite.
Mr. Gonzalez: Well, I'm not an expert on the English language, but the
letter is very clear. The process 'is going to be changed. The NET
Administrators are going to be signing off on the letter of interest. The
NET -- the NET Offices are not going to conduct the inspections. I mean,
the English has changed so much, then I'm going to have to go back to
school and start learning English again. I mean, you know, come on.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. My understanding, everything is going to stay
the same. My understanding, everything is going to stay the same. Is that
correct?
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, the procedure -- we're going to keep the
procedures the same, but we're going to take -- we're going to have the
Assistant City Manager for Operations get together with CD (Community
Development) and NET and see if the process can be improved, along with
input from the community. And if it can be improved, we will. If it can't,
-- if it can't, the procedure the way it is now is fine, then that's the way it
will stay. (Inaudible) recommendations.
Mr. Gonzalez: Whatever is done to improve it, we'll appreciate it, but we
have to keep in mind that the main purpose of the program is to serve the
community, not to serve ourselves. To serve the community and to
serve...
Vice Chairman Gort: Angel, Angel.
Mr. Gonzalez: -- the merchants that are maintaining this City with their
taxes and fees.
Vice Chairman Gort: Angel, my understanding, what they are saying, if
there is a way to improve it, why not?
Mr. Gonzalez: I agree.
Vice Chairman Gort: If there is a way that you can pay faster and improve
and do a lot more, why not? That's what he's saying, OK.
Mr. Gonzalez: I agree. I agree. Thank you.
42 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I want -- I wish Commissioner
Regalado was here, and I would like, again, just to try to understand
where we are and where we're going. Number one, Commissioner
Regalado made a statement, that the facade program is going well, and it
goes well. That's his view. That is not the view in my district. We've
suspended it in District 5, OK. It is not gone well for five years, seven
years. We've documented that. And there are a whole lot of issues there.
There are some people in the public, that I represent, who believe it has
gone great, but when you're doing three facades a year versus everybody
else doing 40, 60, and 75, that's not great. We agreed to do, in District 5
-- and one of the good things that district elections can do is, it can stop
the one - size fits all mentality, and within certain parameters, we can
structure and design programs that meet the unique needs of each
community, and that -- there is going to be a lot of overlap, but the fact of
the matter is, it was my understanding that, in District 5, the facade
money for last year -- what's that, year 25 -- was it year 25?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: The current year that we're in, was suspended. It
was about fifty thousand, I think, dollars.
Ms. Warren: Yours has been suspended for two years.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Ms. Warren: Twenty-fourth and 25th year.
Commissioner Teele: That money was put aside.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Now, -- so, in the context of facade, I think
we need to talk about this a little bit more expandedly because I don't
want my constituent toss be left out. So, what I would like to do, at the
right time, Mr. Chairman, is have some discussion on a neighborhood and
community revitalization pilot program that I would like to see the
department come forward with in lieu of facade. I'm talking now about
the kind of work, like side walk improvements, like parking lots, like
43 May 25, 2000
better landscaping. Things that are not necessarily for one business but
for a particular neighborhood. A neighborhood revitalization program.
So, at the right time, I'd like to talk about that part because we don't have
a facade program. Secondly, on this issue -- and, Ms. Warren, I want to
be very clear. I think your department has done an absolutely amazingly,
great job given the total shambles of the financial condition of the books
of the City of Miami relating to Community Development. I -- it's gone
on for two years. The review, I don't think, enough people in the Finance
Department were involved in it and the Budget Department -- budget and
management office, I think, should have been more involved, but, for
some reason, too many managers, too many assistant managers, it seems
that your department has continued to work through -- I think it's a bad
idea to have the people writing the checks checking on the checkbook
balances, so to speak, and I know you don't write the checks, but I'm
saying, I think there needs to be a certain check and balance in this
review process. But having said all of that, we seem to be further down
the road right now than we've been since I've sat here, and I want to
commend you and your staff on that. Having said that, I think the essence
of your letter today that Commissioner Regalado pointing out, is pointing
to the overall structural problem of your division -- of your department,
and this is not going to be popular with you because no department head
wants to give up power. All of them want to do what your letter is doing,
which is taking more power. But my view, Mr. Manager, is one of the
fundamental problems of the department as its structured, is it needs to be
a grants management office. That's what it needs to be. It does not need
to have operational components and legs. I have sat here and watched
four different programs that are totally in shambles, not just from the
grants management part but from the operational part, and let me just
review them. The Section 8 Program, which is an operational program --
and we dealt with this with those people on 61s' Street week after week
after week -- was managed by the Department of Community
Development. There has got to be a better organizational structure to do
that. The department should manage the grants but some other department
in this City should -- that's out there everyday, that's in that community
everyday should be managing those Section 8 vouchers for those mod
rehabs, and the tension that went on back and forth, mobilizing people,
getting the NET Offices involved, it's a function of the fact that
something wasn't structurally right. That's one program. The second
program that we've asked repeatedly for you all to have, a public notice, a
public hearing, to list all of the pending grants in the application, Mr.
Attorney, which you all have failed to do, is the Home Repair Program.
The fix up the old home program. What is that program called?
Ms. Warren: The Home Rehab Program. First time home...
Commissioner Teele: The Home Rehab Program. We are yet to see an A to Z list of
44 May 25, 2000
everybody in that program, the application dates of when they arrived, and when they can
expect. We've asked repeatedly. I'm going to ask you again, I want a public notice in the
newspaper of everyone -- if you've got it, I apologize. Just show it to me. I will leave
that alone. But, again, there are problems all over this City with that program. There are
people -- I've read the documents. I've read a document on, Brenda, on 20th Street and
3rd Avenue, of a lady who got a letter. I don't know if it was a loan or a grant. Nobody
knows if it was a loan or a grant that we were offering her. The letter doesn't say it. And
it creates a lot of ill will. It is a very poorly written process. And I sent two staff people
in. We still haven't gotten a thorough response on that. That is an operational program.
That program needs to be managed -- I mean, implemented somewhere else. Grants
management needs to be run by community development. But the inspection, the
contractors, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, we need to get out of that. Thirdly, third
program is the program of the scattered site housing. You heard the guy come in here at
the last meeting. What was it, Palmetto homes, screaming up and down. They sent me a
resolution. They made reference to the fact that the properties went to so and so, and this,
that and the other. It's a mess. But, again, it's the kind of great program that the City has
done in the past. It has a great process that Community Development and Community
Development must focus, must development the policy, but managing the construction of
homes and inspecting is something that should be done by an operational agency, and not
a grants management agency. Thirdly, we're dealing now with the facade issue. That
letter clearly states -- if somebody reads it -- it clearly states that we are going to inspect,
and that's something that they should not be doing. We've got too many -- how many
inspectors do they have with badges in that department? Don't we have people with
badges that are trained as inspectors?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Why -- how many inspectors do they have in that department?
How many badge inspectors do they have in that department? And the whole point, Mr.
Manager, is that I really believe we've got way too many departments and not enough
assistant managers. We need about five assistant managers, because the culture in this
City in this City is as bad as I've ever seen, and it's almost like a CIA (Central
Intelligence Agency) culture, where every department is so self-contained, so
compartmentalized that nobody needs to know what's going on in any other department.
We need Assistant Managers that can force these department heads to stop wanting to
build up inspectors to do this and auditors to do that, and, you know, technology people
would be the next wave. Everybody is going to have to have five technology people in
this. We need to stop that. We need to really get assistant managers that can have the
authority, across departments, to force these department heads to use other resources. We
do not need Community Development doing the inspections. We need thein doing grants
management. And the clearest sentence in that letter says, "We shall do inspections of
these facilities", and I'm telling you, with all due respect -- and I trust Gwen Warren. I
trust her department on grants management. With all due respect, unless you're going to
tell me they've got a whole department of inspections in there, I don't think they should
be doing that, and I think that's wrong. And I think it's the kind of thing, out of
frustration, that every department gets in because it just takes too long. And if the
45 May 25, 2000
problem is the inspections aren't going fast enough, then let's fix the problem. But let's
stop creating problems for the people that have to interface with them. So, that's my
point on that issue. I strongly believe that this department needs to be right -sized. It
needs to have more support from other departments, and there should be more -- not
interlocal agreements, but inter -departmental agreements to carry certain things and
certain aspects of it. And that's'the way it should be.
Ms. Warren: I agree with everything you said.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner, before we go on. My understanding is -- and we
made a decision, Commissioner Teele; based on the information you gave us, that we
suspended the facade program and we're having a different program.
Commissioner Teele: In my district.
Vice Chairman Gort: In your district we have a different program that we've been
working on for a while now, which is the assistance to the merchants and the Economic
Development, plus the... '
Ms. Warren: Just to -- again, I agree with whatever the Commission wants to do. The
intent of the letter -- the Code Enforcement officers who work in the NET are doing the
sign -off on the facades. Then it takes another two days. We're sending people out to
basically sign -off on the paperwork. That's all.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm not discussing the letter. I'm not discussing the letter.
Ms. Warren: That's all. You know, whatever.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm discussing the statement made by Commissioner Teele that we
had -- we made the decision here to change that program because that program was not
working. My understanding is, I'm under the impression that you already had made that
change, and there is a new program that is going to be established in that district.
Ms. Warren: In District 5?
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Ms. Warren: There are -- at the last Commission meeting you voted to do a Community
Revitalization Project. At several other Commission meetings there has been resources
set aside so that there will be the ability to do a demonstration project. There is
approximately a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) that has been set aside,
when we're ready to implement a demonstration program. But...
46 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Teele: And that's the facade -- the money that would have been the
facade.
Vice Chairman Gort: Instead of the facade that's going to be...
Ms. Warren: Those monies have been set aside for that purpose.
Commissioner Teele: And what I'm saying is that, in the context of going out for bids, et
cetera, what I would very much like to do is pass a resolution that would instruct that we
would establish a pilot program to select one Community Development organization,
which could be a joint venture or whatever, to be the District 5 -wide revitalization that
would get the fifty dollars ($50), you know, whatever, like on the housing thing, to
coordinate going in and doing the revitalization, neighborhood by neighborhood. And
that's the kind of instruction that I would like to do.
Vice Chairman Gort: And what I'd like, if possible, to make the process -- my
understanding is, the decision -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that we're making today is
how the applications is going to go for next year's application, the percentage and the
system that we're going to use. We're not making a specific allocation to specific
programs?
Ms. Warren: You're making no specific allocations. The Commission's instruction was
to come back so you could do a policy direction regarding categories and activities to be
funded in the RFP.
Commissioner Teele: But we are making an allocation today by category, of.. .
Vice Chairman Gort: By categories, yes. By percentage in categories, yes.
Commissioner Teele: By category, but not to any program.
Vice Chairman Gort: Not to any programs, right. OK.
Commissioner Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Winton, you had a question?
Commissioner Winton: Well, I had a question about what Commissioner Teele's
resolution was. I didn't understand that. And then I have a...
Commissioner Teele: At the right time, what I would like to do is place a resolution that
says that there shall be a District 5 -wide pilot revitalization program and a Community
Development organization or network shall be selected on a -- you know, the department
47 May 25, 2000
will do it -- and it will receive up to fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) a year. The same
amount as in housing, for the administration of that program.
Commissioner Winton: Now -- OK. I understand. I have one question about this memo,
and it is a policy question that we do have to pay attention to. And it's the second to last
paragraph. Because this is absolutely a policy issue. And it says, "Finally, it's
recommended that the City Commission adopt a policy that requires community-based
organizations to identify an area of specialization between Economic Development
activities and housing activities, and that the City Commission limits its funding awards
to that specialization field." And what Gwen went on to say is that the policy here is
stating that community-based organizations, at least the recommendation is, that they
specialize in one and only one area of development here, as opposed to some of them that
do two and three. And that's a policy issue.
Commissioner Teele: I don't think it's -- I think you could interpret it that way. But 1,
interpret it to say; the City is only going to fund one, area for administration.
Ms. Warren: That's correct.
Commissioner Teele: In other words, they can continue to do it. They can go to the
County or they can go to the federal government, but right now we have more agencies
coming in for money than we can fund, and it doesn't make sense. I think we should
force agencies, when they deal with us, to determine whether they want to be a housing
agency or an economic development agency or -- what you call that?
Ms. Warren: Public service.
Commissioner Teele: No, no. The AIDS (Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome)
money. What's that, the Ryan White or whatever it is? But I really think we should force
them to come to us because what this is about, Johnny, is that we're giving each of these
agencies roughly fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for administrative money, which is not
a lot of money at all, but it's a lot .of money when you're funding seven, eight or ten
agencies off the top and you're...
Ms. Warren: Hundred and fifty.
Commissioner Teele: Ma'am?
Ms. Warren: Hundred and fifty.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, it's a hundred and fifty if you get all three categories.
You've got housing...
Commissioner Teele: But that's just per agency.
48 May 25, 2000
0
Commissioner Winton: Right. It could be a hundred and fifty thousand per agency in
just overhead costs, but it's still a policy issue, and we need to make sure -- because there
are agencies out there -- and I don't know how many, frankly -- but there are agencies out
there that probably get fifty thousand from each of these three categories, and when we
make this policy decision, they are going to all be in here -- those that get it are all going
to be in here screaming bloody murder.
Commissioner Teele: I can tell you, in my district at least, St. John CDC (Community
Development Corporation) is being funded or has been funded in more than one agency.
It's going to directly affect them. I don't know of any others. There may be others. But
I'm prepared to make that decision because I really do think that what we're doing is not
trying to provide jobs here. What we're trying to do is provide specialization and focus in
an area.
Commissioner Winton: Right. And just think about how much money we would have
left over to fund real projects if we didn't distribute all this money for administrative
overhead to all of these agencies, for all these different specializations to which they --
for which they generally have no expertise. So, I'm in favor. I just wanted to make sure
that everybody understands clearly that this is on the table here.
Commissioner Teele: I think -- in lieu of a chair, I think that a motion from you that
specifically supports or moves that aspect of this report needs to be done because that
needs to be something that's clear, that's not unambiguous, that everybody can understand
exactly what we're saying here.
Commissioner Winton: I'll so move.
Commissioner Teele: And I will second it for purposes of discussion. Is there objection?
I know -- I think we all ought to understand that people are going to come back in here
when it comes time for funding -- and the way I see this working, Gwen, Mr. Manager, is
that when you send those applications out, you will tell them that they are only eligible
for funding in one area for administration, and if they submit more than one, all of them
shall be deemed to be, you know, inappropriate because you can't -- you know,
everybody is going to try to figure out how do you do it? And you need to force them to
do that. I yield back to the Chairman. The motion, Mr. Chairman, by Commissioner
Winton, was to support the language contained on the last page of the Manager's
recommendation, specifically, that would force agencies to determine a single area to be
funded for administrative support by the City of Miami, and with further instructions that
the RFPs will so clarify that they can only submit in one area. That motion was made by
Commissioner Winton and seconded by myself, and it's pending discussion by
Commissioner Sanchez and yourself.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do these agencies have performance standards?
Ms. Warren: All of our contracts have performance standards, yes, sir.
49 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Sanchez: And every year we review what the services they have provided
and then we evaluate whether we're going to fund them again or not fund them again?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele:
Commissioner Sanchez: And how is that based?
Ms. Warren: Again, when we negotiate the contract, there is federal performance
standards; there are -- each contract, they make a proposal. If it's an eligible activity, we
put specific measurements, goals and objectives, and we.go out and we also have to do
administrative and financial monitoring.
Commissioner Sanchez: Gwendolyn, how many agencies do we have, a ballpark figure
right now?
Ms. Warren: Hundred plus.
Commissioner Sanchez: A hundred plus. Out of that hundred plus, have we terminated
any of the agencies in the past for not performing?
Ms. Warren: Yes, we have.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, we have. OK.
Commissioner Teele: And have we reinstated the ones that you've terminated?
Commissioner Winton: Some.
Ms. Warren: With the exception of two, yes, you have all of them.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's a good question. That's a good question. Have we
reinstated any of them?
Ms. Warren: Yes, we have.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, we have.
Ms. Warren: With the exception of two.
Commissioner Sanchez: With the exception of two.
Ms. Warren: And everybody else you reinstated after we defunded them.
Commissioner Winton: Mine, right?
50 May 25, 2000
i
Commissioner Sanchez: I think every year, when we discuss this, I think the same things
come up over and over and over to try to improve the services that these agencies
provide. You've got to start holding people to the fire.
Ms. Warren: We tried to.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. And if people do not perform and the numbers aren't there,
then we need to get rid of them. And I know that -- I remember -- Gwendolyn, I know
it's not that easy. You laugh, but it's not that easy.
Ms. Warren: Well -- no, I'm not laughing. I'm actually agreeing with you.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's what we need. We need to hold -- every agency in the
City of Miami should have performance standards and if they don't perform to those
standards, and you commit yourself, I'm going to accomplish this and if you don't get to
that, then you better explain why you didn't get to that, OK?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. This has to do with CDBG funds.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: But it doesn't have to do with your department. But the fact is
that what Commissioner Teele was saying makes a lot of sense. This is a poor City. We
have so many needs and so many problems, and we need to get close to the people. So,
we need to implement, as soon as possible, a Neighborhood Enhancement Program. But
we also need to keep helping the social services because these are part of what the City is
about, and I'm saying this to say, Mr. Manager, that the City should get out of any future
projects where CDBG funds are involved, and that are supposed to be City projects, and
I'll tell you one of them. The Tower Theater. We used CDBG funds for the Tower
Theater reconstruction. In the Tower Theater, everything has been guided by Murphy's
Law, you know. I should be blamed for that because I pushed the issue of the Tower
Theater that was an eyesore on Southwest Sth Street.
Commissioner Teele: Well, why don't you say you and me?
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I don't...
Commissioner Teele: (Inaudible) be blamed.
51 May 25, 2000
• 0
Commissioner Regalado: I don't want to blame you because -- I mean, you supported
that and the whole Commission did because it was the right thing to do, but we used a lot
of funds, CDBG funds, that could have been used for other projects in the city.
Sidewalks, streets, infrastructure in the City, where people will see it. Progress is what
people see, not what people are proud of, and we're proud of the Tower Theater now. At
least, the structure. But let me tell you something. That theater has a problem. It has a
problem, Mr. Manager, on many issues, and when we approved the administration
contract, it was said by this Commission that live shows and movies should be presented
in order to bring people -- remember, the main objective of that theater was to bring
people back to Little Havana and Southwest 8th Street, and this is why we use City funds
on City property. Well, it turned out to be that there wasn't in the contract anything that
will say that these people that are managing the theater should do live shows, and now it
turned out to be that they don't have the space to do live shows. Because it was built on a
different way. I don't know who decided that. I guess the architect firm or whatever. So
they cannot do live shows, unless we do something else. Now, a City -appointed
committee gave the contract, which we approved to one group, and we were very happy,
but it turned out to be that that group is not fulfilling, I think, the contract. Because last
Sunday...
Commissioner Teele: But, Commissioner, with all due respect, why don't we set up the
Tower Theater for a...
Commissioner Regalado: Just briefly, Commissioner, because this has to do with CDBG
funds and what you said led me to say this. Because we used CDBG funds hundreds of
thousands of dollars to finish the Tower Theater, and I'm just going to take one minute
more and say that last Sunday the press and the advertising said that the movies were
supposed to start at 1:00. People showed up and the theater was closed. By 3:00,
somebody showed up and told the people there, "Well, you know, we won't run any
movies unless we have many people, so come back another day." And you know who is
the blame for that? They complain to me because the Tower is a City of Miami entity.
They complain to me. Next calls, Mr. Manager, I'm going to send it to your office
because I think it's important that you find out. That theater, by the way, has not even
have been officially inaugurated by the City of Miami because your City staff said, in one
meeting, that they don't want to mix politics with a cultural event. So, this City's
Commission politicians are not good enough to go and cut the ribbon in the Tower
Theater, but I'm telling you something. That's OK by me. What I think is that this has to
be a lesson, that we should use CDBG funds to do sidewalks, to do streets, to do other
things for the better quality of life and infrastructure and not to do things that are white
elephants, whatever they are.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, it's 11:30. Let's...
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion on the motion.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, let me tell you what I recommend. Mr. Chairman, I
recommend, very strongly, that we suspend any further discussion by the Commission on
52 May 25, 2000
•
this; we open the public hearing, and we defer this item until the afternoon, the
Community Development. There are a lot of other issues in here and I think we need to
get through this agenda this morning.
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a motion on the floor. And discussion on the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
v
Commissioner Teele: We need a public -- we need to finish -- we need to have the public
hearing.
Vice Chairman Gort: But let me bring something out. Last time we met on this -- and
every time we have CDBG, it's the same thing. Last time I asked the administration, if
we had CDBG programs that's going to come in front of us, that's going to take the whole
agenda, let's do a separate meeting just on CDBGs.
Commissioner Winton: Well, this shouldn't have taken the whole day.
Vice Chairman Gort: I mean, let's not mix it. Let's not mix it because, let's face it,
CDBG is something we're trying to work, we're trying to fix and each one of us are going
to work and going to determine how we're going to talk and we're going to be here all
afternoon.
Ms. Warren: They have to do this.
Commissioner Teele: But, Mr. Chairman, in fairness to the process, Community
Development is something we live with for the remainder -- the policies that we make
here -- all we're going to do is just approve a bunch of contracts, et cetera, but this is a
policy that we're trying to establish that's going to be the framework for this City.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, I agree with you, but I think we should bring it up and speak by
itself, on a separate meeting by itself.
Commissioner Teele: I had hoped that we would discuss Community Development and
the budget policies issues today, and nothing else, quite candidly, which is what we
agreed we would do.
Vice Chairman Gort: But that's -- I think that's what we should do.
Ms. Warren: Mr. Chair?
Vice Chairman Gort: There is a motion on the floor. We'll make -- we have a motion.
53 May 25, 2000
•
Commissioner Teele: We have a motion by Commissioner Winton...
Vice Chairman Gort: You want to speak.on the motion?
Mr. Mariano Cruz: No, I want to speak on the allocation.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. On the motion. I want to speak on the motion. My
understanding is, what you're saying here is, you want an organization to do Economic
Development, but not to do housing. Unfortunately, you know, if you look at the funding
and how these agencies survive, it's by the funding they get from the management
because their housing does not give them enough money to maintain their staff. I
completely disagree with that, and we had the proof of the three most successful agencies
in the City of Miami do both.
Commissioner Teele: Who are the three, Willy?
Vice Chairman Gort: You had the Allapattah ABDA (Allapattah Business Development
Association); you have the East Little Havana CDC (Community Development
Corporation), and you have HODAG (Housing Development Action Grant). And what
other -- there is at least three or four that receive both funding. They have a great track
record. I completely disagree with this.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort, I think you have a very valid point. What
we're saying is simply this. The fifty thousand dollar ($50,000) funding for
administration is all we're saying you'll be limited to. If you want to do those areas and
do programs in those areas, projects in those areas, they will be free to come in for
Community Development funds in those areas. But it's -- we cannot afford to subsidize, I
think, effectively, the administrative support for multiple areas. I mean, I think it's a fair
debate. But they -- but anybody could come in and apply for -- if they were getting
administrative support for housing, they could come in and do an Economic
Development deal or vice versa, I would supposed, but they wouldn't get the fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000) or whatever the annual amount of the allocation is. That's
what I understand the motion to be.
Ms. Warren: Commissioner, the -- Commissioner Gort is correct. Those are three of our
more successful agencies, but both CODEC and East Little Havana, CDC (Community
Development Corporation) are very successful because they do housing.
Commissioner Teele: And they don't do other areas.
Ms. Warren: No, they do not.
Commissioner Teele: Think don't get funding from you in other areas.
54 May 25, 2000
0
Ms. Warren: I think that they do not receive funding from -- we provide them from the
City.
Commissioner Teele: From the City.
Ms. Warren: From the City.
Commissioner Teele: They may get it from the County. They may get it from the feds.
Ms. Warren: Correct. And what we're recommending is that, in those cases where we
have an ABDA (Allapattah Business Development Authority) that currently is doing both
and that we provide them sufficient funding and -- we're not suggesting the fifty thousand
dollar ($50,000) limit. We're suggesting that they be provided the funding necessary to
do what they do well, and that one of the reasons why agencies have gone into multiple
activities is because there are administrative caps. So, they can only get fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000) for housing, and they can get fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for
Economic Development or for social programs, and what happens is, they end up with
multiple contracts, but, generally, they are very excellent at one or two things, and we're
just recommending that they specialize.
Commissioner Teele: Well, Willy, would you agree to a grandfather provision in this,
that those that are receiving...
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Those that are receiving...
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Those that are currently receiving in a multiple area?
Vice Chairman Gort: I wouldn't have any problem with that because ABDA (Allapattah
Business Development Authority), for example, and Allapattah have done quite a bit and
you have seen their collection, what they are doing for the City, what they are collecting
for the City, as the Economic Development. They also got into the housing, which was
much need for, and they have been able to provide housing. And the problem is, the
second phase that they were working on, because of political reasons, were stopped, but
now they continue to go. So, I won't have any problem if it was grand fathered in.
Commissioner Winton: Well, the problem with grant -- I don't know. You didn't finish
the sentence on grand fathering. But if it's grand fathering every agency that already gets
two hits...
Commissioner Teele: It's only -- that's only one agency, according to Ms. Warren.
55 May 25, 2000
k • 9
Ms. Warren: The agency --
Commissioner Winton: Well, I'll bet it's not.
Ms. Warren: -- at this point, that has a significant impact would be ABDA (Allapattah
Business Development Authority).
Commissioner Winton: But that's not the question.
Ms. Warren: The only agency.
Commissioner Winton: How many agencies get multiple administrative funding? I'm
not talking about whether they are good...
Ms. Warren: Four additional other ones, and Rafael Hernandez, Coconut Grove, and
Edgewater, CDC.
Commissioner Winton: Right. There is a whole host of them out there.
Ms. Warren: Those are the three.
Vice Chairman Gort: I would be against this motion. I'm just saying that.
Commissioner Sanchez: I would be against the motion, too.
Commissioner Winton: Well, then, before y'all make your minds up, you need to think
about something. If you -- well, you don't have to think about it, but I would encourage
you to think about something. Excuse me. Excuse me.
Commissioner Teele: If three Commissioners are against it, that's the policy.
Commissioner Winton: That's right. But there is a hundred -- over a hundred agencies.
If each agency gets fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) and not -- forget about fifty thousand
three times -- that each agency begins to get the fifty thousand dollar ($50,000) cap, that's
five million dollars ($5,000,000). If an agency gets three of them --
Commissioner Teele: There is no money for the project.
Commissioner Winton: -- that's fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) and there is no
money for projects. So, I understand completely the need to -- and I'm always nervous
about policies that weave everybody out, including the good ones. So, I understand
completely, from a business standpoint, the need to provide the appropriate level of
support for those agencies that do a good job, whatever they do a good job at, including if
it's three different things. We should -- they shouldn't be penalized because a bunch of
56 May 25, 2000
the others are doing a lousy job. So, I'm in complete concurrence with that. However,
we have...
Commissioner Teele: Well, let me ask you this: Would you support an amendment --
I'm asking, I guess,-- because Commissioner Gort and Commissioner Sanchez supported
an amendment that would say those agencies that are -- that any agency that seeks to be
funded in more than two areas must have the Manager's recommendation and the support
of four-fifths of the Commission?
Vice Chairman Gort: I don't have any problem with that, but let me tell you...
Commissioner Teele: That just changes the threshold.
Vice Chairman Gort: But let me tell you some of the things...
Commissioner Teele: Is that better for you?
Vice Chairman Gort: When you're talking about a hundred agencies, you're talking about
social services, and you're talking about multiple agencies that provide different types of
services. But I can tell you, the only agency that is working within my district, that has
made a difference and made a change, is ABDA (Allapattah Business Development
Authority), and I don't want to eliminate their performance. They are the top rating
agencies of all the agencies that perform. Now, are we going to punish those guys
because they do well and they do all the work? Listen, I made enemies because, when I
first got...
Commissioner Teele: Johnny, the amendment...
Vice Chairman Gort: When I first got elected, there was four, that I got them out of here
and they have not been refunded. And I've made very big enemies because they are not
funded anymore, and every time I have an election, they go against me, and I don't have
any problem with that, but I made that decision. They were not performing. I took their
funding away.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: And that's what we need to do. If somebody's not performing, take
the funding, do away with it, and give it to the ones that are performing.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort, do you have a problem with the amendment,
then, that would say that, to be funded in more than one area, you must have the
Manager's recommendation and the support of four-fifths of the Commission?
57 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's face it, Teele; unfortunately, we want to take the politics out.
The politics are there. I'd like to have the recommendation of the Manager and the
majority of the Commission.
Commissioner Teele: I'd rather have four-fifths then. I mean, I think it's important that
we really look at those agencies that are being funded and it not be political. It would be
based clearly on the merit of the -- well, the Manager's recommendation and a majority.
I'll live with that.
Commissioner Winton: Then I would accept that amendment.
Commissioner Teele: You'll accept that as an amendment?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, I would.
Commissioner Teele: Well, that would be the motion, as amended, and that is that
everyone would be free to apply but they must have the Manager's recommendation to
receive more than two fundings.
Unidentified Speaker: And four-fifths of the Commission...
Commissioner Teele: No, he doesn't accept four-fifths. I think...
Commissioner Sanchez: Majority?
Vice Chairman Gort: No, four-fifths. The majority of the Commissioners.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Call it...
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Vice Chairman Gort: Nays? No nays. Thank you.
58 May 25, 2000
0 •
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-444
A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION STATING THAT ANY
AGENCY WHICH SEEKS TO BE FUNDED IN MORE THAN ONE
CATEGORICAL AREA, WITH RESPECT TO COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS, MUST FIRST HAVE THE
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION FOR SAME AND THE
SUPPORT OF A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION, TO RECEIVE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING ALLOCATION (S).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: One -- one -- Mr. Chairman, just briefly. On February 10th,
the Commission agreed that funding was given until September to Florida Housing
Cooperative. But, somehow, according to the administration, that decision fell through
the cracks, and I'm asking Gwen or Barbara if we can reinstate that City Commission
decision of February 10th? And we have the minutes there.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I think it's important that we have a public hearing
on this item before we break.
Vice Chairman Gort: We are. We are. We're going to -- the question that Commissioner
Regalado asked... .
59 May 25, 2000
9
Ms. Warren: Regarding Florida Housing? Yes, the intent was to extend them and,
apparently, the resolution didn't go through? Barbara Rodriguez.
Ms. Barbara Rodriguez: Barbara Rodriguez, (inaudible) Compliance Manager. There is
an intent -- there was an intent to extend them through September 30th; however, there is
no resolution for it and they do not have funding as of March 31St
Vice Chairman Gort: Prepare a resolution for later on this afternoon, please, Mr.
Attorney. Thank you. Public hearing. Yes, sir.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. I'm going on the
allocation. I live in Allapattah. We have plenty of public housing there. Section 8,
(inaudible) Towers, (inaudible) Cherry, all that. A lot of people -- that means a low —
income. On the census track, 1990, a lot of the Community Development monies come
into Miami or come into Allapattah that's very important. Not account of the grant of the
Omni there, OK. On the allocations, I want to see more money going there because those
monies are coming -- because its poor areas. I want the money going there. And I'd like
to see in those allocation or those reallocations or reprogramming, when they do them --
if they taking money away, like from Allapattah sidewalks, Moore Park, Juan Pablo
Duarte Park, Curtis Park, the amount of money that's being taken away -- because I think
-- I am not a lawyer, but I read a lot. I read a lot. And the City lawyer can't tell me about
if you -- when you made those reallocations, you get to put the amounts of money there.
The money -- because previous reallocation or reprogrammed is always -- they put the
amount remaining there, and the amounts going like -- I remember money that went to
the Tower Theater came from different place, right? It went for a hundred thousand from
here (inaudible) to there (inaudible) eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) going to
the Tower Theater. The other day they say five million dollars ($5,000,000) and they put
so many things there, but no money -- no money left. I know how much money is
coming from my neighborhood to Southeast Overtown/Parkwest area. At least Omni has
a lot of money (inaudible) the grant, all that. So, that's -- and the citizens participation,
the ads in the paper, I want to see them on the right pages. Because I read the Miami
Times. They always come with the business section. When I -read The Herald, they
come to Section A, Section B, anywhere. No, I want to know. I want to know -- like the
other day, the agenda was ready only two days before the meeting. Two days before the
meeting. Suppose to be ready five days before the meeting. And I don't know why is
that. Maybe because they like to fulfill the obligation of the ad, but not the people to
know what is -- what's going on because I read the Miami Times and I read -- besides the
ad, I read everything else they say, all the quotes they say there.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Mariano. One of the things that I'd like for you to do --
and I'd like for you to give him a copy of that study, the history of the -- all the
allocations that have been done and the percentages so Mariano can see where all the
funds are being allocated. So, could you provide him with a copy? If not; you can get
him one. Yes, Mary Hill.
60 May 25, 2000
0
Mr. Cruz: Last week I talked to (inaudible) Washington about this, too.
Vice Chairman Gort: Good. Mary Hill.
Ms. Hill: My name is Mary Hill. I'm the founder of the Economic Opportunity Acts and
Amendments, first anti -poverty concept, founder of Revenue Sharing Concept, Title 20
Concept, and policies and laws from the White House, and I am, from my effort,
responsible for all of this being in the State of Florida, and I'm very, very, very confused
and I'm very, very disappointed at what I see, not only in the City, County, but at the
State level, and -- which is causing a lot of, a lot of problems, suffering, corruption,
misuse of funds, and we have been told this -- we have been told this, and I'm looking for
a reply. It doesn't matter whether we change managers. It doesn't matter whether we
change the stream of making money to subsidize back to monies that was found from the
White House from my efforts. We're going to have to straighten out these problems, this
corruption, misuse of funds, according to statutory laws and guidelines, because the
specifics is supposed to come through and establish regional office to complete what we
have from the White House. So, changing managers doesn't mean anything. We've got
to change the whole system, what you're using, and use the right system. We've got to
use the right set-up, which I know the attorney is very well familiar with, and I'm have
surprised to see, you know, that -- you know, better direction isn't carried out. We're
letting other groups come up. We're also trying to -- a question or two, which I will
speak on a little later in the day -- a question of authority of the city government, county
government, state government. A question of policies that's being used to carry out, as
you call, CDBG grants. I question this, and the philosophy.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Helena Del Monte: Helena Del Monte, Associate Director for Association for the
Development of the Exceptional. I have a few concerns. I think the number one concern
is, even though I understand specifically that no dollars are being discussed right now,
we're really marking the pace for future process, and it worries me that more providers
are not here, and I'm wondering why? I'm here at every meeting because I truly enjoy,
you know, the presses of the Commission, but why are not more providers here to give
out their opinions and to make it a true, thoughtful process? I don't know if this meeting
was advertised. That's one of my questions. My other concern is in regards to the 23
percent social service allocation. Before, it was even worse. It was 15. And there is a
few agencies that are receiving numbers of three hundred thousand, two hundred and
forty thousand, and to me, it's a contradiction in monies that are so limited by a
percentage that just a few agencies are eating such a big percentage of -- you know, piece -
of that pie. And also -- my third concern is, if you're going to cap the monies allotted to
each district, my agency is located in Wynwood, but, yet, we service participants from
other areas, and I understand that the way you get your percentage is per capita of
residents. Unfortunately, in Wynwood, it is mostly a commercial, less a residential area,
so the cap is very limited and contrary to that, Wynwood have a high amount of social
services. It is really an area that has a high concentration of social services. And I am --
61 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Del Monte: -- very, very afraid of that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Speak into the mike, but thank you. Uh-huh. OK. Anyone else?
Anyone else? OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: I move that the public hearing be closed, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: No. It's closed. Go ahead.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on the issue that the last presenter made. First of
all, the notices were in the newspaper. I read it in the newspaper, and I really don't think
it's very helpful for people in the public to impregnate the record, a record that has to go
to Washington, with information that is clearly not factual, and I think the Clerk should
be instructed to put a copy of the notice in the -- as a part of this proceeding of this
record, because this record is going to go to Washington. I think the fact that we have
made changes in our process -- in our elections process is going to mean a lot more. I can
tell you, Mr. Chairman, on the record, that I have met with not less than four agencies in
the last week, in their offices, that otherwise would be here now if they didn't know that
someone that was representing them was here, and I think single -member districting is
one reason why we don't have this mass confusion that you always have in at large voting
precincts when nobody knows who's responsible, so they've got to come down and make
the argument. I've met with Word of Life. I've met with St. Johns. I've met with Little
Haiti. I've met with the agencies that I represent before this meeting. And the only thing
that I want to say is that I really do think that the record needs to be very clear that there
were meetings, because the last presenter suggested that the fact that there weren't a lot of
people here, there may be some failure to provide notice. Secondly, on the point she
made about public service. We really do have to change the way we've done that
business, and I think that's going to be one of the tough issues we need to decide this
evening. We need to stop referring to Wynwood, Overtown, Liberty City, Little Haiti, in
terms of funding. Because the City now has eliminated neighborhoods as basis for
funding, and has gone -- as I understand it, last year, we went to Citywide -- that the
entire city is the district; is that correct?
Ms. Warren: This is correct.
62 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Teele: And while it's fair for us, as district Commissioners, to be
concerned about making sure money gets into the neighborhoods, I think the real issue
now is how much money is going into the districts? Because you can't be effective
district Commissioners if you don't get enough money -- this is representative of the
amount of money that the districts generate. Now, last week they passed out these charts,
and I just want to make sure that these charts -- would you pass it down -- are correct,
that suggest that District 1 generates 20 percent of the money; District 2 generates 16
percent; District 3 generates 23 percent; District 4 generates 15 percent, and District 5
generates 26 percent. And I really would like to know what the source of this
information is, and I think we need to make the source available to the public and to the
community organizations, because I think this needs to guide our thinking. I don't think
that -- at the end of the day, the funds are supposed to be allocated this way. I think --
we've got to allocate based upon need, wherever those needs are. And just like on the
Flagler Marketplace, I think we've got to come up with a solution to that, and even
though -- if you look at that area, it wouldn't generate but one percent, but the fact of the
matter is, we need to apply the dollars where the need is. But in the area of public
service, Mr. Chairman, I am going to propose that we look at a minimum allocation of
each district -- of each of the five districts, and that we allocate at least 60 or 70 percent
of the money, on a minimum allocation, to ensure that no district gets taken out of this
process. So, in other words, if you have a hundred percent of the public service funds -- I
don't know if we're talking about one million or two million or three million -- that 60
percent of that should be guaranteed -- 70 percent of that should be guaranteed will flow
back into these districts. That means, 30 percent is available to go Citywide or multi -
jurisdictional or all of that, but the fact of the matter is, the only way that the Wynwoods
and that the Flagami -- in Flagami, if there is one area that has been left out or in the past
is Flagami; is that right? Because Flagami was not a CD (Community Development)
district.
Ms. Warren: It was not previously a target area, no.
Commissioner Teele: So, Flagami got literally no money, other than the money could get
from citywide, et cetera. But once you go Citywide, Wynwood, Flagami, and all of the
other areas, particularly in Liberty City, where the Economic Development stuff we've
already talked about just sort of bypassed them, this should eliminate many of the
problems. And, so, Mr. Chairman, I want us to consider a minimum guarantee of public
service funds based upon the allocation of 60 or 70 percent, so that every district
Commissioner can be assured that a percentage of those funds are going to flow into their
districts.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele, my understanding -- and, please, someone
correct me if I'm wrong -- I think we have discussed a lot of the items that need to be
discussed. We need to make decisions then? But I don't think that's what's in front of us
here today.
Commissioner Teele: We have to make decisions, Commissioner Gort, if we're going to
put out the funding...
63 May 25, 2000
• 0
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is, Commissioner Teele -- and that's why I want
somebody to correct me if I'm wrong -- we have the allocations and the percentage that
we want to present to each program. If we want to change that, that's what we need to
discuss, like -- my understanding, the maximum we can do for social service is 23
percent.
Ms. Warren: The maximum is 25. You're currently spending 23. We're recommending
you stay there because the 25 -- that 10 percent extra is going away soon.
Commissioner Winton: And it goes away when?
Ms. Warren: This is the second of three years.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: So, it's three years. Three years it goes away.
Commissioner Teele: So, it's going to go back to 15?
Ms. Warren: Yes, it will.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's going to go back to 15.
Commissioner Teele: And what we're doing now is creating a demand that we're not
going to be able to meet in two years.
Ms. Warren: That's why we're suggesting that you not increase it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, that's what I want to get to. We need to understand, this
process began 25 years ago. There are certain agencies that begun 25 years ago, that
have been providing this service and they continue to provide service in the community.
Commissioner Sanchez: This should be a meeting all by itself.
Vice Chairman Gort: And the decisions you're going to have to make, when you make
some changes is, which agencies, if I take it away to fund new agencies or to add money
to other agencies? Now, my understanding is, if we -- the allocations here today is on
percentage basis. If we want to change any of this, we can go ahead and do this, as a
policy. And then the second item we have on CDBG today is the process that we're
going to follow. The public hearings that we're going to follow to make sure that we
have the input from the public and from those receiving agencies. This is my
64 May 25, 2000
understanding, the decision that we're making today. Later on, I think we can go into
specifics how we want to distribute; who we want to go on the programs.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I take to heart what you're saying. On the issues that are before us,
to use your analogy, I think we should not vote until after lunch, when we have five
Commissioners. But on administration, that's set by law. That's 20 percent. We've
always used 20 percent. On the Economic Development, we have 11 percent. On
housing, we have 12 percent, but there are two categories that are missing here. Where is
the category on infrastructure or capital improvement?
Ms. Warren: The City projects is where you have them. A Public Facilities, if you look
under City projects, the bottom of the page...
Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I know I can find it, but what I'm trying to do is make sure we
have a process that's very transparent and the public understands and we understand.
There are two or three categories that are missing from here, and we need to recast this
document so that it reflects what those categories are. It's capital improvement or -- what
do you call it? Capital improvement? What's the category? The federal -- what's the
category in the federal reg?
Ms. Warren: Public Facilities Improvements.
Commissioner Teele: Public Facilities Improvement. It's not here.
Ms. Warren: Public Facilities is at the bottom of the page. There is a recommendation
that's next to it. The federal categories..
Vice Chairman Gort: Under City projects, you have the...
Commissioner Teele: Public Facilities is a category. It's not a project. If you read the
reg, the federal reg, it speaks to several categories, and Public Facilities is a category.
Ms. Warren: We have Public Facilities here...
Commissioner Teele: And all that I'm saying is, it's in the wrong place. It's a category.
The projects underneath it are how you're going to spend it, but Public Facilities is a
category, and I don't know what the percentage of them -- which goes to Regalado's point
65 May 25, 2000
-- Commissioner Regalado's point. He doesn't think we ought to have Public Facilities. I
think we ought to have twice as many Public Facilities. So, we have a policy discussion
that we need to make, but the only way we can make that discussion is that we look at all
of the categories, and we look at how we're going to allocate the one hundred percent.
And, so, all that I'm asking is that the Public Facilities category be formatted where it
should be, and any other categories, specifically including Historic Preservation, which is
the other category that's not on here.
Ms. Warren: It's under Housing, but -- OK.
Commissioner Teele: Listen, Public Facilities is a category by the federal reg. If you get
the federal regs, I'll show them to you. There are only seven categories. So, let's don't
have a new rule here. You have Historic Preservation as a category. It's not under
Housing. It could be Economic Development. It could be Public Facilities. Historic
Preservation is not limited to Housing. It's limited to any eligible activity, including
Public Service.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So, what I'm saying, Mr. Manager is that we really need to come
back with this information because I think Commissioner Gort is right. We need to
approve, by category, the allocation, and that's what I would like to do. And I think
Commissioner Regalado should be afforded all the time he needs to argue against Public
Facilities, and give me equal time to argue why we need more money for Public
Facilities.
Vice Chairman Gort: You get more than equal time. You're pretty good at that.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I have a question about -- on the Public Services side, which is
currently 23 percent, will drop to 15 percent in two years. What is the amount of...
Vice Chairman Gort: You're talking about Social Services?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. I didn't -- it's called Public Services here, for some
reason, but I'm talking about Social Services exactly. How much money does the County
get from the federal government for Social Service Programs? Let me ask the question
differently. Is the County not responsible, Countywide, including in municipalities, for
funding Social Service agencies?
Ms. Warren: Yes, they are.
66 May 25, 2000
0
•
Commissioner Winton: And, so, what we're doing, Commissioner Teele -- I'm sorry?
Vice Chairman Gort: Some of our agents do get...
Commissioner Winton: But what we're doing in this whole Social Service category, even
though, apparently, CDBG funding allows for that 15 percent carve out, the fact of the
matter is, that the County gets all of the real money from the federal government to
provide Social Services, and it seems to me that one of the things that we've got to do is
figure out how we can all do a better job of getting those funds, that the County gets on
our behalf, into our agencies so that we're not arguing over how you cut up this small
little 15 percent that doesn't do a whole lot for all these people, and get that also into
these areas where we need serious support.
Ms. Warren: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask you a question. By when do you need to have this?
Ms. Warren: The purpose of this discussion was, at the last meeting, we were in the
process of presenting the calendar for the 26th year in order to meet our federal deadlines.
Vice Chairman Gort: What's your deadline?
Ms. Warren: The RFP has to be on the street next Wednesday morning, 8 o'clock, in
order -- and the Commission has to set your public hearings in -- during the week of July
10th in order for us to meet the 34 -day publication deadline. What the Commission has
asked is that -- or instructed is that, again, instead of doing the RFP, absent of funding
policies, that we were directed to bring it back at this meeting, to ensure that the
Commission set funding policy recommendations, and that was the purpose of this item.
Vice Chairman Gort: We'll bring it back later this afternoon. We're coming back at 3:30.
OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, Ms. Wilcox would like to thank the Commission --
Ms. Wilcox -- for a donation that the Commission has given and raised for the children of
Charles Drew Middle School that went to Europe. Ms. Wilcox, if you could just say
thank you. The Commission would like to hear a little bit of good news, I guess, today.
Very quickly. We're trying to...
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait. The problem is, we closed the public hearings...
Ms. Dorothy Quintana: I'm just going to say -- can I say what I want to say?
67 May 25, 2000
• 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me tell you. We had the public hearings and it was open. We
asked everybody to come -- go ahead, ma'am. Go ahead.
Ms. Dorothy Quintana: My name is Dorothy Quintana from Wynwood. You people
want to know where the money goes, who takes it and who really deserves it. Please visit
the sites that's all I have to say. And there will be no complaints if you visit the sites and
know who needs it, and really is making good use of it. That's it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Quintana: That's it.
Vice Chairman Gort: But you'll have the opportunity, during the public hearings, to do
that even more and to speak even more. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
Ms. Inez Wilcox: Good afternoon. My name is Inez Wilcox. I'm representing the
Charles Drew Middle School Parent Club. About three months ago you allowed our
children to be brought in here to be heard, when we were raising money to send them to
Europe, and we were fortunate enough to send them. And I just wanted to thank you for
hearing our children on that day and allowing them to come before the Commission. We
want you to know they went to Europe. They performed in Salzburg, Vienna and
Munich, and they are back now, and they had a spiritual lifetime. Commissioner Teele,
I'd just like to say to you: You know, when I came and was talking with you and I told
you I was about to give up, you said, "Don't give up," and I shall never forget those
words. We did not give up and, as a result, the children had a very fine experience going
to Europe and back. I would like...
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, I'm glad they did. That's an experience they'll never forget.
Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Wilcox: I would like to give -- yes.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Gimenez: Do you want us to go rework this chart the way that you want it,
Commissioner Teele, with the federal categories, and then --
Commissioner Teele: With all of the approved federal categories.
68 May 25, 2000
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Then, what I...
Commissioner Teele: And your recommendation as to the percentages.
Mr. Gimenez: And the level detail you want subcategories?
Commissioner Teele: No.
Commissioner Winton: I think you do.
Vice Chairman Gort: I think you did. You wanted to. I think that has subcategories to
make sure we have everything aboard.
Commissioner Teele: Yes
Mr. Gimenez: So, it will be clear exactly where we're going.
Commissioner Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. Be back at 3:30.
69 May 25, 2000
•
0
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, before you leave, just to correct
one item. PZ -3 is noted as withdrawn. It needs to be continued; otherwise, we have
some problems with advertising departments.
Vice Chairman Gort: We'll do that later on.
Commissioner Teele: So move.
Mr. Vilarello: No. Well -- but it's noted on the board as...
Commissioner Teele: I move, Mr. Chairman, that it be corrected to continue.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Continued, instead of...
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and second. 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. 00-445
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM
PZ -3 (PROPOSED VACATION AND CLOSURE OF PUBLIC RIGHT-
OF-WAY, N.W. 4TH STREET BETWEEN NORTH MIAMI AVENUE
AND N.W. 1sT AVENUE).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
70 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:04 P.M. AND
RECONVENED AT 3:43 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION,
EXCEPT COMMISSIONER TEELE, FOUND TO BE PRESENT.
71 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: I'd like to take an item out of order, and the reason being, that this
item cost us quite a bit. This is the contract for the cable, AT&T (American Telephone &
Telegraph), whichever.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I -- last meeting I requested that we have
Matthew Leibowitz here with us, because there is something going on with AT&T, FCC
(Federal Communication Commission), and the City is about to enter into a contract with
them. So, it's important that we know where we stand. And, also, that we also find out
what is the status of the different issues that the City has before this company. So,
Matthew.
Mr. Matthew Leibowitz: Commissioners. Matthew Leibowitz and Associates. First of
all, directing the answer to Commissioner Regalado. The manner of the AT&T/Media
One transfer is still pending at the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). There
have been negotiations between the two parties regarding the maximum ownership limits
on a national basis, which is pending a court decision. That court ruled this week and
upheld the FCC 's jurisdiction. So, using a little crystal ball, I would say this: That the
FCC will act probably in the next 60 days. Real world, though, that's an acquisition of
Media One. We already have AT&T (American Telephone and Telegraph) as the
provider of the services so that, unto itself, will not affect us. With respect to the years of
negotiations, I can report to you that this week we've had about -- probably 15 hours of
telephone negotiations. We are on your next agenda. And I could assure you that it is
my recommendation that this Commission, at the next agenda -- at the next meeting,
adopt, on second reading, the ordinance. And I believe that there is an excellent chance
we will actually have the franchise, with their agreement, at the same time.
Commissioner Regalado: And how about the HUD (Department of Housing and Urban
Development) buildings?
Mr. Leibowitz: The HUD buildings are under discussion, and is one of the few issues
that we still have to nail down, but they've promised to give us some relief on that issue.
Commissioner Regalado: And how about the frequencies that we can have present and
future, the City?
Mr. Leibowitz: We were able to -- that part of the negotiation was taken care of quite a
while ago, where we have a sufficient number of channels now and growth factor for the
future. So, we'll have up to five channels available to the City. And the most important
issue is the funding, and we -- you know, we had it in negotiations last February, that it's
been refined, and what we're trying to do is front -load some of those dollars, recognizing
that the City is going to have some capital expenses upfront, and rather than wait for the
72 May 25, 2000
number of years, bring those dollars forward, so we can make those capital expenditures
add to these funds:
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask something that I think somehow, in your dealing with
these people, you should request. Last week I received a call from a 90 -year old
gentleman, whose service was cut off, not at the computer level, but at the pole. He
omitted to make the payment, for whatever reason. When you're 90 years old, I guess a
lot of things in your mind. This gentleman did not receive a phone call or, when they
tried to cut it off, like they do in some places, nobody walked up to him and asked him, if
you make your payment now, we will not cut it off, and, somehow, that has to be
regulated. They did not receive any notice that they were going to be cut off. I mean,
most utilities, before they cut you off, they'll call you and they'll give you a warning
because that happens all the time. I mean, I've had it happen in my house twice, and I
had to run and get it done. So, somehow, I'd like for you to -- especially with the senior
citizens -- and I understand that might not happen -- they share some kind of warning
before they cut it off. And sometimes, if they need to cut it off, they can cut it off at the
computer. So, -once payment is made, they can incorporate it right away, not if they take
it off the poles. It takes two to three days. And they offer to pay for this service to put it
on , immediately. I mean these people were willing to pay. And we were told by the
people we called; they were willing to pay to put these services, we can't do it for two or
three days. And for senior citizens, that is very important.
Mr. Leibowitz: We'll address that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you, sir.
Mr. Leibowitz: Thank you.
73 May 25, 2000
u
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. Item 2.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman, could you take item numbers 6, 7, and 9. We have a time
problem. If we're going to have a second reading of those ordinances, it has to be on by
four o'clock today. I'm saying, we have to have the second reading in the next meeting;
we'll have to have those by four o'clock today.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is your first reading. Item 6. Hello. Anyone? Item 6.
Mr. Martin Garcia: Martin Garcia, representing Civil Service Board. This was a request
by Labor Relations to the board. It affects managerial/confidential employees, and it
basically is a language clean-up.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by
saying "aye."
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It's an ordinance.
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): It's an ordinance.
Vice Chairman Gort: An ordinance. Read it. Call the roll.
74 May 25, 2000
•
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 40/ARTICLE III OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "PERSONNEL, CIVIL
SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS", BY INCREASING THE
ANNUAL VACATION ACCRUAL RANGES FOR CLASSIFIED,
MANAGERIAL, AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES FROM AN
ADDITIONAL EIGHT TO SIXTY HOURS; MORE PARTICULARLY
BY AMENDING SECTIONS 40-105 (C) CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
was introduced by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, and was
passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
The ordinance was read, by title, into the public record by the City Attorney.
75 May 25, 2000
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 7.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move it, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's changes in -- for funds allocated to different parks, Lemon City,
Virrick Gym, Culture and Technology Center, and Allapattah Mini Park. OK. This is an
ordinance. Read it. OK. Call the question.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
SECTION 6 OF ORDINANCE NO. 11705, AS AMENDED, AND
ORDINANCE NO. 11839, TO CORRECT AN ERROR IN A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
AND TO ADD NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, TO BEGIN
DURING FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
The ordinance was read, by title, into the public record by the City Attorney.
76 May 25, 2000
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Did you pull item 8?
•
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): We pulled item 8. We would like you to read
number -- item 9, if you could.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is for personal disability. Do I have a motion?
Mr. Albert Ruder (Director, Parks & Recreation): Yes. OK. Do you want us...
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Roll call.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED "CITY OF
MIAMI PROGRAM WITH PERSON WITH DISABILITIES, MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY" ADA GRANT, AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
FOR ITS OPERATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $46,453.41 FROM
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY OFFICE OF AMERICANS WITH
DISABILITIES ACT ("ADA") COORDINATION, 1999-2000 GRANT
FUND; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SAID
GRANT AWARD AN TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY FOR SAID PURPOSE; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
77 May 25, 2000
•
was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, and was
passed on first reading, by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr
The ordinance was read, by title, into the public record by the City Attorney.
78 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Since we're on a roll, let's go ahead and go to 11. This is the --
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Item 8 was pulled, you said?
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 8 was pulled.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Why is that? Why?
Vice Chairman Gort: And item 10 was pulled also.
Mr. Gimenez: I wanted to take a look at the terms of that arrangement. I think the City
can get a better return.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
79 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 11, Watson Island, the FDOT (Florida Department of
Transportation). Item 11.
Ms. Laura Billberry (Director, Asset Management): Lori Billberry, Director of Asset
Management. This is basically just correcting a little piece of parcel out on Watson
Island that was inadvertently omitted from the legal description when they did the access
roads.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is a resolution. It's been moved. Is there a second? Is there a
second?
Commissioner Regalado: I'll second it. Question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion.
Commissioner Regalado: Is this next to McArthur? Right next to McArthur?
Ms. Billberry: Yes. This is actually part of the access roads that the FDOT recently
rebuilt on the island, and this is just a small triangular parcel that was inadvertently left
out of the legal.
Commissioner Regalado: Does this mean that signs cannot be placed there?
Ms. Billberry: FDOT has regulations on signs. This is more towards the bridge
underneath the bridge area, where this parcel is. It's my understanding, though, FDOT
does not allow advertising signs. They allow, maybe, directional signs.
Commissioner Regalado: But that's -- you're saying this is next to McArthur? Right next
to McArthur or under the bridge?
Ms. Billberry: This is closer to under the bridge. It's part of the access roads on the
island.
Commissioner Regalado: There are no signs there?
Ms. Billberry: No, not on this parcel. No.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
80 May 25, 2000
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-446
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A QUIT CLAIM DEED AND ALL NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS TO CONVEY AND QUIT CLAIM TO THE STATE OF
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ("FDOT")
APPROXIMATELY 3,278 SQUARE FEET OF CITY -OWNED LAND
LOCATED ON WATSON ISLAND, ADJOINING THE
SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD A -1-A
(MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY), MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A
PART HEREOF, FOR MACARTHUR CAUSEWAY [STATE ROAD
NO. (A -1-A)] RIGHT-OF-WAY IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton,
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
81 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: This is the -- item 12; resolution awarding contract for Coconut
Grove Streets Improvement Project. Impact fee. Yes, sir. Mr. Jackson.
Commissioner Sanchez: What number is this?
Vice Chairman Gort: Twelve.
Mr. John Jackson (Acting Director, Public Works): This is item 12. John Jackson,
Acting Director. This is an award of Coconut Grove Street Improvement Project to
M.E.F. Corporation.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Does this have to do with 32nd Avenue?
Mr. Jackson: No, sir. This is primarily to replace brick in the Mayfair and the Central
Business District in Coconut Grove.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Winton: And could I put a comment on the record here? In this project
and the next one that we're going to take up, there were a 195 invitations mailed to
potential vendors to participate in this City project. Only six contractors picked up and
responded. And the next one, 195 were sent out and eight picked up bid packages. And .
of those, there were no bid packages picked up from the black community that does the
work. So, the message here that we want to get out is that there are opportunities to do
business with the City and black vendors and contractors need to look at this stuff and
pick up the bid packages so that they can be competitive and participate in the process.
There is a process here and it's available, but it won't work if people don't step to the
plate. And I hope the City -- and I already talked to -- I already had a discussion about it
-- and the City's going to do more to try to reach out further and add to that pool of
potential vendors.
Mr. Jackson: Yes, we will.
82 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, my understanding is, the City, in the past, have put a good
labor of people on the streets, trying to locate vendors, identify vendors, and try to get
some of the people that find it very difficult to comply with the paperwork .that needs to
be done, and this is maybe where the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) can come
in, and some of the business people that were here the other day, the counselors, they can
help them put the bids together. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Sanchez: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Being none, all in favor -- this is a resolution. All in favor state by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-447
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF M.E.F. CORPORATION, INC., FOR THE PROJECT
ENTITLED "COCONUT GROVE STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT/IMPACT FEE, B-4623" IN THE AMOUNT OF $465,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM PROJECT NO. 341138, AS
APPROPRIATED BY ORDINANCE NOS. 11705, AS AMENDED,
AND 11839, THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$465,000 THE CONTRACT COST AND $45,200 EXPENSES, TOTAL
ESTIMATED COST. $510,000, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
83 May 25, 2000
0 •
Vice Chairman Gort: Thirteen, it's a very similar resolution, awarding contract for the
LeJeune --
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move it, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved, second. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Question, John. This has to go to the Oversight Board
now, this contract, storm sewer, and LeJeune?
Mr. John Jackson (Acting Director, Public Works): Yes, it does. After the contract is
executed by the contractor, then it goes to the Oversight Board for their approval.
Commissioner Regalado: When do you think that we can start this project? This is from
47`h to 51, is that correct?
Mr. Jackson: Thirty-seventh Avenue to --
Commissioner Regalado: Thirty-seventh to...
Mr. Jackson: -- 42°d. It's south of Flagler to the City limits. Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Just remember to tell them that whatever they break, they
fix.
Mr. Jackson: Yes, sir. Yes, I will remember that. I didn't answer your question. I
estimate that it will probably start in June -- late June or early July. We have to have a
pre -construction meeting, where we invite the utility companies to clear -- to make sure
that we don't have any interferences, so we have to get enough lead time for that.
Commissioner Sanchez: What's -- Mr. Chairman, what's the time certain on the project?
What are we looking at time certain? What time periods? What are we looking at?
Mr. Jackson: You mean completion or just to start?
Commissioner Sanchez: Completion. Start to completion.
84 May 25, 2000
i 0
Mr. Jackson: I don't know whether I have the duration of it. I may have to get that to
you, Commissioner. There are 12 locations on this project. It's going to take at least six
months to do.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, every project that should come here should have, you
know, funding -- funding -- cost certain, time certain, and project certain. I mean, that
should be on the -- we should know, whatever the project -- all these projects are going to
have an impact to our community, whether -- whatever help, from the smallest to the
biggest project, and it should be on the report.
Mr. Jackson: Sure, I'll make sure that, in the future, that we put this information on your
sheet. OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Manager, I have two questions. In here we get the cost
estimate and the bid that came in. This bid came in 85 percent under the cost estimate.
The one before came in under 93 percent, and last week, if you recall, some of them came
25 percent under the cost estimate. Are they aware of the estimate, the cost estimate, by
us?
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, they are. Before they bid...
Vice Chairman Gort: They are aware of it?
Mr. Gimenez: They are aware of it before they bid, yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. One of the things I'd like to do, if possible, first I'd like -- what
I requested last week is, we check with the industry and find out what the real cost is
because these people are come -- and I don't think we should tell them what we think it
should cost. Because, let me tell you, if I can get it for fifty thousand, but I know you're
willing to pay a hundred thousand, I'm going to come to ninety, ninety-five thousand. I'm
not going to go with my fifty thousand. So, this is something that I think you should be
looking into it, OK.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying
"aye "
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
85 May 25, 2000
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-448
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF M. VILA AND ASSOCIATES, INC., FOR THE PROJECT
ENTITLED "LE JEUNE STORM SEWER PROJECT -PHASE III, B-
5641" IN THE AMOUNT OF $384,719; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM PROJECT NO. 352257, AS AMENDED, AND
11839, THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$384,719 THE CONTRACT COST AND $54,303.60 EXPENSES,
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $439,022.60; AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTACT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
86 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Fourteen. Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes. This resolution was prepared at the
direction of the City Commission, asking the City Manager to file a report on our
compliance with the mandates of 218.5035 of the States Statutes, that's with regards of
our expenditures of parking facilities surcharge dollars.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Do I have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
87 May 25, 2000
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-449
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING
THE CITY MANAGER TO FILE A REPORT WITH GOVERNOR JEB
BUSH, LT. GOVERNOR FRANK T. BROGAN, PRESIDENT OF THE
FLORIDA SENATE TONI JENNINGS, SPEAKER OF THE FLORIDA
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JOHN THRASHER, AND ALL
MEMBERS OF THE DADE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION
DOCUMENTING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE
MANDATES SET FORTH IN §218.503(5) FLA. STAT. (1999),
RELATED TO THE CITY'S USE OF FUNDS GENERATED BY THE
PARKING FACILITIES SURCHARGE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
88 May 25, 2000
E
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Fifteen is withdrawn. Sixteen is withdrawn. Seventeen, 18. Mr.
Attorney.
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): This is a continuation of authorization for the
law firm of Weiss, Serota & Helfman to represent the City in the case of Patrick McGrath
versus the City and Miami -Dade County versus the City. Both of those are surcharge -
related litigations. This amount is anticipated to be sufficient to get us through the end of
the litigation.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: What is the recommendation of the City Attorney?
Mr. Vilarello: My recommendation is that we proceed with the law firm representing us
in those two cases.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's a motion. Second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
89 May 25, 2000
E
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-450
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CONTINUING ENGAGEMENT OF THE LAW
FIRM OF WEISS, SEROTA & HELFMAN, P.A. FOR LEGAL
SERVICES TO THE CITY OF MIAMI IN CONNECTION WITH THE
LAWSUITS CONCERNING THE IMPLEMENTATION AND
COLLECTION OF THE PARKING FACILITIES SURCHARGE,
PATRICK MCGRATH, III, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF O
ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS. THE CITY OF MIAMI,
CASE NO. 99-21456 CA -10, AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, THE
PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND
LAUREEN VARGA VS. THE CITY OF MIAMI, CASE NO. 99-23765
CA -08, IN THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT,
AUTHORIZED. PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 11813;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR, IN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $70,000, FROM THE PARKING SURCHARGE
ADMINISTRATIVE ACCOUNT FOR SAID SERVICES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
90 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Nineteen. Orange Bowl Steering Committee. Commissioner
Sanchez.
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Vice Chairman, this is back on the agenda because we
just need a waiver of the names that we put on here. Because there is a City elector
requirement of appointments that were previously made.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: There is a City resident requirement?
Mr. Foeman: Elector. He must be a registered voter of the City.
Commissioner Winton: Unless we waive it.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Unless waived?
Mr. Foeman: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, my appointment continues to be Lewis B. Freeman as my
appointment to the Orange Bowl Steering Committee.
Mr. Foeman: Lewis Freeman has no problem. He is a City elector.
Commissioner Sanchez: He is a resident of the City.
Mr. Foeman: But you have one that is not, and we've listed the name on the agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'd like to waive the requirement for Adolfo Henriquez, who is my
appointment.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let's just go ahead and waive him. I mean...
Commissioner Winton: Waive all of them.
Mr. Foeman: Yes. In blank...
Commissioner Sanchez: Let's let them roll. So move to waive all the resident
requirements for all the members of the Orange Bowl Steering Committee. So moved.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
91 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is a very special committee. We need people that can raise the
funds.
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely. If I could elaborate on it a little bit on it, Mr.
Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: When -- Mr. Chairman -- you're the Chairman. When would
you be meeting?
Commissioner Sanchez: We -- and let me just -- when we created the Orange Bowl
Steering Committee, it was -- first, our goal was to find ways to improve the Orange
Bowl and find ways to do fundraising, promote it, and find ways to attract more sporting
events to the Orange Bowl. Now, with all the unforeseen things that have happened here
in the City, we have not had a chance to meet. Although, I have met with Christina
Abrams and some of the members of the Orange Bowl employees at the Orange Bowl.
We are prepared now to meet and start the process of putting together what I consider to
be an excellent plan to try to promote the Orange Bowl and bring more events. We are
happy to announce that the XFL will be coming to the Orange Bowl. The soccer league
will be coming in with like 30 or 60 games -- 40 -- I believe it's 45/40 games, so we are
starting to do things to attract more sporting events. Also, we are focusing to sit down
and meet with the University of Miami, to see what we could work on together to
improve the Orange Bowl because they are the number one tenant now, with the games
and stuff. They just signed a 10 -year contract, so -- go Canes. Yeah! So, we're moving
in the right direction. And I promised my colleagues that, by next month, we will have
our first meeting at the Orange Bowl Steering Committee.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor
state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-451
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL
STEERING COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
92 May 25, 2000
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
93 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 20. Budget and Financial Review Committee. This is
nominations. You guys want to wait for those nominations afterwards or you want to go
through it now?
Commissioner Sanchez: Nomination of what?
Commissioner Winton: No.
Vice Chairman Gort: The nominations for different boards. This is for the Budget and
Finance Committee.
Commissioner Sanchez: The finance -- Budget and Finance Review Committee.
Vice Chairman Gort: You can reappoint whoever you have.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I have one appointment. Mando Reyes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mando Reyes. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Well, I'm going to find out if my -- if the person who was
previously appointed attends the meetings, Mr. City Clerk, then, I'm just going to
reappoint her.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Winton: He's researching that right now.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Stanley Gettis.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Teele is not in. I will renominate Steve
Kneapler. Commissioner Sanchez, you had Manolo Reyes before.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. That's the individual I'm reappointing.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Do I have a motion to accept the --
94 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: I'm going to reappoint Mary Ann David.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Do we have any -- a motion to --
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Second? Further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying "aye." .
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-452
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE BUDGET AND
FINANCES REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED
HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by, Commissioner Sanchez the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
95 May 25, 2000
® 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Coconut Grove Festival Committee. Commissioner Winton, you
have one nomination.
Commissioner Winton: Sue Billig.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado, you have one nomination.
Commissioner Regalado: Silvia Cejas.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez, you have one nomination.
Commissioner Sanchez: Coconut Grove?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: What's that?
Vice Chairman Gort: Coconut Grove Festival. You have Ramiro Arango.
Commissioner Sanchez: Has he been -- all right. I'll defer.
Vice Chairman Gort: I nominate Ted Stahl. OK. Do I have a motion to accept the
nominations?
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Second. Any further discussion? Being none, all
in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
96 May 25, 2000
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-453
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE COCONUT
GROVE STANDING FESTIVAL COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS
DESIGNATED HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
97 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Miami Street Codesignation Review Committee. Commissioner
Winton.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have one appointment. Manny Chamizo will
be my appointment. I believe it's a reappointment.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I defer. Defer.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: My two nominations are Lucrecia Machado, Elena Del Monte.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. I have --
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): I'm sorry.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, no, no, no, no, no. I'm ahead. I'm sorry
that will be Yves Fortune.
Mr. Foeman: Commissioner, there is only one appointment.
Commissioner Regalado: That will be Yves Fortune.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is for Miami Street and Codesignation Committee.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Yves Fortune.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. And I'll nominate Placido Debesa. Do I have a motion to
accept the nominations?
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying "aye."
98 May 25, 2000
•
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-454
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE MIAMI STREET
CODESIGNATION REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR TERMS AS
DESIGNATED HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
99 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Latin Quarter Review Board. Commissioner Winton, pass.
Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Two nominations. Lucrecia Machado, Helena Del Monte.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Both reappointments, Eloy Aparicio and Luis Sabines, Jr.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I'm going to renominate Hector Gasca.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. And I will renominate Maria del Carmen Castellanos, and
David Cabarrocas. Do I have a motion to accept all nominations?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-455
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE LATIN QUARTER
REVIEW BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
100 May 25, 2000
E
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
101 May 25, 2000
0
C_ J
Vice Chairman Gort: Miami Audit Advisory Board. Commissioner Winton, you have
one nomination. Mary Ann David is your former nomination by former Commissioner.
Commissioner Regalado, you have a nomination?
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but I don't know if that's yours. It's Mirtha
Guerra -Aguirre.
Vice Chairman Gort: You have Richard Berkowitz.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: You nominate him again?
Commissioner Regalado: Are you going to nominate Mirtha?
Vice Chairman Gort: Mirtha Guerra, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Richard Berkowitz.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: I will reappoint Monica Fernandez.
Vice Chairman Gort: And I will reappoint Mirtha Guerra. How about you?
Commissioner Winton: I'll reappoint Mary Ann David; I think is the name.
Vice Chairman Gort: David. Do I have a motion to accept nominations?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
102 May 25, 2000
E
•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-456
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE FOR TERMS AS
DESIGNATED HEREIN
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
103 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Nuisance Abatement Board. Commissioner Winton, you have one
nomination held by Carolyn Cope.
Commissioner Winton: Renominate Carolyn Cope.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez, you have Robert Valledor.
Commissioner Sanchez: I will reappoint Robert Valledor.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado, Monique Taylor.
Commissioner Regalado: Reappoint Monique Taylor.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. And then I have Guillermo Revuelta. Do I have a motion to
accept the nominations?
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-457
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE NUISANCE
ABATEMENT BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
104 May 25, 2000
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 Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
105 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 24, in compliance with the requirement of Ordinance 11727,
November '98, the administration prepared to provide financial update. We can take that
up later. Twenty-eight, we already did, so we can go back to item 2.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, can I make a couple of nominations to a couple
of other committees?
Vice Chairman Gort: Go right ahead, sir. Sure.
Commissioner Winton: Property and Asset Management, I'd like to nominate Peter
Andolina, and to the Commission on the Status of Women, Anita McGruder.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's take them one at a time.
Commissioner Winton: Sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: Peter Andolina, a motion by Commissioner Winton. Second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Accept the nomination. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-458
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS A MEMBER OF THE PROPERTY AND
ASSET REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED
HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
106 May 25, 2000
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
107 May 25, 2000
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Next.
Commissioner Winton: Commission on the Status of Women, Anita McGruder.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Winton moved and Sanchez second it. Any further discussion? Being
none, all in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-459
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION ON THE
STATUS OF WOMEN FOR A TERM AS DESIGNATED HEREIN
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
108 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other nominations that you would like to -- wish to make?
Commissioner Regalado: We need to make a nomination of the Charter Review --
Vice Chairman Gort: Items 2 and -- items 2 and 3...
Commissioner Regalado: -- by memo, right?
Vice Chairman Gort: I beg your pardon?
Commissioner Regalado: Charter Review Committee by memo? We don't have to do it
here.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Ms. Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): That's correct, Commissioner.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Items 3 and 4, let's wait until Commissioner Teele gets here.
The Clerk is saying no. The lawyer is saying yes. You guys tell me.
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Mr. Vice Chair, I was responding to the City Attorney
and so far as the Charter Review Committee appointments we need to do that by motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Madam Attorney.
Ms. Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Let me take a look at the resolution.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We'll check it out.
Vice Chairman Gort: Items 2 and 4 -- I mean, 2 and 3. We're going to wait so we can
have a full Commission.
109 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: I think we need to go into item 4
Mr. Albert Ruder (Director, Parks & Recreation): Yeah. Hi. Albert Ruder, Parks
Director. Item 4 is accepting some money from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to do
our summer food program, which we do every year. It goes through the State and to us.
It doesn't cost us any money.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion? Let me ask you a question. We go through this grant
every year. Do -- you don't get notification of the time so it has to be an emergency or...
Mr. Ruder: The notification always comes late and, although we get it every year, there
is no guarantee that we're going to get it every year.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: Question.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. Read -- yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Albert, do you have already the funds from the Law
Enforcement Trust Fund to pay for the lunches of the inner city kids that will be attending
the summer camp? Do you have it in your department?
Mr. Ruder: I don't have it in my capacity, but we've talked to the Police Chief and we're
going to be getting it right away, so, there shouldn't be any problems.
Commissioner Regalado: That's June?
Mr. Ruder: Right, June 19th is when it starts.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Read the ordinance. Four.
An Ordinance Entitled
110 May 25, 2000
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
ENTITLED: "SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM FOR
CHILDREN 2000" AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE
OPERATION OF SAME IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $431,814
CONSISTING OF A GRANT FROM THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE THROUGH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE GRANT AWARD FROM THE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND TO EXECUTE
THE NECESSARY DOCUMENT (S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Winton and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for
adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same
on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Whereupon, the Commission, on motion of Commissioner Winton and seconded by
Commissioner Sanchez, adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11929
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
111 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 5 is the resolution for the Summer Food Service Program for
the children, to put out the bids.
Mr. Albert Ruder (Director, Parks & Recreation): Yeah. This is a companion item. We
piggyback on the County. They select a vendor. There is only certain number of vendors
are eligible, and we get a better price and we save money by piggy backing on their bid.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being a resolution, all in favor state by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
112 May 25, 2000
•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-460
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI TO ADVERTISE FOR, EVALUATE, AND ACCEPT THE
BID (S) OF A VENDOR OR VENDORS TO PROVIDE UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (USDA) APPROVED
MEALS TO ELIGIBLE CHILDREN FOR THE CITY'S SUMMER
FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM 2000; FURTHER AUTHORIZING
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TO ENTER INTO THE NECESSARY
CONTRACT (S) WITH THE SUCCESSFUL BIDDER (S) FOR THIS
PURPOSE AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT
THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE THE
NECESSARY PURCHASE ORDER(S), SAID AUTHORIZATION
BEING SUBJECT TO AND CONDITIONED UPON THE CITY OF
MIAMI'S ACCEPTANCE OF A GRANT IN THE ESTIMATED
AMOUNT OF $431,814 FROM USDA THROUGH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND UPON APPROPRIATION OF
SAID FUNDS FOR THE CITY'S SUMMER FOOD SERVICE
PROGRAM 2000.
(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 Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
113 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Gentlemen, we only have left on the regular agenda, items 2
and 3. My understanding is -- my understanding of this item was, one was to present the
plan of the allocation, how they were going to take place. Commissioner Teele believed
that Commissioner Regalado, you had differences. Commissioner Teele -- and I feel
very strongly also, believes that there should be funds allocated for public improvement
in some districts -- some of the Commissioners might decide to have funds they use for
historic preservation of either buildings or -- and you mentioned that you were not in
favor of like the Tower Theater, the money that was spent on the Tower Theater for the
restoration of the Tower. So, we can make a motion and, if you all want, I think -- can
we get a hold of Teele's office and have any idea what his arriving time would be?
Because we can go ahead into the zoning items and then bring it back later, if you guys
would like to do that?
Commissioner Regalado: If you want to do that, I think we'll save time. If we can come
back, Mr. Attorney...
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Let's do that for the sake of time.
Note For The Record: Item 2 was tabled, pending Commissioner Teele's arrival.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, we have a former presentation from
the Department of Public Works. We'll be happy to hold that off. No. Well, I
understand there are a number of people here waiting for a PZ item, so we'll be happy to
hold it off until after that agenda. You also have our number 27 (inaudible). And, also,
it appears that we also have items 3A and B.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 27. I would like to wait until afterwards. I think -- let's go
into PZ and then we'll come back to these. OK?
Mr. Gimenez: At your pleasure.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Attorney, do we have to -- can we just continue the PZ? We
don't have to --
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): You can start your PZ agenda, if you like.
114 May 25, 2000
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, OK. Three A and 3B. This is the -- it's personal appearance.
OK. Three A.
Mr. Manuel Diaz: Manuel Diaz, NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Coordinator.
I think Mr. Albert Alexis was here earlier to request funding -- City funding for an event.
I'll go check out in the front to see if he's there.
115 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Three -B.
Ms. Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Three -B, we are continuing to talk to Mr.
Cohen. We've taken this off the agenda until we get it resolved.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
116 May 25, 2000
0
Note for the Record: At this point, the City Commission closes consideration of regular
portion of the agenda to consider items from the Planning and Zoning portion of the
agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ -1. OK. Anyone that's going to testify in any of the zoning
items needs to be sworn in. Anyone that is going to testify in any of the zoning items that
we're going to take now, they need to be sworn in. Could you repeat that in Spanish,
please?
Note For The Record: Vice Chairman Gort addresses audience in Spanish.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead, sir.
AT THIS POINT, THE CITY CLERK ADMINISTERED OATH, REQUIRED UNDER
CITY CODE SECTION 62-1 TO THOSE PERSONS GIVING TESTIMONY ON
ZONING ISSUES.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. PZ -1.
Ms. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): Mr. Chairman, PZ -3 will be continued
to a date certain.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. I have a -- I need a motion to continue PZ -3 to a date certain,
and that will be on the 291h of June. Do I have a motion to continue PZ -3?
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
117 May 25, 2000
0 0 0
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-461
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM
PZ -3 (OFFICIAL VACATION CLOSURE OF PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING THAT PORTION OF NORTHWEST 4TH
STREET BETWEEN NORTH MIAMI AVENUE AND NORTHWEST
IST AVENUE) TO THE COMMISSION MEETING PRESENTLY
SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 29, 2000.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
118 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ -1.
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning Department): PZ -1 is an appeal of a
variance that was granted by the Zoning Board, approval with conditions. Since it's an
appeal, it's typically the appellant goes first.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Ms. Slazyk: Then the applicant and then the City will present last.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ -1. Go ahead.
Mr. Peter B. Sobel: I'm the appellant. Am I in the right spot?
Vice Chairman Gort: Sir, would you raise your mike and speak into the mike, please.
Mr. Sobel: Yes. This is Peter B. Sobel.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Sobel: I'm the appellant.
Vice Chairman Gort: Uh-huh.
Mr. Sobel: First of all, I want to mention, I have a set of exhibits which, I think, each of you
have a copy of now.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Sobel: Is that right?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Mr. Sobel: And I'd like them admitted as a part of the record here.
Vice Chairman Gort: They already are, sir.
Mr. Joel E. Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
119
Mr. Maxwell: If this is not information that is already a part of the record, I would question
whether or not it should be accepted by the board for consideration.
Vice Chairman Gort: Have you checked it?
Mr. Maxwell: I have it here, but I would have to go through the entire record. I don't know
if it's a part of it.
Mr. Sobel: I'll be glad to wait a moment, if you want to review it?
Mr. Maxwell: More than a moment may -- it may require more than that. I will give it to
the respondent's attorney. You have it already? And she can determine whether or not she
feels prejudiced by...
Vice Chairman Gort: Madam Attorney, you have any problem with -- look at these.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, can we then do PZ -4 or PZ -2.
Mr. Maxwell: You want to step forward, please. Ms. Pardo is the respondent's attorney.
She can respond to that, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Adrienne Pardo: Hello. Adrienne Pardo with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I
would request a moment to be able to look through these documents. So, if you would take
PZ -4 at this time, it would be appreciated.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. OK. We'll defer this for a while.
120
0
Commissioner Regalado: Can we take PZ -4?
Mr. Peter Sobel: You're deferring the hearing at this...
Vice Chairman Gort: Sure. No problem.
Mr. Sobel: You're deferring the hearing at this moment?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: She has to read the stuff.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ -4.
0
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -4 is a request for an
amendment to the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan for the property located at
approximately 5100, 5110-12, NW 1St Street and 40 NW 51St Avenue, from duplex
residential to medium density multifamily residential. The department has recommended
denial of this application, and it was also recommended for denial by the Planning
Advisory Board by a vote of four to two. The department has found that this --
Mr. Santiago Echemendia: Mr. Chairman, if I can just interrupt a second. I'm sorry. My
partner --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Mr. Echemendia: No. My partner is going to make the presentation. He's not here yet. I
would just ask, as a courtesy...
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, excuse me. We'll just start later on. Let her finish.
Mr. Echemendia: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let her finish.
121. May 25, 2000
0
Mr. Echemendia: I'm sorry.
Ms. Slazyk: It found -- as presented, the request will generate commercial traffic on 51St
Avenue, which is an intrusion into the residential neighborhood. The change to medium
density, multifamily residential will not be a logical extension, and will be potentially
detrimental and incompatible with the duplex residential scale of the neighborhood. The
proposal does not comply with the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Policy 1.1.3,
which requires that areas of the City be protected from encroachment of incompatible
land uses, and policies 1.1.5 and 1.2.7, which requires the City to preserve and enhance
the general appearance and character of the city's neighborhoods.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. We have a request of the attorneys. State your
name and address, please.
Mr. Echemendia: Good afternoon. Santiago Echemendia, 201 South Biscayne
Boulevard. Mr. Chairman, my partner, Al Cardenas, was going to make the beginning of
the presentation. So, we didn't realize that we were going to be taken out of turn. He
should be here any minute. If you could just defer our item and take items 2 and 3, and
then just wait until he gets here, we'd greatly appreciate it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I don't have any problem in -- if we can take 2 and 3 but,
you know, if we go through these two items and, you know...
Mr. Echemendia: Then I would take it up. I would make the presentation. Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: You have to do it. So...
Mr. Jose Villalobos: Mr. Chairman, could I be heard?
Vice Chairman Gort: Sure. Name and address for the record.
Mr. Jose Villalobos: Jose Villalobos, 2350 Coral Way. I am representing the applicant --
the opponent of the applicants. I'd like to express to the board that most of the people
here are elderly.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Villalobos: And that we're scheduled at 2 o'clock.. We didn't have notice. I
understand that counsel could be late, but would like to -- for the Commission to take this
into consideration, as well.
122 May 25, 2000
i
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Villalobos, this item is being taken as a request of the
Commissioner, out of turn. So, if we're to follow the procedure, it's important you inform
your individuals it could be heard any time after 2 o'clock. It's not a 2 o'clock time
certain. So, please, let your clients know.
123 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 2.
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -2 is a request for a
special exception, which requires City Commission approval for financial institution to
allow a drive-through facility. The Planning Department is recommending approval,
with conditions, and the Zoning Board also recommended approval, with conditions. The
condition is that the -- a new site plan, depicting a change in one of the access ways to the
east from SW I" Avenue, be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division
prior to the issuance of a building permit. This is because of the one-way street system
there. This would make more sense and it would avoid vehicular complex points in the
site plan. Otherwise, we're OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Yes, sir. Your name and address.
Mr. Jose Gonzalez: Jose Gonzalez (inaudible), and my address is 415 Northeast 114th
Street, Miami, Florida.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Gonzalez, you were sworn in?
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: And you're a registered lobbyist?
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Is anyone here -- are you all in agreement with the Planning
Department's recommendation?
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes. We already submitted the revision.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Is anyone here that would like to testify on PZ -2? Anyone
here that would like to testify to PZ -2? Being none, close the public hearings.
Commissioner Winton: I move PZ -2, per the recommendation of staff.
Vice Chairman Gort: It has been moved and second.
124 May 25, 2000
Mr. Joel E. Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): That would by affirming the decision of
the Zoning Board. Granting...
Commissioner Sanchez: Based on the decision of Zoning Board, second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying
"aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-462
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING
BOARD THEREBY GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FROM
THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA,
ARTICLE 6, SECTION 607.4.3, PRINCIPAL USES PERMITTED
ONLY BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION, TO ALLOW A DRIVE THROUGH
FACILITY FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION, FOR THE
PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 37-49 SOUTHWEST
12TH STREET AND 1150 SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO PLANS ON FILE, SUBJECT TO A TIME
LIMITATION OF TWELVE (12) MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING
PERMIT MUST BE OBTAINED AND A NEW SITE PLAN
DEPICTING THE FOLLOWING MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR
REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING
PERMITS: THE TWO PARKING SPACES PARALLEL TO
SOUTHWEST 12TH STREET, AT BOTH SIDES OF THE PARKING
LOT, ACCESS SHOULD BE RE -ORIENTED PERPENDICULAR TO
SOUTHWEST 12TH STREET, AT THE WEST SIDE OF
AFOREMENTIONED ACCESS, AND LANDSCAPE ISLANDS
SHOULD BE LOCATED AT BOTH SIDES OF THE PARKING
ACCESS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
125 May 25, 2000
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 Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Good luck.
126 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 3, PZ -3.
Ms. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -3 has been continued.
Vice Chairman Gort: It was continued.
Ms. Gelabert: June 29th.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. That's right. PZ -4. Mr. Attorney, you only had to wait two
minutes.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman, there are a number of people here
who would like to respond.
Mr. Santiago Echemendia: Santiago Echemendia, 201 South Biscayne Boulevard,
representing the applicant. I'm accompanied by Carlos Hernandez, who's the property
owner, (inaudible) Hernandez, and my partner, Al Cardenas, who will be here shortly to
make a portion of this presentation. Just in terms of orientation, the property is located
on 51s' Avenue, NW 1St Street. It is one block off of Flagler Street, right down the street,
just passed 51s' Place; you have Henry Flagler Elementary School. As you can see, the
property to the south is designated multifamily residential. Actually, medium density
residential is all of the property to the south. And to the west of the property there is also,
on the same block, there is multifamily -- medium density residential. We're the property
on the corner with the little dots. The reason why the little portions at the end are not
shown as being dotted is because our first application intended on simply redesignating
the rest of it, excluding that so as to serve as a buffer to the duplexes that are to the north.
There is a little gap in between our property and the property that the designations to the
west. We would argue that it is a logical extension to extend the medium density
residential to the end of the block that is to 51s' Avenue. Indeed, staff recommended -- in
1997, staff recommended favorably on this application and, subsequently, reversed their
favorable recommendation, not based on the little gap, but rather based on a traffic issue.
The little gap has not changed since 1997 and staff was recommending favorably at the
time. I'm hopeful that you can see these pictures from up there, but this is the corner of
51" and Flagler. You have a multifamily apartment building. This is just behind our
property or to the south of our property. This is the same building. As you go around the
corner, this is NW 51St Avenue. This is the multifamily apartment building that you see
over there on the corner, and this is the site here. There is a duplex here. This is actually
a site over here. This is again the multifamily, which is not dissimilar to what we would
be proposing. Just behind that multifamily is another multifamily building, and then you
have this garage here and our property is right here, which is, in effect, this. This vacant
127 May 25, 2000
•
lot, which really is kind of a barren lot that really doesn't add anything to the
neighborhood. And this is part of that barren lot, as well. Was I blocking your view Mr.
Vilarello? As you continue around the corner, this is our client's, Mr. Hernandez's site.
This is the corner of.5lst and NW 1st. He built this duplex there. That is on the corner,
and the neighbors will tell you that -- or the neighbors have stated in the past that it has
been an enhancement to the neighborhood. This is the vacant parcel again. This is the
duplex that my client has built. This is the duplex again. And this is a view down NW Ist
Street, toward the elementary school. So, as you can see from the initial pictures, both of
the buildings behind us -- well, there is one building on Flagler. That's multifamily, three
stories, then you have a lot, and right behind the multifamily, three stories, another
multifamily apartment building. So, we would suggest that our proposed redesignation
and the covenant that we're going to submit acts as a transitional density to the duplex
that is further to the north. Some changes since 1997 are that the property was rezoned --
I'm sorry. The property was replated and, since then, our client has also constructed the
duplex that is on the corner. What you have before you is staffs recommendation, which
was verbally modified before the Commission, but that is staffs recommendation. In
1997, notwithstanding the fact that that little gap that you see between our property and
the multifamily residential further west, was there at the time. And, as you could see, that
recommendation says that the property -- that it is found that the property immediately
adjacent to the south is actually designated multi -- medium density, multifamily
residential, and that the proposed change will represent an extension of the existing
designation. Staff, since 1999, has now changed their recommendation to read, the total
converse of this, which is that it's not a logical extension. But I submit to you that
nothing has changed since 1997 regarding a logical extension of the designation. In 1997
staff further states that it has found that NW 1st Street, west of 51st Place, is actually a
dead end street because of the existing school. For that reason, the traffic on NW I st
Street is already heavier than the traffic in a standard residential street. The additional
increase and levels of service for the proposed change will be minimal and will not
change the existing conditions. We heard testimony before the Zoning Board and before
the Planning Advisory Board that, indeed, the traffic on NW 1st is already of a
commercial nature, not a residential nature, because of the elementary school, because of
the clinic on 51" Place. Most of the testimony in the Planning Advisory Board was that
the traffic on NW 1st is already of a commercial nature, not a residential nature. Since
this recommendation, staff went out there in 1997 and they realized that NW 51st Place
was not a dead end street, but rather -- it said, do not enter between the hours of nine and
-- seven and nine and two and three, and because of that, staff tells us that things changed
their recommendation because it wasn't a dead end. Instead, it's a "do not enter". We,
quite frankly, don't see the difference. We don't understand -- I'm sure that they'll explain
that, but I still haven't quite understood why the dead end, as opposed to the "do not
enter", makes a difference, when the point is that the nature of the traffic on NW 1st is
already of a commercial nature. Moreover, our ingress and egress to the apartment
building would be on north/northwest -- I'm sorry, on 51st Avenue. I would submit to
you that those cars are not going to get NW 1st Street to go west, nor to go south. If
anything, they would simply make a right turn on 51st Avenue to Flagler and either make
a right turn there or, if they wanted to go north, they'd go north on 51st Avenue. Finally,
staff finds in its 1997 recommendation that the application is not in conflict with the
128 May 25, 2000
CDMP (Comprehensive Development Master Plan), due to enhancing the general
appearance of the area. It's actually vacant and abandoned, as you saw in the
photographs. It is still vacant and abandoned, except for the improvement of the duplex
on the corner of NW 1 st, and that it is being developed at a density and intensity that will
not be detrimental to the adjacent area. Now, that recommendation was based on 65
dwelling units per acre. We're going to propose 26 new units and a cap, with a covenant,
of 26 new units, rather than the 65 dwelling units per acre. We've now come to 1999 and
staff has a recommendation that is completely at odds with what they recommended in
1997 on the same exact points. It reads completely different. We don't understand why
there is that departure. We understand that staff verbally changed its recommendation
based on the fact that there was a misapprehension as to whether 51 st Place was a dead
end or a "do not enter". We don't think that that justifies flip flopping on the
recommendation on all of these other aspects, when the logical extension issue still has
not changed since 1997. On the issue of the neighbors. We had a number of meetings
with Mr. -- we met with Mr. Villalobos. We chatted with him over the phone. We
extended ourselves and asked that we proffer a different concession. We first had a
conversation over the phone, where we discussed density, et cetera, limiting the number
of units. We thought we had made some headway. Subsequent to that there was a
hearing, where there was -- where he opposed us. After that hearing, we met with Mr.
Villalobos again and we voluntarily proffered a number of concessions. He took -- that
meeting was on a Friday. He took that proffer to the neighbors and on the subsequent
Monday, he informed us, before the Planning Advisory Board, that the neighbors were
not willing to accept any of the proffers that we had submitted, and that they were still
adamantly opposed to our application.
Commissioner Sanchez: And, if I may, how many proffers have you made? How many -
Mr. Echemendia: I'm going to submit that right now to you all. Now, just to go back a
second on the recommendation issue. Not so much the recommendation from staff in the
past, but the recommendations of the two boards below. The two boards, Commissioner
Regalado, did recommend against the application, but then those two boards -- your City
Attorney advises them not to consider a covenant that we were proffering. So, those
boards, in effect, really act in a vacuum in terms of the proffer that was given, and are
asked not to consider that by your City Attorney and, therefore, this is really the first
opportunity for us to present and for this board to consider our proffer, which is a
substantial modification to what Planning and Zoning review, which is 65 dwelling units,
per acre, and none of the other proffers that were submitted.
Vice Chairman Gort: Joel.
Mr. Joel E. Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): Yes. Mr. Chairman, our admonition to
lower boards regarding whether or not they should consider covenants on land use
applications, that is Comprehensive Plan applications, goes contrary -- respectfully,
contrary to Mr. Echemendia's comments apply to this board, as well. We have
consistently advised you in the past not to consider submission of covenants for purposes
of making determinations on land use designations.
129 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: Why is that?
Mr. Maxwell: Because your Comprehensive Plan is like your constitution. You cannot
amend it with extraneous documents. It borders on contract zoning to do so. However,
we do allow you to consider them for purposes of zoning amendments because the courts
are unclear as to distinctions between conditional zoning; which very well may be
considered, and contract zoning. So, we have kind of moved in the gray area there and
said purposes of zoning amendments, we do allow you to consider them, but not the
comp plans. Now, having said that, this particular application is kind of a rare one. It's a
rare one because it does not have -- it's a Comprehensive Plan amendment -- a land use
amendment. It does not have a corresponding zoning change with it. You will rarely see
that. But in this particular situation, it does. It -- that's the case. Some of you probably
were approached by the applicant and maybe by other parties and you, quite properly,
said that you would not talk to them because this was a land use matter and it would
violate Jennings. We had spoken to the application and we had advised the applicant to
contact the client if that happens. To contact us and we would inform them of the
situation. Some of the Commissioners did. Because this is purely a land use matter, the
courts have held that Comprehensive Plans are legislative matters. They are not quasi-
judicial matters. Therefore, they don't trigger -- under Brevard V Snyder, they do not
trigger the Jennings Rule, which prohibits you from talking to people outside of a public
hearing. So, in this particular situation, you could do that. Now, to relate back to what I
was saying about this particular covenant. In order for them to use a property, as they are
requesting, the underlying zoning would have to authorize that or they would have to
have a zoning change. Therefore, the Zoning and Planning Department can comment on
that. But my understanding of the law would be that that's the case. Now -- zoning, no.
This is purely land use. This item is purely a land use change. Therefore, it is legislative.
The rules of review by the courts are different. The rules of your review are different.
The criterion is different. Everything is different. However, ordinarily, when you get
one of these, you will have companion items. That is where -- that is why we will tell --
advise you not to violate Jennings because the two are so inextricably intertwined when
you have the comp plan and the zoning change that it's impossible for an ordinary person
to discuss one without discuss the other. So, we advise you, in our abundance of caution,
not to do so when you have these two together. In this particular situation, you don't have
that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Maxwell: Oh, on the covenant idea, you may want to have Planning Department
respond to that. I believe you probably could consider this now because zoning -- there is
zoning in place and they could very well proffer this covenant, not for purposes -- and I
would suggest you not consider it -- but they could proffer it later for purposes of the use
on the zoning as it now exists, but you should not consider it for purposes of making your
determination.
Commissioner Winton: Today?
130 May 25, 2000
• 0
Mr. Maxwell: Today.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Echemendia: I will just go through the covenant even though you're not going to
consider it for purposes of your determination. I mean, quite frankly, we respectfully
disagree. with your City Attorney. Your City Attorney has historically taken that
position. At the County, they regularly accept covenants as a part of plan amendments,
so that's really just a policy issue, not a legal one. But, in any event -- and I -- Lourdes,
correct me if I'm wrong. I think I've seen other covenants proffered as part of plan
amendments before the City, as well?
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): I haven't. My only
concern with this covenant, from what I can see, looking over it quickly, it contradicts the
zoning. This covenant is attached to a land use designation of multifamily, medium
density residential, which is equivalent to R-3. If you accept this covenant, you're putting
a covenant on a piece of property that's zoned R-2. The land use amendment that they are
getting here today doesn't give them a right to go get a building permit and build an
apartment building. They can't do that until they get the companion zoning item. So, this
covenant means nothing until they get the companion item.
Vice Chairman Gort: My experience has always been, every time there has been a change
of land use, right next to a companion item, has been to change the zoning.
Ms. Slazyk: That's right. It's not required...
Vice Chairman Gort: It doesn't make sense. We can pass this here today --
Ms. Slazyk: It doesn't give them any rights...
Vice Chairman Gort: -- and nothing is going to happen. You're still R -l. OK.
Ms. Slazyk: That's right. It's still R-2.
Mr. Echemendia: Well, let...
Ms. Slazyk: Under the pyramid concept in the City of Miami, we had pyramid zoning
and pyramid comp plan, you can have a less restrictive come plan amendment and a more
restrictive zoning classification and you're deemed in compliance with the law, but you
can pull building permits on the higher ranking districts until you change your zoning to
match. So, this land use amendment, they can't go get a building permit to build anything
with it, other than what you can do in R-2, and this covenant gives them a right to do
more than R-2. So, I mean, without sitting with the Law Department, I would believe
that this contradicts the zoning designation.
131 May 25, 2000
Mr. Echemendia: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, if...
Vice Chairman Gort: So, you're suggesting that shouldn't be read and Mr. Attorney is
suggesting it should be. You tell us.
Mr. Maxwell: The covenant should not be considered for purposes of making a decision
today.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Echemendia: OK. Mr. Chairman, if I may? Not to be argumentative, but just to
make a point, just to address the issue that Lourdes addressed. There is a land use -- this
instance is peculiar because, typically, you have (inaudible) you have the -- the plan
amendment and the rezoning. The reason why we didn't do it this way is because there
was a prohibition on doing the rezoning within a certain timeframe, based on the denial a
few years ago. So, we were able to do the plan amendment, but not the rezoning and
that's why the rezoning is going forward. Joel, you remember our discussions on that.
The reason why this is just the planned amendment is because of the prohibition on the
denial and the timeframe, et cetera.
Ms. Slazyk: That's correct.
Mr. Echemendia: Correct.
Ms. Slazyk: But what I'm trying to say is that I believe the covenant is premature.
Mr. Echemendia: No. I understand that. Now, at the...
Vice Chairman Gort: Look, if you understand it, go ahead and state it. (Inaudible)
Mr. Echemendia: No. I haven't finished my presentation. Covenants -- and just to make
the point -- covenants are regularly proffered as part of plan amendments. The covenant
runs with the land and though we can't do anything until we have the zoning, there is
nothing inconsistent with having a covenant running with the land, which limits the
redesignation and enables us to redesignate because we're indeed restricting the density,
et cetera, and, therefore, makes it more palatable and compatible and more palatable to
the City Commission. There is no incongruence between the underlying zoning. We still
can't do anything. What this covenant does is, it disallows us from going to 65 units per
acre once we get the rezoning done. So -- but having said that, the City Attorney has
opined that you can't consider the covenant. In any event, when we come back -- just to
frame this a little differently -- when we -- this is just the planned amendment. I guess I'll
-- because this isn't the Commissioner's district, I'll hold off for a second.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Regalado, he's holding for you.
132 May 25, 2000
Mr. Echemendia: OK. All right. Mr. Maxwell, if there was an attendant rezoning, we
would be able to then proffer the covenant?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes. You would proffer -- you wouldn't proffer -- if this was -- if you had
attendant zoning --
Mr. Echemendia: We would proffer it at the zoning hearings.
Mr. Maxwell: This is item 4, right? The attendant zoning would be item 5.
Mr. Echemendia: Correct.
Mr. Maxwell: You would not be proffering the covenant for purposes of four even then.
It would only be for item 5.
Mr. Echemendia: Understood.
Mr. Maxwell: It would only be for item 5.
Mr. Echemendia: Understood.
Mr. Maxwell: But, hypothetically, five.
Mr. Echemendia: Commissioner Regalado, what we'd like to do is -- because we think
that this covenant is critical in terms of our concessions to the neighbors and in terms of
enhancing the compatibility and because your Attorney has opined that we can't proffer it
without the rezoning, we would like to defer the item so that we could modify our
application to include the rezoning, which now we are able to do because the time has
passed and then we could, therefore, proffer the covenant and have you consider those
concessions.
Mr. Villalobos: We would respectfully object to that. We have been here seven times.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Wait. OK. Hold it. Hold it. Hold it. Let's wait a
minute. You had the floor, Commissioner. Let the Commissioner speak, then I'll let you
speak, Mr. Villalobos.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. I think that this has been going on for years, and the
administration, the boards, have ruled already, so I will move to deny.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There is a motion to deny. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second. For discussion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion.
133 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: And, probably, it's -- Mr. Echemendia, it's probably less
discussion. I think it's important for the record for everybody to understand that I did
have a meeting with the -- is that the applicant? Mr. Santiago, are you the applicant?
And -- because, typically, we don't meet with any -- on either side relative to these things,
but the City Attorney said it was legal for me to do so. But I --
Mr. Maxwell: In this particular situation.
Commissioner Winton: In this particular situation. And I guess, though, that -- I know I
asked this question before, but I'd like to just to ask it one more time. In under -- and it's
partially a point that I think we've got to continue to get to the development community
out there. Your client, Santiago, has a right to build in the existing -- with the existing
zoning, 18 dwelling units per acre, which is 15 units on this particular site. That's
allowable right now. Don't have to do anything. Which is considerably more or
considerably greater density than what exists on that site right now. And it's always
interesting, even before I was elected, to watch developers come before the Commission
and talk about the need to create even greater density than is allowed, and the argument is
always that we can't make enough money because the price of the land is too high for the
existing land use. And I always -- as a real estate guy, I kind of scratched my head and I
always thought, well, don't pay that much for the land and then you could -- so, why is it
that your client thinks it's important to create a greater density on this piece of land than
what's already allowed there?
Mr. Echemendia: Commissioner Winton thank you for asking. Because of the
configuration of the lot, because of the configuration of the lot, we cannot get 15 duplex
units. They just -- it doesn't configure that way. We have to go to two stories to get 15
units. We can't get the 15 units. There is -- it really is kind of a rectangular lot that is left
for purposes of -- there is one lot, which is lot 3, that we're willing to put a duplex. We're
actually willing to limit lots 1 and 2 to the existing duplexes. If you refer to this plat
here, lots 1 and 2 to the existing duplex, lot 3 to a duplex, and then only on lot 4 would
we have a three-story building. With parking on the bottom, we can't get 15 duplex units.
It just -- it doesn't configure. That's why we need to go to two stories.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Winton: No. That's -- I understand.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Villalobos: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
134 May 25, 2000
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-463
A MOTION TO DENY PROPOSED CHANGE OF LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 5100
AND 5110-5112 NW 1sT STREET AND 40 NW 51sT AVENUE FROM
"DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL" TO "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL."
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the motion was passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
135 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Next item. Item 5. Can we get back to Item 2, PZ -2? Are we ready, PZ -2?
Ms. Anna Gelabert (Director, Planning Department): PZ -1.
Mr. Joel Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): One. I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ -1.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes. Mr. Chairman, you may want Ms. Pardo to comment on the record. Could you
please have Ms. Pardo comment on the record as to whether or not she's reviewed this information
and her...
Vice Chairman Gort: Ms. Pardo. Excuse me a second.
Ms. Adrienne Pardo: Hello. I have reviewed the documents submitted by Mr. Sobel and my
comments are as follows: with regards to the inclusion of Chapter 163, I do object to that. I do not
believe that it is applicable and it was not below the Zoning Board to my knowledge. With regards
to the Memorandum of Agreement, I have no objection to that. With regards to the inclusion of the
project map, I have no objection to that. With regards to the elevations of the north and south
properties, that are not part of this application, I don't have any objection to that. With regards to
the submittal of the regulations for the South Florida Building Code, the Zoning ordinance with
regards to non -conformity and the HEP (Historic & Environmental Protection) Board provisions, I
object on the grounds that I do not believe that it is applicable to these setback variance
applications. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. You understand that? Mr. Attorney, could you inform
the applicant, please?
Mr. Maxwell: The purposes of amending that information, of course, was to qualify -- it was to
satisfy the Jennings Quasi Judicial requirements again. The objections that I've heard from counsel
deal with relevancy, really, and I don't believe that, for purposes of relevancy, the item should be
excluded from the record. However, for purposes of making your decision, counsel would have the
opportunity, again, to argue to the Commission as to whether or not you should consider those
things. Staff also went through these documents in the interim and I understand that the -- other
than the copies of codes and laws, which are a matter of public record, the rest of that information is
in the record. Therefore, upon consideration, I would suggest to you that you can accept the exhibit
into the record, and Ms. Pardo will make her arguments concerning the two items she objected to,
when she has an opportunity.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Go ahead, sir.
136 May 25, 2000
• 0
Mr. Peter Sobel: Thank you. With regard to the Memorandum Agreement, which I've given copies
-- it's part of the exhibits -- I believe that 163 does apply and I think...
Vice Chairman Gort: Sir, did you give -- I'm sorry. Did you give your address -- name and
address?
Mr. Sobel: Peter B. Sobel, 421 NW 3rd Street, Miami, Florida.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Sobel: OK. I would like to argue the point with regard to Chapter 163. One sixty-three, the
pertinent part of 163 is 163. 3225, which says -- and this has been in effect since July 1, 1999, and
the agreement before you has been signed after the date of this particular legislative passage.
"Before entering into, amending or revoking a development agreement, a local government shall
conduct at least two public hearings at the option of the governing body. One of the public hearings
may be held by the local planning agency. 2A. Notice of intent to consider a development
agreement shall be advertised approximately seven days before each public hearing, in a newspaper
of general circulation and readership in the County, where the local government is located. Notice
of intent to consider a development agreement shall also be mailed to all affected property owners
before the first public hearing. The day, time, place, which said public hearing will be held shall be
announced at the first public hearing. Two. The notice shall specify the location of the land,
subject to the development agreement. The development uses proposed on the property. The
proposed population densities, the proposed building intensities, and height shall be specifically --
shall specify a place where a copy of the proposed agreement can be obtained." And other cities are
complying with this Chapter.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me, sir. Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Can you address what the gentleman's referring to?
Mr. Maxwell: The presentation now being made to you is a challenge of the notice requirements.
That's the two things that I spoke of earlier, relevance. I can respond to that. I'm sure the petitioner
-- the respondent's attorney can, as well. I don't believe that the argument being made by counsel
has merit. We are not aware of any violation of the notice requirements. One sixty-three does not
apply in this particular situation. And I think it was a Federal 109...
Ms. Pardo: Section 106.
Mr. Maxwell: One zero six provision that the agreement is writing under, not 163 that the plaintiff
is relying on. So, I don't think, personally, it would be our recommendation to you that there is no
notice deficiency on this item.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Next item.
137 May 25, 2000
Mr. Sobel: I'll proceed now. I'm really surprised that the City Attorney doesn't acknowledge that
this law is in effect. It was in effect at this time, at the time of the agreement. However, be that as
it may, the Florida Local Government Development Act was designed to prevent people getting
together, without the public knowing about it, for the purpose of creating historical districts and
things like that, with developers. And I think it's quite clear that this law does apply. But we'll
proceed with the other points on my appeal and pass on that for the time being. The Zoning Board
may grant variances from the terms of the Zoning ordinances of the City, as will be -- will not be
contrary to the public interests, where owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the
provisions of the Zoning ordinance of the City would result in unnecessary and undue hardship.
That's what the Zoning Board is supposed to do. The moving of a wood framed building is not a
variance of a Zoning ordinance and it's not the business of the Zoning Board. It must be done in
accordance with the South Florida Building Code, and I've provided you with those portions of the
South Florida Building Code that apply to moving of buildings and wood framed buildings.
Ms. Pardo: Mr. Chairman, just for record, I would just like to put on my standing objection to any
reference...
Vice Chairman Gort: Do me a favor. Write them all down and when it comes time for rebuttal,
you'll bring them all out. Let's finish this, please.
Ms. Pardo: All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Continue, sir.
Mr. Sobel: OK. The applicants used the Zoning Board to get approval to move a wood framed
house. That is not within the Zoning Board's authority. The applicants use the -- please read the
South Florida Building Code. The Zoning Board acted prematurely by granting the request for a
variance. The Zoning Board, in order to hear the merits of the variance, which includes the moving
of a wood framed house, from 428 Northwest 4th Street to 401 Northwest 3rd Street, claim to be
eligible for historic designation as a potential future historic district. The designation of the historic
district would have to be completed. You haven't even started to declare this district under the
ordinance historic. To do that, the City would have to complete the historic preservation procedure
under Chapter 23. I recited Chapter 23 in my exhibits, the complete chapter. The law requires that
the Board shall conduct a public hearing. First, the report must be prepared by the City, not a
private developer, containing facts, identifying contributing structures, then a map indicating
proposed boundaries and reporting the impact of the proposed historical district will have on the
property owners and the citizens of the City, culturally and economically. Then, the City, the State
and the national authorities must determine whether the proposed district meets the criteria for
designation. The hearing must be noticed to the property owners, 30 days prior to the board
meeting, signs posted, advertisement in newspapers, with the right of appeal if anyone wants to.
Until all the proper due process has been completed and the historical designation district has been
completed, the Zoning Board does not have a right to hear this matter. The City Commission must
follow its own laws before any historical district variances can be heard. There has not been and
there cannot be a waiver of the South Florida Building Code, Fire Prevention Code or City
Ordinances that now apply to the structures that are existing in the City. It would be meaningless
without the creation of a historic district, which hasn't taken place. With regard to this fire zone, I
138 . May 25, 2000
0 •
wanted to bring this to your attention. In fire zone one, the house at 428 NW 4th Street, to be
moved, is a wood framed house and the provision says: "Move buildings." We're talking about
1601.3 of the South Florida Building Code, which you have there. "Move buildings: Any building
or structure within or in any fire zone shall be made to comply with all the requirements for new
buildings in the fire zone." Section 1062, Fire Zone 1, Section 1602 states: "Any existing building
or structure in Fire Zone 1 that does not comply with the requirements for new buildings erected
therein shall not be hereafter be enlarged, altered, remodeled, repaired or moved, except as follows:
such a building may be entirely demolished; such a building may be moved outside the limits of
Fire Zone 1." Those are the only two things that you can do in order to move that building or to get
it out of the district. They're asking for a side variance, but that's not what they're asking for.
They're trying to get a full approval of this Commission to move a building that's improper under
the ordinances and the Florida South Florida Building Code. They never filed for historic
presentation district. They've never gone through any of the processes and, consequently, they're
not entitled to even mention this as a historic building or an historic area. It has to go through the
processes I outlined before. There's a substantial difference between an alleged, eligible historic
home and a designated historic building. There is no proof that the dilapidated and neglected house
proposed to be moved is any way historic. And even if it is historic, there's no precedent for
moving it within this district. Today, if you wanted to build a house, a simple, one -family house, in
an R-4 District, you could do so, but you'd have to comply with all of the current building and
zoning applications that are in the South Florida Building Code. Certainly, it wouldn't permit a
framed one. It would have to be a CBS (Commercial Business Structure) with all of the present
requirements under South Florida Building Code. Their only desire is to build a 14 -story and
3 -story high-rises and they're just trying to get this historic designation under this illegal contract,
and they're trying to force the property owners that are left to go under the historic district. They're
trying to create a historic district so that I can't freely demolish my building or sell it to someone
who wants to demolish my building, unless I get permission from the historic district people when
it's finally called a historic district, but they're going to finish building a 14 -story with a parking
garage and everything. They're going complete everything first; get all their building permits, and
then they're going to close the door. It's like -- for instance, if I was making alligator bags and I sold
thousands of alligator bags and then, finally, I'm down to two little alligators and I want to declare
them, you know, endangered species, that's about what they're trying to do. They're going to create
this and then say, they're going to build this high-rise and then say everything that's existing is
endangered species and should be preserved for the rest of our lives. Doesn't make any sense and I
don't think you people would go along with something so foolish. And then, after they move the
house, 421, around the corner onto my side of the street, they're going to move another house from
the site on the north side of 4th Street to make room for their 14 -story building into that lot. They're
moving this house so they can build alongside of it; then they're going to put another historic house
and move it across the street and they're going to be able to go 14 stories.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask you a question, sir. My understanding of what's in front of me is
a historic yard variance, am I correct?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: You understand what's the issue in front of us today? This is side yard
variance. The arguments you have presented, you presented in other meetings that we've had for all
139 May 25, 2000
is
those things you're discussing now.
Mr. Sobel: It's not just the side.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Sobel: If it was just that, I would...
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm sorry. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Sobel: ...only confine myself -- I don't believe it's just that. I think that the Zoning board and
the applicant have an interest in keeping it down to a six-foot variance. They would love to have
you think of this as only a six-foot variance, and I can't talk about any of this historic district that
went into this contract with the City. Of course not. It's just six foot. All we're talking about is six
feet. We'll just talk about six foot.
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Sobel: I don't think it's appropriate to talk just about six foot. I feel that...
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Sobel: ...there's more to it and I'm trying to express that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Sir, -I hope you're...
Mr. Sobel: Now, let me show you what I mean. What they're trying to do...
Vice Chairman Gort: Use the other mike, sir.
Mr. Maxwell: Again...
Mr. Sobel: Where is the mike? Oh, I lost the mike. This is what -- this is basically the historic
district. Let me just give you a visualization. All right. They're going to build this whole block --
this whole half a block is the 14 -story with the garage, OK? So, that's taking up all this. This,
they're selling or leasing to commercial because it's zoned "C." So, they're developing this whole
complete block. Then they're developing this area here, right in back of my building. My building
sits right here. They're going to develop this into a three-story apartment building. And they are
very interested in historic developments, so what they're going to do after that is, they're going to
freeze my -- this lot with the new house on it. My next door neighbor and my property, they're
going to freeze us forever to live with our old properties because they're going to turn it into a
historic district, while they built their beautiful, fancy high-rises, with affordable housing, and I
think this is a travesty and you people got to stop it. I'm sorry. I'd like a little time to rebuttal.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
140 May 25, 2000
Ms. Pardo: Hello. My name is Adrienne Pardo with law offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here
today with Mike Spetko, who's a representative of Gatehouse Development Corp. The item before
you today is solely whether or not you should uphold the Zoning Board's decision, which granted a
side yard setback. Fifteen feet are required on the west side, since this is a corner lot, and we are
providing six point two feet. The reason that we needed the variance is -- I'm sure you're all
familiar, and I'm just going to go through in one minute -- is because, pursuant to a memorandum of
agreement, which we entered into with the City of Miami, which also involved the State of Florida.
We sat down. We had several meetings with the Dade Heritage Trust, with Arva Parks, with Dade
County's Historic Presentation Division, with many, many partners. It was ultimately decided to
preserve certain single family homes, which are considered eligible historic homes, and it was
decided that one of them should be moved to a lot within the Lummus Park district. This was the
only lot available and, therefore, we filed an application in order to comply with that memorandum.
We filed an application and we needed a variance because of the side yard. We feel that we meet
the hardship requirement, which is the standard, before the Zoning Board; that there is a hardship
here in order to preserve an eligible historic home. We went before the Zoning Board and that
board unanimously decided to approve this application with nine members approving on a variance,
which is a very unique thing. At this point, I won't say anymore; however, if you have any
questions of me, I'd be happy to answer them. And just for Mr. Sobel's clarification, we are not
pursuing the designation of the Lummus Park district. That's the Planning Department, I believe,
that is doing that. And my client, Gatehouse Development, was required to go through this entire
process because the property was merely considered eligible historic property. It was not by our
choice. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Sarah Eaton: Sarah Eaton, Preservation Officer for the City. The hardship for this setback
variance is directly related to the Federal requirements that the applicant comply with the provisions
of Section 106 with the National Historic Preservation Act in the development of the Miami River
Park Apartments Project. This requirement was triggered because the Lummus Park Historic
District has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Many
of the arguments that were raised in the appeal relate to the fact that the property has not been
locally designated by the City of Miami. Local designation is not required, nor is it relevant in
determining whether or not a hardship exists in this case. The granting of this variance is in
harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning ordinance and is not injurious to the
neighborhood. On the contrary, Lummus Park, historically, has been a mixed-use neighborhood of
single and multi -family uses. The granting of this variance would further the preservation of the
Lummus Park Historic District. This variance does not exempt the applicant from obtaining
building permits and complying with the provisions of the South Florida Building Code. Thank
you.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is -- because I understand Mr. Sobel's objection to it
because he thinks his property is going to be affected and he would need to comply with historical
requirements and so on. My understanding is, he would not have to comply with that, even if it's
declared a district; am I correct?
Ms. Eaton: As it stands today, there are no requirements for him.
141 May 25, 2000
•
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Ms. Eaton: If the district is locally designated some time in the future, then there would be
requirements.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. Yes, sir. You have a few minutes for rebuttal.
Mr. Sobel: In order to declare a historic district, Chapter 23 goes into great lengths about protecting
property owners, giving notice to property owners, requiring public hearings, requiring the City to
provide all kinds of data with regard to the actual geographic area. They're actually just doing what
the City's supposed to be doing and the City is signing an agreement to it and the agreement is also
supposed to have a public hearing designed to protect the property owners, too. So, you have a
double whammy here. The agreement, which is supposed to be through a public hearing and be
open and above board, has been done behind the backs of the property owner. And the historic --
she says it doesn't need -- you don't need to declare this an historic district in order to move framed
houses from one place to another, and clear property for 14 stories, which is totally adverse to the
historic district. The pictures of the buildings are in my exhibits and they're totally adverse to this
being a historic district. They're modern, 14 -story buildings. I have nothing against the 14 -story
building. But let me building one, too.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Sobel: Don't come in and try to stop me from building one after you build yours and then you
take my zoning of R-4 away from me by freezing my property into an historic district.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you, sir. My understanding -- and let me see if I clarify
something in here and, please, if I'm wrong, will you please...
Mr. Maxwell: Mr. Chairman, I think, if you could have the Hearing Boards Officer come forward,
I think they could indicate on -- she could indicate on the record as to whether or not all required
public notice was satisfied for this item.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm going to go through that. My understanding is, you are presently
applying to create a district that's not been declared a district yet.
Ms. Eaton: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: You're going through the procedure that the gentleman is explaining right
now, where you're going to have the publics?
Ms. Eaton: The process has not even begun.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. But that's what I want to clarify. So, in other words, what he's stating,
there needs to be taken'place -- it will be taking place. And the reason this application's in front of
us because when this gentleman came to us, that they want to build a building, we told him, you
142 May 25, 2000
0 0
cannot tear those houses down because we believe that it should be kept; it should improve the
neighborhood and, for that reason, it was our request that the -- we put the burden on the applicant.
So, as you can see, you'll still have the opportunity and I've closed the public hearings. You'll have
the opportunity to go through the whole process, where they'll go in front of you; they'll go in front
of the neighborhood and they'll talk and you can make your presentation and you can make your
argument.
Mr. Sobel: Yeah, but you're...
Vice Chairman Gort: Sir, the public hearings is closed. I'm speaking now. I gave you the right to
speak and I ask you to do the same for me, OK?
Mr. Sobel: Yeah, but you're close...
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. So, let's look at it this
way: I personally.-- my personal feeling, I've already gone through that neighborhood constantly
because I go to the police station constantly; I've seen some of the improvements that's already
taken place. The only thing this -- all this can do for the whole district is to improve the value of all
the land within that area. So, thank you, ma'am. This is in your district, Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, I move to affirm the Zoning Board's recommendation with
the conditions required by staff.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second? Any further discussion? Being none, all in
favor state by saying, "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Item 2.
Mr. Maxwell: The appeal is denied, sir.
143 1 May 25, 2000
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-464
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), DENYING THE APPEAL, AFFIRMING THE
DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD, THEREBY GRANTING A
VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE
ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS,
"REQUIRED STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK", TO ALLOW A
STREET SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 6'2. 6" (15'0" REQUIRED), FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 401
NORTHWEST 3RD STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, PURSUANT TO
PLANS ON FILE, SUBJECT TO A TIME LIMITATION OF TWELVE
(12) MONTHS IN WHICH A BUILDING PERMIT MUST BE
OBTAINED AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT: 1) THE PROPOSED PARKING SPACES SHALL BE
RELOCATED FROM THE FRONT YARD TO THE REAR YARD
WITH AN ENTRANCE ON NORTHWEST 4TH AVENUE, AND 2)
OAK TREES SHALL BE AT LEAST 15' IN HEIGHT.
(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 Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
144 May 25, 2000
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 2. PZ -2.
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): P -- yeah, we're done with
two.
Ms. Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): Five. You already passed.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're doing pretty good, then.
Ms. Slazyk: PZ -5 is a second reading. It's a City item to add the SD -12 buffer overlay
district to the properties along 17th Avenue Corridor, from Northwest 54th Street to 62nd
Street, in the Model City area, in order to allow for parking to serve the 17th Avenue
Commercial Corridor.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion?
Commissioner Sanchez: None.
Commissioner Winton: Is Commissioner Teele.. .
Vice Chairman Gort: Being none -- he's in favor. He's the one that requested it.
Commissioner Sanchez: He's in favor of it.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
145 May 25, 2000
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. He moved it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Will you read the ordinance? It's a second reading. Read the
ordinance. OK. Call the roll.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION OF THE
MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT (S),
AMENDING PAGE NO. 12 OF THE ZONING ATLAS OF
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 6,
SECTION 612, SD -12 SPECIAL BUFFER OVERLAY DISTRICT IN
ORDER TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PARKING ALONG THE
NORTHWEST 17TH AVENUE CORRIDOR FROM NORTHWEST 54TH
STREET TO NORTHWEST 62ND STREET, IN THE MODEL CITY
AREA FOR THE PROPERTIES MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED IN ATTACHMENT "A"; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of April 27, 2000, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Sanchez,
seconded by Commissioner Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and
final reading by title, and was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11930.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Note For The Record: Commissioner Teele entered the Commission chambers at 5:20
p.m.
146 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 6.
Ms. Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ -6 is an amendment to
the City Code regarding the schedule of fees for the Coconut Grove Parking
Improvement Trust Fund. This is also a second reading to reflect the actual intent and
billing practices of the City for the sidewalk cafes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Any discussion? Motion?
Commissioner Teele: So moved.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Discussion.
Commissioner Winton: Could I ask a question?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: In the ordinance it says that the -- I guess it's on the second page,
under Article V, looks like section 35-224-A and paragraph 1. Fee in lieu of providing
required Off -Street Parking for sidewalk cafes. In addition to the twenty -dollar ($20) per
square foot permit fee. Now, twenty dollar ($20) per square foot permit fee, two
questions related to that. Per square foot of what are we measuring there? Just sidewalk?
Mr. John Jackson (Acting Director, Public Works): John Jackson, Acting Director for
Public Works. That's the per square foot of sidewalk area that the cafe table and chairs
are on, that they are using.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, that's a one-time fee.
Mr. Jackson: (Inaudible) that they pay.
Commissioner Winton: OK. So, it's on sidewalks. And where does that fee go?
Mr. Jackson: Basically, to the general fund.
147 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: Not to the -- OK. To the general fund.
Mr. Jackson: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion? Read the ordinance. Call the roll.
An Ordinance Entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 35 ARTICLE V, SECTION 35-224 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED
"SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES" RELATING TO THE
COCONUT GROVE PARKING IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND TO
CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE ORIGINAL INTENT
AND ACTUAL BILLING PRACTICES OF THIS CITY; CONTAINING
A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of April 27, 2000, was taken up for its
second and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele,
seconded by Commissioner Winton, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and
final reading by title, and was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11931.
The ordinance was read by title into the public record by the City Attorney.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, that takes care of PZ items.
148 May 25, 2000
Note for the Record: At this point, the City Commission closes consideration of the
Planning and Zoning portion of the agenda to consider items from the regular portion of
the agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you very much. Public Works has been waiting all day for
their presentation, so let's hear their presentation. Yes, sir.
Mr. Albert Alexis: Yes. My name is Albert Alexis. I am with the Little Haiti Roots and
Cultural Festival.
Vice Chairman Gort: You'll have to wait until we call you, sir.
Mr. Alexis: Oh, OK. I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: We called you earlier but you weren't here. OK. We'll get you
back in a minute. We've got to go back into the regular meeting now.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, while we're waiting...
Vice Chairman Gort: Item -- we have item 2A. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: While we wait. In the morning there was -- the administration
was directed to bring a resolution regarding one organization of that wasn't funded and
that was the intent of the City Commission in February, but it fell through the cracks.
Florida housing Cooperative, and they have the resolution already, I think.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We'll (inaudible) CDBG (Community Development Block
Grant) -- we'll pick it up. Let's hear from 3A. Mr. Alexis.
Mr. Alexis: Thank you. Basically, I'm here representing the Little Haiti Roots and
Cultural Festival that happens in Little Haiti. This is our 6th year. This year we're
planning a two-day event. We feel that the event is important in the community because
it gives Little Haiti an opportunity to develop itself, to showcase the culture of the Haitian
community: Also, to educate the local people. We are working with the University of
Miami. We're doing a big AIDS (Acquired Immuno Deficiency Syndrome) program out
there at the festival site. We are also doing on site testing. We are encouraging people to
register to vote in the community, and the purpose of the festival is to, as I said earlier,
promote the Haitian culture in the community. It increases tourism because we have a lot
of people coming from different parts of the country, where the Haitian population is
largest, as New York, Haiti, Boston, Washington. They are coming down here. They are
spending dollars in the community. And we think it's a worthwhile cause. The benefit is
that it increases its tourism in Dade County, and especially in that neighborhood. That
means that more dollars is being spent in Little Haiti -- it's a two-day event. We're
149 May 25, 2000
estimating approximately five hundred thousand dollars. ($500,000) will be spent that
weekend in Little Haiti. So, we look at it as Economic Development for that area. Long-
term benefits are that we are hoping to be able to do this on an annual basis. That's why
we're asking some support from the City this year, because it's a two-day event, I got my
budget from the Police Department kind of late because they were very busy. I didn't
pick it up until about 12 days ago. We had planned on paying approximately fourteen to
fifteen thousand dollars ($15, 000) for services, but when I got the budget, the budget was
up to approximately twenty-eight thousand dollars ($28,000).
Commissioner Teele: How much?
Mr. Alexis: Twenty-eight thousand dollars ($28,000). So, what I'm asking here today is
that, if the City can pick up 50 percent of that, and we already have the money in hand to
pay the other 50 percent. Because the budget came in late, it was hard for us to raise the
funds to cover the whole budget, because I didn't get it until 12. days ago. I have
documentation to show when I got -- when I received the budget. And, basically, we are
willing to pay 50 percent. We think it's a very important program for Little Haiti. This is
our 6th year. The theme for the festival this year is Preserving Caribbean Cultural in the
New Millennium. We have a kid's program this year. We're getting all the kids involved
from the local elementary school. Dade County libraries are working with us. We are
doing a book drive this year. We're donating books. We have a lot of people coming and
donating books in the community. We're encouraging the kids to read more, rather than
watch TV. So, we're promoting education in the community. And it would be a shame if
this festival is hurt from that because we've made all the necessary arrangements to pay
for all the fees, but there is -- just that the police fees came in kind of late, so we cannot
have a full budget for them until late. So, we did prepare for to pay back fifteen thousand
dollars ($15,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Alexis: Thank you.
Mr. Manuel Diaz: Manuel Diaz, NET Coordinator. You have before you in your
package one, the original cost to the City. I handed out a second cost to the City. The
first cost to the City for the police services, if they are done at the off-duty cost, which is
below the time and a half parade. The second one reflects -- the second page I just
handed out reflects the cost at time and a half. If the City -- the event -- if the City
decides to or if the Commission decides to handle the police services on an on -duty rate,
it automatically goes to time and a half. The first one reflects the fees. That -- if the
promoter picks it up, the second one reflects the fees if the City picks it up, picks up the
fee. So, there is a difference. If you notice -- as we usually prepare for the Commission,
there is City services reflected. There is waivable fees reflected and there are other fees
reflected. The City services are salaries, and those are usually not waived or they are not
waived. The waivable fees are the -- you might refer to them as the -- the money that we
take into the City, that we charge the promoter for administration fees and permit fees,
150, May 25, 2000
and the other fees are the -- the 438 is the sanitation fees, which, when we dispose of the
waste, it's a cost to the City.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you, sir. Commissioner Teele, it's in your district.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, this is a very difficult issue. First of all, the
Manager has recommended denial, and that's what we pay him to do, and I really
appreciate, Mr. Manager, and I hope that a year from now you'll be just as firm and
resolute in making very clear recommendations. We pay you for your recommendations,
and I hope that you'll continue to do that. Obviously, I don't agree. But I also think that
the Commission needs to take note of the fact that one of the by-products of what we
always talk about when we get into these discussions about poverty and when you look at
some of these areas is, you don't have the corporate support. I mean, I wish this Roots
was like Calle Ocho, but the economic impact -- I mean, the economic infrastructure in
Little Haiti is totally different, and what we want to do is, we want Little Haiti to become,
if you will, as vibrant and as strong as Calle Ocho, and it's not going to happen if we don't
invest in the infrastructure. I have two concerns. First, I think we really need to look at
the history of this event because I think it doesn't make sense to continue to fund these
programs if we don't have a plan for self-sufficiency. In other words, they just can't -- we
cannot keep letting people come in here year after year. There is a gentleman who has a
program in Little Haiti that's gotten funding for three or four years. I don't support him
because the program never really took off, and I really do think that this is a program that
has a chance, and we ought to have a plan for self-sufficiency for these programs. Are
you getting any money from the County?
Mr. Alexis: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Have you requested any money from the County?
Mr. Alexis: No, we haven't. Because the fellow that used to handle this program, he
passed away about a year and a half ago. I kind of stepped in his shoes. We --
Commissioner Teele: The County has something called the Tour -- TDC, Tourist --
Vice Chairman Gort: That's how we gain Calle Ocho, some of the (inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: Tourist Development Council, TDC, which has tourist
development funds. And, you know, they have a very deliberate process and it's a plan
for self-sufficiency. I think you can get funding for three to five years. And I think, you
know, anything we do, if any, of this year, is going to be conditioned on the fact that you
must receive TDC approvals in the future. The second area is the police, which is really
the big number. And I've got to tell you something. You know, it just -- there is a lot of
mixed messages in this -- you know, we don't have money for one thing. We've got it for
another. And -- so, the question that I want to ask is a different question. Why can't
these people go out and engage a Wackenhut or a security company? I mean, is there -- I
mean, we don't have a mafia rule or anything in here, where you've got to use the City of
151 May 25, 2000
Miami Police. I mean, it says -- I mean, don't -- do we have a rule -- do we have an
ordinance that says somebody -- and the same thing is true for emergency services or fire
services, for that matter. Does a private operator have the ability to provide equal or
comparable services that's satisfactory to the Police Department, that's satisfactory to the
Fire Department, that could be cheaper, or do they have to use the City of Miami Police
Department?
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if I could address the issue of security versus enforcement of the
laws. Our police officers are the only ones that can enforce the laws within...
Commissioner Teele: This says security. I'm not talking about law enforcement.
Mr. Vilarello: Traffic control. Any of those items must be provided by sworn officers. If you're
just...
Commissioner Teele: Sworn officers.
Mr. Vilarello: If you're talking about...
Commissioner Teele: Let me tell you, Alex. Don't get into something you're not sure about
because I'm sure about this. Last year the school board said they would provide security. Sworn
police officers doing traffic, doing this, and our department said, "We don't want you doing
that." And, you know, you get into this overtime thing and this, that, and the other. And what I
really would like to do is have a total review -- because I know the difference between security,
armed security, and I know the difference between law enforcement, and I'm asking, as it relates
to security here, which is what we're talking about, as I understand it, How much of this is
security and can someone — can we contract or can anybody contract for people to provide
security? Or, for that matter, even emergencies? I mean, can you hire Randle Eastern
Ambulance Service to provide it or does it have to be provided by the city? Can you contract —
can the City of North Miami, which is — you know, I don't think we ought to try to take the
burden on this stuff ourselves. North Miami — the City of North Miami could come in with some
support for you all, even though it's in the City of Miami. What is the rule and can that be done,
Mr. Attorney?
Mr. Vilarello: Again, enforcement of the laws can only be done by sworn officers, which have
jurisdiction within the City of Miami. With regard to emergency fire rescue services...
Commissioner Teele: No, no. With regard to security.
Mr. Vilarello: With regard to security, you know, I don't know how they broke down the
security versus traffic control and law enforcement, but, no, anybody can hire anybody to
provide security services. That does not have to be a City of Miami police officer.
Commissioner Teele: So, you know, you go into nightclubs; you go into places — they have
security, they have bouncers; they may have a police officer. You know, you go into various
events, they have security; they have police; they have undercover; they have, you know — and
152 May 25, 2000
there is no place better than the Miami Arena where that works. So, what I'm saying is, I need to
know how much of this twenty-eight thousand of the police — twenty-five thousand is law
enforcement and how much is security, and how do you make the difference?
Chief Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Commissioner, I may be able to answer some of your
questions. Raul Martinez, the Chief of Police. The cost, the police cost, for off-duty rate for the
Roots and Cultural Festival, it's about nineteen thousand seven hundred dollars ($19,700) for
paying police officers that are off-duty. The other costs for police is the surcharge, which is
something that, if you wish, you could waive. The others are twenty-five hundred dollars
($2500), which is the three -dollar ($3) per hour surcharge. A Commissioner has the right to do
that.
Commissioner Teele: Is there an operational plan that generated that nineteen thousand dollars
($19,000)?
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir. There is a plan that assigns police officers and, instead of bringing all
the officers at the same time in the morning, they're spaced out. So, some come in early; some
come in later. In fact, there's one, two, three, four, five different reporting times. So, at the peak
times, you have most of the officers there and, early in the morning, when all you do is street
closures -- don't forget, this year — last year, I believe it was, on school grounds, it was one of the
schools. You know, if you do it on private property, you can hire security guards, I mean.
Mr. Alexis: (Inaudible) that we use the Police Department.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. Wait. He's talking now. Don't do that, please.
Mr. Alexis: Oh. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
Chief Martinez: And, Commissioner, like if you have a discotheque, you have security officers
for the district, but when you're doing it in the public street, in the public right-of-way, we're
blocking streets, we have to send traffic left, north and south, so on and so forth.
Commissioner Teele: I understand the law enforcement aspect of it, but — 54"' Street is a City
street or a State street — county?
Chief Martinez: It's State road, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So, in other words, they could just as easily use Florida Highway Patrol if
they could get a better rate?
Chief Martinez: If they could get a better rate.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's not about...
Commissioner Teele: Absolutely.
153 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Sanchez: They can, but it's not a better rate. I can tell you that right now.
Chief Martinez: Yeah. I believe, but maybe I'm mistaken, I think FHP (Florida Highway
Patrol) is a little more expensive than we are, but they could.
Commissioner Teele: And you're suggesting that the entire amount in the Operational Plan, as
you have presented to you, is traffic and is law enforcement, and not security?
Chief Martinez: Yes, sir. It's my understanding, when they met with the gentlemen and they
met with — they took a look at last year's events and a little alcohol had been served at this event,
that heightens the crowd (inaudible) any crowd. It heightens the crowd in Calle Ocho; heightens
the crowd in Coconut Grove Arts Festival any time there's a sale of alcohol. So, the staffing was
based on the history of this event. They've had it already — I think this is the third year —the sixth
year.
Commissioner Teele: Is it this Saturday?
Chief Martinez: This Saturday and Sunday. It's a two-day event. You know, the cost is so high,
nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000), because you're doing it on Saturday and you're doing it all
over again on Sunday.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to hear from the gentleman, but I really would
like to know what my colleagues, how you feel? Obviously, I would like to provide fifty percent
of this, and ask the Manager to make available and to rework shifts to — as we've done in other
areas of the community — to try to minimize the impact, and to rework the numbers to the extent
they can, without impacting the operation, you know. But I've got to tell you, the Mayor's
Summit is a classic example when, in my district, there wasn't one police officer to answer calls.
The one police officer there came from Coconut Grove. They had a call. The back-up came
from Wynwood or somewhere, while it was going on. I mean, we pulled police officers and —not
we. The management of the Police Department can move police officers around to meet needs
of this community for some folks, and it's just really difficult to understand the logic and the
rationale when, I know for a fact, we do it all the time. We use on -duty police officers by
detailing them out of the areas of operation to carry out special events and special functions, and
it's nobody's overtime, see, because they're being paid, but other events — and I don't want to
create — you know, I don't want to compare event to event, and I think the Mayor's Summit was
a good thing. I think you did the right thing or whoever did the right thing, in doing that. It was
important. But I really do think that neighborhood redevelopment is also important, so...
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, we keep talking about the need to build bridges, and keep
talking about the need to ease tensions, and I would think that one of the best ways to do that,
since we all cannot be at the same time in every community, is to show that — even if this is not a
major event, the City of Miami is behind any and all community events in any and all
154 May 25, 2000
communities of the City of Miami, and I, for one, was one of the elected officials that asked and
kept asking for support to the administration, when we have the rallies and parades, and I think
that every community is entitled to have the same level of concord that we, as the community,
had in the past. Commissioner Teele was very gracious in not talking about other events, but I
can because — remember, I was the first elected official, I think, that requested police protection
in November for Elian's house, when anybody — when nobody knew about Elian. So, I think
that it would be fair to reroute police, to use garbage trucks, and to have this community event,
because it may not be Calle Ocho; it may not be the festivals that we all — we attended one in
Little Haiti last year, didn't we? Arthur, did we attend one last year in Little Haiti?
Commissioner Teele: Yes. That's the annual August...
Commissioner Regalado: Well...
Commissioner Teele: But that's the August...
Commissioner Regalado: And I work — I just want to say: If only a hundred and two hundred,
three hundred persons goes there...
Commissioner Teele: This is going to have ten thousand people.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, then, we've got to do it, because it's about people. It's about the
different communities. And I'll tell you something: Whatever this Commission wants to do, I'll
do, but whatever we do — and I think — I believe that we should do something, and we should do
a lot for them. The people in that area — the people that attend that festival should know that this
City Commission, which is the mirror of the City of Miami, support their event. And I, for one,
believe that you all have to do something to support this event.
Vice Chairman Gort: Gentlemen, let me — perhaps there's founding members of four
organizations that began with public funding, 50150, and today have become very independent.
believe at one time we created a Festival Committee, and when we created a Festival Committee
-- and, if not, we should enact it again. You have your Calle Ocho; you've got the Hispanic
Heritage Week; you've got the Orange Bowl, and those events, the Book Fair, all those events
begin with partial funding from the government, and, today, they're completely independent.
My understanding, in Calle Ocho, we pay the City of Miami over four hundred thousand dollars
($400,000) in expenditures. I think these people — those people should get together and help the
new projects coming up. Get a sponsor. They have the contact. They have the connections.
They can get them through the sponsors, where they can create this. At the same time, they can
help you in the planning, because you want to close the street for two days. You've never done
that before. This is something unique. I don't know if you're ready to close the street for two
days.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, we do because the people — I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. I'm speaking now. This is something that we need to look
into, and maybe someone with more experience could go back and say, "Look, you don't need to
155 May 25, 2000
do it two days. You can do it in one. You can get as much money as we do." I know we get
enough funding in Calle Ocho and the Book Fair and the other ones, to do it. I think, somehow —
and these projects have brought economic development to downtown, to the different
neighborhood. Somehow, I agree, we need to fund it. Let's find a way to do it. But, at the same
time, we need, like you said, Teele — Commissioner Teele, we need to get these people into
becoming self-sufficient, and they can do that. Fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) is nothing for
sponsorship, if it's going to the right people and the right sponsors, and if you gear it directly, the
way you should, so your sponsor will back you up.
Commissioner Regalado: But let me tell you, Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: So, let's make a motion and let's go.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. Chairman, but — I think — I just want to say, very briefly,
something because I think I have a little experience in this area. To get a sponsor, you have to
have a certain degree of comfort, as a sponsor, that the community that you are trying to reach
has an economic level that will give you return for your sponsorship, and sometimes the
perceptions are that some communities are poorer than other communities, and I think, for now —
for tomorrow — I mean, the day after tomorrow, it will be really difficult to get a sponsor. In the
future, I'm sure...
Vice Chairman Gort: No. I understand that. Not for tomorrow. We can't do it for tomorrow.
That's for sure.
Commissioner Regalado: In the future, I'm sure that they can get a sponsor, but I'm telling you
that it's about the egg and the chicken. If we don't help them now, they won't be able to bring
people.
Vice Chairman Gort: I agree with you. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Well, I guess there's a number of points. One is the issue over
the fact that you got your notification, in terms of costs, that were much higher than you
anticipated, in too short a period of time to be able to respond to it, with additional
fundraising efforts. So, that's an issue I'm thinking about, kind of in a separate box. The
other is the policy issue over what we do with these kinds of things, and I — when
Commissioner Teele was talking, I was listening to what he was saying, and I don't
happen to agree with the point over Elian and Summit of the Americas. Those are
regional issues. They're not local neighborhood issues, and those always require
different levels of resource than neighborhood issues, that municipal government has to
deal with. And, so, the struggle that I've got, from a policy standpoint, is — because
we've had a bunch of different organizations in front of us, and I go through it every
single meeting. There isn't — there's very few of them that you want to say no to, but
there's still a lot of them, and if we say yes to all of them, what's the costs to the City.
And the cost to the City comes right out of your residents' pockets, in terms of taxes.
And, so, we have all of our residents raising hell because our taxes are too high, but, then,
we have all these groups coming back and saying, ""Well, you've got to help my
156 May 25, 2000
festival", and that's a major kind of policy issue that, at some point, we've got to get better
addressed. And, so, I'm nervous sitting here saying -- as much as I would like to help
your festival, because I think it is a great idea -- but I'm terribly nervous, suddenly
creating a new policy here that says, well, we've got to build bridges by helping festivals
support themselves. Well, that's a nice concept, but it requires money to do it, and I don't
think our City has done the planning that it needs to do to make that kind of blanket
decision that opens up the flood gates for all the other groups that are going to be here the
next -- the two Tuesdays from now or Thursdays from now -- the next Thursdays from
now, et cetera, et cetera. So, let me ask you a question. Do you -- since you sell alcohol
at this event, don't you make money from the event? Who makes the proceeds from the
alcohol sales?
Mr. Alexis: We sell beer from Budweiser, and we use that money to be able to pay
festival fees. Because the festivals are a free event in the community, I don't make any
money from it. I have a full-time job.
Commissioner Winton: No, I understand that.
Mr. Alexis: I'm just saying.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Mr. Alexis: But those are part of the monies that we raise to pay other bills: printing,
advertising, promotions. We've got to pay to clean up the street. I mean, the people that
we get from the City is not sufficient. We've got to maintain the streets. We've got to
provide different kinds of labor. There are a lot of other costs involved. I don't have a
festival budget with me, but the other costs that are involved, even though we have
sponsorship from so and so hotels, from the others that are coming from out of town, but
there are certain fees that we have to. be able to pay to do the festival. I mean, the police
bill is...
Commissioner Winton: And your festival, in the past, has always been on private
ground?
Mr. Alexis: No, it's been in the street. We've always been self-sufficient.
Commissioner Winton: All right.
Mr. Alexis: It's always been in the streets, except last year.
Commissioner Winton: Except last year. What have you paid for police protection in
prior years?
Mr. Alexis: Last year we paid less than five thousand dollars ($5,000).
Commissioner Winton: Last year you owned private land, so it's a different issue.
157 May 25, 2000
Mr. Alexis: Property on -- we're on the grounds of Edison High School. The year prior
to that, it was a bigger festival. It was all the way to 62nd Street. I think we paid
approximately ten or eleven thousand dollars ($11,000) for that year. I'm not sure exactly
the figure. As I said, the fellow who used to handle that, he passed away.
Vice Chairman Gort: That was a one - day event.
Mr. Alexis: That was 1998. That was a one -day event.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, a one -day event. So, that's a reason the fees are so much
higher.
Mr. Alexis: That it was a bigger event. It was in a small -- it was from 54th Street to 62nd
Street. We are doing four blocks this year. It's a smaller block. Before we did from 54
to 62nd Street. This year we're only doing from 54 to 591h Street, which is approximately
five blocks, which cuts it in half. So, that bill, realistically, would have been
approximately six thousand dollars ($6,000) for that day, if we did not go an extra five
blocks.
Commissioner Winton: And you have raised all the money that you need to raise to pay
for fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) of City services?
Mr. Alexis: That is correct, sir.
Commissioner Winton: But not twenty-eight thousand?
Mr. Alexis: No. What had happened was, for three months I was calling Officer Cary
(phonetic), basically keeping in touch with him, trying to get a budget, and they kept
telling me, well, I have plenty of time; that they were really busy with this Elian project,
and that they'll get back with me.
Commissioner Sanchez: Who was that?
Mr. Alexis: Officer Cary? OK. And, basically, I did not get my budget until 12 days
ago. If I had known, I would have made the effort to raise the money to pay for the
police because I know, basically, the Police Department will not provide the service for
free. So, we would have contacted our sponsors or tried to raise the money in the
community to make sure that the police bill is paid. But to raise another fifteen thousand
dollars ($15,000) within 10 days, that's kind of difficult.
Commissioner Winton: Well, it seems to me that -- I'm very nervous setting a new policy
here, that opens the flood gates, and, so, I struggle with that, and I'm_not sure that it's a
smart thing for us to do. But the flip side of the coin is, this group has had only a fifteen -
day notice to get itself prepared for this kind of budget, which simply isn't enough time to
158 May 25, 2000
respond, so it seems to me that the City's got to provide the service because I'm assuming
that it was our fault that they didn't get the appropriate budget...
Mr. Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): And, Commissioner, let me say -- Raul Martinez,
for the record. I mean, Officer Cary is not here. Lena Blanco has spoken to Officer Cary
and Officer Cary disagrees with this gentleman's statement, that it was always the
understanding that the money was going to be there because they've paid every year.
Every year they pay whatever the bill is. And I want to make sure that we're clear about
the dollar amount, because we're throwing different dollar amounts. The cost, if the City
doesn't pay for it -- which is the cheapest cost. If we pay, unfortunately, we can't pay off
(inaudible). We've got to pay the officers time and a half. The cost for City services for
employees is twenty-two thousand dollars ($22,000). Twenty-two one twenty-five. That
is if he pays or he gets donations to pay for that. There is an additional forty-five
hundred dollars ($4,500) that are fees, permit fees, and so on and so forth, that the
Commission has waived in the past for a lot...
Commissioner Winton: For lots of different things.
Mr. Martinez: For lots of different things.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Mr. Martinez: That's money the City doesn't make, but it doesn't cost us any money.
Commissioner Winton: Right. Which...
Mr. Martinez: In reality, we're talking here twenty-two thousand dollars ($22,000) versus
the fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) that the gentleman claims he's gotten so far. That
is the difference. If we, all of a sudden, say the City does it, then the twenty-two
thousand dollars ($22,000) jumps to twenty-eight thousand dollars ($28,000) because the
officer that will make twenty-three dollars ($23) an hour for the off-duty rate now makes
time and a half -- because much more expensive event for the same police officer doing
the same thing. Also, the reason is, we're talking from Miami Avenue, main
thoroughfare, from 54th to 59th Street being blocked off; they start setting up early at
night, like at midnight, so we have to close the streets so the vendors can set up their
booths, just like Calle Ocho, we start blocking off the street from traffic. So, that requires
traffic control early, from midnight until basically the next day, you know, until they
clear.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Alexis, could you -- if you have additional time and you have
a successful event here, could you raise the additional seventy-five hundred dollars
($7,500) that really would be required if we waived all of the other waivable fees?
Mr. Alexis: Would I be able to raise it within the next day?
159 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no, no, no. If we give you some amount of time to raise
the other seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500) -- you know, how much time would you
need to raise the additional seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500)?
Mr. Alexis: Well -- I mean, it's going to be hard for me to raise that money because if I
try to get sponsorship -- because it will have to be during the event and the (inaudible) is
at the event. Everybody's not going to give me money afterwards. I want to make a
point that I did submit my application. I've been working with Lena Blanco. She's been
very helpful with this project. I submitted my application over three months ago for this
special event, and we've been working diligently. I've gotten contacts with everybody
else who sent me, which I have copies of budget here, which I received from -- this is
from Public Works, dated March 281h, and they responded and told me how much I had to
pay, and I have the amount here. So, I knew from over a month ago, almost two months
now, how much I have to pay them.
Commissioner Winton: Well, it seems to me that we have an event that's going to be
pulled off this weekend -- and it is this weekend, right?
Mr. Alexis: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Whether we like it or not. So, it has to have security by Miami
Police this weekend. No question about it.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a liability issue.
Commissioner Winton: Right. So, the...
Commissioner Regalado: Johnny -- and we're not setting policy. I think that the policy
that we should set is what Chairman Gort said, that the Festival Committee should be
impaneled to work with them in events, five months, six months, and try to, you know,
reach out to the sponsors. I'm telling you, I'm sure that I could get some sponsors
because of radio stations that I work for have many concerts and activities, and there are
a lot of people that sponsor those events. But the time is short, and I will tell you
something. If we need to do something in terms of money to build some of the bridges
now -- and I mean now, today -- it's money well spent because we all have experience, in
the past weeks -- this is not a policy. This is, I would think, something that -- it's
happened and it has to be done.
Commissioner Winton: Well, provided that we're not setting a new standard, that this is a
unique situation that's caused by a unique set of circumstances -- and, by the way,, I don't
buy for a minute, that seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500) buys any bridge building, at
all. Bridge building is built by us going out into the community and talking to each other,
so money doesn't do it.
Commissioner Sanchez: It helps.
160 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Regalado: No, but gesture it does.
Commissioner Winton: But -- well, the gesture is us being out there with the people.
That's the gesture, not this -- but, that said, the -- if we're not setting a new standard that
opens the door, then I -- and we know we're going to have a festival that has to happen,
and they don't have the money to pay right now, I think we're kind of in a box and we
have to provide the security for this particular group, but it won't be the standard for all
the groups that are having festivals coming into the City Commission; is that correct?
Vice Chairman Gort: That's correct. My understanding is the gentleman has fifteen
thousand dollars ($15,000). I think somebody could make the motion that the police will
work with him and see how they could -- what kind of budget they can put together; what
fees we can waive and maybe we can bring it down to 20 instead of 33, like he has here,
or 25, and then the City's portion will be a lot less. I think it's also important to
understand that we have made a decision, a policy decision, about six or seven months
ago -- and I think you all have received -- I received an additional memo, whether they
ask us, which are the major events that we would like to sponsor? Because this is what
we need to do. Which major events we want to sponsor, so we can go out and people
will know, this is the ones that we're going to sponsor and this is the only one: Don't
bother to come here because we're not going to be able to help you. I think we need to do
that as soon as possible. Also, I'm a great believer that, if we create the Festival
Committee, and we can ask the people from Calle Ocho to organize it; we could ask the
people from Bayfront Park, from the Orange Bowl, to work with these people. I'm sure,
for them, picking up fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) is nothing. If we had enough
time, I know we could have done it ourselves. We could have committed each one of us,
and we could have raised three thousand dollars ($3,000), but we need time. You also --
during your planning, you also have to begin -- we do our planning a year before. We
start a year before, and we have a budget nine months before to make sure that we can
comply with. So, this is the type of structure you need to do. I need a motion,
gentlemen.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to -- in light of your comments, I'm
pleased to move that the City Manager -- City provide a waiver of up to 50 percent of the
total costs of the project, and further request that the management work with the Police
Department and other agencies to minimize the costs by maximizing the on -duty persons
that will be available throughout the City, to assist; and further ask that the Manager
coordinate with the superintendent of the school board, the Miami -Dade Police, as well --
the Miami -Dade Manager, as well as the Florida Highway Patrol, to see if they would
like to participate, in any way, in reducing the overall costs of security and law
enforcement, as required.
Vice Chairman Gort: If anyone would like to donate some time.
Commissioner Teele: And the City of North Miami, and El Portal.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
161 May 25, 2000
•
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Any further discussion?
Ms. Mary Hill: Yes. I would like to say something on that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mary Hill.
Ms. Hill: As a citizen, not as from the VOA at this present time, and neighborhood
citizens, I would like to say something on this. First of all, I would like to state --
Vice Chairman Gort: Your name and address, ma'am.
Ms. Hill: My name is Mary Hill, 146 Northwest 67th Street, in the same area, no more
than four, five, or six blocks from where this is happening. We have a union situation
here. Instead of Haitian Roots and Cultural Festival, we have a lot of Americans with
their roots and their culture in this neighborhood, and was there way before it was named
Little Haiti. We built that area over there. We put our lives on the line in order for us to
be staying over there, and we are being totally disrespected. We don't have -- we are
divided. The Haitians working here and Americans working here. They do not work
together, and that should be corrected, and it's a diversion and to just say take monies and
just put into, which I hear, up to 1:00, 2 o'clock late in the night...
Commissioner Teele: All right. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Ms. Hill: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. One or two at night, we hear a lot of noise and we don't
accomplish anything there.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Thank you very much, ma'am. Thank you very much.
All those in -- there's a motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's a motion.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state by saying aye.
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
162 May 25, 2000
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-465
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO
THE ROOTS AND CULTURE FESTIVAL 2000, CONDUCTED BY
THE ROOTS AND CULTURE FOUNDATION, INC. (THE
"ORGANIZER"), TO BE HELD IN THE LITTLE HAITI AREA, AT
MIAMI AVENUE FROM 54TH TO 59" STREETS, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
ON MAY 27-28, 2000; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
AUTHORIZE: (1) THE WAIVER OF UP TO FIFTY PERCENT (50%)
OF ALL COSTS AND FEES RELATED TO THE FESTIVAL, AS
PERMISSIBLE BY THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AS AMENDED; AND (2) THE PROVISION OF IN-KIND SERVICES
BY THE DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE, FIRE -RESCUE, GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, SOLID WASTE, AND PARKS AND
RECREATION; CONDITIONING SAID AUTHORIZATIONS UPON
THE ORGANIZER: (1) OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED BY
LAW; (2) PAYING FOR ALL NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY
SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID
EVENT NOT WAIVED HEREIN; (3) OBTAINING INSURANCE TO
PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY THE
CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; (4) COMPLYING WITH ALL
CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY
THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; AND FURTHER URGING
THE CITY MANAGER TO COORDINATE EFFORTS WITH THE
SUPERINTENDENT OF MIAMI-DADE SCHOOL BOARD, THE
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY MANAGER, THE CITIES OF NORTH
MIAMI AND EL PORTAL, AND THE FLORIDA HIGHWAY PATROL
TO ASSIST THE ORGANIZER IN REDUCING THE OVERALL
COSTS OF THE FESTIVAL AND IN PROVIDING SECURITY AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
163 May 25, 2000
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Gimenez: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Albert, hold on.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): We will abide by the wishes of the Commission,
but I would, you know, second your thoughts, that we do need to get a listing of those
festivals this City will sponsor so that we don't get, you know, into this situation
anymore, and that we can budget that ahead of time; we can put that in the budget so that
we know ahead of time this will cost -- this is an impact on the budget, and, you know,
we've got to get a handle on this.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: We received a second request from the administration about a
month ago, and we need to comply with. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to say this. Mr. Alexis, I think you all
need to do some repair with the Police Department. I'm very well aware there was an
incident last year in which a police officer of high rank went onto the stage, disconnected
the mike, as you read about in strip joints and other clubs and all that other kind of
foolish necessary, and said, you all haven't paid the money required you all to come up,
and cash was being paid on the stage and all that kind of stuff. You know, we -- and
that's what's behind some of this. Everybody needs to know that there was a big
confrontation last year. They disconnected the mikes. I mean, stuff that -- you know, I
used to do in colleague kind of stuff, ghetto stuff for real, if you want to get on down to
it. Cash was being paid to the police to keep them from walking off, and it was a
horrible, horrible scene, and I hope that we won't repeat that. I hope that you all can get
them a cashier's check.
164 May 25, 2000
0 . 0
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. Tomorrow morning.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So -- because you all have some payment history issues, and
everybody needs to work together. By the way, I just left the MPO (Metropolitan
Planning Organization) meeting. Raul Martinez is leaving town tonight or tomorrow
morning, but he asked me if there is anything that the City of Hialeah can be helpful in,
they would be more than willing to help. So, I would urge you all to get with the police
now and call Raul and see if they would like to send a few police over that can stand up
there and smile and waive and relieve some City of Miami police, if necessary.
Commissioner Winton: He might have a couple of sponsors from Hialeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: The other suggestion is, your NET (Neighborhood Enhancement
Team) office works a lot with the merchants and the industry within the area. Ask them
to work with them and see if they can pick up some additional sponsors. OK. People,
I'm going to have to be leaving in about ten or fifteen minutes.
Mr. Alexis: Thank you, gentlemen, and I invite you to maybe stop by at the festival and
see what we're doing.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. My understanding -- thank you.
Mr. Alexis: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able. If not, I would have been
there. And I understand Commissioner Sanchez also has to leave. What time?
Commissioner Sanchez: Six -thirty, at the latest.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
165 May 25, 2000
• 6
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. What items you guys want to take?
Commissioner Regalado: If you all going to take CDBG (Community Development
Block Grant)...
Commissioner Sanchez: Number three. Let's take number three. Let's --
Commissioner Regalado: I have the -- Mr. Chairman, I have the resolution here that was
directed by the Commission to...
Vice Chairman Gort: Make the motion.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. I move the resolution authorizing the allocation of funds
in the amount of twenty-four thousand dollars ($24,000) from 25th Year Community
Development Block Grant funds to Florida Housing Cooperative, Inc. for housing
administration activities, with said allocation retroactive to April 1St, 2000 and continuing
to September 30th; authorizing the City Manager to execute the document. I'll move this.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion? Being none, all in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
166 May 25, 2000
• 0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-466
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $24,998 FROM 25TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS TO FLORIDA HOUSING COOPERATIVE,
INC. FOR HOUSING ADMINISTRATION ACTIVITIES, WITH SAID
ALLOCATION RETROACTIVE TO APRIL 1, 2000 AND
CONTINUING THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2000; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENT (S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE
CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort .
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
167 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Item 2, my understanding, the decision -- and,
gentlemen, let's try to understand this. My understanding, the decision we need to make
today is to give the guidance to the plan that's going to be presented and how the funds
are going to be allocated and the percentage. If we need to do some changes, let's state it
now. My thoughts -- second item, my understanding is, a procedure and the times and
the dates that we are going to follow for the public hearing so we can be in -- a percent on
time. The grant.
Commissioner Sanchez: Move item 2.
Commissioner Teele: Which one is item 2?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is the one with the allocation and the percentage.
Commissioner Teele: As clarified in the...
Vice Chairman Gort: You have a new sheet now. Yes.
Commissioner Teele: As clarified. And this is providing approximately fifteen hundred
dollars ($1500) for Rehabilitation and Preservation activities so that people -- with the...
Ms. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): That's a million five.
Commissioner Winton: More than a half million. Million five.
Vice Chairman Gort: One point five.
Commissioner Teele: A million five. With the understanding that anyone can apply in
any category that's eligible, and receive historic -- in those areas as provided for in the
red. I second the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait. Discussion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right. OK. It's been moved.
Ms. Warren: Commissioners, can I make one point of clarification? The million five, the
category -- we gave you the federal categories. The categories are Rehabilitation and
Preservation activities. Under that, staffs -- the administration's recommendation is for
the million five. That is the current funding level for Code Enforcement. If you're
directing us to put that out to bid, we can do that. But just to clarify. The
168 May 25, 2000
recommendation is that we fund Code Enforcement at the current level, and what we
were asked to do is provide you a list of the allowable federal at categories. Staffs
recommendation is that we keep the funding level as -is this year, and the -- currently,
you're funding Code Enforcement activities, and in order to effectuate what the
Commissioner is asking is, you would, again, just direct staff to put the million and a half
out and/or add additional monies for Historic Preservation or a combination thereof,
either way.
Commissioner Teele: I'm not asking that you do that. All that I'm asking you to do is
that you have a special category that receives applications for Historic Preservation
activity. If there is going to be any funding, we'll make that decision. But this is the
category and this is the amount now.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Obviously, we can move monies around just to see.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but the...
Vice Chairman Gort: What we're saying is, Public Facilities improvements will be five
percent for a hundred and sixty-three thousand; Clearance Activity, seven hundred
seventy-five thousand, six percent; Public Service, Social Work will be 23 percent, 2.921;
Construction of Housing, 1.52 4, 12 percent; Code Enforcement and Rehab of
Preservation activity -- and each one within your target area -- the people in the target
area will decide what they would like to do -- is 1.5; and special Economic Development
activity is 2.867; program administrations, 2.5; total: 12,700.
Commissioner Winton: I've got a question, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: The forty thousand dollar ($40,000) second mortgage program
that we have, that's also the Single Family Home Rehab Program...
Ms. Warren: That's paid out of our State SHIP (State Housing Initiatives Partnership)
monies. That is not our CDBG (Community Development Block Grant). .
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: On public services.
169 May 25, 2000
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Why do we have 23 and not 25 percent?
Ms. Warren: Again, what the Commission asked us to do was to provide you funding
recommendations. The current funding level is at 23 percent. You're allowed up to a
maximum of 25. The Commission has funded at a level of 23. Staff is recommending
that you maintain that level in order not to increase expectations. Again, we're
anticipating the Commissioner (inaudible) our policy.
Commissioner Winton: But it has to go down to 15 when?
Ms. Warren: Huh?
Vice Chairman Gort: Two years.
Ms. Warren: In two years.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: The problem, Commissioner Regalado, is, in two years, that's got to
come down to 15.
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Vice Chairman Gort: In two years, that's got to come down to 15. They can stay at 23.
Commissioner Regalado: I know. But there is -- Los Angeles just did -- just got an
extension from Congress on -- we have Los Angeles and Miami, right?
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Tomas, honestly, I'm going to tell you...
Ms. Warren: It's up to the Commission to direct us.
Commissioner Teele: This is a dangerous thing.
Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly.
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to tell you. It's going to be 15 percent in two years --
one year, right?
Ms. Warren: This is our second year.
170 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Regalado: Two years
Commissioner Teele: So, you have one more year.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And then it's cold turkey. And I'm telling you, if we --
Commissioner Winton: It ought to be lower.
Commissioner Teele: It really ought to be lower. It ought to be 20 percent. We ought to
try to lock in at 20 percent. In deference to what you're saying, I don't want to get into
that, but I'm telling you, once it goes back down to 15 percent, we're going to have a real
mess on our hands. We ought to be trying to wean everybody down a little bit.
Commissioner Winton: That's correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, I have two questions.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that. I understand that. But what I'm trying to do
is -- I'm trying to remember what we did last year. For instance, on the lot clearing, we
did not spend all the money that was allocated.
Ms. Warren: To my knowledge, we have spent all the money that was allocated. We had
not...
Commissioner Regalado: Because we took -- remember how much we took from the lot
clearing, at that time. A hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) we took.
Commissioner Teele: But, see, the problem is -- you have to look at the whole thing.
We're stopping the demolition of buildings right now because we've used all of the
demolition money to lot clearing money. They are administratively juggling, trying to
keep this thing moving, but there really aren't a lot of pots of money left right now.
Commissioner Regalado: But in terms of demolition, Code Enforcement will fall into
that category.
Commissioner Teele: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: So -- but I'm not talking about Code Enforcement. I'm talking
about the lot clearing. So...
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I have two questions. One is pertaining to
Historic Preservation, which I support. Where would the money come from? Would it
come out of Rehabilitation and Preservation activity? The money would come out of
that?
171 May 25, 2000
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: That's right.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. So; what are we talking about into putting into Historic
Preservation?
Vice Chairman Gort: We don't know.
Commissioner Teele: We don't know.
Vice Chairman Gort: We don't know.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Warren: At this point in time, my understanding and what the Commissioners are
desiring, that when we put the RFP (Request for Proposal) out, and when we run our
public notices, we would list these as the amounts that are currently authorized in those
categories. Obviously, with the caveat that the Commissioners can cancel, in whole or in
part, and do modifications, but this is the desired funding level based on your policy.
Vice Chairman Gort: I believe, at the public hearings, they'll be able to come back and let
us know if they want to use it or not want to use it. Any other questions?
Ms. Warren: And, additionally, your...
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other questions?
Commissioner Sanchez: None whatsoever.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, you've been very patient.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: No further discussion. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
172 May 25, 2000
adoption:
0 0
MOTION NO. 00-467
A MOTION ACCEPTING RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE
ADMINISTRATION IN CONNECTION WITH 26TH YEAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS
BY CATEGORY, AS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION
DURING TODAY'S MEETING.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
173 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Number 3
Ms. Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Now that we have
established the funding percentages, we're looking to approve the calendar. It requires --
there are two technical requirements. Again, the 45 -day notice, submission of the plan to
HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development), prior to the beginning of the
year -- that's a date that we cannot miss -- and 30 days prior to that, there must be a public
hearing. We're asking you to set a special meeting for the week of the 10th of July.
Vice Chairman Gort: What I would like to do is, any dealing with CDBG (Community
Development Block Grant), I want it to be by itself.
Ms. Warren: This is why we're asking you to do...
Vice Chairman Gort: I don't want it to mix -- and I don't have any problem with that.
Ms. Warren: We have to have this meeting...
Vice Chairman Gort: Are we in agreement -- July the 10"?
Ms. Warren: Any time in that week.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I move that we establish Tuesday afternoon, at 1:30 p.m., on July
I Ith, as just CDBG activities.
Commissioner Sanchez: Tuesday, July 11th.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's right.
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think I will be in town.
Ms. Warren: And, Commissioners, while he's checking that...
Vice Chairman Gort: How about July the 6th or the 20th, Thursdays?
174 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: Well, I'll have my calendar in a second.
Ms. Warren: You're going to have to do your community meetings. One community
meeting per district, prior to that one, so we'll have to coordinate...
Vice Chairman Gort: Right. Well, you can do that in June. You can set those meetings
up in June.
Ms. Warren: Yes, we can.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we could go July 6t", though, obviously.
Ms. Warren: Yes, you could.
Commissioner Teele: So, we'll either set it for the l Ith or the 6th, depending upon the
availability of the Commission.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding, I don't have any problem with either one of
them. If Natalie would have called me, they would have let me know because our whole
crew is watching this.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't have any problem with any -- just any day.
Ms. Warren: Commissioners, the only thing that -- again, as a result of this meeting,
we'll be issuing an RFP and the closer it is to the 10th, the longer the agencies will have to
do their -- submit their applications.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's try to get it on the I I th. Is everybody's schedule open on the
11th? Mine is.
Commissioner Sanchez: I will be out of town the 12th, I think.
Commissioner Winton: I'm open the I Ith.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is the 1 Ith a good day?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: The 1 I th. It's been a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: One thirty, right?
Commissioner Teele: What time is the meeting, 2 o'clock, 1:30, Commissioner Gort?
175 May 25, 2000
i
Vice Chairman Gort: Two o'clock will be fine.
Commissioner Regalado: Two o'clock. All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Ms. Warren: The only thing that I ask is that this week we're going to be trying to
contact your staffs for your community meetings, at a location to hold them in, in order to
stay on the tight deadline...
Commissioner Sanchez: We've got three of them? How many...
Commissioner Teele: One meeting.
Commissioner Sanchez: Just one meeting?
Vice Chairman Gort: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: No? How many did we have last year?
Ms. Warren: It's one per district. District 2, last year, had two.
Commissioner Teele: You're saying at least one per district?
Ms. Warren: At least one per district.
Commissioner Winton: My district is pretty scattered.
Ms. Warren: Because of the...
Commissioner Winton: Gerrymander.
Commissioner Teele: But, see, this is where the trick is. I mean, you know, we're talking
past the real deal is. She has us having these meetings June the 5th through the 12th
That's literally next week. I mean, next -- next week is Memorial Day...
Ms. Warren: Again, you could -- well, that was, again, staff trying to stay on a schedule,
any time on that 30 -day time frame.
Commissioner Teele: I understand. I understand. So, we've got a very tight window
here to organize these district meetings.
Ms. Warren: That's why we need to call you tomorrow for schedules.
176 May 25, 2000
40 0
Commissioner Teele: And, again, I think, consistent with some of the concerns that the
public has, we've got to have maximum publications and notice on that.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: I will tell you, in my district, I would like to have it at the Activity
Center, where we have had it all these years, and I would have it after 6 o'clock.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir. And we'll schedule a date with your staff.
Commissioner Sanchez: Center of the Artime after 6 o'clock.
Ms. Warren: (Inaudible) same place as last year? OK. The church? Commissioner
Regalado, the same?
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to set it up for the Elks Lodge, after 5 p.m., and we'll
give you the date. Elks Lodge on 7th Avenue and about 40th -4 1h -- 48th
Ms. Warren: So, we'll be calling your staffs tomorrow to tie down the schedules because
of publications and everything.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Teele: Did everybody give -- Mr. Chairman, excuse me. I would move
that each Commissioner shall file the date, time, and place with the Clerk, not later than
Tuesday, May 30th. Date, time, and place.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Teele: In writing.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: Can I talk on the deferral then? I say something on that? That's what
make -- Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. That's what make you have the
citizens participation. You were here (inaudible) then they start changing dates. On
those dates of the district meetings, remember, the last year you had a meeting at Flagami
-- not Flagami. At the Centro (inaudible). I went there and the meeting been sent to City
Hall. I want to make sure that those meetings are advertised properly, the date and the
place right, because I don't want to go there to Flagami and then find out that the meeting
is in City Hall, because it's very hard for people that work to get to the place, unless that's
very convenient to staff.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're going to make sure that it's well-publicized and each one of
us are going to pick the date and the locations, and we are going to be responsible to
make sure that we let the people know. Yes, ma'am.
177 May 25, 2000
Ms. Mary Hill: I'm Mary Hill. I live at 146 Northwest 67th Street, and federal official.
And I want y'all to understand that you were supposed to -- I believe these are the items
that we were supposed to bring a recommendation concerning the policies on CDB
(Community Development Block), and what happened?
Vice Chairman Gort: Ma'am, the meetings are going to be so the public can sit down;
they can look at the different programs, and they can come up with their priorities, what
they believe they should be doing in their community. And they can also, at the same
time, speak on behalf of the agencies that are performing work within your community,
and you've got to let us know if they are working or not.
Ms. Hill: It's not my community, sir. I'm a federal official and founder, CEO (Chief
Executive Officer).
Vice Chairman Gort: No, I understand that. We'll deal with Washington when it comes
to that.
Ms. Hill: OK. No. It's local. It's local. A federal with local effect. That's law.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Ms. Hill: To set up neighborhood centers and help the poor, regardless to race, creed or
color. This is different.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I know you're going to leave, but I --
Ms. Hill: And I would like --
Commissioner Teele: We have two motions on the floor that we haven't had a vote on
either one of them.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. All in...
Ms. Hill: I would like for you all to take under consideration -- I'm talking, please. Tell
me when I'm over, and then I'll hush.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're discussing the dates. You have any problems with the dates
we discussed?
Ms. Hill: OK. Of CDB and the discussion of the community.
Vice Chairman Gort: No. The discussion of the community meetings. You have any
problem with the dates?
178 May 25, 2000
9 •
Ms. Hill: Right. All CDBG grants.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Hill: And the community is not aware of the small prints and the illegal --
Vice Chairman Gort: Ma'am, they are going to be very large print...
Ms. Hill: -- red -ink spending that's going on here. So, the community is illiterate to the
fact what need to be done right here in the City.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Hill: And I'm not here to just argue with you all. I'm just letting you know because
later on, you all can't say you don't know because this corruption and all of this stuff is
going to have to stop. And the monies -- and it's going to have to be focused to the
people that's supposed to be served and make self-sufficiency according to statutory laws,
and this is not being done. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Ms. Hill, a representative of the federal agency, local here. I'm
going to make sure you get all the addresses and times and I'll make sure you let the
people know. I know you will do that. OK. What motion...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would call the question on the original motion, to
establish the special hearing at 2 o'clock, on July 11 th. We never...
Vice Chairman Gort: That was passed already.
Commissioner Teele: We never voted on it.
Vice Chairman Gort: No? 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. 00-468
A MOTION SCHEDULING A SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING
RELATED TO 26TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT ALLOCATIONS FOR TUESDAY, JULY 11, 2000
BEGINNING 2 P.M.
179 May 25, 2000
0 6
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 Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Two times. OK. Next motion.
Commissioner Teele: And the next motion is that the Commission shall file, in writing,
each member, with the Clerk, the date, time, and place -- hopefully, with the
administration and logistics worked out, so there won't be any transfers of places, by
noon on Tuesday, May 12th
Vice Chairman Gort: Tuesday, May 121h
Ms. Warren: No, the 31St, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: No. May 31St. May 31St
Commissioner Winton: We're a little past May 12th
Vice Chairman Gort: We're on the 25th, Art
Commissioner Teele: I'm talking about -- we have until -- we have Friday and Monday --
and Tuesday. Monday is a holiday.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: We have two days to confirm and work out all the logistics
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah.
Ms. Warren: Thirty-first of May.
Commissioner Teele: And get it in...
Vice Chairman Gort: You said May 31 St. By May 31St.
180 May 25, 2000
0 •
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, May 31 sc
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: At noon. Because the problem is this: We don't want to have
changes and all of that, and we can't really commit a building and all that sitting up here,
and that's one of the things that people complained about last year.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: So, we...
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There is a motion. There is a second. All in favor state by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-468.1
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT, ADOPTING A PLANNING CALENDAR FOR THE
TWENTY -SIXTY (26TH) COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT YEAR, PURSUANT TO THE APPROVED "COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING RECOMMENDATION
BY CATEGORY", SET FORTH IN ATTACHMENT NO. 1,
ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
181 May 25, 2000
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-469
A MOTION DIRECTING EACH MEMBER OF THE CITY
COMMISSION TO FILE IN WRITING WITH THE CITY CLERK
PRIOR TO NOON OF MAY 31, 2000 THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE
OF THE DISTRICT PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD IN THEIR
RESPECTIVE DISTRICTS IN CONNECTION WITH 26TH YEAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS.
Note for the Record: The following members of the Commission have
indicated a preference for their respective district meetings:
Vice Chairman Gort (District 1) — June 6, 2000, 6 p.m., Allapattah
Community Action Inc. Center, 2257 N.W. North River Drive.
Commissioner Sanchez (District 3) — June 7, 2000, 6 p.m., Manuel Artime
Theater, 900 S.W. 1St Street.
Commissioner Teele (District S) —, June 6, 2000, 6 p.m. at Elk's Atlas
Lodge, 4949 N.W. 7th Avenue.
Commissioner Winton (District 2) — June 5, 2000, 6 p.m. at Frankie
Shannon Rolle Center, 3750 South Dixie Highway; and June 13, 2000, 7
p.m. at De Hostos Center, 2900 N.W. 2°a Avenue.
Commissioner Regalado (District 4) — June 7, 2000, 6 p.m., at Iglesia
Casa de Alabanza, 3500 West Flagler Street.
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 Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Teele: That would be the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
182 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there any other business to come in front of this Commission?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: You have a couple of items, but Raul Martinez is in here. I really
do think, Mr. Chairman, at some point -- and, you know, this gets back into the change in
government form. We need to get a sergeant at arms, and we need a proper sergeant at
arms. And I know there are a whole lot of concepts of sergeant at arms, but you know,
sergeant at arms is a legislative branch division. There is no such thing as a Governor's
sergeant at arms, a Mayor's sergeant at arms, a President's sergeant at arms. Sergeant at
arms belong to the House, the Senate, whatever the legislative body is. The Commission,
the assembly. We need a sergeant at arms, and however the Chairman and the Manager
and the Mayor want to work that out. But I'm telling you, there is a way to do this. We
don't need a uniform police standing up telling people to sit down. There is a way we
need to conduct this meeting with a lot more decorum, and I think, you know, the
problem that we're dealing with Ms. Hill and others needs to be dealt with appropriately
through a sergeant at arms, and I would ask you, Mr. Manager, or to the Chief of Police,
to do a -- with the attorney, to do a white paper or -a document that, first of all, researches
sergeant at arms under the U.S. Constitution because we don't need to create a Miami
concept of the Constitution. And, second of all, look at, with the County Commission
and other legislative bodies, including the House in Tallahassee, as to how a Sergeant At
Arms functions so that we can prepare ourselves to have a proper sergeant at arms, and
those associate sergeant at arms, so we don't continue to have meetings that go on with
people just standing up saying things that have no business to be said in the context that
they are saying them.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Ms. Mary Hill: May I defend myself, since he (inaudible) my name?
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm sorry, ma'am, but the public hearing is closed.
183 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: What other items that we have coming up?
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): The only item I'm aware of is -- we have a
presentation from Public Works, but if you desire, we can postpone it until the next
meeting.
Vice Chairman Gort: I apologize to Public Works. I know you've been here all day, but
at least you get to see what we have to put up with when we make our decisions and so
on. So, we appreciate if you come back, because I do have a lot of questions for you all,
and suggestions and, once again, I apologize.
Commissioner Teele: Pocket items.
Vice Chairman Gort: But you've seen what it's been like today.
Commissioner Teele: Do you have a pocket item, Mr. Chairman?
184 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Teele: Do you have a pocket item, Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: I have an item, which is the -- it's a resolution that's supposed to be
here, but I don't know what it is. I received a letter from the West Miami, a resolution
that passed. I don't want that same resolution. What I'd like to do is -- my understanding
is, we asked FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) to pay for the overtime
and expenditure that we -- City of Miami had to pay for because of the actions of the
federal government, and my understanding, FEMA came back stating that it was not their
responsibility. So, I have a resolution that says, the resolution of the City of Miami
Commission directing the City Manager to request reimbursement for any appropriate
federal agencies for the expenses incurred by the City of Miami to maintain the public
peace, order, and general welfare of the citizens of this City of Miami concerning the
custody asylum of Elian Gonzalez; directing the City Clerk to transmit a copy of this
resolution herein (inaudible) to designated officials.
Commissioner Teele: Motion by Commissioner -- by Vice Chairman Gort. Is there a
second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Winton. Is there discussion?
Commissioner Sanchez: Discussion.
Commissioner Teele: Discussion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, we have to declare the City's state of an
emergency in order to get funding from the federal government?
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): I'm not sure of that, but I would like to add to the
resolution that we could -- we pursue both State and federal funds.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: But what happened, Joe, is that the state said that they don't
have anything to do. Go to the federal government.
Commissioner Sanchez: The State clearly stated that they had nothing to do...
185 May 25, 2000
• 0
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah. The Governor's secretary issued a statement that
came out through the wire stories, saying that the State will not declare any area of
emergency; that we have to go to the federal government in order to get the money.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): I'd still like the opportunity to apply through the
State and the federal government. If they want to say no, they can say no.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, I'd like to amend his resolution, and also to
include the State to go ahead and, in writing, request it. If they deny it, we have it in
writing that they denied it. So, with a friendly amendment to include the State's...
Vice Chairman Gort: Accepted. OK. All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-470
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING
THE CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT FROM
ANY APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AND STATE AGENCY FOR THE
EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI TO MAINTAIN
THE PUBLIC PEACE, ORDER AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE
CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI CONCERNING THE CUSTODY
AND ASYLUM OF ELIAN GONZALEZ; DIRECTING THE CITY
CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE
HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICIALS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
186 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Pocket items. You've got...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I have a pocket item relating to a resolution of the
Miami City Commission expressing its support and cooperation in creating a Tier I
Network Access Point, NAP (Network Access Point), in the redevelopment area in the
City of Miami, and encouraging the telecommunication carriers to locate their facility in
the Network Access Point, and further directing the City Manager to expedite and fast
track the permitting process to a successful conclusion. And I would so move.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Discussion? Being none, all in favor
state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-471
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING
ITS SUPPORT AND COOPERATION IN CREATING A TIER ONE
NETWORK ACCESS POINT IN THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AREA IN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ENCOURAGING
TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS TO LOCATE THEIR
FACILITIES IN THE NETWORK ACCESS POINT; AND PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXPEDITE AND FASTTRACK THE PERMITTING
PROCESS TOA SUCCESSFUL CONCLUSION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
187 May 25, 2000
0
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Sanchez: Also, just...
188 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Teele: The companion resolution is a resolution of the City Commission,
naming Commissioner Johnny Winton as the liaison from the Commission, as the
Network Access Point, which will encourage telecommunication carriers to locate their
facility in the redevelopment area, in conjunction with the DDA (Downtown
Development Authority) and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and the
City of Miami.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second? Is there a second? Regalado second. Discussion? None.
All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-472
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION NAMING
COMMISSIONER JOHNNY L. WINTON AS THE LIAISON FOR
NETWORK ACCESS POINT ("NAP") WHICH WILL ENCOURAGE
TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS TO LOCATE FACILITIES IN
THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY
WORKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
189 May 25, 2000
Upon being .seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
190 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other pocket items?
Commissioner Winton: I have a blue agenda item here, whatever that is.
Vice Chairman Gort: What did you call it?
Commissioner Winton: Well, I don't know. The thing on our blue sheets here.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, OK. Go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner's agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioners' agenda.
Commissioner Winton: I don't have all these things figured out yet. I tried to have a
meeting with all the Commissioners. This is about. the Charter Review, and there is a
number of issues. One is that timing is a crucial issue here that we're faced with, and as
we said in the meeting the other day, it was clear that, in order to get this Charter Review
process done, in order to really effectively do it, we're going to have to have all the work
done essentially by the end of July, which is only two -months time that I have to do all of
this. And I think this is a very serious effort, and I don't have a shortage of things to do
and I'm very, very nervous about being able to get this job in a two-month time frame.
So, the other issue -- and I brought resolutions to the table or substitute resolutions from
the one that we had before for y'all to look at, and they are not cast in stone. I really
wanted to have this dialogue in the meeting that we had earlier, but everybody's schedule
got messed up. Because I wanted your input. The other issue is the formation of the
committee, and it's really important to get people on this committee who will make a real
commitment to looking at the issues that are important for our City's Charter, and the way
the original structure was, each Commissioner could appoint one member to the standing
committee, and one member to the technical committee and, so, what I was encouraging
is -- and that process could still work. I was nervous about it, and it still could work. But
what we need to make sure, if we're going to do that, is that we really go out and find
people who really understand this business and get them at the table, as opposed to
people who might be just kind of viscerally interested, and not make a major
contribution. And, so, what I suggested is that we expand the size of the committee, and
I only brought that up as a suggestion, not something that I was absolutely committed to
having, to have and because I'm convinced that I could go out and find three or four or
five people to serve on this thing. So, in order for me to put three or four on, I thought
we needed to expand the size of the committee. I don't need a bigger committee, frankly.
That isn't the most important thing. The most important thing is getting good people to
serve on this thing. So, there were two issues. One issue is related to the quality of the
people that we choose to serve on this very important committee and the other is timing.
101 May 25, 2000
None of us have made any appointments. So, I'm going to go back to the timing thing
one more time. None of us have made any appointments. We have to have any Charter
changes have to be in front of the -- Walter, in front of.. .
Commissioner Regalado: Supervisor of Elections.
Commissioner Winton: Right. By the 14th of September. We don't have Commission
meetings in August. No, they have to be there by the 81h, the 8th of September. Our first
Commissionmeeting is the 14th of September, and we don't meet in August. So, that
really means that, effectively, there is only two months to get all this done and we don't
even have a committee put together. So, I was suggesting that we extend the time frame
to do this so that the mission would be to get this committee put together; do the work
between now and November, early December of this year, and report back at the first
Commission meeting in January.
Commissioner Regalado: But I will tell you, Johnny...
Commissioner Teele: In January?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: He said in January. I will tell you, I think that what you're
doing is very important, and I think that we should all name and appoint anybody that we.
want to do as soon as possible. But I will tell you something. If we have to have a
special meeting of the Commission -- for CDBG (Community Development Block
Grant), we need to have for Charter Review because we're going to miss the biggest
opportunity, November the 7th, presidential election. You have 60 to 70 percent turn -out,
at least, in some areas of the City, and it would be a shame that -- you know, when the
voters approved the change of government, it was said that it wasn't approved for that --
not too many people voted for it, and it was a shame. And I think that you should call
special meeting, through the Chairman, and study any results of the committee. Because
I think it will be a shame to lose, at least to place one or two issues on the ballot, on the
presidential election.
Vice Chairman Gort: Johnny, let me give you a suggestion. There was a committee that
did some work for about six months. Ms. Wiley was here. She was part of the
committee. There are certain changes that -- the only reason it was not taken to the voters
because we didn't believe that should take too many of them.. Those changes already in
there. It was already done. The homework has been done. All you need to do is have
them discuss it, and it's a three -- staff really recommend it, and the people recommend it.
And we had public hearings on those changes, and some of those you can look at them
very lightly. But I agree, we need to appoint people as soon as possible, and if we need
to have a special meeting, we'll have a special meeting.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
192 May 25, 2000
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez has the floor.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Johnny, I participated in the review -
- Charter Review Committee. I had two concerns. One, of course, was the timing that
we brought out and we identified. The other was the appointees. One of the things is that
we should have a majority of people in this process that are City residents because, after
all, we're changing the City -- Charter of the City. So, those are the two concerns that I
have, that I express my concern.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And I saw this -- I saw the Mayor a minute ago. The Mayor has
said repeatedly -- and I think he's very sincere about this -- he is prepared to work with
this Commission, from what he has said, at least, on two separate occasions, to create a
Charter process that he would be comfortable with. And I really do think that we should
take the Mayor up and give him an opportunity. I don't know how your resolution faces
that. I think that's one issue. The second issue is this issue that Commissioner Winton is
raising. I don't think you should be the chairman of a committee if you don't have a
committee structure that makes you comfortable as a Commissioner. I am prepared to
support this resolution, but I don't -- I do think that you all have got to work to come back
to us in July with a report to see if we can do it. I agree with Commissioner Regalado,
that we need to have something on the ballot in November. If we can't, then we can't.
But we certainly don't need to give up at this point and not do it. There are some
technical issues that the attorney has had drafted for over four years. They've just never
come forward. There are some property issues that we didn't put on the ballot for one
reason only. We didn't want to be accused of commingling or land grab with the Charter
change, but there are some technical issues that will greatly move this, that are ready to
go forward. And, so, I would move the resolution, as you...
Commissioner Winton: Before you do that, then, it seems to me, if we're going to be on a
fast track here, my -- I'm going to back step here a bit. Because the more people we have
on it, the harder it's going to be to get it put together, Commissioner Teele. So, probably,
I would rather leave it a small group and ask each of you to go out and find somebody
that's really a good thinker that can participate in this process as a good thinker here
about this thing and I'll be satisfied with that.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: Are you just saying you don't want to move this resolution
forward?
193 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Winton: That's correct. I will -- we have to change the time frame, but I
would rather stick with the smaller committee, and just urging each of you to go get me
somebody soon that's very good.
Commissioner Teele: I would then move that each Commissioner shall have one week to
file with the Clerk the name of a new member of the Charter...
Commissioner Sanchez: Deadline June 8th
Vice Chairman Gort: There is a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Amendment deadline, June 8th. Gives you enough time.
Vice Chairman Gort: There is a motion. There is a second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are you comfortable with the...
Commissioner Teele: Deadline of June the 5th. I mean, we've got to get moving. We
can't waste two weeks.
Vice Chairman Gort: Motion and a second. All in favor state by saying "aye."
Commissioner Teele: June the 5th
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. June the 5th
Vice Chairman Gort: 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. 00-473
A MOTION DIRECTING EACH MEMBER OF THE CITY
COMMISSION TO SUBMIT TO THE CITY CLERK IN WRITING
PRIOR TO JUNE 5, 2000, THE NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE
NUMBER OF THEIR RESPECTIVE APPOINTMENTS TO THE
CHARTER REVIEW AND REFORM COMMITTEE.
194 May 25, 2000
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSENT: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, before next meeting, I'd like to know -- I'd like to get a report
from the administration and from the Attorney's office. My understanding is, the election
that took place, term limits was approved and the audit -- Independent Auditor was also
approved. What are we doing about that? That auditor is supposed to have been aboard
in January. So, we need to work on that. All right. ' Auditor General. That was
approved.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: We need to bring that up. I mean -- OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, the strong mayor was approved, too.
Commissioner Teele: Well, The Auditor General wasn't challenged and, you know, I
really do think that the best way to handle the Auditor General issue is through the budget
process, and we really need to work with the Manager to develop that, and let it start with
the new budget.
Mr. Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Are you...
Vice Chairman Gort: (Inaudible) y'all.
Commissioner Teele: Are we adjourned, Mr. Chairman?
Vice Chairman Gort: (Inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: So moved.
195 May 25, 2000
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
•
196 May 25, 2000
•
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY
COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:37 PM.
ATTEST:
Walter Foeman
CITY CLERK
Sylvia Lowman
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
JOE CAROLLO
MAYOR
(SEAL)
197 May 25, 2000