HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2000-12-14 MinutesCITY
'I
MIAMI
0
COMMISSION
MEETING
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 14, 2000
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL
Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk
ITEM NO.
1.
►i
3
9
4.1
4.2
INDEX
MINUTES OF COMMISSION MEETING
DECEMBER 14, 2000
SUBJECT
LEGISLATION
PRESENTATION AND PROCLAMATIONS. 12/14/00
PRESENTATIONS
2
CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF 12/14/00
SYLVESTER CURLY WINTON UPON HIS R-00-1047
UNTIMELY DEATH. 3-4
CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF 12/14/00
CLARANCE PATTERSON, JR. UPON HIS UNTIMELY R-00-1048
DEATH. 5-6
CONSENT AGENDA. 12/14/00
DISCUSSION
7-8
ACCEPT BID OF PROFESSIONAL GENERAL 12/14/00
CONTRACTORS, INC. FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "A R-00-1049
HEAVY EQUIPMENT SERVICE FACILITY 9
COMMUNICATION WORKSHOP, LUNCH ROOM
AND RESTROOMS, B-6348," $128,353.
ACCEPT BID OF GANCEDO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 12/14/00
FOR PROJECT ENTITLED "HEAVY EQUIPMENT R-00-1050
CITY GARAGE GENERATOR, B-6313," $207,000. 9
•- •
4.3 ACCEPT BID OF GREATER CARIBBEAN ENERGY & 12/14/00
ENVIRONMENT FOUNDATION FOR PROJECT R-00-1051
ENTITLED "CITYWIDE CANAL MAINTENANCE 10
CONTRACT, B-5656," ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
GENERAL FUND, $95,559.50.
4.4 ACCEPT BID OF GOLDCOAST REFRIGERATION 12/14/00
FOR ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF AIR R-00-1052
CONDITIONING CONDENSING UNITS FOR 10
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $18,275; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT.
4.5 ACCEPT BID OF PUBLIC SAFETY DATA SERVICES, 12/14/00
INC. FOR REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION R-00-1053
SERVICES FOR ONE HUNDRED (100) MOBILE 11
DIGITAL COMPUTERS FOR DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE, $20,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
4.6 ACCEPT BID OF MARTIN'S LAMAR UNIFORMS 12/14/00
FOR PROCUREMENT OF UNIFORM CLOTHING R-00-1054
FOR DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $426,294.12; 11
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET.
4.7 ACCEPT BID OF ANDER POLICE SUPPLY FOR 12/14/00
PROCUREMENT OF UNIFORM ACCESSORIES FOR R-00-1055
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, $287,794.70; 12
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET.
4.8 AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF 12/14/00
MIAMI, WEST GROVE COMPUTER EDUCATIONAL R-00-1056
PROGRAM, $25,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM 12
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
4.9 AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF "DO THE RIGHT THING" 12/14/00
PROGRAM, $45,242; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM R-00-1057
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND (See #5). 12
ol
4.10
AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF COCONUT GROVE
12/14/00
PLAYHOUSE 2001 IN -SCHOOL TOURING
R-00-1058
PROGRAM, $70,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
13
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
4.11
AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF DADE-MIAMI
12/14/00
CRIMINAL JUSTICE COUNCIL, $35,000;
R-00-1059
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT
13
TRUST FUND.
4.12.
APPROVE RENTAL OF PORTABLE TOILETS FROM
12/14/00
CERTAIN VENDORS FOR DEPARTMENT OF
R-00-1060
PURCHASING TO BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY
13
DEPARTMENTS UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 6118-2/01-1;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM EACH OPERATING
BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS.
4.13
APPROVE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION
12/14/00
OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AT EATON PARK
R-00-1061
DAYCARE CENTER FOR DEPARTMENT OF PARKS
14
AND RECREATION FROM LEADEX
CORPORATION, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 4907-3/98-2, $17,900;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECREATION FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001
BUDGET.
4.14
APPROVE PROCUREMENT OF ICE SERVICES
12/14/00
FROM PERFECT ICE CORPORATION FOR
R-00-1062
DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING TO BE USED BY
14
VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS UNDER EXISTING
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CONTRACT NO. 0883-2/02-
OTR; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM EACH
OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS.
4.15
APPROVE SELECTION BY COMPETITIVE
12/14/00
SELECTION COMMITTEE OF MOST QUALIFIED
R-00-1063
FIRMS TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
15
FOR RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM STUDY
FOR CITY.
4.16 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AMENDMENT TO REVOCABLE LICENSE
AGREEMENT WITH CONCORDE CRUISES, INC.
D/B/A BAYFRONT VENTURES FOR USE OF 1,800
SQUARE FEET OF WAREHOUSE SPACE IN
SERVICE BUILDING AT MILDRED AND CLAUDE
PEPPER BAYFRONT PARK TO EXTEND TERM OF
AGREEMENT UNTIL JULY 7, 2002, $15,000.
4.17 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY
ON BEHALF OF SOUTH FLORIDA URBAN SEARCH
AND RESCUE (USAR) TASK FORCE AND MERCY
HOSPITAL, INC. FOR PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING
AND PROVIDING EXPENDABLE MEDICAL CACHE
OF SPECIFIC DRUGS AND SUPPLIES FOR
DISASTER RESPONSE, $4,200.
4.18 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA COMMUNITIES
TRUST (FCT), $150,000; WITH LOCAL MATCHING
REQUIREMENT OF SAME TO BE OBTAINED
THROUGH APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM
SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND PROGRAM
SERIES 2000 PROJECTS, FOR PURPOSE OF
ACQUIRING 3.25 ACRES OF LAND ON SOUTH SIDE
OF. LITTLE RIVER CANAL AT 399 N.E. 82ND
TERRACE, TO BE RESTORED AS NATURE
PRESERVE AND FUTURE CITY PARK SITE KNOWN
AS LITTLE RIVER PRESERVE.
4.19 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
WILLIAM YATES, FOR INTEGRATION OF
MULTIPLE SEGMENTS OF POLICE
DEPARTMENT'S DEMONSTRATION CENTER'S
INFORMATION NETWORK, $34,178; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM COMMUNITY POLICING
DEMONSTRATION CENTER GRANT.
12/14/00
R-00-1064
16
12/14/00
R-00-1065
17
12/14/00
R-00-1066
18
12/14/00
R-00-1067
19
4.20 ACCEPT RECOMMENDATION OF MANAGER TO
12/14/00
APPROVE FINDINGS OF EVALUATION
R-00-1068
COMMITTEE THAT TOP RANKED FIRM,
19
PURSUANT TO RFP 99-00-122, FOR FOOD AND
BEVERAGE CONCESSION AGREEMENT OF CITY
OWNED PROPERTY KNOWN AS MIAMI
RIVERSIDE CENTER LOCATED AT 444 SW 2
AVENUE IS KARLEN FOODS, INC. D/B/A TROPICS
CATERING; THEREBY AUTHORIZING MANAGER
TO EXECUTE CONCESSION AGREEMENT WITH
ABOVE FIRM.
4.21 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE GRANT OF
12/14/00
EASEMENT OF 100 SQUARE FOOT PERPETUAL,
R-1069
NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT TO FLORIDA POWER
20
& LIGHT COMPANY, FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS
ELIZABETH VI RICK PARK, LOCATED AT 3255
PLAZA STREET FOR CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE OF OVERHEAD AND
UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UTILITY FACILITIES.
4.22 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
12/14/00
AMENDMENT TO USE AGREEMENT WITH F.L.T.,
R-00-1070
INC. TO CHANGE COMMENCEMENT DATE OF
20
TERM OF AGREEMENT FROM MARCH 1, 2001 TO
MARCH 1, 2002.
5. MANAGER TO DIRECT MIAMI POLICE CHIEF 12/14/00
RAUL MARTINEZ TO MEET WITH CITY DISCUSSION
ATTORNEY AND WORK OUT UNFINISHED 21-22-
BUSINESS AS PERTAINS TO "DO THE RIGHT
THING" PROGRAM INCLUDING PUBLIC RECORDS
LAW AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS (See #4.9).
6. RELATED TO 38TI ANNUAL BANK OF AMERICA
COCONUT GROVE ARTS FESTIVAL CONDUCTED
BY COCONUT GROVE ASSOCIATION, INC. TO BE
HELD FEBRUARY 17-19, 2000; AUTHORIZE
MANAGER TO ISSUE THREE-DAY PERMIT FOR
SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES DURING SAID
EVENT IN AREA OF MCFARLANE ROAD FROM
SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE TO MAIN HIGHWAY
AND SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE FROM
MCFARLANE ROAD TO MAIN HIGHWAY
INCLUDING ALL STREETS, AVENUES, ALLEYS,
WAYS AND THOROUGHFARES WHICH
INTERSECT SAID AREAS IN COCONUT GROVE;
SAID AUTHORIZATION CONDITIONED UPON
ORGANIZERS.
7. PRESENTATIONS:
1. PROCLAMATION TO CIVIL AIR PATROL
MONTH (TO CAPT. GEORGE NAVARINI).
2. PROCLAMATION TO REVEREND ROSS FOR
10-YEAR ANNIVERSARY WITH MT. ZION
BAPTIST CHURCH DECLARING DEC. 1, 2000
AS "REV. ROSS DAY" FOR HIS BEING A
SPIRITUAL LEADER AND CIVIL ACTIVIST.
8. BRIEF DISCUSSION REGARDING NEWSRACKS
ORDINANCE (See # 11).
9. WAIVE PROHIBITIONS CONTAINED IN SECTIONS
2-611 THROUGH 2-614 OF CITY CODE AS SUCH
PROHIBITION PERTAINS TO ANNE STERLING,
FORMER EMPLOYEE OF CITY, IN RELATION TO
HER REPRESENTATION BEFORE COMMISSION AS
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS FOR BOYS
AND GIRLS CLUB OF MIAMI, INC.
12/14/00
R-00-1071
23-25
12/14/00
PRESENTATIONS
26-28
12/14/00
DISCUSSION
29
12/14/00
R-00-1072
30-31
10. WAIVE PROHIBITIONS CONTAINED IN SECTIONS 2-
611 THROUGH 2-614 OF CITY CODE AS SUCH
PROHIBITION PERTAINS TO JOHN F. LINDSAY,
FORMER EMPLOYEE OF CITY, ENTERING INTO
CONTRACT, TRANSACTING BUSINESS WITH AND
FOR CITY, OR APPEARING BEFORE COMMISSION
AS CONSULTANT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE.
11. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REGULATE
PLACEMENT OF NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS -
OF -WAY IN CITY BY REPEALING SECTIONS 54-261
THROUGH 54-269OF CITY CODE AND
SUBSTITUTING NEW SECTIONS 54-261 THROUGH
54-271 (See 98).
12. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH INITIAL
RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR NEW
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT V PROGRAM,"
AND APPROPRIATE $2,821,192 TO SAID FUND,
CONSISTING OF GRANT RECEIVED FROM U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, $2,539,073 AND
MATCHING FUNDS FROM CITY, $282,119;
PROVIDING FOR APPROPRIATION TO SAID FUND
OF INTEREST EARNED FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-
2001 AND FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002; FURTHER
ALLOCATING $282,119 FROM DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET.
13. APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING OF
SOLE SOURCE; WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR
COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES,
AND APPROVE ACQUISITION OF ON-LINE
SERVICES FOR PUBLIC RECORDS RESEARCH FOR
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE FROM DBT ONLINE,
INC., SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, $39,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRUST FUND.
12/14/00
R-00-1073
32-33
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
34-52
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
53-54
12/14/00
R-00-1074
55-56
14.
ALLOCATE $50,000 OF UNOBLIGATED HOME
12/14/00
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) FUNDS TO
R-00-1075
MODEL HOUSING COOPERATIVE, INC. FOR
57-60
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES IN DEVELOPMENT
OF DR. GODOY VILLAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT.
15.
RELATED TO COCONUT GROVE FOOD & MUSIC
12/14/00
FESTIVAL "TASTE OF THE GROVE," WAIVE PARK
R-00-1076
USAGE FEES, AND PARK VENDOR FEES; CLOSING
61-65
MCFARLANE ROAD AND SOUTH BAYSHORE
DRIVE FROM MAIN HIGHWAY TO 27TH AVENUE
FROM 7 AM SATURDAY, JANUARY 20, 2001 UNTIL
8 PM ON SUNDAY, JANUARY 21, 2001; PERMIT
SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES DURING
FESTIVAL HOURS, 10 AM-7 PM EACH DAY; AND
GRANT VENDING FOR TWO BLOCK RADIUS
AROUND FESTIVAL BOUNDARIES.
16.
TABLED: PROPOSED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE:
12/14/00
"STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN," TO
TABLED
INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS, $60,092 (See #19).
66
17.
ACCEPT BID OF GREATER MIAMI CATERERS FOR
12/14/00
PROVISION OF FOOD FOR PARTICIPANTS IN
R-00-1077
DAYCARE AND PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR
67-68
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION,
$115,293.10; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM GENERAL
FUND.
18.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW
12/14/00
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "MIAMI-
FIRST READING
DADE COUNTY EMS GRANT AWARD (FY `2000-
ORDINANCE
01)," AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR OPERATION
69-70
OF SAME, $113,304.80 CONSISTING OF GRANT
APPORTIONED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FROM
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH "GRANT
PROGRAM FOR COUNTIES".
19. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE
NO. 11557 WHICH ESTABLISHED INITIAL
RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "STOP
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN," TO INCREASE
APPROPRIATIONS, $60,092, CONSISTING OF
GRANT FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, $44,886 AND IN -KIND
SERVICES MATCH, $15,206 FROM DEPARTMENT
OF POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET. (See
# 16).
20. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED "CHILD DAY
CARE FOOD PROGRAM" AND APPROPRIATE
FUNDS FOR OPERATION OF SAME, $100,135,
CONSISTING OF GRANT FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE THROUGH FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.
21. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTIONS 39-
26 AND 39-37 AND ADD NEW SECTION 39-37.1 TO
CITY CODE BY ESTABLISHING `BISCAYNE
BOULEVARD SPECIAL VENDING DISTRICT";
PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; ESTABLISHING
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES; PROVIDING FOR
EXCLUSIVE VENDING FRANCHISE
OPPORTUNITIES AND LOCATIONS; PROVIDING
CRITERIA; PROVIDING FOR FRANCHISE FEES;
ESTABLISHING PUSHCART DESIGN CRITERIA
AND REVIEW; PROVIDING OPERATING
REGULATIONS AND LIMITATIONS.
22. TABLE: PROPOSED AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
11970, ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2001 FOR PURPOSE OF ADJUSTING
APPROPRIATIONS RELATING TO OPERATIONAL
AND BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS OF CERTAIN
CITY DEPARTMENTS (See 954).
12/14/00
ORDINANCE
NO. 12000
71-72
12/14/00
ORDINANCE
NO. 12001
73-74
12/14/00
ORDINANCE
NO. 12002
75-77
12/14/00
TABLED
78-80
23. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ACCEPTING $2,718.63,
IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS FOR CASE
OF DECOMA MIAMI ASSOCIATES, LTD. VS. CITY
AND MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION
AUTHORITY.
24. AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY
JESUS DEL RIO, $75,000, IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF
ALL CLAIMS AGAINST CITY FOR CASE OF JESUS
DEL RIO VS. CITY, AND TO PAY GONZALO
MIRANDA, $25,000, IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF ALL
CLAIMS AGAINST CITY, FOR CASE OF GONZALO
MIRANDA VS. CITY; ALLOCATING $100,000 FROM
SELF-INSURANCE AND INSURANCE TRUST FUND.
25. APPROVE CITY'S CO-SPONSORSHIP AND DIRECT
PROVISION OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT,
ASSISTANCE, AND IN -KIND CONTRIBUTIONS AND
SERVICES, $165,000, FOR FOLLOWING PARADES
AND EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001:
ALLIED VETERAN'S PARADE, TOYS FOR KIDS
2000, KING ORANGE BOWL PARADE, KING
MANGO STRUT PARADE, THREE KINGS PARADE,
MARTIN LUTHER KING PARADE, AND JOSE
MARTI PARADE.
12/14/00
R-00-1078
81-82
12/14/00
R-00-1079
83-84
12/14/00
R-00-1080
85-89
26. CONCERNING UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
(UDP) FOR NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF WATSON
ISLAND CONSISTING OF 25 ACRES OF CITY -
OWNED WATERFRONT PROPERTY INCLUDING 11
ACRES OF UPLAND AND 14 ACRES OF ADJACENT
SUBMERGED LANDS INCLUDING WATSON
ISLAND MARINA, LOCATED AT 1040 MACARTHUR
CAUSEWAY; AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF REQUEST
FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID PROPERTY WHICH
MAY INCLUDE (1) MEGA YACHT MARINAS AND
MARINE FACILITIES, (2) RECREATIONAL,
ENTERTAINMENT, EDUCATIONAL AND
CULTURAL FACILITIES, (3) ENTERTAINMENT
DESTINATION, CONVENTION AND/OR
CONFERENCE FACILITIES, AND (4) HOTEL,
RETAIL, AND ANCILLARY RELATED USES SUCH
AS OFFICE AND PARKING.
APPOINT INDIVIDUALS TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
AND SELECT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM TO EVALUATE PROPOSALS RECEIVED IN
RESPONSE TO' SAID RFP.
APPROVE LIST OF NAMES SUBMITTED BY
ADMINISTRATION FOR, APPOINTMENT AS
MEMBERS OF REVIEW COMMITTEE TO
EVALUATE PROPOSALS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE
TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS.
SELECT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
OF PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPERS, LLP IN
CONJUNCTION WITH MINORITY FIRM OF GRAU &
CO., P.A., TO EVALUATE PROPOSALS.
12/14/00
R-00-1081
M-00-1082
M-00-1083
90-121
27. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 12/14/00
2-892 AND ADD NEW ARTICLE CONSISTING OF ORDINANCE
SECTIONS 38-230 THROUGH 38-242 TO CHAPTER NO. 12003
38 TO CITY CODE TO ESTABLISH VIRGINIA KEY M-00-1084
BEACH PARK TRUST. 122-129
MAYOR JOE CAROLLO TO PROVIDE EACH
MEMBER OF NOW SUNSETTED VIRGINIA KEY
BEACH ADVISORY BOARD PROTOCOL
DOCUMENT, NAMELY CERTIFICATE OF
APPRECIATION, FOR EXEMPLARY SERVICES
RENDERED ON BEHALF OF CITY.
28. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 2-
1144.4 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATIONBOARDS, COMMITTEES,
COMMISSIONS/PARKS ADVISORY BOARD," TO
PROVIDE THAT CHAIRPERSON OF PARKS
ADVISORY BOARD MAY EXCUSE ABSENCE OF
BOARD MEMBER IF MEMBER'S ABSENCE IS
DEEMED UNAVOIDABLE.
29. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "GOLD SEAL
ACCREDITATION PROJECT FY 2000-2001" AND
APPROPRIATE $12,000 CONSISTING OF GRANT
FROM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN RESOURCES CHILD DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DIVISION.
30. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTIONS
2-885 AND 2-1152 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATION/BOARDS, COMMITTEES,
COMMISSIONS" TO CHANGE PROCESS BY WHICH
VACANCIES ON COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD
ARE FILLED.
I
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
130-131
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
132
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
133-134
31. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ACCEPT BUTLER ACT 12/14/00
DISCLAIMER FROM BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF R-00-1085
INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF 135-136
STATE OF FLORIDA, DISCLAIMING ANY
INTEREST TRUST MAY HAVE IN PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2700 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE,
CONSISTING OF 8.28 ACRES OF FORMERLY
SUBMERGED LANDS.
32. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ACCEPT SPECIAL 12/14/00
WARRANTY DEED FROM COMMUNITY R-00-1086
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) FOR 137-138
CONVEYANCE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, OF SOST'S
SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK B,
PAGE 27, OF PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY.
33. RELATING TO CONVEYANCE OF FIVE CITY- 12/14/00
OWNED VACANT PARCELS TO RAFAEL R-00-1087
HERNANDEZ HOUSING AND ECONOMIC 139-140
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE NEW SINGLE FAMILY
HOMES FOR PURCHASE BY LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES; GRANT
EXTENSION FROM APRIL 25, 2001 TO DECEMBER
14, 2001 TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION AND
SALE OF FIVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES PLANNED
IN CITY; AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO PROVIDE
ALTERNATE PARCEL LOCATED AT 229
NORTHWEST 30TH STREET, IN LIEU OF CITY -
OWNED PARCEL LOCATED AT 1264 NORTHWEST
31 ST STREET WHICH PARCEL HAS CERTAIN TITLE
DEFECTS.
34. TABLED: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 40 UNIT 12/14/00
NEW HOPE/OVERTOWN HOUSING PROJECT. TABLED
141
35. AMEND RESOLUTION NO. 00-170, WHICH
AUTHORIZED MANAGER TO ALLOCATE HOME
INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP (HOME) PROGRAM
FUNDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN CITY, TO
CHANGE NAME FROM PINNACLE HOUSING
GROUP, INC., TO RAYOS DEL SOL, LTD. AS
DEVELOPER AWARDED HOME FUNDS TO
FINANCE RAYOS DEL SOL APARTMENTS
PROJECT AT NORTHWEST 13TH AVENUE
BETWEEN NORTHWEST 1ST AND 2" STREETS
LOCATED IN LITTLE HAVANA.
36. AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN CONTRACT WITH
INTER-AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SERVICES FOR
PROVISION OF SECURITY GUARD SERVICES FOR
DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING TO BE USED BY
VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS, $60,000, FROM
$130,000 TO AN ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $190,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM OPERATING
BUDGETS OF INDIVIDUAL USER DEPARTMENTS.
37. RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT OF 40 UNIT NEW
HOPE/OVERTOWN HOUSING PROJECT; DIRECT
MANAGER TO CONVEY CERTAIN VACANT CITY -
OWNED PARCELS AT NORTHWEST 6Tx AND 8Tx
STREETS BETWEEN NORTHWEST 5Tx AND 6Tx
AVENUES LOCATED IN OVERTOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD, TO BAME DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC.;
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO CONVEY SUBJECT
PARCELS AT NO COST TO BAME, PURSUANT TO
APPROVAL OF CITY'S FIVE YEAR
CONSOLIDATED PLAN (1999-2004), CONTINGENT
UPON CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION AND SALE
OF FORTY NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN
TWENTY-FOUR MONTHS FROM DATE OF
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION OR TITLE TO
SUBJECT PARCELS SHALL REVERT BACK TO
CITY (See Section 434).
12/14/00
R-00-1088
142-143
12/14/00
R-00-1089
M-00-1090
R-00-1091
144-150
12/14/00
R-00-1092
151-153
38. AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN CONTRACT WITH
APRICOT OFFICE SUPPLIES AND STATIONERY,
INC. FOR PROVISION OF OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR
DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING FOR USE BY
VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS, $50,000, FROM
$475,000 TO AN ANNUAL $525,000; ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM EACH OPERATING BUDGETS OF
VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS.
39. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ACCEPT PROPOSALS
FROM PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS AND
PROCURE SUCH ADDITIONAL SERVICES AS MAY
BE REQUIRED TO ASSIST IN PREPARATION OF
SCHEMATIC MASTERPLAN PROPOSALS FOR
BICENTENNIAL PARK/FEC SLIP WATERFRONT
RENEWAL PROCESS, $200,000 FOR ALL
CONSULTANTS, SERVICES AND RELATED
EXPENSES.
40. APPROVE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER'S
DECISION TO REJECT PROTEST OF U.S. TONER
AND COPIERS, INC., IN CONNECTION WITH
INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 99-00-206 FOR
CITYWIDE LEASE OF COPIERS, AS SUCH PROTEST
HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE WITHOUT MERIT.
41. ACCEPT BID OF COPYCO, INC. FOR ACQUISITION
OF CITYWIDE COPIER SERVICES FOR
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, GRAPHIC REPRODUCTIONS
DIVISION, $297,641.88; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS.
12/14/00
R-00-1093
154-155
12/14/00
R-00-1094
156-158
12/14/00
R-00-1095
159-168
12/14/00
R-00-1096
169-170
42.
APPROVE AND CONFIRM MANAGER'S FINDING
12/14/00
OF EMERGENCY, WAIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR
R-00-1097
COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDS AND APPROVE
171-172
CONTINUATION OF SPECIALIZED FLAT TIRE
REPAIR SERVICES FROM ROUND TIRE SERVICE,
INC. FOR DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, LIGHT FLEET DIVISION;
INCREASE CONTRACT FOR SAID SERVICES
$20,000 FROM OF $45,000 TO $65,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, LIGHT
FLEET DIVISION.
43.
ACCEPT BIDS OF GUS MACHADO FORD,
12/14/00
MAROONE DODGE, SHEEHAN PONTIAC-GMC,
R-00-1098
AND HOLLYWOOD CHRYSLER JEEP FOR
173-176
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, FOR PROCUREMENT OF
POLICE AND GENERAL FLEET VEHICLES,
$5,901,108; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS.
44.
AUTHORIZE PAYMENT TO MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
12/14/00
FOR DISPOSAL OF CERTAIN SOLID WASTE
R-00-1099
COLLECTED IN AND BY CITY, $8,506,716.
177-182
45.
AUTHORIZE INCREASE IN CONSTRUCTION
12/14/00
CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY AND CAZO
R-00-1100
CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, $480,000, FOR
183-184
CONSTRUCTION OF ELIZABETH VIRRICK
COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT (SECOND
BIDDING), INCREASING CONTRACT SUM FROM
$2,063,716.41 TO $2,543,716.41, WITH FUNDS
APPROPRIATED BY AMENDMENT ORDINANCE
NO. 11969.
46. ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED SAMANTHA REMI PARK. 12/14/00
R-00-1101
185
0
47.
DISCUSS PROPOSED APPROVAL OF MANAGER'S
12/14/00
FINDING OF EMERGENCY, WAIVING
DISCUSSION
REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED
186-194
BIDDING PROCEDURES AND ENGAGING BACON'S
INFORMATION INC. FOR PROVISION OF PRESS
CLIPPING SERVICES - CONTRACT IMPROPERLY
SIGNED.
48.
APPOINT MEMBERS TO ORANGE BOWL
12/14/00
ADVISORY BOARD; WAIVE ELECTOR/RESIDENCY
M-00-1102
REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN SECTION 53-124
R-00-1103
OF CITY CODE WITH REGARD TO THE
195-197
FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS: SAM BURSTYN,
RODOLFO CAMPS MARITZA GUITTEREZ, ADOLFO
HENRIQUEZ, ARTHUR HERTZ, AL DOTSON PAUL
(BUTCH) DAVIS, AND DOUGLAS GREIST;
APPOINTING COMMOSSIONER JOE SANCHEZ AS
CHAIRPERSON.
49.
EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTIONS 2-
12/14/00
887 AND 53-126 OF CITY CODE TO REDUCE
ORDINANCE
NUMBER OF MEMBERS REQUIRED FOR QUORUM
NO. 12004
TO CONVENE MEETING OF ORANGE BOWL
198-199
ADVISORY BOARD.
50.
RELATED TO PROPOSED MIAMI CHILDREN'S
12/14/00
MUSEUM IN WATSON ISLAND, ESTABLISHING
M-00-1104
$75,000 ANNUALLY TO BE PROVIDED IN IN -KIND
200-211
SERVICES AS FOLLOWS: (1) YEAR ROUND HALF
PRICE RATE TO BE PROVIDED TO ALL CITY
RESIDENTS; (2) SPECIAL PROGRAMS TO BE
MONITORED BY CITY'S PARKS DEPARTMENT
WHICH WILL DESIGNATE COMPLETE DAY VISITS
TO MUSEUM FOR 5,000 INNER CITY CHILDREN
WHO PARTICIPATE IN SUMMER, WINTER AND
SPRING CAMPS; ESTABLISH TWO DOLLARS A
YEAR AS RENTAL FEE.
51. ELECTED OFFICIALS RETREAT ON SATURDAY, 12/14/00
JANUARY 27, 2001; 10 A.M. M-00-1105
212-214
52. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
12/14/00
AGREEMENT WITH OSTERHOLT CONSULTING,
R-00-1106
INC. TO PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES
215-216
REQUIRED FOR JANUARY 2001 ELECTED
OFFICIALS RETREAT; $25,000.
53. APPROVE REQUEST OF REPRESENTATIVES OF
12/14/00
CALLE OCHO CELEBRITY WALK OF FAME TO
R-00-1107
CONSTRUCT, INSTALL AND MAINTAIN NON-
217-222
STANDARD IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN DEDICATED
RIGHT-OF-WAY IN SIDEWALK AREA OF
SOUTHWEST 8TH STREET FROM SOUTHWEST 12TH
TO SOUTHWEST 27TH AVENUES CONSISTING OF
MARBLE STARS HONORING ENTERTAINMENT
CELEBRITIES, WITH PREFERENCE TO THOSE
CELEBRITIES RESIDING IN SOUTH FLORIDA.
54. (A) EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND
12/14/00
ORDINANCE NO. 11970, ANNUAL
ORDINANCE
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING
NO. # 12005
2001 FOR PURPOSE OF ADJUSTING
M-00-1108
APPROPRIATIONS RELATING TO OPERATIONAL
223-228
AND BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS OF CERTAIN
CITY DEPARTMENTS; REVISE ONGOING CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND ESTABLISH NEW
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO BEGIN
DURING FY 2001 (See #22).
(B) DIRECT MANAGER TO REVIEW PUBLIC
WORKS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AS
CONTAINED IN MOODY'S REPORT REFLECTING
THAT CITY HAS NOT DONE GOOD JOB OF
DEALING WITH INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS, WITH VIEW TO ENSURE SOME
CONFORMITY DISTRICT -WIDE THROUGHOUT
CITY; BRING BACK RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING CARRYOVER FUNDS FROM LAST
YEAR; TO PRIORITIZE SAID FUNDS FOR PUBLIC
WORKS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS,
$5,000,000 ($750,000 TO $1,000,000 PER DISTRICT)
BASED UPON NEED FIRST, AMONG COMMISSION
DISTRICTS.
55. ALLOCATE $750,000 FOR EMERGENCY ROAD 12/14/00
IMPROVEMENTS AT N.W. 41ST STREET BETWEEN R-00-1109
12TH AVENUE AND 17" AVENUE; MANAGER TO 229-232
EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR DESIGN AND
ENGINEERING SERVICES AND SCHEDULE PUBLIC
HEARING ON JANUARY 11, 2001 TO WAIVE
BIDDING PROCEDURES FOR SELECTION OF
CONTRACTOR.
56. DISCUSSION CONCERNING FINANCIAL UPDATE 12/14/00
AND BUDGET OUTLOOK - IMPROVED BOND DISCUSSION
RATING. 233
57. MANAGER TO EXECUTE TEMPORARY USE 12/14/00
AGREEMENT WITH BARRY UNIVERSITY, FOR USE R-00-1110
OF PORTION OF PROPERTY ON VIRGINIA KEY 234-236
LOCATED AT 3601 RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY,
AT FEE OF FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS PER MONTH
FOR PURPOSE OF OPERATING AND MAINTAINING
WATER RECREATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES WHICH SHALL INCLUDE
PRIVATE INSTRUCTION, CLINICS, CLASSES AND
SPECIAL EVENTS (ROWING, SAILING, KAYAKING,
WATER SAFETY, SWIMMING, AND
SCUBA/SNORKELING).
58. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND 12/14/00
CHAPTER 37 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED ORDINANCE
"OFFENSES -MISCELLANEOUS" TO ADD NEW NO.12006
SECTION 37-6 TO MAKE IT UNLAWFUL FOR A 237-239
PERSON TO AGGRESSIVELY PANHANDLE.
59. APPROVE APPOINTMENT OF JOSEFINA HABIF, 12/14/00
MARIE F. BELL, JOE BURKE, CARLA HARRIS, R-00-1111
WILLIE IVORY, JOHN THACKER, AND VICTORIA 240-241
VILLALBA TO JOBS AND EDUCATION
PARTNERSHIP REGIONAL BOARD.
60. APPOINT JESSICA SHAPIRO AS MEMBER OF 12/14/00
CULTURAL AND FINE ARTS BOARD. R-00-1112
242
0 0
61. APPOINT LINDA ROMERO, REVEREND WILLY 12/14/00
LEONARD, TORRIS COOPER AND ANTHONY M-00-1113
ROBBINS AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY 243
RELATIONS BOARD.
62. APPOINT TONY VILLAMIL AS MEMBER OF 12/14/00
INTERNATIONAL TRADE BOARD. R-00-1114
244
63. APPOINT JOE GANGUZZA AND ALLAN SHULMAN 12/14/00
AS MEMBERS OF ZONING BOARD. R-00-1115
245
64. RELATED TO PROFESSIONAL SOCCER MATCHES 12/14/00
PRESENTED BY INTERFOREVER SPORTS, INC. TO R-004116
BE HELD JANUARY 6TH AND FEBRUARY 3RD, 2001 246-247
AT ORANGE BOWL STADIUM; AUTHORIZE CAP
ON USER FEE OF $5,000 PER EVENT DAY,
CONTINGENT UPON ORGANIZERS.
65. MANAGER TO REVIEW PROPOSED CREATION OF 12/14/00
ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT IN LITTLE HAVANA M-00-1117
AND COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATION FOR 248-249
PILOT PROJECT REGARDING SAME.
66. MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE CONTRACT WITH 12/14/00
SCHOOL BOARD AND NATIONAL ROOFING, FOR R-00-1118
TEMPORARY EASEMENT OF SOUTHWEST 250-251
PORTION OF WEST END PARK, TO PROVIDE
ACCESS TO CONSTRUCTION SITE AT FAIRLAWN
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL S AT RATE OF $2,256 A
MONTH.
67. (A) DISCUSSION CONCERNING JOSEFINA 12/14/00
CASTANO KIDNEY FOUNDATION. DISCUSSION
(B) COMMENTS REGARDING BROKEN 252-253
ELEVATORS AT MANUEL ARTIME.
•
68. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO WAIVE RENTAL FEE 12/14/00
FOR USE OF COCONUT GROVE CONVENTION R-00-1119
CENTER, $4,500 FOR "THE CYSTIC FIBROSIS 254-257
FOUNDATION CELEBRITY BOXING EVENT," TO
BE HELD ON MARCH 10, 2001, WHICH EVENT
WILL BE TELEVISED NATIONALLY BY
TELEMUNDO NETWORK.
69. ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED WAL-GATE REPLAT. 12/14/00
R-00-1120
258-259
70. (A) DISCUSSION CONCERNING IMPROVING 12/14/00
CONDITIONS OF VACANT LOT NORTHWEST 7TH DISCUSSION
STREET. 260-263
(B) MANAGER TO CLOSE ANTONIO MACEO PARK
AT NIGHT FOR SECURITY REASONS.
71. DISCUSSION CONCERNING NET 9 PROGRAM, 12/14/00
"MIAMI NEIGHBORHOODS."- ADMINISTRATION DISCUSSION
TO KEEP COMMISSION INFORMED ON MATTERS 264-265
PERTAINING TO SAID PROGRAMS.
72. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS 12/14/00
NECESSARY TO DEFEND INTERESTS OF CITY, R-00-1121
INCLUDING INVESTIGATION, NOTICE OR OTHER 266-268
ACTION AUTHORIZED BY LAW OR IN EQUITY TO
OBTAIN RELIEF AND/OR TO REMEDY ANY LOSS
OR DAMAGES TO CITY CAUSED BY MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED
RELATED TO WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY
(WASA), INCLUDING DIVERSION OF DOLLARS OR
EQUITY CHARGE BACKS; AUTHORIZE CITY
ATTORNEY TO RETAIN COUNSEL, $50,000.
73. CALL FOR JOINT MEETING BETWEEN CERTAIN
12/14/00
OFFICIALS OF CITY AND MIAMI-DARE COUNTY
R-00-1122
TO BE HELD BEFORE JANUARY 30, 2001 TO
269-273
DISCUSS ISSUES CONCERNING BOTH
GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES INCLUDING PENDING
LITIGATION AND VARIOUS FINANCIAL MATTERS,
SUCH AS PARKING SURCHARGE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (US
HUD PILOT) PROGRAM, TRADE CENTER,
BASEBALL STADIUM, 55 ACRE FEC RAIL TRACK,
TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT, MIAMI RIVER, AND
PORT OF MIAMI EXPANSION; DESIGNATING
ATTENDANCE OF FOLLOWING OFFICIALS:
MAYOR JOE CAROLLO, MAYOR ALEX PENELAS,
COMMISSIONER ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.,
COMMISSIONER FROM COUNTY SELECTED BY
MAYOR ALEX PENELAS, MIAMI CITY MANAGER
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, COUNTY MANAGER
MERRETT R. STIERHEIM, MIAMI CITY ATTORNEY
ALEJANDRO VILARELLO, AND COUNTY
ATTORNEY ROBERT GINSBURG; ISSUANCE OF
JOINT REPORT BY BOTH COUNTY AND CITY
MANAGERS.
74. REFERRING TO MIAMI STREET CODESIGNATION
12/14/00
REVIEW COMMITTEE PROPOSED
R-00-1123
CODESIGNATION OF N.W. 55TH STREET BETWEEN
274-275
N.W. 17TH AND 19TH AVENUES IN HONOR OF
MABLE DEAN BARLOW.
75. APPROVE TIME EXTENSION NOT TO EXCEED 12/14/00
NINETY 90 DAYS, FOR OUTDOOR ADVERTISING R-00-1124
REVIEW BOARD AND DIRECT MANAGER TO 276-277
CONTINUE PROVIDING ALL NECESSARY
ASSISTANCE TO REVIEW BOARD (BILLBOARDS).
76. GRANTING ONE YEAR TEMPORARY 12/14/00
ENCROACHMENT CONSISTING OF TWO R-00-1125
EMERGENCY ACCESS FIRE ESCAPE STAIRWELLS 278-279
WITHIN DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTHEAST
37TH STREET ALLEY TO POWER STUDIOS MIAMI,
LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION AT 3701
NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE.
0 •
77. ALLOCATE $50,000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
12/14/00
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FROM SPECIAL ECONOMIC
R-00-1126
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN EDISON LITTLE
280-281
RIVER TO ASSIST GEORGES WILLIAMS
ENTERPRISE; SAID FUNDS TO BE REALLOCATED
FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AWARD TO SAID
BUSINESS THROUGH COMMERCIAL
REVITALIZATION PROGRAM.
78. AUTHORIZE CITY'S CO-SPONSORSHIP OF "A
12/14/00
CHRISTMAS EXPERIENCE IN OVERTOWN,"
R-00-1127
CONDUCTED BY ZO' S SUMMER GROVE
282-283
FOUNDATION TO BE HELD ON DECEMBER 17,
2000, AT GIBSON ' PARK — DISTRICT
COMMISSIONERS TO BE NOTIFIED OF ALL
EVENTS IN THEIR DISTRICT (See #80).
79. DISCUSSION CONCERNING DEPARTMENT OF
12/14/00
PUBLIC WORK'S PLANS TO ADDRESS STREET
DISCUSSION
EXCAVATIONS IMPROPERLY REPAIRED.
284
80. COMMENTS REGARING MIAMI SPORTS AND 12/14/00
EXHIBITION AUTHORITY (MSEA) EVENT IN DISCUSSION
OVERTOWN (See #78). 285
81. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONER REGALADO 12/14/00
CONCERNING MEMOS HE HAS SENT REGARDING DISCUSSION
BROKEN SIDEWALKS — PUBLIC RECEIVES FALSE 286-287
IMPRESSION WHEN GIVEN DATES FOR REPAIRS
THAT ARE NOT MET.
82. DIRECT MANAGER TO CO-SPONSOR "PROJECT 12/14/00
SAFE PLACE," PROGRAM DESIGNED TO ASSIST M-00-1128
YOUTH AND FAMILIES IN CRISIS SITUATIONS. 288-289
83. EXPRESS INTENT TO CODESIGNATE SOUTHEAST 12/14/00
3RD AVENUE, BETWEEN 3RD STREET AND WEST R-00-1129
FLAGLER STREET AS CARLOS GARDEL AVENUE. 290-291
84. DISCUSSION AND STATUS REPORT CONCERNING 12/14/00
EMPOWERMENT ZONE. DISCUSSION
292-293
85.
URGE BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
12/14/00
COMMISSIONERS TO EXEMPT MUNICIPALITIES
R-00-1130
FROM APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS
294-295
CONTAINED IN SECTION 2-11.1 OF MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY CODE, AS RELATES TO CONE OF
SILENCE ORDINANCES OR IN ALTERNATIVE TO
RELOCATE CONE OF SILENCE PROVISIONS TO
SECTION OF CODE NOT APPLICABLE TO
MUNICIPALITIES.
86.
DIRECT MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE LEASE WITH
12/14/00
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR
R-00-1031
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 405 N.W. 3RD AVENUE,
296-298
ADJACENT TO CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR
PURPOSE OF BUILDING CHARTER SCHOOL.
87.
AUTHORIZE FUNDING OF BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF
12/14/00
MIAMI, INC. $100,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM
R-00-1132
LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND.
299-300
88.
TABLED: CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED
12/14/00
MODIFICATION TO WATERFRONT CHARTER
TABLED
REQUIREMENTS TO PERMIT 20-FOOT SETBACK
301
FOR PROPERTY BOUNDED ON EAST BY METRO
MOVER GUIDEWAY, ON WEST BY SOUTH MIAMI
AVENUE, ON NORTH BY SE 4" STREET AND ON
SOUTH BY THE MIAMI RIVER (See 495).
89.
APPROVE MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TEN
12/14/00
SIXTY BRICKELL PROJECT LOCATED AT 1050-
M-00-1133
1060 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 1051 SE MIAMI
R-00-1134
AVENUE ROAD TO ALLOW TWO TOWERS WHICH
302-304
WILL INCLUDE 543 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 1,022
PARKING SPACES AND 25,000 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE (Applicant(s): 1060
Brickell Partners, LLC and Horacio Toro, Trustee).
90.
APPROVE MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR TEN
12/14/00
SIXTY BRICKELL PROJECT LOCATED AT 1038-
R-00-1135
1060 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 1051 SE MIAMI
305-306
AVENUE ROAD TO ALLOW TWO TOWERS WHICH
WILL INCLUDE 619 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 1,207
PARKING SPACES AND 30,000 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE (Applicant(s): 1060
Brickell Partners, LLC and Horacio Toro, Trustee).
91.
APPROVE MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
12/14/00
CORAL VIEW PROJECT LOCATED AT 2960, 2980
R-00-1136
AND 3014 SW 22ND STREET AND 2963, 2975, 3001,
307-308
3015 AND 3019 SW 22ND TERRACE TO ALLOW
BUILDING WHICH WILL INCLUDE 226
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 429 PARKING SPACES AND
16,897 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE
(Applicant(s): Challenger Investment, Inc., Owner and
BAP Development, Inc., Contract Purchaser).
92.
APPROVE SUBSTANTIAL MODIFICATION TO
12/14/00
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MAJOR USE SPECIAL
R-00-1137
PERMIT FOR ONE MIAMI PROJECT LOCATED AT
309-361
205 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF PHASE I OF PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 34 STORY OFFICE TOWER, 49
STORY 425 RESIDENTIAL UNIT TOWER WITH
RELATED AMENITIES AND 12 STORY PARKING
GARAGE WHICH WILL INCLUDE 1,834 PARKING
SPACES (Applicant(s): The Related Group of Florida).
93.
CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL
12/14/00
REGARDING DERMOCOSMETIC SPA AS
M-00-1138
ACCESSORY USE TO HEALTH CLINIC AT 1900
362-363
BRICKELL AVENUE.
94.
DENY APPEAL AND AFFIRM ZONING
12/14/00
ADME\dSTRATOR'S INTERPRETATION
R-00-1139
REGARDING FREESTANDING BILLBOARDS IN SD-
364-373
6 CENTRAL COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS IN CITY (Applicant(s): Paul Warren,
President for North Star Media, Inc.)
95. DENY VARIANCE TO PERMIT 20-FOOT SETBACK 12/14/00
(50-FOOT REQUIRED) FOR PROPERTY BOUNDED M-00-1140
ON EAST BY METRO MOVER GUIDEWAY ON 374-387
WEST BY SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE ON NORTH BY
S.E. 4 STREET AND ON SOUTH BY MIAMI RIVER
(See #88).
96. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND 12/14/00
ORDINANCE 10544, CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE ORDINANCE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING LAND USE NO. 12007
DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5932 388-389
NE 2ND AVENUE FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL" TO "RESTRICTED
COMMERCIAL" (Applicant(s): Christian T. Neptune).
97. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE OF 12/14/00
ZONING AS LISTED IN ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ORDINANCE
ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, NO. 12008
SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, FROM R- 390-391
3 MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
TO C-1 RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5932 NE 2ND AVENUE
(Applicant(s): Christian T. Neptune).
98. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND 12/14/00
ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE
BY AMENDING ARTICLES 4, 9 AND 25 TO MODIFY NO. 12009
LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR 392-393
COMMUNITY BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES
(Applicant(s): City of Miami Planning and Zoning
Department).
99. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND 12/14/00
ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE, ORDINANCE
BY AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 916 TO NO.12010
MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO INTERIM 394-395
PARKING (Applicant(s): City of Miami Planning and
Zoning Department).
100. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND
ORDINANCE 11000, CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE,
BY AMENDING ARTICLE 9, SECTION 910 TO
MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO COVENANTS
IN LIEU OF UNITY OF TITLE AGREEMENTS TO
ALLOW FOR ACCEPTANCE IN R-4 ZONING
DISTRICT (Applicant(s): City of Miami Planning and
Zoning Department).
101. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND
CHAPTER 62/ARTICLE V OF CITY CODE ENTITLED
"ZONING AND PLANNING/APPOINTMENT OF
MEMBERS AND ALTERNATE MEMBERS OF
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ZONING
BOARD", TO AMEND PROVISIONS RELATED TO
COURTESY NOTICE FOR CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATIONS (Applicant(s): City of Miami Planning
and Zoning Department).
102. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION
62-156 OF CITY CODE ENTITLED "ZONING AND
PLANNING FEES", SCHEDULE OF FEES, TO
AMEND PROVISIONS RELATED TO MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT FEES, TO ADD TRAFFIC STUDY
REVIEW FEE FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
APPLICATIONS (Applicant(s): City of Miami Planning
and Zoning Department).
103. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE DISASTER
RELIEF FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR
PURPOSE OF ACCEPTING FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) GRANT FUNDS
FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EMERGENCY RELIEF
EXPENSES INCURRED BY CITY DURING AND IN
AFTERMATH OF OCTOBER SOUTH FLORIDA
FLOODS.
12/14/00
ORDINANCE
NO. 12011
12/14/00
ORDINANCE
NO. 12012
398-399
12/14/00
FIRST READING
ORDINANCE
400-401
12/14/00
M-00-1141
M-00-1142
R-00-1142.1
402-404
• 0
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 14th day of December 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 9:41 a.m. by Presiding Officer/Commissioner Wifredo Gort
with the following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Wifredo Gort (District 1)
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton (District 2)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4)
ALSO PRESENT:
Carlos Gimenez, City Manager
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk
Sylvia Lowman, Assistant City Clerk
ABSENT:
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5)
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Sanchez, after which, Commissioner Winton led
those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
1 12/14/00
1. CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION FOR CONTRIBUTIONS RELATED TO SAFE
HALLOWEEN CELEBRATIONS TO JOSE FERNANDEZ; JANICE ARMISTEAD; LUIS SABINES,
JR.; GEMA RUIZ AND JANE CAPRELLI.
2. PROCLAMATION OF NOVEMBER 12-19, 2000 AS BOOK FAIR WEEK.
3. CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ALLAPATTAH
MARKET TO: LT. RAMON FERNANDEZ, SGT. JORGE GOMEZ, OFF. WILLIAM CLAYTON,
OFF. MANUEL CABRERA, OFF. ARIEL SAUD, OFF. DONALD LAGO, OFF. VICTOR GIMENEZ,
OFF. ORLANDO MUNOZ, OFF. GILBERTO GOMEZ, OFF. MELISSA STUCKEY, OFF.
ANTONETTE SMITH, OFF. SALVADOR LOZANO, JORGE GARCIA, LAZARO ORTA, ALFREDO
MENEJIAS, NORMA MENDEZ, EDDIE BORGES.
4. ACCEPT CHECK FROM FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT FOR $100,000
(GRANT FOR PARKS AND RECREATION TO BE USED FOR PEACOCK PARK SHORELINE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BOARDWALK.)
5. CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO FLORIDA INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT.
CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION TO COMMISSIONER CATHERINE VOGEL (OF FLORIDA
INLAND NAVIGATION DISTRICT).
6. PROCLAMATION TO MARTHA G. MILLER, OWNER OF OVERTOWN DEFENDER
NEWSPAPER, FOR HER WORK RELATED TO ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY AND HER
WORK WITH CHILDREN.
Note for the record: Commissioner Teele entered the Commission Chamber at 9:47 a.m.
2 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Sanchez: We'll now go into the consent agenda. The --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Vice Chairman Gort: At this time, I'd like someone to make a motion for a resolution of condolences to
Sylvester "Curly" Winton.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move, Mr. Vice Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's been a motion and a second. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: To be signed by all the Commissioners.
Vice Chairman Gort: To be signed by the Mayor and all the Commissioners, the resolution.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1047
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING
DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST CONDOLENCES ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ITS CITIZENS TO THE
FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF SYLVESTER "CURLY" WINTON,
UPON HIS UNTIMELY DEATH.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
3 12/14/00
•
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
4 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Any one item that anybody would like to pull out of the Consent Agenda? Any one
item that any one of the Commissioners would like to pull out of the Consent Agenda?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Gimenez: Before you move on, I regretfully have to announce that Clarance Patterson, Jr., the son of
Clarance Patterson passed away this morning.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, do I have a motion for resolution, name?
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. All in favor state if by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
5 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1048
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING
DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST CONDOLENCES ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AND ITS CITIZENS TO THE
FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF CLARANCE PATTERSON, JR., UPON
HIS UNTIMELY DEATH.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
6 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Any pocket -- any item in the consent agenda that anybody would like to pull?
Being none, anyone in the public who would like to address -- yes, ma'am.
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): May I just clarify something?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Billberry: On CA-15, we have an item for a new concessionaire in the cafeteria at the MRC (Miami
Riverside Center) Building, and we would just like to clarify the fees, because, unfortunately, the latest
agreement wasn't copied. Basically, in Section 2.1, we would be permitting the concessionaire to utilize
the premises for catering for non -City functions, and they will be paying us a percentage fee of ten percent
of their gross revenues.
Vice Chairman Gort: Which is this?
Ms. Billberry: CA -- I'm sorry -- CA-20. And then in Section 5.1, we're clarifying that the fee for the
City, for catering non -City functions is ten percent. And they have indicated they will be subcontracting
the vending service, and in accordance with their proposal, the fee will be five percent of the revenues that
they receive.
Vice Chairman Gort: So that will be additional revenues for the City. And do you recommend the
number one team?
Ms. Billberry: I'm sorry. Yes, we recommend this.
Vice Chairman Gort: You are, which is Karlen Foods, Inc.?
Ms. Billberry: I'm sorry?
Vice Chairman Gort: Karlen Foods, Inc.?
Ms. Billberry: Karlen, yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. Anyone in the public who would like to address any of the
consent agenda items?
Commissioner Sanchez: Hearing none.
Vice Chairman Gort: Anyone in the public?
Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. The only thing, I would like to see are some of
these groups receiving Law Enforcement Trust Fund moneys, something like you got for the other bid,
like the other bids, the addresses of the -- because you only say Miami -Dade Criminal Justice System, but
7 12/14/00
I don't know who they are or what they are, like if I want to go and check them, just to see the address
here, too, in paper.
Vice Chairman Gort: The staff would be more than glad to supply you with all the information.
Mr. Cruz: OK. All right. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: And you're welcome to go to the meetings. They're open meetings to the public.
Commissioner Winton: Move the consent agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it 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.
THEREUPON MOTION DULY MADE BY COMMISSIONER WINTON AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ, THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WERE PASSED BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
8 12/14/00
0
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1049
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF PROFESSIONAL GENERAL CONTRACTORS, INC.,
FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "A HEAVY EQUIPMENT SERVICE
FACILITY COMMUNICATION WORKSHOP, LUNCH ROOM AND
RESTROOMS, B-6348," IN THE AMOUNT OF $115,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM PROJECT NO. 311841, AS
APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $115,000 FOR THE CONTRACT COSTS AND $13,353
FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $128,353;
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1050
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF GANCEDO TECHNOLOGIES, INC., FOR THE
PROJECT ENTITLED "HEAVY EQUIPMENT CITY GARAGE
GENERATOR, B-6313," IN THE AMOUNT OF $196,579;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM PROJECT NO. 311016, AS
APPROPRIATED BY THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ORDINANCES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $196,579, FOR THE CONTRACT COSTS AND $10,421
FOR EXPENSES, FOR A TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $207,000;
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
9 12/14/00
0 0
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1051
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF GREATER CARIBBEAN ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
FOUNDATION FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED "CITYWIDE CANAL
MAINTENANCE CONTRACT, B-5656," IN THE PROPOSED
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $83,850.00, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW
FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS; ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR FROM GENERAL FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.311002.6340.67041, IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,850.00 FOR
THE CONTRACT COSTS AND $11,709.50 FOR EXPENSES, FOR A
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF $95,559.50; AND AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1052
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF GOLDCOAST REFRIGERATION FOR THE
ACQUISITION AND INSTALLATION OF AIR CONDITIONING
CONDENSING UNITS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $18,275; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 312018.299401.6.840.
10 12/14/00
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1053
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF PUBLIC SAFETY DATA SERVICES, INC. FOR
REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION SERVICES FOR ONE HUNDRED
(100) MOBILE DIGITAL COMPUTERS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $20,000; ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST
FUND, PROJECT NO. 690003, SUCH EXPENDITURE HAVING
BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING
WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO
EQUITABLE SHARING."
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1054
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF MARTIN'S LAMAR UNIFORMS FOR THE
PROCUREMENT OF UNIFORM CLOTHING FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT. TO
EXCEED $426,294.12, ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR A PERIOD OF
TWO (2) YEARS, WITH THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO (2)
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO PRICE
ADJUSTMENT IN THE EXTENSION YEAR PERIOD(S);
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.290201.6.075.
11 12/14/00
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1055
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF ANDER POLICE SUPPLY FOR THE PROCUREMENT
OF UNIFORM ACCESSORIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE,
IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $287,794.70, ON A
CONTRACT BASIS FOR A PERIOD OF TWO (2) YEARS, WITH THE
OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR
PERIODS, SUBJECT TO PRICE ADJUSTMENT IN THE EXTENSION
YEAR PERIOD (S); ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET,
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.290201.6.075.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1056
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF
MIAMI, WEST GROVE COMPUTER EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM, IN
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND,
PROJECT NO. 690001, SUCH EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN
APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH
SECTION 932.7055, FLORIDA STATUTES (1999).
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1057
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF THE "DO THE RIGHT THING"
PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $45,242; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND,
PROJECT NO. 690001, SUCH EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN
APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH
SECTION 932.7055, FLORIDA STATUTES (1999).
12 12/14/00
u
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1058
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF THE COCONUT GROVE
PLAYHOUSE 2001 IN -SCHOOL TOURING PROGRAM IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $70,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND,
PROJECT NO. 690001, SUCH EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN
APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH
SECTION 932.7055, FLORIDA STATUTES (1999).
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1059
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF THE DADE-MIAMI CRIMINAL
JUSTICE COUNCIL, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $35,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO. 690001, SUCH
EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE CHIEF OF
POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH SECTION 932.7055, FLORIDA
STATUTES (1999).
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1060
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING THE RENTAL OF PORTABLE
TOILETS FROM CERTAIN VENDORS AS LISTED ON THE
ATTACHED NO. 1 FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING TO
BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ON AN AS -NEEDED
BASIS, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY CONTRACT
NO. 6118-2/01-1, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MAY 31, 2001, AND ANY
EXTENSIONS THERETO; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM
EACH OF THE OPERATING BUDGETS OF VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL.
13 12/14/00
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1061
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE PROCUREMENT AND INSTALLATION OF PLAYGROUND
EQUIPMENT AT EATON PARK DAYCARE CENTER FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION FROM LEADEX
CORPORATION, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
CONTRACT NO. 4907/3/98-2, EFFECTIVE THROUGH MAY 31, 2001,
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $17,900; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND
RECREATION FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 BUDGET, ACCOUNT
CODE NOS. 001000.580302.6.340, IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,900 AND
001000.580302.6.717, IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,000.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1062
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE PROCUREMENT OF ICE SERVICES FROM PERFECT ICE
CORPORATION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PURCHASING TO BE
USED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS ON AN AS -NEEDED
CONTRACT BASIS, UNDER EXISTING MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
CONTRACT NO. 0883-2/02-OTR, EFFECTIVE THROUGH OCTOBER
31, 2001, AND ANY EXTENSIONS THERETO; ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR FROM EACH OF THE OPERATING BUDGETS
OF VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY
APPROVAL.
14 12/14/00
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1063
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE FINDINGS OF THE COMPETITIVE SELECTION COMMITTEE
THAT THE MOST QUALIFIED FIRMS TO PROVIDE
PROFESSIONAL TECHNICAL SERVICES FOR A RADIO
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM STUDY FOR THE DEPARTMENTS
OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, POLICE AND FIRE -
RESCUE, ARE IN RANK ORDER: (1) RCC
CONSULTANTS/OMNICOM, INC., (2) HSMN/CTA
COMMUNICATIONS, AND (3) L. ROBERT KIMBALL &
ASSOCIATES; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY WITH RCC CONSULTANTS/OMNICOM, INC., THE
FIRST RANKED FIRM; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
WITH HSMN/CTA COMMUNICATIONS, THE SECOND RANKED
FIRM, AND THEN L. ROBERT KIMBALL & ASSOCIATES, THE
THIRD RANKED FIRM, IN THE EVENT A FAIR, COMPETITIVE
AND REASONABLE AGREEMENT CANNOT BE NEGOTIATED
AND EXECUTED WITH THE FIRST RANKED FIRM, OR SECOND
RANKED FIRM, AS APPROPRIATE.
15 12/ 14/00
® 9
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1064
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
16 12/14/00
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1065
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH MERCY
HOSPITAL, INC., ON BEHALF OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA URBAN
SEARCH AND RESCUE ("USAR") TASK FORCE, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING AND PROVIDING AN EXPENDABLE
MEDICAL CACHE OF SPECIFIC DRUGS AND SUPPLIES FOR
STATE OR FEDERAL ACTIVATED DISASTER RESPONSE, IN AN
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $4,200;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM (1) REQUIRED
DISASTER RESPONSE EXPENSES FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO.
110095.280906.6.714, AND (2) THE ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE
FOR MERCY HOSPITAL, IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,200, FROM
ACCOUNT CODE NO. 110091.280907.6.340, SAID ALLOCATIONS
CONTINGENT UPON ALL EXPENSES BEING 100%
REIMBURSABLE FROM STATE OR FEDERAL FUNDING
SOURCES.
17 12/14/00
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1066
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH THE FLORIDA
COMMUNITIES TRUST ("FCT"), A NON -REGULATORY AGENCY
WITHIN THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, TO ACCEPT A GRANT FROM THE FCT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $150,000, CONTINGENT UPON THE PROVISION
OF LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACQUIRING 3.25 ACRES OF LAND ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
LITTLE RIVER CANAL AT 399 NORTHEAST 82ND TERRACE,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR RESTORATION AS A NATURE PRESERVE
AND FUTURE CITY PARK TO BE KNOWN AS THE LITTLE RIVER
PRESERVE; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
APPLY TO THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS BOND PROGRAM
SERIES 2000 PROJECTS FOR THE MATCHING FUNDS REQUIRED
AS A CONDITION OF SAID GRANT.
18 12/ 14/00
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1067
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1068
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
19 12/14/00
C
E
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1069
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A GRANT OF EASEMENT OF APPROXIMATELY A 100
SQUARE FOOT PERPETUAL, NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, TO FLORIDA POWER
& LIGHT COMPANY, FOR THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS
ELIZABETH VIRRICK PARK, LOCATED AT 3255 PLAZA STREET,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN
"EXHIBIT A," ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF,
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
OVERHEAD AND UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC UTILITY
FACILITIES, WITH THE RIGHT TO RECONSTRUCT, IMPROVE,
CHANGE THE VOLTAGE, AND REMOVE SUCH FACILITIES OR
ANY COMPONENT THEREOF WITHIN THE EASEMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1070
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE USE AGREEMENT
("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM,
WITH F.L.T., INC. TO CHANGE THE COMMENCEMENT DATE OF
THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT FROM MARCH 1, 2001 TO
MARCH 1, 2002.
20 12/ 14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Manager, is there any one item you'd like to pull?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Is the Police Chief here? On consent agenda item number -- was it 9?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. He's -- he's here.
Commissioner Teele: Chief, this "Do the Right Thing" is being funded again, right?
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yes, sir. It's receiving partial funding for about three -- three to four
months of this year. They are part of the new process that we began that you all are aware of that is going
on right now, where all the groups will be assessed. There will be a committee put together to rank all the
requests for moneys, and sometime in January or February, we'll come back in front of the Commission
for funding for next year for those that are deemed the most appropriate.
Commissioner Teele: OK. I have confidence in you and confidence in your staff on this item, but there
are still some issues. And I didn't want to get into the consent agenda, but there are still some issues. I
really wish you and the Law Department would sit down and work it out, because the one thing that I
think, just as a post -script to all of this, is that if we're funding "Do the Right Thing," and all of that, "Do
the Right Thing" should meet the same requirements as other public agencies. And, you know, we've sort
of swept this under the rug and -- you know. But we went through a period where the media couldn't get
information, the Commission couldn't get information, and I have no problems with the funding, I support
it fully. But I just think there's some unfinished business. And I don't know if you, and the Manager and
the Attorney have worked all this out, but do we have this thing solved now?
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner, if I may. The reason that it's a partial funding is because all the issues have
not been resolved to my satisfaction. And until they are resolved to my satisfaction, then we won't be
coming for full funding of this.
Commissioner Teele: Well, there's another way to do that, and you could -- you could fund them subject
to, see. You know, you don't have to negotiate a lot. You just say, "Here's the money. It's subject to
these conditions." But I really do think that as this program comes back -- it's a good program. It's not
something we ought to walk away from. But I really do think we ought to resolve those issues that we've
never really resolved. And all of us were uncomfortable when the media was glaring on this, you know.
We were all wringing our hands. I think now is the time to get that legislation correct. And Mr. Attorney,
as much as' anyone, my intent is to ensure that "Do the Right Thing" meets the Florida Public Records
Law and other laws that these type of agencies that receive this kind of funding should do, please.
21 12/14/00
•
Chief Martinez: And Commissioner, if I may add, 1, like you, agree that this is a wonderful program.
And just because some adults may not have done something that's right, we shouldn't punish the kids that
get rewarded every month. They, to get this forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) that they're going to get
if you approve it, have gone through the same criteria that everybody else that gets funded. For the new
process, they're going to have to submit all the paperwork and all the oversight.
Commissioner Teele: You know, let me tell you something. We got a long agenda. I don't want to -- Mr.
Chairman, we need to move the agenda forward, but let me say two things about that. Number one, I
don't think "Do the Right Thing" ought to be put in that category, because, number one, it puts everybody
else at a disadvantage. Number two, this is a City program. We're sort of the sponsors of this. And I
question whether or not -- I mean, I understand that you're trying to have transparency, competition, all
that. But I don't even know if we ought to do that. I really don't. I wish you all would think about that.
That is going out with all the CBO's, community based organizations, including "Do the Right Thing," to
have a competition and apply. I think we ought to fund them off the top, personally and -- as long as they
do the right thing, so to speak -- and do that. Is Major Clark still sort of the manager of this program?
Chief Martinez: Well, she's not the manager. She's one of the board members. There's a board of
directors. And also, Linda Haskins, who is the Budget Director for the City is also a board member of the
board, and we have quite a few dedicated citizens that are part of that board, and some of them are here.
Commissioner Teele: But when I was in Washington -- just so that you know the history -- and well
received in Miami, because I would bring money here, Major Clark was a beat officer, and I got to know
her. I have a lot of confidence in Major Clark's professionalism and her honesty. So I feel good about the
program. I don't want you to -- you know, I know how somebody can take something -- please don't
misconstrue what I'm saying. I just think we ought to get it resolved. I really do.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Commissioner Teele.
22 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item number 2 -- Before we go into the news racks, I had a request from the
Coconut Grove Art Festival. It's something nice and quick. Could you come up, please? Which item is
this? Name and address, and the item.
Carol Romine: It is Item 11, requesting the alcohol and wine permits, and the street closures for the 38tn
Annual Coconut Grove Arts Festival.
Commissioner Teele: Johnny, do you support that?
Commissioner Winton: I'm sorry. I didn't --
Commissioner Teele: Coconut Grove Arts Festival, exemption to sell --
Ms. Romine: Alcohol and --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. And the only question I had is the waiver of fees for park usage. And my
view is that the waiver ought to be consistent with what we've done with every other organization that's
come before us this year. I don't want something extra. I don't want something less. I just want it to be
consistent in terms of what we've done. So -- and their request in number 4, it doesn't state how much
that is. And I just want it clear for the record that I want it to be equal to what we've been doing since I
landed on this Commission.
Ms. Romine: Commissioner, that actually is not our request, but if I am correct, the Chamber's request.
So we had no waiver put into place, unless I stand corrected.
Commissioner Winton: Is this 1 I?
Unidentified Speaker: Twelve.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, no wonder.
Ms. Romine: Twelve. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Winton: All right. Well, I was speaking to 11. That's what I turned to.
Ms. Romine: I'm sorry.
23 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion on number 12.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. It's been moved and seconded. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor,
state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you and have a good day.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1071
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO
THE 38TI ANNUAL BANK OF AMERICA COCONUT GROVE ARTS
FESTIVAL, CONDUCTED BY THE COCONUT GROVE
ASSOCIATION, INC., TO BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 17-19, 2001;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ISSUE A THREE-DAY
PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES DURING
SAID EVENT IN THE AREA OF McFARLANE ROAD FROM SOUTH
BAYSHORE DRIVE TO MAIN HIGHWAY AND SOUTH BAYSHORE
DRIVE FROM McFARLANE ROAD TO MAIN HIGHWAY,
INCLUDING ALL STREETS, AVENUES, ALLEYS, WAYS AND
THOROUGHFARES WHICH INTERSECT SAID AREAS IN
COCONUT GROVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA; SAID AUTHORIZATION
CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1) OBTAINING ALL
PERMITS REQUIRED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO A TEMPORARY PERMIT TO SELL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS REGULATION,
DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO,
PURSUANT TO SECTION 54-13 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; (2) PAYING FOR ALL
NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES
ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT; (3) OBTAINING INSURANCE
TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY
THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE; (4) INSTITUTING AN
IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM TO ASSURE THAT ONLY THOSE
INDIVIDUALS OVER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE MAY
PURCHASE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; (5) ADVISING ALL
ADJACENT BUSINESSES, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND RESIDENTS
OF STREET CLOSURES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT; AND
(6) COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS
MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
24 12/ 14/00
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
25 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: I understand the Mayor has two other presentations.
Commissioner Winton: And Carol, sorry. I was reading the wrong thing.
Carol Romine: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Mayor Carollo: I apologize. We have a couple more presentations that we need to make. Captain, would
you come up, please. Johnny, could you possibly read this? Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Winton: Hope I can read it today. A proclamation, City of Miami, Florida. Whereas
December 1, 2000 marks the 59th anniversary of the Civil Air Patrol, a volunteer public service arm of the
United States Air Force, this unique civilian auxiliary was established to help America in its hour of need
during the dark days of World War II. Today, the group of volunteers is dedicated to servicing humanity
in non-combatant defense of our nation; and whereas the members of the Civil Air Patrol, Florida Wing
give their time and resources for the benefit of fellow Americans through aerial and ground search and
rescue operations, humanitarian and mercy flights and many other unselfish acts in times of emergencies;
and whereas this organization of volunteers also conduct an effective national program of aerospace
education, leadership training -- leadership training and development, and career motivation to its teenage
cadet members and the general public, and now therefore, I, Joe Carollo, Mayor of the City of Miami,
Florida, do hereby proclaim the month of December of the year 2000 as Civil Air Patrol Month.
Captain George Navarini: I understand we're running a meeting, so I'll keep my remarks short. Mr.
Mayor, members of the City Council, ladies and gentlemen, good morning. On behalf of Colonel Antonio
Pineda, Wing Commander for Florida Wing and the 4,000 members of Florida Wing Civil Air Patrol, we
thank you gentlemen. We thank the City of Miami for this single honor. As the Mayor just read a
moment ago -- actually, Councilman just read a moment ago -- our organization is in its 59th year. We
were formed a week before Pearl Harbor, as many observers across the country saw the war clouds
glooming in Europe and realized that that storm would come to the United States. And in the weeks and
months to come, that storm did not just come to the United States, but it came to the shores of South
Florida. And it's interesting, we're honoring an aviation organization, and we're sitting basically at that
point was an air terminal. And basically, from this building, at least once a week, the people of the State
of Florida, the people of the City of Miami could see the awful fireworks of an American ship burning in
the horizon. And rather than just sit idly by, those who knew how to fly, those who knew aviation came
together. They could not join the armed forces, because of age or other difficulties, and they joined Civil
Air Patrol. And they took to the sky in a myriad of small aircraft. Twenty-six of them lost their lives, but
they also sank a few submarines, and they saved thousands of American lives, both onboard the ships, and
26 12/ 14/00
0
our men and women were fighting overseas. The true measure of what we did came to pass in 1947 when
the United States Armed Forces were interviewing the leaders of Nazi Germany. And when they spoke to
the submarine commander, Grand Admiral Donetz (phonetic), and they asked him why, in 1942, did
Germany stop the submarine warfare off the coast of the United States, he threw down his hat, and he
said, "It's those damned yellow airplanes." And those were the CAP (Civil Air Patrol) aircraft. In the
years that have passed since World War II, Civil Air Patrol has fought a new scourge. Our organization,
although we are non-combatant, we do provide counter -narcotic flights for DEA (Drug Enforcement
Agency), for Forest Service, and for other federal agencies. We also work in conjunction with several
county and state agencies and city agencies to help with our youth. The best way I can describe what we
are -- the combat we are fighting today is a young lady that was in my squadron about three years ago.
Young lady -- we have no idea where mom is, other than the fact she is a druggie out on the west coast of
the United States, and dad's best friend is Jim Bean. 15 years old, good looking, and lived in a gang -
infested area. When I first met Sarah, I interviewed her, and I asked her what she wanted to do when she
graduated from high school. And she looked at me with cocky eyes and said, "Survive." I'll cut straight
to the chase, because you guys still have a meeting to run. Sarah, this September, will be accepted into the
Air Force ROTC (Reserve Officers' Training Corps) Nurses Program. She went from being a potential
gang member to now going to be a member of the United States Air Force, and be an officer in the United
States Air Force. So even in its 59"' anniversary, Civil Air Patrol is still rescuing Americans, one at a
time., Again, I'd like to thank the Mayor. I'd like to thank the City of Miami for its support in the past,
and I'd like to thank all of you for your support, both in the past and in the future. Thank you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Teele: Well, speaking of rescue, Mr. Mayor, you have given me the high honor again of
acknowledging a person who has saved many souls in our community. I'd like to bring forth Reverend
Dr. Ralph M. Wright. He's a native. Whereas -- did I say "Wright"? Dr. Ralph M. Ross. Dr. Ross,
Reverend Ross, Pastor Ross is a native of Miami, is married to the former Gertrude Stephens of
Philadelphia. Reverend and his wife have been blessed with -- it says five, and has in parentheses six --
six children and ten grandchildren. Reverend Ross is the spiritual of the historic Mount Zion Baptist
Church, and has been the pastor since 1990. He has also trained, and licensed, and ordained five
individuals to serve a deacon and deaconess in the church's ministry, and he's offered compassion and
support for the congregation and really, the community. Pastor Ross has the vision of a new faith and
challenge -- has brought a vision of new faith and challenge to Mount Zion, and has provided himself as a
well rounded spiritual leader. Whereas Reverend Ross has been an active member of the Overtown
Advisory Executive Board, Empowerment Zone, Neighborhood Linkage Executive Board, the President
of the Mount Zion Development Corporation, and a former United States Navy officer, he continues to
provide spiritual support to the Navy Chaplains Corps. Whereas on the occasion of the tenth year -- it's
been ten already? -- Tenth year of his service to the historic Mount Zion Missionary Baptist Church in the
City of Miami, local authorities salute Reverend Ralph Ross for his many, many contributions to our
community. Now, therefore, I, Joe Carollo, as Mayor of the City, do hereby proclaim Friday, December
1, 2000 as Reverend Dr. Ralph Ross Day. And we call upon the residents to join in celebrating this
important date for this important man of God.
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Carollo: Thank you.
27 12/14/00
Reverend Ralph Ross: Nothing ever fits me, so pardon my bending over. First of all, I'd like to express
my sincerest appreciation to the honorable Mayor and the Commission for acknowledging me in this
outstanding way. We are simply a church on the corner, trying to light a torch for God and for good. And
we are not making a lot of noise. We're just simply trying to touch lives. And one simple example is that
we have a young man who lived in Gibson Park, who was a drug addict for four years. And he is now
actively working in our church, and has abandoned his drug addiction. So we thank God for that
opportunity and for the opportunity to serve our City as a religious institution. May God bless you and
keep you.
(APPLAUSE)
Vice Chairman Gort: Is that it? OK. Item 2.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, before we proceed, we'd like to pull Item 18-B and item
number 47.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 18-13 and 47 will be pulled.
Note for the Record: At this point, agenda items 18-B and 47 were withdrawn.
28 12/14/00
BRIEFDIS'CUSSION REGARDING NEWSRCKS ORDINANCE (Seems#=11) .''1 11 1 - � I I
Vice Chairman Gort: I understand we had a lot of workshops, and everybody is in agreement, and we
don't have any problems.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Oh, it's one happy family. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I'm
Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager for Operations. And we're going to do a presentation to you this
morning on a proposal for a news rack ordinance, which has been in the works for quite some time --
years, I hear.
29 12/14/00
0
r�
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I'm probably going to abstain from this. With your permission -- and I won't say
anything on the newspaper rack, because I don't agree with it, anyway. With your permission, could I just
bring one little up, non -controversial?
Vice Chairman Gort: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: Item 8. It's a public waiver of a conflict of interest under Section 2-611 and 2-614,
such a provision applying to one former City of Miami employee, Anne Sterling. So move, Mr.
Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
30 12/14/00
•
0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1072
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION BY A FOUR
FIFTHS (4/5THs) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, WAIVING THE PROHIBITIONS
CONTAINED IN SECTIONS 2-611 THROUGH 2-614 OF THE CODE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AS SUCH
PROHIBITION PERTAINS TO ANNE STERLING, A FORMER
EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, IN RELATION TO
HER REPRESENTATION BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION AS
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS FOR THE BOYS AND GIRLS
CLUB OF MIAMI, INC.
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
31 12/ 14/00
•
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, number nine is the same issue, with a different
person. So, I — if you agree, I'll move it.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and second. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor state
by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1073
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION BY A FOUR
FIFTHS (4/5Txs) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, WAIVING THE PROHIBITIONS
CONTAINED IN SECTIONS 2-611 THROUGH 2-614 OF THE CODE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AS SUCH
PROHIBITION PERTAINS TO JOHN F. LINDSAY, A FORMER
EMPLOYEE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ENTERING INTO
A CONTRACT, TRANSACTING BUSINESS WITH AND FOR THE
CITY, OR APPEARING BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION AS A
CONSULTANT FOR THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City
Clerk.)
32 12/14/00
•
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
33 12/14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Yes, sir.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): OK. Here we go. All right. Again, Frank Rollason, Assistant
City Manager of Operations. And we're going to do a presentation to you on a proposal on a newsrack
ordinance that will take the place of the current one that we have.
Vice Chairman Gort: Frank, let me ask you a question.
Mr. Rollason: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: For the sake of time, I think --
Mr. Rollason: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: I've read it. I think most of us have read it. Why don't we go right into if there is
any differences, or if we have any questions? Or would you all like to see the whole presentation? What
is the wish of the board?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I think they ought to just present what the conflict issue is. It's my
understanding it's one issue, and that's whether it's going to be one color, or you're going to have
multiple colors, or are you going to have bands, or signs, or something. And let's just get to the issue.
Mr. Rollason: Well, OK. We'll cut to the chase, as we say. Let's do that. Why don't we go ahead and
flip through this and get to where the color picture is of -- of the -- This is the best way to do a
presentation, too, by the way. All right, here we are. This is the style of the newsrack that we're
proposing. One with -- on the left, which is the one without a coin box, which is an honor system. And
the one on the right are for the free press. And the one on the right has a coin -operated device. The color
that is there, which is not as we would like it as aesthetically, with the picture that we took, but it's a green
color, which you can see that it's a green, shade of green. But I think the issue is, is that some of the
industry wants to retain the color of their particular boxes. We, as a committee, and from input from the
downtown businesspeople and the community have recommended that they all be the same color. The
way we have tried to address the problem so that there is an effort on our part that the publications can be
identified is that originally, these bands you see up here, one's called The Informer. The other one is
called The Advocate. There's no -- nothing inferred by that, just two names that we picked. But it was
just to give you an idea. Originally, the bands were going to be four inches in width, and the writing was
going to be two inches. We, after meeting with the industry, we increased the bandwidth to six inches and
the writing, lettering to three inches. It can be of any color, design that they desire to have in that. Those
bands go around three sides, or two sides in the back, and on the front, we have the band that's two and a
half inches across the bottom on the front, with the lettering one and three quarter inches. So there we are
with what they will look like. So at that point, if you want to, you know, open it up for input from the
industry and the public. That seemed to be the major bone of contention at our last meeting. We worked
34 12/ 14/00
out a lot of other things with mounting, and brackets, and all that type of thing, hardware, stickers. Those
things, I think we settled.
Vice Chairman Gort: You also had a presentation by a company. They were willing to do --
Mr. Rollason: The modulars.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- modulars. And those people who could not afford to do their own, they would be
able to have spaces in it and so on.
Mr. Rollason: Well, the modular presentation that was given to us at the committee was from an industry
that presented it in a way that they would come and put this in, and the way that they recoup their or made
their money was from the advertising. The issue of the advertising is not directly addressed in this
ordinance. And that really became a bone of contention between different people as to whether they'd be
modulars or stand-alone.
Vice Chairman Gort: Because one of the main reasons that we had in here, although Ted brought it in, in
downtown Miami, we've had a major problem with all the (unintelligible) that go in there and looking
completely different and not being maintained. And right now, as you are aware, we're going to go the
reconstruction of the Flagler Street with the Flagler Marketplace, and we'd like to see something uniform,
hopefully.
Mr. Rollason: Well, I think what we were able to result from this -- and a modular is in the ordinance.
There is an option to use a modular. And we felt that by having these the same color and the same style,
and the maximum of five of them together, it gives us the same width that a modular would have, as far as
the aesthetics, if the individual -- industry decided to stay with individual racks.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Regalado: I have a question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'll yield and then I'll go after Tomas.
Commissioner Regalado: Several issues. Seems that one of the ways to help the industry, especially
those papers who are free, it would be through the modular set. However, one of the issues that has not
been resolved is advertising. That's the only way that they can use to defray the cost in order for them to
have their papers free. It's not in the ordinance.
Mr. Rollason: No, sir, it is not.
Commissioner Regalado: Is there going to be like another debate or --? There is opposition from the
Grove, from downtown about advertising. So this is -- this is one of the things that we should deal with.
And the other thing that I -- I read the ordinance, and I don't think, frankly, that we, as a City can meet the
deadlines that you have in the ordinance. Thirty days, file an application, and 30 days, you're going to
35 12/14/00
•
have your permit, and 30 days, you're going to have your stand. I don't -- I just don't think that we have
the manpower to do that. So I -- I don't know who's going to be blamed -- the industry or the City -- if
those deadlines are not met. And the sec -- and the third is the compliance. They got a year. Fine. But I
think that we need to start doing some quality of life work now. This has not been done. We had a
meeting with the Coconut Grove community almost nine months ago or something like that. We
promised them -- And if you go to Coral Way and 371h Avenue on the City of Miami sidewalk, you are
It going to see 11 newsracks. Two are not being used. Two are just filled with trash and garbage. Papers
are all over the floor. The paint on four of them, it's almost gone. So in this period of transition, when we
approve this ordinance, we've got to do something in order to expedite the quality of life, because that's
what we want. I guess that everybody agrees that we've got to do something, because the situation with
these newsracks is out of control. I think, I think that in Coral Way and 371h, most -- at least two or three,
I don't think they could have permits. I don't think that they -- they just placed it there because it's a nice
place to go. And by the way, two of them are loose. On a 40-mile wind, you can have a tragedy,
especially in that intersection. Now, those are some of the issues that I have. But I think that we need to
resolve the modular situation, because we can't -- we can't decide on something that is not -- that is half
finished. And --
Mr. Rollason: Let me address the three items that you brought up. Let's talk about the advertising for a
moment. Today, you will hear a proposal come before you from the industry for a pilot type program with
the modulars to attempt to address the advertising. And I think it's probably a pretty good compromise in
that it would give us an opportunity to try some of it in some areas and see what the results are, and to see
what kind of participation they really do, in fact, allow the free press to take part in. Or is it going to be
difficult for them to get in? And that's one of the concerns that the free press has expressed to us about
the modulars, is it -- what's the control going to be and how they get their foot in the door. So I think
you'll hear a presentation on that, and then a little bit about the advertising. And we're open to trying a
pilot program. The time lines you speak of, they are aggressive from the beginning when we look at the
huge number of racks that are out there that have to be brought into compliance. But when you look at it
from the standpoint of new newsracks coming in and being permitted, as will happen, they are reasonable.
And the City should certainly be able to meet those times, and not set longer times, and have the industry
having to wait needlessly for a decision on whether or not their permit is going to be approved. The way
we have addressed this is that we have allowed the existing racks that are permitted to notify us within 15
days of this ordinance finally passing in January, you know, if it passes the two readings, that they intend
to maintain the racks that they have. And by doing that, they will lock those positions up, and then they'll
have 30 days to put their applications in. And we'll, in turn-- we'll have to add some people and do kind
of a crunch thing to get those things out. But it's our intent to make those-- make those time frames. And
on the compliance, you're exactly right on that. I mean, we think that a lot of this is going to help us with
the compliance. It will be very simple by color to see if a rack belongs there to begin with. And number
two, there will be the permits affixed in the same place. The Department of Public Works will affix the
first permit, and they'll do an inspection on site to make sure that the rack has been installed in the proper
place, in the proper way. And from that time on, the racks will be renewed, and they will have the same
numbers, and we'll be able to keep a better handle on it. You are correct, and Mr. Jackson has told us that
he's probably going to need another body to help him with this process, and we're aware of that. But it's
something that needs to be addressed, and it's going to take some personnel to make it happen, and we
intend to do it.
36 12/14/00
Commissioner Regalado: One question that I don't remember. I -- I think I saw it, but I just want to make
sure. Who's going to be responsible for the graffiti?
Mr. Rollason: The owners of the racks. We will enforce it, and there's -- in other words, we didn't go
through the full presentation, but there are stipulations on there as far as the paint being maintained, it
being graffiti free, and also, when we go to pull a rack, because they don't comply that we agreed with the
industry that we would give them -- instead of just pulling a rack off the sidewalk, that we would notify
them for anything other than not having a permit. If there's one out there without a permit, it's going bye-
bye. But if they're out there because they haven't maintained it with paint or graffiti, we'll put them on
notice before we come and pull a rack; give them a chance to square it away.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, thank you. This is one of the many quality of life issues that
will improve the appearance of our City, and also would improve the value of properties around. So I
commend the administration and everyone that worked so hard in putting this together. After studying the
.issue, .I must say that there are a lot of restrictions here, restrictions that both sides have agreed on. And
just to give you a breakdown of so many restrictions that were put on, basically, on location, maintenance,
features, if you read Section 54-296, which is the newsrack mounting standards, the following standards
shall be applicable to the mounting of newsracks on concrete surface: "Two "U-shaped steel brackets,
7/64ths inch thick and one and a quarter inch high and wide with a depth equal to that of the newsrack.
One hole shall be at each corner of the steel bracket for anchor or bolts." I mean, you really went into
details to assure that this was done properly. After reviewing everything, there's only one thing that really
I have a problem with. And first of all, going back to the modular newsrack, the compromise that we're
making will benefit the City, without a doubt. All the little newspapers in our community, which they
have every right, and they -- that's how they make a living, and God bless them. You know, these little
papers, City papers, they're local papers, I'd say a good percentage of them end up in our streets. And
then Solid Waste is the one that has to pick up the scattered newspapers throughout our community. So
this modular newsrack will allow them the opportunity to be able to put it in a place where I think that
with the wind and the elements of our community, you know, we will reduce those papers on the street,
therefore improving our City. Now, the only concern that I have here is: One, that everyone must be
treated fair, and impartial treatment must be applied to everyone, from the smallest little newspapers to the
biggest newspaper in our community. The other thing that I have a concern with, Frank is trademark.
You know, trademark, the trademarks -- You know, it's us restricting someone. To put an example
together would be us telling McDonald's that they can't have a golden arch. It's like telling our nation's
flag that they can't have red, white and blue. You know, these are the things that I'm a little concerned
with when we really start putting restrictions that are affecting people's income or a company's income.
You know, we are truly a City of colors. This is -- Miami is Miami for the different colors and stuff. So
that is one thing that I have expressed some concern and hope that, you know, we could come to an
agreement. But when you have -- when you're restricting people from displaying their colors, what is --
what could be identified -- You know, people usually look at a sign and you could identify. You know,
my daughter is four years old, and when we drive around town, she goes "Taco Bell." She can't read, but
she knows Taco Bell. You know, Burger King, she can't read, but she knows Burger King. So that's the
only concern that I have here. It's, you know, basically doing away with colors. To be honest with you,
that green, I don't like. I told you that in the meeting that we had. It's a horrible green. But that is what
it's all about. But I want to be fair with everyone, from the smallest little local newspaper to the Miami
37 12/14/00
Herald, which is the biggest paper in our community. I think that to deprive people from exhibiting their
colors and their trademark, it's something that, you know, I -- I just can't venture into doing that. So
that's a concern that I want to express on the record.
Mr. Rollason: I understand. Well, let me go back over again real quickly how we attempted to address
that, and try to, you know, have the wisdom of, you know, splitting the baby, so to speak. There is a
group that is very vehemently against them all looking alike for the aesthetics and what it does, and I'm
sure you're going to hear from those people. And there are those that want it to stand-alone and be what
they were. Our position coming off of that were the colored bands and allowing those to be of any color
and increasing them to six inches. And in the experiment we did with putting racks out and walking a
distance away -- Like I went to the Gables and we went to several other places where you walk outside,
and you just want to glance down and say, "Where can I see that I could pick up a particular newspaper
and identify it with a color?" And with that six-inch band, it was very easy to see yellow, red, blue, light
blue, dark blue, whatever. And I think that when you start to standardize it throughout the community, it
may become a lot easier for people to start to see exactly what they're going to pick up, because they will
-- it will look the same wherever you are in the City of Miami. And it also will start to set a tone or for a
way that we expect our sidewalks and public rights -of -way to look. We're now looking at the trashcans
and redoing those so that they can be in some kind of coordination, and the other street furniture, as we
start redoing downtown Flagler Street, that we just don't have a hodgepodge of what we have now. So we
felt this was a good compromise. And we feel that if you put a set of these side by side, and you look out
there, and you identify a particular color with a newspaper, you're going to see that color, and you're
going to be able to go over there and pick it up.
Commissioner Sanchez: Here's another question I have for you, Mr. Rollason. One is, all the regulations
that apparently from my understanding is that they have agreed on, it's going to cost them a lot of money
to basically do what they have to do, all the changes that they have to do to meet standards, first of all.
Once again, I remember Solid Waste was an industry that basically had no regulations, laws had no teeth.
We addressed that issue. I was blessed by this Commission to be appointed as the Chairman for the Solid
Waste Committee. We're doing the same thing here. For many, many years, we didn't have -- I felt or I
still feel that we didn't have enough regulations, or we didn't apply the rules that were there already. So
bringing this out, bringing this forward and coming to these agreements which we have come to an
agreement with, in the long run, these people, including -- and I don't want to mention any names,
because I'm going to leave somebody out -- but it's going to cost them money to make all these required
improvements to meet standards.
Mr. Rollason: Well, let's speak to that for a minute. First of all, I don't want to give the impression
sitting -- standing here in front of you all -- it may look like I'm sitting, but I'm standing up -- that they
agreed with everything that we have here. What I'm saying here is the bone of contention was color when
we left. At the September Commission meeting, we were directed to go back one more time to meet with
the industry, and try to go over those issues. And at that meeting, there were a myriad of issues that
resulted in why you see these specifications that you have, that the industry came to us and said, "Look,
you are making this so restrictive that we can only have this one particular newsrack. There's another one
that's very similar to this. It's a little more inexpensive, and if you would relent a little bit on this
dimension, or relent a little bit on this type of -- instead of saying stainless steel hardware, it can be non-
corrosive, we could buy this cheaper rack." We agreed to all those. We agreed to a major change in how
they're mounted so that they are now allowed to mount to our sidewalks, which was being prohibited.
38 12/14/00
That sped up their installation time. It allowed them not to have to have several people to deliver a
newsrack with a big, heavy weight on it to sit there. And the angle that you speak to was another
concession that we gave that made it to where they could more easily do the installation. Rather than
installing them from inside the box, they could run this bracket along the side, et cetera, et cetera. So we
feel that the administration has tried to strike a compromise with the objective of coming up with some
type of a standard. And we have allowed a year for compliance, for that to come into compliance. So.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Why don't we hear from those people that are here from the public that
participated? Then let's ask them, because I have some questions myself I want to pass this around. This
is in Chicago.
Mr. Rollason: I saw that. Yeah, pretty neat.
Vice Chairman Gort: And Chicago Tribune is a pretty major paper, isn't it? It's considered --
Mr. Rollason: I would think so.
Vice Chairman Gort: They're here.
Commissioner Sanchez: See, all the trips have paid for themselves. OK, that's a great idea that we
brought back from Chicago.
Mr. Rollason: You're right. I mean and the modulars pose some terrific opportunities to us.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Lori Weems: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Lori Weems, 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite
3000. I'm here representing the Miami Herald Publishing Company, which includes the Miami Herald, El
Nuevo Herald, Street and El Viernes. We have -- we appreciate -- First, let me express my deep
appreciation to staff and to Mr. Stahl and the community, because we have worked a lot. We've worked
hard. We've worked long in four workshops. The last one was a marathon workshop. And we did give a
lot, and we do appreciate the --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Let me stop you a minute. There's a meeting going on outside. Can
we stop it, please? Go ahead. Sorry.
Ms. Weems: We have worked diligently to try to come to compromise. But Commissioners, there is one
issue that we simply cannot compromise on. It is critical to us that we maintain our trademark design and
color. And there's a reason for it beyond simply painting the newsracks. The reason -- and I have tried to
reach -- tried to reach each of you individually to discuss it -- is that we have empirical data, from the
experience that we went through in Coral Gables in 1990. And I'd like to share it with you in the form of
this chart. This represents our decline in sales, starting in May of 1990, when implementation of
monotone, mono -scheme newsracks went into effect in Coral Gables that shows we experienced in Coral
Gables a 36 percent decline in sales. This obviously affects our profit, but it also affects jobs and it affects
the ability of people to get their newspapers. On our Sunday, which is obviously our large distribution
day, we experienced a 25 percent decrease in sales. These decreases have been consistent over the years.
39 12/14/00
In other words, we haven't rebounded. There hasn't been a standardization that Mr. Rollason referred to.
In Coral Gables, we're talking about 30 newsracks. In the City of Miami, we're talking about 900. We
agree completely with Commissioner Sanchez that the City of Miami is a City of color. It's a City of
diversity. And we believe that we can meet the aesthetic standards and goals that are being sought to meet
by the community today by maintaining our trademark colors. Remember, we're talking about limits in
numbers of five newsracks, newsracks that will all be the same size. They'll be plumb -- in other words,
level with one another, same width, same depth. They'll all be mounted. There won't be more than five
within 300 feet of anything. The only difference that we're asking you for is the difference in color and
design. Obviously, aesthetics is naturally subjective. But we believe that when considered in cooperation
with the empirical data relating to the loss of sales and concurrent loss of jobs that are independent
contractor distributors, that are employees, and the loss of access that the public is going to have that the
balance swings in favor of us. Again, this is a critical issue to us. It -- we've come a long way, and we
really have to reach a common ground here on this issue.. We cannot give up. It's critical to us. I can't
express enough respect to the staff and the community, and it's with regret that we can't compromise on
this issue, but we simply can't. It would be similar to asking the City of Miami to market itself without
the benefit of a palm tree, the golden sun, or a pink flamingo. And obviously, that would not be desirable,
nor workable. At this time, I'd like to briefly defer to Nelson Fonticiella, who is the single copy manager
with Miami Herald Publishing Company. I'd like to introduce him, and allow him to answer any business
questions or other questions you might have, and let him briefly address you.
Commissioner Winton: Well, Lori, I'm struggling with the compromise that you're offering. It sounds to
me like you want what you've got, and that's what you want to keep.
Ms. Weems: Commissioner, we have compromised more -- this is -- what you see in front of you is the
strictest newsrack ordinance in the State of Florida that I'm aware of.
Commissioner Winton: But not in the country.
Ms. Weems: We've compromised -- oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.
Commissioner Winton: But not in the country.
Ms. Weems: No, no.
Commissioner Winton: It may be strictest in Florida.
Ms. Weems: No, no, no. In Florida. We're talking about restrictions on height; we've met on width,
depth, material, mounting, cement type, cement color, bolting, type of steel, location --
Commissioner Winton: But Lori, those pieces that you're talking about don't have a thing to do with what
we're trying to solve, and that's quality of life issues, where we have everybody's individual box all over
our City. And there's -- and you've -- you know, you go downtown. You're on Brickell Avenue.
Ms. Weems: I live downtown, Commissioner.
40 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: It's a disgraceful mess. And so -- so those little pieces about the brackets, and the
bolts and that stuff, that's not -- that's -- I don't consider that part of the compromise. The compromise is
the aesthetic part that the public sees. And that's what we're really looking for here. We're looking at
what the public's viewing in terms of a -- of a quality, neat looking community, as opposed to one that
looks like it's just "Wild West," or "Wild East," or "Wild Miami."
Ms. Weems: Or "Wild Southeast." Commissioner, with respectful permission to Lucia, I'm going to use
actually a photograph that City Solutions, who you're going to hear from briefly. Again, who we have --
we're not expressing opinion on today. And believe me, that again represents a long stretch of
compromise from our early days, Commissioner. But first of all, I just -- I just -- These will look, these
racks will look exactly the same. They will -- as far -- in every single respect, except for their design.
And let me just -- if I may approach you, let me just show you what I believe exemplifies -- (inaudible,
speaking off microphone).
Commissioner Winton: Which one here are you saying is the good one and the bad one?
Ms. Weems: Commissioner, together, I think that they look aesthetically pleasing. I don't think that --
Commissioner Winton: Which ones do?
Ms. Weems: The entire picture. That's a combination.
Commissioner Winton: Looks aesthetically pleasing?
Ms. Weems: I don't think that it's aesthetically ugly, Commissioner. Obviously, as I mentioned earlier,
aesthetics are subjective. You can't -- But we are -- we really do believe that this City is a City of color,
and that our colors can be consistently applied with that. Let me turn it over to Nelson Fonticiella to
further address your concerns.
Nelson Fonticiella: Good morning. Nelson Fonticiella, 1 Herald Plaza. And I'm with the Miami Herald,
obviously, and am personally responsible for most of the racks that we are discussing here in the City of
Miami today. I can certainly understand the City's position and request. There has been over recent years
a proliferation of newsracks. There are corners that have ten or more. Understand the City's position in
trying to limit the number of those on a corner, and certainly can understand the position' of a number of
racks having a uniform look to that. My point and the point that Lori has made today, and again what
Commissioner Sanchez spoke briefly about earlier, I -- it is -- although you may want to limit that,
although you may view that as aesthetically unpleasing, my -- my opinion, it slightly differs. I think it is
what it is. It is a brand. It is who we are. It is a brand, an identity, if you will, that we've established over
nearly a hundred years in this community through our sweat equity; not only that of this organization, of
the managers and the publishers, but that of the distributors, whose livelihood depends on the pennies they
make each day on the sale of the newspaper. Are there too many McDonald's and Burger Kings in this
area? We've talked about the branding. There may be. Some people would say there are. Some people
would say that too many fast food restaurants are not aesthetically pleasing. Will we limit -- will we limit
their branding, the golden arches, everything else? Should we? As we look at racks today, you do see a
hodgepodge. You do see a mess. No argument here. If I -- if I may -- if we think of it as a library, right
now, a disheveled mess, if you would. What you're suggesting with a uniform color is an encyclopedia
41 12/14/00
where you see that the books are there, but you need to walk up to it and get up close to identify exactly
what volume you're looking for. What we suggest is a clean, appealing library that has a variety of colors,
shapes -- not shapes but colors for different tastes, in my opinion, nonetheless appealing. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Fonticiella: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Next.
Ted Stahl: My name is Ted Stahl. I have stood here for the last 15 years in front of four sets of Mayors,
two sets of Commissioners, four City Managers. I have been coming before you, and I want you to know
that the reason I am here is I belong to numerous organizations. Most of these organizations that I belong
to serve the communities that I serve. I'm only concerned -- and I've never said in any of my workshops
that I have been, 55 of them -- I am only concerned about the appearance of my community. I am
extremely concerned about our public rights -of -way. I have lived in this City for 65 years, and as far back
as I can remember, I have always been a servant to my community. What we have got on our hands is a
mess. It has been getting out of control for years. I have been monitoring this issue for a good ten years.
I have sat in numerous workshops. I have given countless hours of my time, and I will continue. There is
no reason why we can't make things better. This is an issue that makes things better. It does not say you
can't be there. It does not say you cannot operate there. It says you must fall in line to make things better
appearance to our public rights -of -way. We spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in landscaping on our
public rights -of -way, and then before, in front of this landscaping that we spend hundreds of thousands of
dollars, we have this "sightly" newsrack issue. It has gotten out of hand. We have given them over the
years the opportunity to clean up their boxes. The reason at the moment that the City is burdened with all
of these permits is because there has been no regulation of permits for ten years. Of course, there's an
abundance. But it can be cleaned up. I do honestly feel that your decision today will make things better.
How you cannot make things better that will not cost you a penny will be hard for me to understand. As
far as the little guy, when I find out that the little guy has 250 newsracks in this City, he's not little. He's
not little at all. He's making money. This whole issue is about making money. It's advertising.
Modulars, yes. What is going to be the advertising on these modulars? As a resident of my community,
we're very concerned about that. Not saying that the advertisement should be there, but what kind of
advertisement is going to be on the modular? If the .modulars come out, does the City get ten dollars ($10)
per space, or is it ten dollars ($10) per modular? I'd like to know that, because the monies collected from
these newsracks helps run a department efficiently. If we don't have that money coming in to run a
department, we're going to be in the same mess, even with the new newsracks. The color green that you
see up here is a computer green. It is a forest green. It develops on film like a lime green. It is not. It is a
forest green. And you see forest green in numerous areas of this City on other newsracks. Thank you, and
I hope that you support this issue.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Ted. Next.
Josie Legido Correa: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Josie Legido Correa, and I'm the
Executive Director of Downtown Miami Partnership. Ted, basically, you took the words out of my
mouth. I concur with everything that Ted said. I've also attended some of the workshops, and we've been
involved in the background of this issue for over a year. Several weeks ago, I attended a Commission
42 12/14/00
meeting where all of you vowed to support, and made a serious commitment to the downtown area, and
specifically, the Central Business District. I applaud all of you, and thank you for that support. The issue
of the newsracks is one of those issues that needs to be resolved if we are really committed to making this
a world class City. On behalf of the downtown central business community and our downtown residents,
we ask that you please support and approve this ordinance, and help us to reach to the next level. This
ordinance can and will be successful. It has been done in other areas, other cities, and it works. Again, I
ask you for your approval of the newsrack ordinance. I would like to address the issue of color. The issue
of color is extremely important if you want it to be aesthetically pleasing. Our group has met with the
company that has the modulars. We're OK with the modulars. We're OK with the independent
newsracks, as long as they are all the same color, they look organized, they look aesthetically pleasing.
That's extremely, extremely important. With the issue of advertising, downtown has historically not
wanted more advertising on the streets. But I think we would be willing to look at that as long as the
advertising -- you know, you don't have Sawgrass or other areas advertising in the downtown area. So we
would be willing to look at that. I think with the issue of advertising and the colors, I think what the City
has conceded to with these labels or whatever you want to call them that's now being put on there that's
going to be able to identify what newspaper, and they would even be able, you know, to have their logo or
whatever probably on there, I think that deals with the issue of the color. And you're giving them an
opportunity to showcase who they are if that's exactly what they want to do. Another issue, you talked
about McDonald's. Those places are on private property, not on public rights -of -way. These newsracks
are on public rights -of -way, and that's the difference. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Josie. Next.
Elena Carpenter: Good morning. Elena Carpenter, 2980 McFarlane Road, Coconut Grove, Florida.
Good morning. I am the publisher of the Coconut Grove Times, the Brickell Post and the South Miami
Times. And I am here as a publisher today and as a resident. As a publisher, I'm much smaller than the
little guys that Ted was talking about, because I don't have 250 racks out there. I'm probably a little, itty,
itty-bitty guy. I need to put my brand out there and create more name recognition than the Herald,
because we are smaller and don't have their financial wherewithal. So this is not to say that we do not
fully understand the need for marketing and promotion of our own brand. Perhaps the difference between
a major market daily and a small, little, itty-bitty guy is that most of us live in our communities, and deal
with our communities, and respect them very, very much. I am a resident of Coconut Grove and the City
of Miami, and I much more value the quality of life in our neighborhoods than I do by ruining it or
contributing to it not being there by self -promoting my own newspaper in a public right-of-way. I really
urge you to go with what the administration recommends. It's good for our communities. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Next.
Brenda Hairston: Morning. I'm Brenda Hairston. I'm here on behalf of the Brickell Area Association.
We're located at 1428 Brickell Avenue, Suite 200. We're a 25-year-old membership organization, and we
are dedicated to the quality of life and business environment in Brickell. And to that end, one of our
primary initiatives for the year 2000 and 2001 is enhancement of the streetscape. This is an obvious issue
of concern for that project. To that end, we support this ordinance as far as it regulates the uniformity, the
location and the quantity per location of these newsracks. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
43 12/ 14/00
Ms. Weems: Can I respond on one point, Commissioner?
Vice Chairman Gort: I mean, everybody made their points. We're still on number 2 and we have --
Ms. Weems: It'll take one minute.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am. Go ahead.
Ms. Weems: I just want to point out that there's an inherent inconsistency in suggesting that we can't use
our colors, which is our means of advertisement, and then the modulars can use their large advertisement
with colors, and I'd like to point that out. And secondly, we're talking about jobs, access, and, yes,
profits. And that's the bottom line. To equate quality of life with simply the color of the newsracks I
think is a stretch. And we just respectfully request that you favorably consider our position on our
trademarks.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Lucia Dougherty: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Lucia Dougherty with offices at
1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today for City Solutions. With me is Tom Trento. At your last meeting,
I introduced you to the concept of advertising subsidized modular units, and I think at that time, you had a
-- you had suggested that that might be a good idea. And this ordinance, however, does not permit
advertising in connection with modular units. It does, in fact, permit the modular units, but without
advertising. I have spoken to the Herald attorney, and I've spoken to Chief Rollason, and I think they
both agree to the following language, which would permit this as a pilot project in the City of Miami.
And the following language would be -- and I've given this language also to your City Attorney. City
Solutions, the folks who introduced you to the modular newsracks -- and the modular newsracks would be
free to any publication. The only -- and it's -- but it's subsidized based on one, one advertising piece on
the back of the newsrack. And let me just --
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, Lucia.
Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: There is no way that we can, by law, regulate advertising. That would be -- I
mean the kind of advertising. That would be something infringing on the First Amendment. But Josie
said something that I think is important. You can't or you shouldn't advertise in downtown Sawgrass or
Dadeland. And in Coconut Grove, you shouldn't advertise Sunset Place, because that would directly
impact their way of life. So I'm sure that we cannot say there's a prohibition to advertise certain things,
but, you know, it --
44 12/ 14/00
0
0
Ms. Dougherty: I hear you.
Commissioner Regalado: It's a compromise that -- I mean, you got so many things to advertise.
Ms. Dougherty: I understand. Mr. Commissioner, we have a very strict advertising policy. And this is a -
- We're proposing a pilot program. And what I'm saying to you is that if you don't like what we're
doing, we're out of there. So my suggestion is that this company knows what your desires are, and they're
going to be very sensitive to it. So let me just read to you the language that we've proposed:
"The Director may initiate a modular newsrack pilot program, including appropriate standards on a
case -by -case basis, provided the program is consistent with all provisions of this article for newsracks
unless otherwise noted, and other pertinent rules, regulations and policies; and secondly, notwithstanding
the limitations on advertising set forth in this section, modular newsracks may include advertising,
provided such newsracks are a part of a pilot program, that the advertising consists only of a single
advertising panel located on the back of the modular newsrack, and that the single advertising panel does
not exceed 18 square feet in area. "
So what we're suggesting is that in this pilot program, if you see that you don't like the kind of advertising
we've done, you don't have to approve it anymore. So we're going to be very sensitive to your issues.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just a question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead.
Commissioner Regalado: Or an idea. Maybe, Frank, if -- if we take that pilot program with the
advertising, it's only fair that other news media that does not want to participate in the modular and wants
to do their own newsrack will have the possibility of advertising accordingly to the size. What I mean is if
-- if the -- if whatever media participates in the modular, then if the Herald wants to do a separate, or
Diario Las Americas wants to do a separate, they would also -- they should have the possibility of same
advertising. What I mean is, we can't say to one, "You can advertise," and to another one, "Because it's
one free standing newsrack, you can't advertise."
Mr. Rollason: Well, it goes -- it goes further than that, Mr. Commissioner, because these were the -- the
issues that began to rise as we sat in the committee and started to talk about advertising. If we approach it
as a pilot program -- I don't look at this one as a pilot program for advertising as much as it is for the
modular newsracks, to see how they fit in aesthetically, how they are receptive to the business community,
because primarily, these would be in those areas.
Commissioner Regalado: But excuse me. They won't install the modular if they don't advertise.
Mr. Rollason: No, I understand that. I understand with these, there would be some advertising. But that
advertising, as I see the proposal, would be part of the pilot program. They would not come and put in
newsracks without the advertising, nor would they be able to put up advertising without a modular
newsrack. I mean, they go hand in glove. What starts to happen is, is that as we talked and some of the
newsrack people approached me afterwards, they said, "Look, if we have five newsracks together on a
45 12/14/00
corner, could the five of us agree to go in together and put on one advertising that goes across the back of
all five, and connect us together with some type of thing?" So there's a myriad of different options that
could come.
Commissioner Regalado: Of course.
Mr. Rollason: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: Of course, because you have to equal, too.
Mr. Rollason: I understand that.
Commissioner Winton: Let me -- let me -- I want to ask a question, that question of the City Attorney.
Are we required to allow advertising on single purpose or single media boxes if we're allowing
advertising on the modulars?
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Simply put, no. We could establish standards on how the
advertising is set up.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Regalado, this is in answer to your point about whether or not
advertising -- whether we're required to allow advertising on single media boxes if we're allowing
advertising on the modules.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the answer is?
Ms. Chiaro: And the answer I said was: "No. We can establish different standards for the modular
advertising than we do for the single box advertising." This is commercial speech, not First Amendment
rights, so we could establish different standards.
Mr. Rollason: I think another thing that we would approach is being that this has gone on for so many
years that this, what we have before you, is a first cut and something to get moving. If we get into a pilot
program and we see that, hey, look, we like the modular concept in the downtown area or in this area, and
the community buys in and we don't have the problems with it, we could restrict it in a way, because
naturally, the advertising's going to want to be where they get the best bang for the buck. And in some of
these areas, this type of newsrack is going to be what is called for, and not the modular units. So, I mean,
it gives us an opportunity to try it in some locations and see what we're up against.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me give you a -- maybe we can cut this. This is the only agenda item that we
have dealt with, and we still have got a lot to go, too. This is an ordinance. It's going to have two
readings. This is our first reading. Why don't we pass it on the first reading? Let's look at some of the
modules that we can put. Let's look at some of the samples we can do. Maybe the Miami Herald can
come up with the color theme that -- instead of the whole thing colored -- with an idea where you can be
identified, and then we can take the second vote on second reading.
Commissioner Winton: I'm prepared to offer a motion, but first of all, I want to say something. The last
thing I want to do is get the Miami Herald mad at me. But this isn't about the Miami Herald. This is
46 12/14/00
•
about the City of Miami. And maybe you haven't seen this picture. This is a picture of a module in
Chicago. And I can tell you -- and the Chicago Tribune is in this. This is class. This is more stuff. And
while I applaud all of the people that have gotten together to craft a compromise here -- and I'm going to
support this compromise position personally, as the City Commissioner who has the responsibility for
District 2, I think we haven't gone nearly far enough. And I appreciate the branding issue, but that
branding issue is an issue that's been fought all over the United States. It's been fought by McDonald's.
It's been fought by Burger King, and it's been fought by others in communities where communities
literally started demanding that the garishness of some of the fast food operations can't go into our
community. The City of Miami has allowed way too many really -- We've had no controls over anything
forever. We invited the mess that we've got, because we haven't done anything about it in a long time.
And for that, I must apologize to you and everybody else. But it doesn't change the need that we have to
create an environment in our community, which will bring more and more residents to our community
who will want to read your newspaper. And our mission here is to raise the quality of life throughout this
entire community in all of our neighborhoods. And in doing that, I think we will create an opportunity
that will allow you to sell -- all of you, not just the Miami Herald, but all the media -- to sell more product
at the end of the day than you are today. Will you be hurt? You know, you've got empirical evidence that
suggests that you will have a decrease in sales immediately, and that's -- I don't get any great thrill in that
issue. I mean, that's not good. But we don't seem, as far as I can see, to have any other choices. This
looks much better. So therefore, I am moving the recommendation of the staff in this newsrack ordinance.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second?
Ms. Dougherty: Is that including the advertising?
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second.
Ms. Dougherty: Does that include the modular units that would permit advertising?
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Ms. Dougherty: In other words, my amendment?
Commissioner Winton: Yes. Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: I'll second it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion.
Commissioner Teele: On the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: On the motion.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me again commend you, congratulate you. You're
being very patient, I think, as a Chair. This issue is important, but in the context of today's meeting, in the
47 12/ 14/00
® 0
context of what we're doing, it's almost -- I think we're really going to wind up being irritable in the end
of the day, and we've got zoning agendas here. And, you know -- you know, we spend a lot of time on
issues that a few people bring that quite candidly, I think need to be thought out more. I'm -- I like the
concept that is being discussed. I particularly like the modular. I think it adds dignity and order. And I
really commend the businesspeople, the entrepreneurs in bringing this forward. I'm deeply troubled by a
number of aspects, and troubled, not to the point that I'm going to vote against it, but troubled that I really
do think that government should not get involved in each and every challenge that we're confronted with,
unless there's some overwhelming -- some rational wrong that we're trying to fix. Now I'm -- Ted, I'm
really impressed with the concerns that you stated, the neighborhood issues, the quality of life issues. But,
you know, in Seattle, in Minneapolis, Coral Gables -- it's hard to make some of these arguments in
Miami. I mean, the word, "Miami," all over the world has a meaning. And it doesn't mean Coral Gables.
When people hear the word, "Miami," they sort of think of a little bit of color, and loudness. And so, I
mean, you know, I don't think we ought to get overboard here. I think, quite candidly, the notion of
having advertising on it makes it even more attractive. But then I'm worried about what kind of
advertising that's -- see, I mean, is it going to be advertising for the new development activities that we're
doing in Park West? I hope not, because we're trying to steal the people from South Beach that the mayor
of Miami Beach wants out of there, and we're saying, "Come on over to Miami at 1 o'clock in the
morning, 2 in the morning." We've got nice clubs and nice after -evening entertainment, even gentlemen
and ladies' entertainment, I guess is the proper term for it. So, you know, I'd hate to see -- I'd hate to see
a sign on this thing that says, you know, "California Gold Rush" or something on it, or whatever those
things are, "Madonna" or whatever. So I mean we -- how do we address this? I mean, and I think this
needs to be thought through. Let me tell you, as a County Commissioner, I was not ashamed at all to
support the hometown companies. Burger King would have moved after Hurricane Andrew if we hadn't
done a lot of things like we're doing there in Park West to keep them here. They had planned to shut
down that whole Burger King facility and move. They had to rebuild it. They -- people don't realize they
put fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) back into that. The insurance companies did. I don't have any
problem saying that we have a hometown newspaper. And even though -- I want to put it on the record --
they didn't endorse me for Mayor of Dade County. They didn't even endorse me for this seat that I hold
now. So I mean, I don't really -- you know, I've won without them, and I'm not really going to kiss up --
(indicating) -- too much to them on this thing. But I really do think that we should not be ashamed of the
fact that we have a newspaper. I was watching CNN or I guess it was MSNBC. They did a tremendous
job on the Presidential coverage. And one of the things that Bradley, the publisher or the Executive Editor
of the Washington Post was saying on "Larry King" -- I guess it was CNN -- he said, "Don't think that the
Miami Herald is gong to own the story on the recount of the 67 ballots, because every major newspaper in
the country is going to be down there trying to get" -- I mean, you know, the Miami Herald is a major
newspaper. I mean, it's a Washington Post, L.A. Times. And I don't think we ought to be ashamed of the
fact that we have a -- other than the editorial endorsements -- we have a really good newspaper. So I'm
not at all ashamed. I really wish that the City staff and the vendors could come up with some policy that
ensures a lock for the Miami Herald. I'm going to put it on the record. I mean, I do. I think that if it's
something that says that the Miami Herald in yellow, gaudy, bold, ugly yellow that they have that's on
every one of them, I don't mind writing that into this law, to the extent that we can, to say that the Miami
Herald is sold here, because it is our newspaper. I would say the same thing for U.S.A. Today, quite
candidly. But I do think that there ought to be some type of preference for local newspapers of general
circulation. You know, you can say "No, no, no." That's fine. But I'll tell you this: We advertise in the
newspapers of general circulation because that is a preference that is based in the state law. And so if
we're going to do an advertisement, you know, we don't go out and just advertise in every weekly, and
48 12/14/00
i
every giveaway and every this. We advertise in the local paper of general circulation. And I do think that
it is important that we be a part of recognizing, to the extent that it does not take away anybody else's
opportunities and rights, some form of advertisement that allows for the newspapers of general circulation
-- not to exclude the Sun Sentinel or any other newspaper -- to have a streamer, if you will, on this. I don't
know if that's possible. But I do think that streamers are something that lets people know that U.S.A.
Today, Miami Herald, the Sun Sentinel -- any newspaper of general circulation is how I would make the
standard. If somebody wants to publish on a newspaper of general circulation seven days a week, or
whatever the definition by state law is. But I don't think we ought to come in here with our eyes closed.
There are certain requirements and standards written in the state law and in the general laws that provide
certain preferences for newspapers of general circulation. And, you know, the greatest tragedy I think that
Miami has -- and I say this in all sincerity -- is that it is a one newspaper town. This -- the Miami Herald
was a much better newspaper when the News was here, and the coverage was more objective when the
News was here. And one of the best things in the News -- Miami Herald is the contributing writer that
writes about the historical -- he was a Miami News editor. So I just think that without being ashamed of
the fact that we have a newspaper, we ought to put it on the record that we should be concerned. And
those numbers, those statistics that show the drop in circulation and advertisement should be disturbing to
everyone who wants Miami to be a premier City and a world class City. So I'm supporting it. But I really
wish you all would take this back, as the Chairman has said, do a workshop. I wish that there was some
way that newspapers of general circulation -- this is first reading, right?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Mr. Rollason: Yes, it is.
Commissioner Teele: -- that newspapers of general circulation could have some kind of streamers built
onto each of the boxes that's not an advertisement, but newspapers of general circulation.
Mr. Rollason: Well, I've got some ideas, and I think we can get back together and discuss that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Teele is -- wait a minute.
Commissioner Regalado: Could you yield? Just an idea and a question. Frank, the City Attorney has said
that we could establish different standards in advertising. I will support the ordinance on first reading. I
wish that we'll take into account some issues, but I think that we should, with the permission of the maker
of the motion, amend that to say free-standing single can also advertise, and for this reason: If the Miami
Herald -- if the Miami Herald wishes to advertise their own product, they have the right to do it on their
own free-standing single issue. If the modulars want to advertise a dot com. or whatever they want to
advertise, it's fine. But I think that we should not discriminate. And by doing that, they can use their
space on advertising, allowed for advertising to promote their color and their brand or their different
brands. So that -- I was the one that brought this to the this Commission, but we cannot be extreme. We
have to be fair. And I mean, no one is going to like, probably, the end result of this one, the industry or
the people that really want to resolve this situation. But I'll tell you something. We've got to do
49 12/ 14/00
something, because as it is right now, it's a shame that we cannot do something immediately about the
blight on the streets. But I would -- I don't know, I don't know if the maker would --
Commissioner Winton: I'm -- I haven't had time to think it through well, but my initial reaction isn't --
isn't favorable, because it seems to me if we do that, then we create an incentive for the free-standers to
stay free standing. What we're really trying to do is create an incentive for the free-standers to get in the
module, and get rid of all these freestanding units, period. And in regards to their ability to advertise, is
there a prohibition against any of the newspapers buying advertising on the modular? So they can still
advertise. They can get all the advertising they want. They can buy the whole modular advertising piece,
if they wanted to, if that would help their advertising effort.
Commissioner Regalado: No. But, Johnny, I don't think that that would increase the number of singles,
because for a single, you have to pay a permit, you have to build it yourself, you have to incur a huge
production and maintenance cost. And on the modular, you don't. You don't pay permits; you don't pay
installation cost. You don't pay anything. So that's --
Commissioner Winton: Is that correct? Is that correct?
Ms. Weems: No, you pay.
Mr. Rollason: No. You pay.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. That's not correct.
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me?
Commissioner Winton: Would you please clarify the --
Mr. Rollason: Right. There would be -- permits would have to be pulled for it.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. But I'm talking about construction. I'm talking about --
Mr. Rollason: Well, the construction would be borne by the industry that --
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Mr. Rollason: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying on the modular.
Ms. Dougherty: And we pay -- we pay the permit fees, the same as everybody else.
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a couple of questions. OK.
Mr. Rollason: But this is going on, on --
50 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Mr. Rollason: Go ahead.
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a couple of questions. Burger Kings and McDonald's, in special zoning
areas had to change their design to go in accordance with those -- My question is, in downtown Miami,
we're going to spend ---and we just approved it eight million dollars ($8,000,000) improving the market,
Flagler Marketplace. The Miami Herald and everyone has criticized the City of Miami because of the
way we look. What we're trying to do is really make the City look beautiful. And I'm sure the Miami
Herald can find many a ways where we can work with them, and they can advertise, because I agree with
Commissioner Teele. We have to let all our newspapers advertise and let them know they're there. One
way to keep our public informed. But I want you also to understand, for the last 15 years in downtown
Miami, in Coconut Grove, in Little Havana, we've been fighting this. Not only are they -- they're not
regulated; they're all over the place. They're obstructing the pedestrians in many sidewalks. We need to
bring uniformity to this. What I'm saying is on the second reading, try to come back and see how we can
use the modular, because what I would like to do, also, if we have a special district, like in downtown
Miami, we're going to create a special district and in Coconut Grove, we're going to create a special
district, that could be in compliance with. That's something that you have to check on it, and the Legal
Department would have to look at it. But those are the things that I'd like to see coming back on the
second reading. OK? Any --
Mr. Stahl: Mr. Gort, one quick -- In all due respect, sir, what you're asking for, we will be glad to do.
But we have done what you're asking, time after time. The Miami Herald does not want to be in the
modulars.
Vice Chairman Gort: I understand. And they're getting the message, and we're telling them. They're
asking us to do certain things within the City of Miami. They also want to be good citizens. And I'm sure
they would like to work with us.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Call the question.
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: Is this an ordinance?
Note for the Record: The Assistant City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by
title only.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call.
51 12/14/00
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE PLACEMENT OF
NEWSRACKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF -WAY IN THE CITY OF
MIAMI BY REPEALING EXISTING ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 54
OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AS
AMENDED, PERTAINING TO SUCH REGULATION AND
SUBSTITUTING, IN LIEU THEREOF, NEW ARTICLE VII IMPOSING
SAFETY AND AESTHETIC RESTRICTIONS RELATED THERETO;
PROVIDING FOR PURPOSE; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
PROVIDING FOR NEWSRACK CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES
AND FEES; REQUIRING INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION;
ESTABLISHING STANDARDS FOR OPERATIONS, PLACEMENT
AND INSTALLATION OF NEWSRACKS; PROVIDING FOR
ENFORCEMENT AND APPEALS; MORE PARTICULARLY BY
REPEALING SECTIONS 54-261 THROUGH 54-269 AND
SUBSTITUTING NEW SECTIONS 54-261 THROUGH 54-271;
PROVIDING DIRECTIONS FOR TRANSMITTAL OF COPIES OF
THIS ORDINANCE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
was introduced by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Sanchez: First reading.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. You all have a good day, now.
52 12/14/00
0
•
Commissioner Teele: Move item 3.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there any discussion? Would anyone like to address Item 3? Being none --
Commissioner Teele: You need to read the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Teele: How about calling the roll now?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Wait a minute. We have public opinion. Yes, sir.
Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26t". These funds are to be used only for the Police
Department, certain areas, or general use for them, whatever?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Cruz: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
53 12/14/00
0
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ESTABLISHING INITIAL RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATIONS
FOR A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT V PROGRAM," AND
APPROPRIATING $2,821,192 TO SAID FUND, CONSISTING OF A
GRANT RECEIVED FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,539,073 AND MATCHING FUNDS FROM THE
CITY OF MIAMI IN THE AMOUNT OF $282,119; PROVIDING FOR
THE APPROPRIATION TO SAID FUND OF ANY INTEREST
EARNED FROM FISCAL YEAR 2000-2001 AND FISCAL YEAR
2001-2002; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT
SAID GRANT AND TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS,
IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO
IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT AND
APPROPRIATION OF SAID INTEREST; FURTHER ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR IN THE AMOUNT OF $282,119, AS THE CITY'S
REQUIRED MATCH, FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE
GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT CODE NO.
001000.290301.6.050; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
54 12/ 14/00
13 APPROVE "AND' CONFIRM MANAGER S FINDING OF SOLE SOURCE; : AkEUIAMEN
TS FOR: COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDDING PR®CEDVRE`S; ANDAPPRO
ACQL7ISITIbN OFF ON LINE SERVICES FOR PUBLIC A" CARDS RESEARCH FOR;'
k 3 �b .
DEPART MENTOF POLICEFROM DBTON"LINE,�INC ,� S®LE SOURCE PROVIIIDER,� $39;000,
ALLOCA=TINGFUNDS FR®1VIE LAWENFORCEMENT=TRUSTFUND N`
Vice Chairman Gort: If you guys would allow me, let me go through this and try to get some of the items
out of it, instead of following the sequence. Let me get the easiest ones.
Commissioner Teele: Move item number 5, which is a sole source for DBT Online Research.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1074
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION BY A FOUR -
FIFTHS (4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER A DULY
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING, RATIFYING, APPROVING AND
CONFIRMING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE
SOURCE; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE
SEALED BIDDING PROCEDURES AND APPROVING THE
ACQUISITION OF ON-LINE SERVICES FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
RESEARCH FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE FROM DBT
ONLINE, INC., THE SOLE SOURCE PROVIDER, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $39,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR
FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO.
690002, SUCH EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE
CHIEF OF POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF THE TREASURY'S "GUIDE TO EQUITABLE SHARING."
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
55 12/ 14/00
0
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
56 12/14/00
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move item 6, Mr. Vice Chairman. And this was -- this dates back to --
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Commissioner Regalado: -- July 11`h. And it's been advertised. But also, I would like to mention the fact
that there is another CDC (Community Development Corporation), Word of Life, that has been doing
construction in the City of Miami, and it has a similar situation as the Model Housing, Inc. So I'm
moving item 6, the Model Housing, but I would like some information on Word of Life.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. There's a motion and a second. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Winton: Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: He's asking for information. Are you --
Vice Chairman Gort: No. My understanding, we're going to add it. My understanding is we're adding
this to this --
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. I'm voting on this, but I'm asking about what is -- OK. Did we vote on
this one?
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding, the motion on this is to look for the sources for --
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah. This is only about -- because this was advertised.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: But it's not -- Word of Life is not included here.
Vice Chairman Gort: But it's to be included in your next Commission meeting. Is that what you're
saying?
Commissioner Teele: Is Word of Life in a similar situation?
Gwendolyn Warren (Director, Community Development): Not to my knowledge.
Commissioner Regalado: Do they need administration funds to finish --
57 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, they do.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that they do.
Commissioner Winton: I do, too.
Ms. Warren: We have not received any communication. And I'm not sure. I'd have to check with my
staff.
Commissioner Teele: Well, Mr. Chairman, just two seconds, if we could hear from Reverend Dunn, the
Chairman of the Board of Word of Life.
Reverend Richard Dunn: Thank you, Commissioners. We are in need. Last year, our budget for
administration funding, we are -- last year, our budget was a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), I
believe, or ninety plus thousand dollars. One of the things that we were asked to do was to demonstrate
that we were capable of carrying out our objectives. About a month ago, we had a groundbreaking, and
we anticipate to start construction on two single-family homes in the Liberty City area for next year. Our
goal is a total of about four to six in that same area. What happened, the budget was actually reduced to
fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). So that created a hardship. Our agency has only received funding for
about two years from the City of Miami, and we believe that we've acted in good faith; we've
demonstrated good prudence the last two years. We have received our auditing from the City. We have
complied in every possible area. There were no areas of non-compliance. We've received excellent
reportings or ratings. And so we need additional money so that we can, in fact, carry out our goals and
objectives in building affordable housing in the Liberty City area.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Reverened. Yes.
Ms. Warren: Mr. Chairperson, we were going to request that it -- that there be a special Community
Development meeting in February to appropriate any carryover monies. At that time, we could do an
evaluation and bring this item back. There are no funds right now, but during that process, all the
recaptured funds from last year would be here for re -appropriation, and we would talk to the agency. We
were not -- we haven't communicated on this issue before.
Vice Chairman Gort: Reverend, let me ask you a question. Can you survive until February or --
Reverend Dunn: I mean, we can survive till February, yes. But we hope that before the end of the year,
because again, we're dealing with half of the budget. We're operating on half of what we started with.
We can survive, but, I mean, we're on a shoestring budget. Our Executive Director -- and I hope he won't
mind me saying this publicly -- is perhaps one of the lowest paid Executive Directors probably in the
country. And we're demonstrating again, we're doing the work. In two years, we have already -- we've
already accumulated the assessment of two properties. We've acquired two properties, and we're working
on a third property in the City. And, of course, we have all of our funding in place. It's just a matter of
the County releasing the surtax funds, which we have been approved for. And we have the money
available to build the houses. But again, we're running into a shortfall in the administrative category. We
would like to see our staff go from part-time to full-time. That's all we're trying to do.
58 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: The fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) that we're approving for the Model, is that in
addition to other funds that they're getting for this year?
Ms. Warren: No. These are funds that they requested during the regular RFP (Request for Proposals)
process, but because they were not in compliance at the time, the Commission instructed once they met
certain criteria that we bring this back for funding.
Commissioner Teele: In other words, this is a total of fifty thousand that they will get for the year.
Ms. Warren: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: And Word of Life is getting how much?
Ms. Warren: Fifty thousand, my understanding. And again, we are not aware of what their administrative
shortfall is. We'd love to work with them and bring it back to the Commission if there's some issues, and
we can do it within the parameters you've set.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, my suggestion is to bring it back in January with a source of funding or
possible source of funding. You advertise as a public hearing for January and we'll discuss -- we can
approve it or reject it in January. And then in February, if they -- if you have the funds, immediately, you
release the funds, because if we do it in February, it's going to take three or four months, and these people
are going to die, anyway. So I would ask you to advertise for a hearing on January, and bring it back --
bring back to the Commission all the details of the possible funding, and just approve the resolution,
provided that you find the funding. OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. You don't need a motion for that. We need to move.
Commissioner Teele: But we've got one motion on the floor we haven't carried.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's move on 6. We have a motion on 6. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Do you need a motion to instruct -- you don't need a motion for that, do you?
Ms. Warren: No. I understand the instruction.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Okie doke. Thank you. Thank you, Reverend Dunn.
Reverend Dunn: All right. Thank you.
59 12/14/00
•
•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1075
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
60 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman, could we bring up item 11? They've been sitting here since first
thing in the morning.
Vice Chairman Gort: Eleven.
Commissioner Teele: Is it 10 or 11?
Commissioner Winton: It's 10. It's the one I thought I was talking about the first time. This is the
Coconut Grove --
Vice Chairman Gort: That's the next one anyway.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, it is?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: All right. So as I was -- as I stated earlier, I'm all right on all of their requests, 1,
2 and 3. Their request number 4, I'm only in favor of waiving those fees that we've been waiving for all
other organizations since I landed on this Commission, whenever that is. And I've never understood that
completely, and I still don't understand it completely, but that's what I'm --
Commissioner Teele: So you would be moving the requests 1, 2 and 3?
Commissioner Winton: One, 2 and 3, and a waiver of the fees that we've been waiving for everybody and
their grandmother that comes before us.
Sis Sussman: We're requesting --
Commissioner Regalado: If I may say, Johnny, I --
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded.
Commissioner Regalado: You know, the Taste of the Grove is one of the signature events that we have in
this City, like the art festival, like, you know, Calle Ocho Carnival, and all that. To charge fees for the use
of the park, it's something that we could say, well, you know, the City needs money and all. But if they
61 12/14/00
i
pay for the staff, if they pay for the off -duty police, if they pay for everything, what are we gaining? What
are we gaining with seven hundred or six hundred dollars ($600), whatever the fees of the -- or two
hundred dollars ($200) -- whatever the fees of the park are? If we, as a matter of fact, don't support with
in economic help this festival -- which we should, by the way, because this is part of the City's activities.
We should be proud if we have one festival a week in the City of Miami, because that's what the City is
all about. So I -- I don't know how much is the park fees, but if they pay for everything in terms of staff
and cost, I don't see why we have to charge for a fee of the park. And that's what I wanted to say.
Commissioner Teele: How much are we talking about?
Mr. Sussman: Six thousand dollars ($6,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: Name and address, please.
Mr. Sussman: Sid Sussman, 2545 Swanson Avenue. I'm the Chairman of the event.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I mean, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Regalado is making the point that I
think I agree with.
Commissioner Winton: And I do, too.
Commissioner Teele: But is six thousand dollars ($6,000) the cost of staff or the cost --
Commissioner Winton: The use of the park?
Albert Ruder (Director, Parks and Recreation): No, sir.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir. That's just the permits. The cost of staff is another additional --
you know, close to five thousand. So --
Commissioner Teele: But they're paying all the staff costs?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir. They're asking for basically a waiver of the fees. It's about -- close to six
thousand.
Commissioner Teele: And what's the six thousand dollars ($6,000) go for?
Mr. Gimenez: You have the park use fee for four days. It's about sixteen hundred. There's a tax on that.
There's a beer and wine permit, which is seven hundred dollars ($700), concession fee for thirty-three
hundred dollars ($3,300).
Commissioner Teele: What's the concession fee?
Mr. Sussman: It's a surcharge.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let him stand up.
62 12/ 14/00
•
Mr. Gimenez: Yeah, go ahead.
Mr. Ruder: Hi. Albert Ruder. When a festival sells food or other items, the City charges a flat fee per
booth. In this case, assuming they have 30 booths, we charge fifty-five dollars ($55) flat. They make
whatever -- you know, they make whatever they make on that, and we just get the flat fee.
Commissioner Teele: Do we provide the equipment?
Mr. Ruder: No, we don't.
Commissioner Winton: I'll tell you, we're good at figuring out how to get fees, I'm telling you. I've
never seen government better at figuring out how to get money out of something that we're doing.
Commissioner Regalado: Come on. I mean, come on, guys. I mean this, this is really ridiculous, I mean,
you know.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. I think that all those fees ought to be waived. I mean, that would be -- my
motion is that -- and frankly, I think those are the fees we've been waiving all along, anyhow. So I'm not
waiving something more than we've been doing. And so my motion is to waive those fees, and agree to 1,
2 and 3.
Commissioner Teele: And that's the second.
Commissioner Regalado: You know, we are --
Vice Chairman Gort: No further discussion. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Regalado: You know, when we change the mentality on declaring war on all and every
event in the City of Miami, you know, we are going to market and promote the City much better than we
do now, which we don't, by the way.
Commissioner Teele: There's a policy conflict here, because I strongly support the Parks Department
raising more money through fees, et cetera, I mean. But it's a "six and six." Item number 13.
Mr. Sussman: Thank you.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, just a clarification. You approved the request that
came before the City Commission, items 1, 2, and 3 and 4?
Commissioner Teele: The full request.
63 12/14/00
• 0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1076
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO
THE COCONUT GROVE FOOD AND MUSIC FESTIVAL, ALSO
KNOWN AS THE TASTE OF THE GROVE FESTIVAL (THE
"FESTIVAL"), CONDUCTED BY THE COCONUT GROVE
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE (THE "CHAMBER"), TO BE HELD
JANUARY 20-21, 2001, AT PEACOCK AND MYERS PARKS, IN
COCONUT GROVE; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ISSUE A TWO-DAY PERMIT FOR THE SALE OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES DURING SAID EVENT; AUTHORIZING THE
CLOSURE OF DESIGNATED STREETS AND ESTABLISHING A
PEDESTRIAN MALL SUBJECT TO ISSUANCE OF REQUIRED
PERMITS BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT; GRANTING VENDING
RIGHTS TO THE CHAMBER CONSISTENT WITH AN
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, WITH THE CHAMBER, AND ESTABLISHING AN
AREA PROHIBITED TO RETAIL PEDDLERS DURING THE PERIOD
OF THE FESTIVAL; AUTHORIZING THE PROVISION OF IN -KIND
SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $6,000, FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION; SAID
AUTHORIZATIONS CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS: (1)
OBTAINING ALL PERMITS REQUIRED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO A TEMPORARY PERMIT TO SELL ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGES BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS
REGULATION, DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND
TOBACCO, PURSUANT TO SECTION 54-13 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; (2) PAYING FOR ALL
NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES
ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT; (3) OBTAINING INSURANCE,
INCLUDING LIQUOR LIABILITY, TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE
AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR
DESIGNEE; (4) INSTITUTING AN IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM TO
ASSURE THAT ONLY THOSE INDIVIDUALS OVER THE AGE OF
TWENTY-ONE MAY PURCHASE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; (5)
ADVISING ALL ADJACENT BUSINESSES, PROPERTY OWNERS,
AND RESIDENTS OF STREET CLOSURES ASSOCIATED WITH
SAID FESTIVAL; AND (6) COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS
AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY
MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
64 12/ 14/00
0 0
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
rJ
65 12/14/00
Note for the Record: Vice Chairman Gort and Commissioner Regalado exited the Commission Chamber
at 11:45 a.m.
Commissioner Teele: Item 13.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Is there objection? Discussion? Read the ordinance. Mr. Attorney? An
emergency ordinance establishing a new revenue entitled "Stop the Violence Against Women," and
appropriating funds for the operation of the program.
Commissioner Sanchez: Hold it, (inaudible).
Commissioner Teele: Huh? That's not the correct one?
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Teele: All right. We're going to hold this one. It requires a four -fifths vote.
Commissioner Sanchez: Four -fifths.
Commissioner Teele: Just hold it right there with the reading of the ordinance.
66 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: Item number 15 -- Item 14 is an emergency ordinance. Item 14.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's also a four -fifths. Go to 15.
Commissioner Teele: Fourteen? Fifteen is?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Fourteen is a four -fifths vote.
Commissioner Teele: No. Fourteen is an emergency ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Number 15.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move. Second.
Commissioner Teele: Item 15. Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All opposed?
67 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1077
A RESOLUTION TO THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF GREATER MIAMI CATERERS, FOR THE PROVISION
OF FOOD FOR THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE DAYCARE AND PRE-
SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND
RECREATION ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE (1) YEAR, WITH
THE OPTION TO RENEW FOR TWO (2) ADDITIONAL ONE (1)
YEAR PERIODS, IN AN ESTIMATED ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $115,293.10; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM
THE GENERAL FUND, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 001000.580201.6.710;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE CHIEF
PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS FOR
SAID SERVICES.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
68 12/14/00
•
18. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
ENTITLED: "MIAMI-DADS COUNTY EMS GRANT AWARD (FY `2000-01)," AND
APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR OPERATION OF SAME, $133,304.80, CONSISTING OF GRANT
APPORTIONED BY MIAMI-DADS COUNTY FROM FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
"GRANT PROGRAM FOR COUNTIES."
Commissioner Teele: Item 16.
Commissioner Sanchez: Also is a four -fifths. Sixteen is also -- 17 is also a four -fifths. Eighteen -A.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, I believe that it was --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): That was set for a time certain after the break.
Mr. Vilarello: The task force was advised to come after the break.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Eighteen-B was withdrawn.
Commissioner Teele: Nineteen.
Commissioner Sanchez: Nineteen.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Is there objection? Is there discussion? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Mr. Vilarello: We're on 19?
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Teele: Call the roll.
69 12/14/00
•
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED:
"MIAMI-DADE COUNTY EMS GRANT AWARD (FY `2000-01),"
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME
IN THE AMOUNT OF $113,304.80 CONSISTING OF A GRANT
APPORTIONED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FROM THE STATE OF
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH "GRANT PROGRAM FOR
COUNTIES"; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT
SAID GRANT AWARD AND TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
70 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Would you go back and call the roll, please, on item number 13, and then I'll yield
back to the Chairman. We read -- it required a four -fifths vote.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11557, AS
AMENDED, ADOPTED OCTOBER 14, 1997, WHICH ESTABLISHED
INITIAL RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR A
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "STOP VIOLENCE
AGAINST WOMEN," TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $60,092, CONSISTING OF A GRANT FROM THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $44,886 AND IN -KIND SERVICES MATCH IN THE
AMOUNT OF $15,206; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO:
(1) ACCEPT SAID GRANT AND EXECUTE THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY; (2) EXPEND MONIES FROM THIS FUND FOR
NECESSARY EXPENSES TO CONTINUE THE OPERATION OF THE
PROGRAM; AND (3) EXECUTE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENTS WITH INDIVIDUALS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE
TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR THE PROVISION OF DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE SENIOR COUNSELOR(S)/VICTIM ADVOCATE(S), IN
AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $44,886 FOR AN
ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR PERIOD; FURTHER ALLOCATING
FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,206 FROM THE DEPARTMENT
OF POLICE GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE REQUIRED
IN -KIND MATCHING FUNDS; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
71 12/14/00
•
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Teele: Item number 14, emergency ordinance. Read it into the record. I yield back.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): There's two roll calls, Mr. Clerk?
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): That is correct. Second roll call on item 13. Second roll call.
Whereupon, the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez,
adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
THEORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12000.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public. .
Note for the Record: Though absent during roll call, Commissioner Regalado requested of the Clerk to
be shown in agreement with the motion.
72 12/14/00
0
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Item 14, the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): I need a movant and a seconder.
Commissioner Teele: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved, seconded. Being no discussion, read it.
Mr. Foeman: Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
COMMISSION ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
ENTITLED: "CHILD DAY CARE FOOD PROGRAM" AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME IN THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $100,135 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.
73 12/14/00
0 0
was introduced by Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Whereupon, the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez,
adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12001.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
74 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 15, authorizing -- we did that already? OK. Sixteen.
Commissioner Teele: Now, Mr. Chairman, we've got people here for number 4. That's the Watson
Island deal? Is that it?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: We're not going to take that up before lunch, are we?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Commissioner Regalado, I'm sure, would like to address that issue. So it'll
be -- probably be after lunch.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. OK. Biscayne -- item 16 is Biscayne Boulevard Vending District.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Teele: We didn't do that?
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): No.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
Mr. Foeman: I need a seconder for the record.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Mr. Foeman: Roll call.
75 12/14/00
An Ordinance entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT (S), RELATING TO
SIDEWALK AND STREET VENDING; AMENDING CHAPTER 39,
ARTICLE II OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS
AMENDED, BY ESTABLISHING THE `BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
SPECIAL VENDING DISTRICT"; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
ESTABLISHING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES; PROVIDING FOR
EXCLUSIVE VENDING FRANCHISE OPPORTUNITIES AND
LOCATIONS; PROVIDING CRITERIA; PROVIDING FOR
FRANCHISE FEES; ESTABLISHING PUSHCART DESIGN
CRITERIA AND REVIEW; PROVIDING OPERATING
REGULATIONS AND LIMITATIONS; PROVIDING FOR
ENFORCEMENT, REVOCATION AND APPEALS; PROVIDING FOR
HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENTS, INSURANCE, TAX
CERTIFICATES AND COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LOCAL
AND STATE REGULATIONS; MORE PARTICULARLY BY
AMENDING SECTION 39-26 AND ADDING NEW SECTION 39-37.1
TO SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
76 12/ 14/00
u
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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12002.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
77 12/14/00
0 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 17 is an emergency ordinance amending the appropriation --
Commissioner Winton: So move for -- and one discussion point.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Discussion.
Commissioner Winton: I'm still -- at the last Commission meeting, we discussed this, and I was
concerned about the idea that we were doing -- and you all answered this, but I can't remember. It's been
a different two weeks. But I was concerned that we're only going to foreclose on those properties where
we have an opportunity to develop at least a half an acre parcel, as opposed to being able to foreclose on
some single-family derelict home that's really wrecking a neighborhood. And the concern on the part of
the staff was that we wouldn't be able to get rid of the property because of the restrictions we have in
selling property. And my view at that time, I remember saying that I felt very strongly that if we
foreclosed on four, five or six, seven, eight single-family properties that we could bundle them in a
package, just like the RTC (Resolution Trust Corporation) bundled properties, and we would get plenty of
bidders to bid on these properties. But this is coming back just the same way, so I don't know what --
what the --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Well, Commissioner, this is just the appropriations ordinance.
Policy is set separately and not as part of this ordinance. And certainly, that policy is an appropriate
policy.
Commissioner Winton: Great. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, my understanding is when the expenditure is to take place, it's to come back
with a specific plan, because one of the things that I requested is like the one million dollars ($1,000,000)
to hire a process engineer, to see if the savings -- I wanted to get an idea, more or less, how much. How
much of a savings are we going to receive? We're going to invest a million dollars ($1,000,000) but we're
going to get back five or ten, and that type of thing. It's the same thing with the two million to hire
outside consultants to fast -rack the development of Watson Island and Bicentennial Park, and all that.
When that comes back, I would also like to see -- excuse me -- that somehow, we don't get -- end up
paying for that, that when it comes to the RFP (Request for Proposals), part of the RFQ (Request for
Qualifications) that will go out, pay for this. All right?
Bob Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager): Yes, sir. Thank you. Bob Nachlinger, Assistant City
Manager. You are correct, Mr. Commissioner. The amounts that we would be spending for City projects,
if there's a private sector component in it, we'd be asking for the private sector to refund the City those
amounts under the RFP process. In response to your question, Commissioner Winton, the write-up that
we --
78 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: You don't have to answer this question right now. The point is you all are
coming back with whatever the requests are, and we'll discuss that at another time.
Mr. Nachlinger: Yes, sir. You're absolutely right.
Commissioner Winton: And so we don't have to have that dialogue.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: It's 11:55. I'm going to object to this item for a minute. I'd like very much to
resolve these. I'm going to ask that we temporarily pass this till after lunch. I have a real concern. You
know, when we brought these items up before, a couple of weeks ago, and they were going to the
Oversight Board, it was like, "This is informational, and you all are going to have a chance to look at it
and discuss it." Now we're pass -- we're appropriating. You don't appropriate and then figure out what
you're appropriating. You -- you know what you're -- this is our last time, really, to deal with this. When
it comes back as contracts, we really should have already figured out all of this. The appropriations is the
most important thing that we, as legislators do. And we really should not appropriate money and not
know fully what we're doing. I'm going to say I'm going to support this today, but I want to know a little
bit more about why we're doing some of this. I still have some noted exceptions about the
appropriateness of these funds, notwithstanding the fact that the Oversight Board has approved them. You
know, I've said privately with you and the Manager that I really do think that these are not strategic
projects in some -- and I want a little -- understand just a little bit more. But you know the other thing that
bothers me? I'm going to put it on the record. All of the infrastructure improvements are taking place in
the most elite, the most upscale neighborhoods, in the Design District, downtown and Coconut Grove.
And something is wrong with that picture, maybe. And -- not if I represented District 1 or -- what's the
district you represent?
Commissioner Winton: Two.
Commissioner Teele: -- District 2, it wouldn't be anything wrong with that picture. But -- and the Design
District is the district that I represent. So I want to put that on the record, along with Commissioner
Winton. But I really do think that there is a big frustration right now. I know that Commissioner
Regalado's got a bunch of items on this agenda today. I've got some concerns. We've got neighbors
coming in today. And the thing that I think needs to be said -- and Mr. Chairman, I would like to do the
settlement items before we break -- the thing that I think needs to be said is that we are continuing to defer
maintenance. I don't know if we've commended you, Mr. Manager, publicly. We should not get too busy
that we don't do that. But your entire financial team, led by Bob Nachlinger, and your able Budget
Director, and their staffs should be commended for the good news that we received from Wall Street on
the bond upgrading. But one of the things contained in the report was what? That the City of Miami has
got to stop deferring maintenance on streets, and sidewalks, and those kind of things. Am I overstating
that, or was that in the report?
Mr. Nachlinger: No, sir, you're exactly right.
79 12/ 14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: So I think we need to really begin to bring a little bit more focus and clarity to this.
So with your permission -- this requires four votes, I think -- I'd like to just hold this until --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Commissioner Teele: -- until after lunch.
80 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: And Mr, Chairman, I would like to move through the items that the Attorney has
got on here, so that we can at least resolve those items before the lunch. Mr. Attorney, what are those
settlement items?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Thirty-eight --
Commissioner Teele: Have you met with each of the Commissioners?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir, I have.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Vilarello: As well as the Manager, and the Mayor and the Chief of Police.
Commissioner Teele: I would move number 38, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: Second. Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
81 12/14/00
E
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1078
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ACCEPT AND EXECUTE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, ACCEPTING THE SUM
OF $2,718.63, IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY
AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS, FOR THE CASE OF DECOMA
MIAMI ASSOCIATES, LTD. VS. CITY OF MIAMI AND THE MIAMI
SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY, IN THE ELEVENTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY,
FLORIDA, CASE NO. 96-12055 CA (04), UPON THE EXECUTION OF
A RELEASE LIMITED TO THE DECOMA LAWSUIT AND THE
LAND LEASE AGREEMENT RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI
AND DMAL, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS
AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS.
(Here follows body of the 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
82 12/ 14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move number 39.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor, state it
by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1079
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY JESUS DEL
RIO, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $75,000,
IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR
THE CASE OF JESUS DEL RIO VS. CITY OF MIAMI, IN THE
ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 94-9018 CA (30), AND FEDERAL
COURT CASE NO. 00-1499-CIV-HIGHSMITH, AND TO PAY
GONZALO MIRANDA, WITHOUT ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE
SUM OF $25,000, IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF
ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF
MIAMI FOR THE CASE OF GONZALO MIRANDA VS. CITY OF
MIAMI, IN THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CASE NO. 94-9017 CA (30),
UPON THE EXECUTION OF A GENERAL RELEASE RELEASING
THE CITY OF MIAMI, ITS PRESENT AND FORMER OFFICERS,
AGENTS AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL CLAIMS AND
DEMANDS; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $100,000, FROM THE SELF-INSURANCE AND
INSURANCE TRUST FUND, INDEX CODE NO. 515001.624401.6.661.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
83 12/14/00
0
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Gort: What other ones do we have?
Commissioner Teele: Was there another one?
Vice Chairman Gort: That's it. Is there any other one?
Commissioner Teele: Why don't we move 42 while we're finishing --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. Not yet?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Tomas, I think, wants to address 42.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
84 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: I would move 43-A.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and second. Any further --
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, this is just second for the purpose of discussion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion.
Commissioner Sanchez: This is the Veteran's Parade, the King's Orange Bowl
Parade, King Mango Strut Parade, Martin Luther King Parade, and Jose Marti
Parade, correct? Those are the five...
Commissioner Teele: The Three Kings and the Jose Marti and Martin Luther
King. King Mango --
Commissioner Sanchez: Not to exceed a hundred and sixty-five thousand
dollars ($165,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, you had seven.
Commissioner Sanchez: Total. OK. What are we going to do about the other
events?
Mr. Genaro "Chip" Iglesias: Commissioners, Chip Iglesias, Chief of Staff, City
Manager. The Veteran's Parade, Toys for Kids, is the Mango Strut, and the
Orange Bowl Parade had already been to this Commission and approved already.
The Three Kings, Martin Luther and Jose Marti are parades that were submitted
by Commissioners as the ones they wanted to sponsor for their district.
Commissioner Teele: What?
Mr. Iglesias: The Martin Luther, Three Kings, and Jose Marti are parades that
were submitted by Commissioners that wants to sponsor in their district. If you
85 12/14/00
remember, the original process, the Manager had requested that each
Commissioner present a parade in their area that they wanted to sponsor. Those
that are outside of those will be handled via resolution, as they come about.
We're in the process of establishing -- this Commission directed the
administration of establishing a process for a festival and parades. Originally,
we weren't on that track. We were -- had allocated a certain amount of money
for festivals and parades. There was a discussion, at the Commission level, that
wanted us to come up with a process. Unfortunately, some of these parades
were upon us. * Then we had to take action on some of these to be able to do it
on a timely basis, especially --
Commissioner Teele: Chip, look, this thing has been here for three times. I
know -- I've been here three years. Look, this is not exactly what I understand.
It was my understanding that these parades -- and all of them, except one --
clearly meet within this. That these are parades that the management, as a
matter of overall, over -arching policy of the City of Miami, that these are
certain parades or activities that cut across all districts, and that the City of
Miami is supporting them. Now, that's what I thought we- had here. Look, I
don't have any problems saying Three Kings Parade or Martin Luther King
Parade, but let me tell you something. If any Commissioner is asked to support
that as his parade, then the other Commissioners ought to not show up for those
parades because the fact of the matter is, these are City parades. These aren't
district parades. I'm talking now about Martin Luther King and Three Kings
Parade. That's two -- just to -- or Orange Bowl for that matter. It was my
understanding -- and I really do hope that you all will sort of relook at this
because the Oversight Board has said repeatedly, they will approve a policy as
long as it is a City policy. Should have been a part of the budget process.
These things should be put in the budget, and there should be a resolution
carefully written and carefully crafted that says, "It is the policy of the City of
Miami to support and provide financial support, technical assistance, et cetera,
to the following activities that have far-reaching, multicultural, general
significance to the City." And I'll tell you right off the bat, the Allied Veterans
Parade -- is that the one on Veteran's Day?
Mr. Iglesias: This came before the Commission already.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but...
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: But the Allied Veterans Parade, the King Orange Bowl
Parade the King Mango Strut, the Three Kings Parade, the Martin Luther King
Parade, and the Jose Marti Parade all meet within, as far as I'm concerned, that
broad category. I mean, two of them are -- happen to be Hispanic. More so,
Three Kings and Jose Marti. One happens to be African -American, where
Martin Luther King are the focus. One happens to be City of Miami Orange
86 12/14/00
Bowl, King Mango Strut, you know
So...
Everybody else deserves a chance too.
Mr. Iglesias: Commissioner, if I could clarify what -- I think we're saying the
same thing. Some of these came before the Commission already. The
distinction was that the administration is recommending that these that already
were approved by the Commission be funded from the festival line item, if you
will, that we had allocated for this year. So, that's why these came back. The
others are being recommended by the administration for funding out of this
account, also.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but you said these are being sponsored by the
Commissioners.
Commissioner Winton: And that was just...
Commissioner Teele: And I'm going to tell you right up front. I don't think it's
fair for you to ask me to sponsor the Martin Luther King Parade, when I'll have
to fight Mayor Carollo, Mayor Suarez, Mayor Ferre, and Mayor Gort, and
everybody else, who's going to be wanting a front seat of that Parade, at City's
expense, and then, you know, you're going to say, "Well, that's Teele's
sponsored event," and I'm riding a donkey or the elephant at the end of the
parade, you know. So, don't charge that to me. I mean, I'm for it. I'm one
hundred percent for it, but this is a City parade.
Mr. Iglesias: It definitely is, Commissioner.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding, what's in front of us today is, if you
recall, we decided that we're going to set up a site. I think it was three hundred
and fifty thousand dollars ($350,000) for sponsor Miami -- City of Miami
sponsors and this is what these are. But I would like to get feedback on the --
Allied Veteran's Parade; how they went, how did it go. Unfortunately, I was not
here. The parade.
Commissioner Winton: The Allied Veterans.
Mr. Iglesias: Allied Veterans.
Vice Chairman Gort: It doesn't have to be now. You can do it -- just send me a
report.
Commissioner
Sanchez: They were in
front
of this Commission and we
approved it.
Every one of these items
-- and
let me just make my point of
clarification,
so there isn't my confusion
here.
OK. We can complicate the
whole darn process, if you want, OK?
But every
one of these parades were
approved by
this Commission, and
every
one of these parades, the
87 12/14/00
administration set guidelines of how they were going to establish this, so there
is a fair process, OK? I agree with Commissioner Teele, every parade within
the City of Miami -- but, of course, the administration directed the
Commissioners to suggest what parades were in their district that they wanted to
support or fund. We came back -- I know that I wrote a letter supporting the
Three Kings Parade because it is -- it's a parade in my district, which is very
well attended and it's a historical event in my district. We provided the
administration with a list of parades that we thought, because of the time frame,
so we could get these parades funded so we would have a parade. We did
exactly what the administration did. The administration, of course, with time
frame, came back and suggested how they wanted to do this. This is a simple
process and we're taking 25 minutes of rhetoric.
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
n
Vice Chairman Gort: I think we're all saying the same thing.
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is a City -sponsored Parade. All in favor...
Commissioner Winton: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: And, Commissioner Teele, you'll be on the donkey in
the back.
88 12/14/00
•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1080
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE CITY OF MIAMI'S CO-SPONSORSHIP AND AUTHORIZING
AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF TECHNICAL SUPPORT,
ASSISTANCE, AND IN -KIND CONTRIBUTIONS AND SERVICES,
IN AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $165,000, FOR
THE FOLLOWING PARADES AND EVENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2000-2001; ALLIED VETERAN'S PARADE, TOYS FOR KIDS 2000,
KING ORANGE BOWL PARADE, KING MANGO STRUT PARADE,
THREE KINGS PARADE, MARTIN LUTHER KING PARADE, AND
JOSE MARTI PARADE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman Gort: Come back at 2:30.
Commissioner Winton: What time are we coming back?
Commissioner Sanchez: Two.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Gort, 2?
Vice Chairman Gort: 2:30.
Commissioner Winton: Oh,.2:30.
THEREUPON, THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:07
P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 2:43 P.M., WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE
CITY COMMISSION, EXCEPTING COMMISSIONER TEELE, FOUND TO
BE PRESENT.
89 12/14/00
• 0
Vice Chairman Gort: He's getting everybody upset today. I don't know why he's doing that.
4
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, we have a long agenda. Could we proceed? Could we start
with item number 4, which is the one that -- this one is going to take a while, so --
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 4 is the only one left from this morning.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's the Watson --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): We'll be ready in a second.
Commissioner Sanchez: You're getting ready?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Is there any other item that we could take out of the way?
Mr. Gimenez: We're ready.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are we ready?
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Good afternoon.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
90 12/14/00
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioners, at your last meeting --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Let me interrupt. I should have done this in the morning. I apologize.
There's no vetoes from the Mayor's office. Go ahead.
Note for the Record: No vetoes were received from the Mayor's Office.
Ms. Bianchino: You asked us to meet with the Waterfront Advisory Board to deal with some of the issues
that they had raised. We have done so. As part of that meeting, we would like to change the RFP
(Request for Proposals) to allow boats or ships at 80 feet and larger, as opposed to 60 feet, because we've
been advised that that's better for the City in terms of attracting mega yachts. We would like to have the
ability in our design guidelines to encourage view corridors, more than we already have. So those are the
changes that we would ask. I know that Mr. Parente is here from the Waterfront Advisory Board.
Note for the Record: Commissioner Teele entered the Commission Chamber at 2:49 p.m.
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. I've got a question. I read, I think, in the Moody's presentation or
somewhere that there was a hotel. When I -- when I spoke to you, there was no mention of a hotel in the
plans.
Ms. Bianchino: OK. There is --
Commissioner Regalado: But now it's a hotel?
Ms. Bianchino: No, no, no.
Commissioner Regalado: No? It's no hotel?
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, it's anything that's allowed under C-1 zoning. We did restrict some uses
in there. For example, used car lots and other things that are not appropriate for Watson Island. A hotel is
an allowed use. However, we're not restricting it. It's open. And that -- I don't recall saying that to you.
Commissioner Regalado: No, you didn't. That's why I'm asking, because I read somewhere -- I think it
was in the Moody's presentation -- that you talked on the north side, or the west, or the south side, and
then the Children's Museum, the Conventions and Visitors Bureau, a mega yacht and a hotel. I remember.
In a blue folder that I was given --
Ms. Bianchino: OK. If you look --
Commissioner Regalado: -- after I learned from the Herald that the Manager went to meet with Moody's.
Ms. Bianchino: If you look on Page 15 of the RFP, it outlines the acceptable uses, which would be
entertainment, educational or cultural facilities, hotel, including convention or conference facilities, retail,
restaurants, theaters, recreation buildings, playfields and ancillary and support facilities, such as parking
and offices, only in support of the development. And those are all allowable uses. But we're not -- the
only use we're requiring in this RFP is a marina to serve mega yachts. That's a requirement.
91 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Regalado: That's the only one?
Ms. Bianchino: It's the only requirement.
Commissioner Regalado: That's the only requirement?
Ms. Bianchino: The only use requirement.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, if I may. The--
Commissioner Regalado: But there's no mention, no mention of the actual marina with the facility to sell
fish or whatever?
Ms. Bianchino: We talk in the RFP about we would prefer to have within the development a fish market.
We would also, in response to Commissioner Gort's request, talk about charter fishing and the ability for
people to buy fresh fish at the -- at the site.
Commissioner Regalado: But you just said that only it's the mega marina. You're just requesting only for
mega marina.
Ms. Bianchino: Yeah, but a mega yacht marina could include water taxis, it could include charter fishing
boats. Mega yacht marinas are not fully occupied 12 months of the year in Miami, because during the
summer months, they go elsewhere. So there's a lot of different kinds of boat uses that will end up
occurring there, depending on the time of the year. A mega yacht developer can allow for fishing boats
within the marina. That's not disallowed.
Commissioner Regalado: Can --
Commissioner Winton: Well, is that what you're asking?
Commissioner Regalado: I was asking whether or not the intent of the Administration was to include a
fish market, small boats, charter, fishing charter, like Pier 5. Remember that we have that in Biscayne
Boulevard. But since Dena said only the RFP called for mega marina yacht, I wanted to clarify. Also,
have you been in touch with the State of Florida in order to use some of the space under the McArthur and
the area? That's a huge area that could be used as park. Do we know if they would let us use that?
Ms. Bianchino: Currently, that -- that area that you're talking about is designed to hold tour buses.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I'm not talking about that.
Commissioner Winton: The waterfront. The water.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm talking about the water. I'm talking -- There's only one area where by law,
fish, fishing vessels or any kind of vessel can go through from one side to another: Then you have a lot of
property under the expressway that could be used or converted to a marina facility, be that -- that's
92 12/ 14/00
different. What I'm asking is whether you have contacted DOT (Department of Transportation) to see
about the possibility of using that space.
Ms. Bianchino: The space you're referring to is currently --
Commissioner Regalado: Water.
Ms. Bianchino: -- is currently programmed for bus parking.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I'm not referring to that.
Commissioner Winton: The water, Dena.
Ms. Bianchino: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: You don't park buses in the water.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Ms. Bianchino: No, no, not -- on the -- on the land there. On the land. Let me --
Commissioner Winton: But he's talking about the water.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm talking about the water.
Ms. Bianchino: But the water has to have upland to be water usage.
Vice Chairman Gort: Dena, if you recall -- if you recall, one of the things we mentioned is tourism is still
one of the major industries that we have here. Pier 5, because of Bayside, was moved, and it was moved
other places, but it was a great tourist attraction. What we're saying is we would like to maintain the same
concept of Pier 5, and that's something that we requested, that whatever we do in here, we also consider
the ability to maintain the uses of Pier 5, where people can go, and go fishing, and it also have -- it does
not have to be those very expensive fishing trips, so the people that come here, moderate income tourists
that would like to go on a boat would take 16, 15, and then they come back and they sell the fish, or they
can buy it, whatever.
Ms. Bianchino: What I was going to say is that it's currently programmed for buses. We can talk to
FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation). We can go to them, talk about integrating a marina use
there, look at other locations for buses. It's certainly something that we -- we'd be happy to move forward
with.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right. Well, this is something I think Commissioner Regalado is requesting. OK?
Ms. Bianchino: And we will do it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other questions?
93 12/14/00
r:
Commissioner Regalado: You still don't know what I'm talking about.
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, I do.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Mr. Gimenez: We can certainly ask the State to give us permission to do that on that parcel you're
looking at.
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, my understanding in this ordinance here or this resolution, we're asking
someone to come back with a plan with a mega marina, but it can also include convention facility, hotels
and whatever related use to marine use, because we're asking -- we're giving them 25 acres. You come
back and you tell what's the best use this and what's going to produce the most income for the City of
Miami.
Ms. Bianchino: Correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is what this said. At the same time, we do have a disclaimer here that for
whatever comes back, if it's not to the liking of the Commission, we can say no?
Ms. Bianchino: That's -- all of our RFP's have disclaimers that we can disavow all bids and send them
back.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, but not -- they're not -- they're not asking -- they're asking us to
approve the issuance of an RFP. And what's going to happen if we approve this now as it is, they are
going to issue the RFP. And it's going to -- it's going to be the same scenario with the Off -Street Parking
situation that they put -- I mean, they went ahead before the elections by asking for letters of intent and all
that. And I think that what Commissioner Gort is saying is that you have to come back with all these
answers before we approve your issuance of the RFP. Is that what you're asking? No? You're not asking
that?
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is that by asking the question and going through all this, my
understanding is it was an open document that tells people we have 25 acres in here, and then -- correct
me if I'm wrong -- and the industry out there are going to look at it, and it says one of the requirements is
we do want a mega yacht. That's one that we want fdr sure. Now, besides that, we would like to see what
other ancillary services can be provided within this 25 acres that produce the most for the City of Miami.
Ms. Bianchino: Correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is my understanding what this RFP is doing.
Ms. Bianchino: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's a combination of the whole thing. And it's up to us that if somebody comes,
obviously, with the mega yacht marine and not anything else, I don't think it might be the best use for us.
94 12/14/00
I think we want a comprehensive project to come back to us that's going to be attractive to the tourists and
it's going to produce the most income for the City of Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: Well --
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Sanchez: I --
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado. Are you finished, Commissioner Regalado?
Commissioner Regalado: For now. Yes. For now, I'm finished.
Commissioner Sanchez: I would like to hear from the board, what the board has to say, the Waterfront
Board.
Robert Parente: Thank you, Commission. Robert Parente, Chairman, City of Miami Waterfront Advisory
board. A month ago, you gave us the opportunity to meet with staff; to try to work out what we thought
would be some improvements to the RFP. And I'm in somewhat of a milestone, I think, and I'd like to
start out by thanking staff for absolutely an incredible effort to meet with us not once, but twice, in very
lengthy workshops, to go over what really in 30 days was a Herculean task to try to massage and work the
RFP into shape. Quickly came down to two things. There were some very analytical issues specific to the
RFP, and then some holistic overarching concerns that the City, understandably, said, "We're not going to
address those," based on basically what amounts to the fast -tracking that you've asked them to do of
getting this project moving forward. Given the luxury of time, those issues might have been easier to
address. In regards to the RFP itself, the final 80-foot requirement and the other things really basically,
we think, put forth the best RFP. When we took a final vote, however, the board voted five to three to
reject the RFP for three reasons, three major reasons. And one of -- and some of the people that are here
that want to speak to that -- one person said he would have voted for it, but giving one sentence change to
the RFP. The three holistic things that people wanted changed was one -- one member said he couldn't
vote for the RFP because he felt that we needed a new master plan for all of that side of Virginia Key.
Given the lack of time and the Commission willingness to indulge in that, we moved forward with trying
to work on the RFP as it was. But still, that member wanted to push forward that concept that he felt the
new -- and one other person felt the new master plan was needed. The other one was -- and this is a very
strong belief, and some of my members are here today to tell you .that it's their firm belief that the City
should build and manage or the City should have built for them and then manage this marina. Staff gave
very impassioned reasons why they felt that wasn't a good idea, but nevertheless, they felt that it's
something they still want to bring forward to you.
Commissioner Teele: I don't understand. I don't understand. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. May I?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I don't understand your comment. You said that the City should do
what?
95 12/14/00
i 9
Mr. Parente: Several members of our board, Commissioner Teele, felt that the City should build, get --
you know, put out bonds and build the mega yacht marina facility themselves, and manage the marina,
manage the mega yacht marina.
Commissioner Teele: Now, who said that?
Mr. Parente: Well, some of our Waterfront Board members. In fact, some are here to speak about it, so
I'll just let them really articulate it. But essentially, they don't think this should go to RFP for private
development. They think the City should take it under their wing and do it themselves. And I think staff
could tell you clearly why they feel that's not such -- not the way to go.
Commissioner Winton: And some of the Commissioners.
Mr. Parente: Right. So I'm just --
Commissioner Teele: And a lot of the taxpayers, too.
Mr. Parente: That could be very true. I'm wearing my hat as Chairman and giving you all the
information. The last and final thing was somebody said -- voted against the RFP because they felt that
maybe we shouldn't build there at all, and keep it open. However, collectively, I will tell you this: There
is -- there was a general feeling. Should the RFP prevail and go forward, we believe the City should use
this opportunity in that space to maximize the amount of revenue the City can get, with the understanding
or at least the -- I don't want to say "caveat" -- with the understanding that the remaining nine acres on the
other side of the island, on the southeast side or northeast side, whatever -- however you look at it --
remain open. The area that was commonly referred to as a possible site for cruise terminals, that we say to
ourselves, that nine acres remains open. Possibly the science museum could go in there, but nothing else.
And actually, if you look at it, it's zoned P&R (Parks and Recreation). And just now listening to the
conversation about fish market and those ships, the small boats that go out fishing, they might possibly be
moved there. That's just -- that's my idea, not the board's. But overall, the collective feeling was if you
could keep that nine acres open, let's go for the gusto on the mega yacht marina, ancillary hotel and
facilities, whatever else makes sense there. The City gets a great return on that piece of property, and we
have a nice section left open as a park for the citizens. If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer
them. I'd like to wrap up by just saying thanks again to the staff for being so cooperative, and working
with us in two different meetings.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Parente.
Mr. Parente: You're welcome.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any board members?
Jack King: Mr. Chairman, my name is Jack King. I reside at 4031 El Prado Boulevard in Coconut Grove,
and I'm a member of the City of Miami's Waterfront Advisory Board. And Mr. Teele, I was the one that
came up with the idea that I -- I think that the City should build and manage the marina, and let me tell
you why. OK? First, it's a recreational facility. There is no money in recreational facilities. We own the
property. All right? If a private landholder came in and bought that land, it would cost them a fortune.
96 12/14/00
They couldn't afford to do it. So the City is going to subsidize this in one way, shape or form. And the
best way for the return to come back to the City is the City operates it. Look at the marinas that are being
operated now. They're operating, probably, if you factor everything in, at about a 45 to 50 percent return
to the general revenue fund over all the expenses, all the bonding, everything else. All right? I think that
this -- you know, we could -- this gets even better. I mean, from an operational standpoint, it can be built
with -- with -- some with grant funds, some with borrowing. If you have a private operator, they're going
to have to borrow or put 100 percent of the money in. They can't do it with grant funding. And they're
going to give you back maybe ten to 15 percent, rather than 45 to 50 percent. So if you're looking at
maximizing your revenue, I think the best way to go is for the City to operate this. I'd like to see the City
move ahead in a number of areas in marinas and develop a -- sort of like an Off -Street Parking Authority
that operates the marinas. I mean, I've looked at enough of them to find out --
Commissioner Teele: What was the vote of your committee on that recommendation?
Mr. King: On my recommendation?
Commissioner Teele: On this recommend -- whether it's --
Mr. King: On this rec -- there was not a -- this was one of the three reasons that was given for voting
against the RFP. Not everybody was in favor of it. This is a new idea. I mean, this is -- it's going to take
a while for people to get through all of this. But there were three, three separate ideas that led to the five
to three defeat of the -- of accepting the RFP.
Commissioner Teele: But you all defeated -- I mean, you did not accept the RFP on a five to three --
Mr. King: That's correct.
Commissioner Teele: And my question is, what is the most important factor that you would site in asking
us to defer to your -- to your committee's judgment on that?
Mr. King: As an individual or as a --
Commissioner Teele: As a member of this committee.
Mr. King: As a member of this committee, I think that you would have to say there were three of them.
There was a lack of a master plan, not utilizing this property for anything but park property, and the third
one was that the City should build and operate this facility themselves. Not the upland portion of it, just
the marina portion. So those three combined were the three reasons that five members voted against it.
And I can't tell you, you know, who feels one way or the other about it. All right?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. Thank you. We have -- the whole board is going to speak?
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, yeah. They have an active board.
John Brennan: Gentlemen, thank you for putting up with me. My name is John A. Brennan. I live at
2336 Swanson Avenue, and I've been on the Waterfront Board for several weeks, maybe more. I am
97 12/14/00
® 0
going to ask you -- and these gentlemen may be a little shocked -- to vote "yes" on what's presented. And
I'm going to ask you that because I've been dealing with this for better than five years. You can count
them any way you want, and it goes on, and on, and on. I agree with Jack that the City could make a
considerable amount, much more money if the City did its due diligence on that. The same should be a
pressure against it. That's OK. If you move forward, we will have a mega yacht marina. The biggest
fight in a long time in all of this has been mega yacht marina. Now, that's an all -encompassing word.
And that says to a boater many things. First, boats over 60 foot -- now 80, but that's marginal. They're
up to 220 or some odd feet. And each one of them will contribute to the community. And when it's tied
up to that pier, a million dollars ($1,000,000) a year, flowers, curtains, paint, all sorts of things. A million
bucks a year, per boat, to the community. And I think that it should be moved forward so that we can
have a mega yacht marina. We keep hearing, well, we don't have many mega yachts down here. We
don't have any place to put them. You can -- you can give the kid all the toys you want, but she's got to
be able to bring them in the house. So I'm going to ask you that. Let's have a mega yacht marina. If you
want my help, Jack's help, the rest of the -- we all have our own ideas on how it should be done. We can
go ahead and give you some extra ideas. But let's have a mega yacht marina.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Next, please.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Brennan, your vote -- it was five/three, and with your vote, now it's
four/four tie.
Mr. Brennan: I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: With your vote -- did you vote for it or against it? Because it was five/three. With
you changing your position, now it's four/four. Am I correct or am I wrong?
Mr. Brennan: Essentially, I am changing my position, yes. I voted against it.
Commissioner Sanchez: So it's four/four now?
Mr. Brennan: The proposal was put out on the table: "Would you vote for this?" And I -- and my
personal opinion, and I'm with a couple others, is that that's not what I want. However, I'm willing to
take second place.
Commissioner Teele: But you didn't explain this. If you would just allow me. You didn't explain. What
is it you find objectionable about the plan?
Mr. Brennan: No, Mr. Teele --
Commissioner Sanchez: He supports it.
Mr. Brennan: I've been here for five years, and I've been explaining it for five years. So to say that I
didn't explain it, at that particular time, it was at the end of the evening, and you know what the end of the
evening is like. Yes, that's right. It was time to move on. And I would like to see a mega yacht marina.
We are the fourth poorest City in the country. Let's change it.
98 12/14/00
® 0
Commissioner Teele: OK. I'm all for -- and I find that your comments are very helpful, and particularly
the fact that you took a minute just to explain what mega yacht marinas are, because one of my concerns,
based upon some of the other discussion, is that I candidly don't think grants are appropriate for mega
yacht marina facilities. I mean, I just have a hard time subsidizing some forty million dollar
($40,000,000) toy.
Mr. Brennan: You're subsidizing me?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. I mean, you know. And there's only so much grant money. We got people
in here from the Virginia Key Task Force.
Mr. Brennan: I agree with you.
Commissioner Teele: And, you know, I'm sure a chill is going through their minds every time somebody
talks about getting a grant for a mega yacht marina, because, I mean, here we are trying to, you know,
build a carousel, and we're talking -- So what is it you find -- what is it -- I know what you like. What is
it that concerns you about the plan that we have before us?
Mr. Brennan: If I had my way, I would say take the mega yacht marina and separate it from everything
else, and let's build a mega yacht marina. Now, that means two RFP's. You can build them all today if
you like. But certainly, there's other things on the island that you want done that don't necessarily
associate directly with the mega yacht marina.
Commissioner Teele: Well, let me ask you another question specifically, because I'm -- I'm very much in
-- in agreement with where you are, I think, on that concept. What bothered me about this RFP or this
concept initially is that the concept of a mega yacht marina was buried. I mean, the notice was actually --
didn't really convey that that's what we really want.
Mr. Brennan: That's true. That's true.
Commissioner Teele: Suppose we prioritize. You understand what I'm saying?
Mr. Brennan: Oh, yeah. I don't know yet.
Commissioner Teele: The name of this -- I don't remember what the name was. Did you all ever change
the name?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: What's the name of it now?
Ms. Bianchino: It mentions "marina" in the name of the REP, which they had recommended.
Commissioner Teele: But before it didn't.
Ms. Bianchino: You're correct.
99 12/ 14/00
0 •
Commissioner Teele: I mean, it was almost like we were --
Ms. Bianchino: It's Watson Island Northwest Quadrant and Marina Redevelopment Site.
Commissioner Teele: That's the name of it. And you hear the gentleman's proposal. Let me ask you
this: Suppose we required as a condition of the RFP that the marina must be the first phase of this? In
other words --
Mr. Brennan: The first what?
Commissioner Teele: Phase.
Vice Chairman Gort: First phase.
Mr. Brennan: OK.
Commissioner Teele: That we said -- you know, I understand you got a problem maybe with the hotel or
the this, that and the other. But if we put the marina out there, sort of as the leader of this thing, would
that make you feel more comfortable with it?
Mr. Brennan: I'm sorry. I said five years. I wasn't kidding. I read that RFP so many times and so many
different ways that I couldn't tell you. If you guarantee that a mega yacht marina is what's going to come
out of it, then you can put as many ferris wheels as you want. That's not what I want. However, let's get
the marina running. The marina will make money, and you can walk --
Commissioner Teele: He makes sense.
Mr. Brennan: -- drive through Fort Lauderdale and find out.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's why I asked the question. In this RFP, the difference is the marina is a must.
That's number one. And then anything else that can come on. OK. Thank you, sir. Any other questions?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Let's listen to their concerns, and then I would reserve five minutes for this
discussion.
Stuart Sorg: Stuart Sorg, 3091 Lucaya in Coconut Grove. The founder, past Chairman many times. I'm
still a member of the Waterfront Board. We've dealt with these issues for many, many years. But let me
just say that I want to commend Dena and the City Manager for putting out an REP that I think is one of
the best they have ever done before. From the Waterfront Board, we have asked that a mega yacht -- as
we have been mentioning -- facility be there. And I think that's critical. But let me also say to you that
we are not the Planning Advisory Board. And the Waterfront Board has some way drifted into needing
master plans and all these things. And of the years when I -- Twice I have rewritten the ordinance for the
Waterfront Board. We have never been in the Planning and Zoning Department. So I think we need to
begin to think that -- where'd that go? -- I think we need to begin to realize that we take our responsibility
along the waterfront. And whether there's a master plan or not a master plan is not what we're looking
100 12/14/00
• 0
for. We're looking for -- to focus on one thing today. That's a cotton picking mega marina. And that's
all it is. It's not the hotels, or the golf course, or the tennis courts. It's strictly the marina. All right. The
second thing is that the -- in supporting the City, what we need to do is we need to get the City Manager
one day to come to the Waterfront ,Board, and bring the Planning Advisory Board, and let's straighten it
out, and get our direction so we know where we're going. Dena presented everything at two workshops
that we asked for. And we didn't -- the only thing we concentrated on was the mega marina. And we're
into so many areas now that doesn't make any sense. We were never asked to build a marina. That was
not part of the RFP. We were never asked to do anything like that. If that's what the City wanted, then
somebody should have come up and said, "Decide now. Do you want to build it, or should we not build
it?" But we weren't asked for that. We were asked only to approve exactly what the City Commission
wanted, an RFP which included the mega marina. And that's all I've got to say, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir.
Martin Tritt: My name is Martin Tritt. I live at 5261 La Gorce Drive. I've been running the bait shop at
Watson Island; bait shop/gas station facility for the last 22 years. I find it amazing that in spite of the fact
that I have paid the City more money than any other entity on this island in the last 22 years that they
always forget to put that there's a bait shop on Watson Island. This is also the only business on the island
that really caters to the poor people of Miami. I'm open to 10 o'clock to sell them bait so they can go
fishing. You're about to take away the last piece of waterfront park that's worth a damn in the City of
Miami, and you also risk making the MacArthur Causeway inaccessible. You have no idea how much
business the Parrot Jungle is going to have and how much commission you're going to get. They probably
will have four times the business that they have in South Miami. And you don't know how much you're
going to mess up the traffic on MacArthur Causeway, probably making it inaccessible for the people on
the islands to get to their homes. What you should do is you should wait on this project until the three
very ambitious projects are in place and running, and make sure that the Parrot Jungle doesn't need any
extra land, because you are going to find that they are going to do a hell of a lot of business here. Thank
you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Mr. Cruz.
Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 261h Street. I live like ten minutes away from Watson
Island. I use it. I go there often. And this is the northwest quadrant what you're referring there? The one
facing the Herald and the Venetian Causeway, right? That corner there. But I would like to know what --
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no.
Mr. Cruz: That's the --
Vice Chairman Gort: That's the other side.
Mr. Cruz: No. You said northwest quadrant, unless something is wrong over here, because that's what
the -- what the agenda say. Which quadrant is -- what part of the island is it?
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
101 12/14/00
Mr. Cruz: Oh, south, south. OK. But it will be facing the Herald and the Venetian.
Unidentified Speaker: It is the northwest quadrant.
Mr. Cruz: OK. But what I worry, I worry in all, all these things that Miami is doing, what is the benefits
for us residents of the City? Because I see a lot of people with three piece suits and briefcase and all that,
that come here. But they benefit. They benefit. They will be benefiting to that, the money. The same
thing when I see the arena being built and all that, and you see a sign, twenty-five dollar ($25) parking.
Who, what resident of the City can afford to go there? You know, what's happening here is the other
people are building structures here that they don't want in their neighborhoods. Like they got this Mega
Arenas. I remember when it used to be the Hollywood Sportatorium there in Pembroke Pines. Now there
is no more Hollywood Sportatorium there. Houses, houses there. And a lot of these people come to
Miami, to the facilities in Miami. And how many people from Miami will be using that mega marina?
What about those people that are there on the island? Will they be forced out of the island there, the ones
that used to be in Pier 5 and all that? What about the people that go there on Sunday? Can we go park
there, or do we have to go through gates, like it will be another gated neighborhood, too. That's all I want
to know. What is the benefit for us, City residents? If we're going to be in any way affected by that, we
want to see some benefit for us.
Vice Chairman Gort: The benefit, OK. You look at Bayside. Bayside produced, I think, one point five
million dollars ($1.5 million) just in revenue for the City. It's open to the public, and at the same time, the
ad valorem taxes that they're paying. This is what we're trying to do with this land, to make sure that we
get enough revenue so we can go to your neighborhood and our neighborhood, and reduce the taxes and
the fees, some of the fees that we have placed.
Mr. Cruz: OK. Comment.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is what we're trying to do. And this is why we're taking so long in doing the
things that we're doing.
Mr. Cruz: Yeah. Comment. Maybe from that money --
Vice Chairman Gort: We want to make sure that things that happened in the past do not happen again,
like the gentleman in the bait shop, I'd like to have that contract, too. I think he pays twelve hundred
dollars ($1,200) a month. And that was --
Mr. Cruz: Maybe from that money you can use some money to put more part-time personnel in the parks.
Then at 6 p.m. on Sunday, the bathroom won't be closed, like they are now.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's an idea. That's an idea.
Commissioner Winton: Well, if we don't have the money, Mariano, we can't do that.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you, Mariano. King, you already --
Mr. King: OK. One more, one more thing, Mr. Chairman.
102 12/ 14/00
® 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Gentlemen, we have a lot to go.
Mr. King: I'd like to answer Mr. Teele. The grant money is not for subsidizing people with, you know,
twenty million dollar ($20,000,000) yachts, Commissioner Teele. It's for building marinas that develop
economic "worthwhileness" for the City of Miami. Each one of those yachts that sits there will probably
generate about a million dollars ($1,000,000) a year in revenue, in buying infrastructure, whatever,
whatever, whatever. So where the City may be looking at a gross of maybe five or six million dollars
($6,000,000) for the actual -- the slip rental, you're looking at twenty-five million in economic
development somewhere down the line. And that's the reason why Florida Inland Navigation District has
grants for funding like that. And there are also Federal grants for economic development, specifically for
these types of situations.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. I'll now close the public hearing and comments from board members.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: This is probably going to be one of the most important decisions this legislative
body is going to make for years to come. I believe this process has been going on for about five years.
Correct me if I'm wrong. How many years have we been in the process of putting out an REP for Watson
Island? And I just want a year. How many years?
Ms. Bianchino: Well, it's been at least five years, if not more.
Commissioner Sanchez: Five years. And in those five years, I'm sure that there have been countless
hours of planning, meetings, compromises that have led us to this point. Now, my understanding is that
the only problem that the Waterfront Board had, which is an advisory board to this legislative body, was
that they had concerns that we were not capitalizing on an industry that I feel that we should be
capitalizing in, and that is the mega yachts. Now, we have a golden opportunity for additional revenues
for this City. This process right now has safety nets installed where if it doesn't please this Commission,
we could always turn it down. And if the taxpayers don't like the development, they could vote against it
in a referendum. Very, very simple. Now, we are going through a period of development boom in the
City of Miami. With all the instability that we've had in the past, we still have gone through a
development boom. Alone this year, we will probably -- we have passed one billion dollars
($1,000,000,000) in permit fees in this magical City, which people still want to invest. We have a
reasonably stable stock market today that we may not have that in years to come. We do not know the
future of the stock market. Now, I was one of the Commissioners that went to New York in front of
Moody's and S&P (Standard and Poore's). And although we were very conservative in our presentation,
this was one of the things that they were told that was in the works. We presented to them the future
forecast of this City for years to come. And then we have been rewarded with a letter of advisement that
our bond ratings are going to be going up to investment level. Now, the safety nets that exist are very
good safety nets, because if the taxpayers do not like the final project, come a year from today, November,
when they vote on this project, they could vote it down. And the most frustrating thing that I have
experienced in my two and a half years here as a City Commissioner is that we have created committee
103 12/ 14/00
after committee after committee after committee, and we get nothing done. This is one RFP that I think
will send out a clear message that this City is back on its feet, and we are on our way to becoming a world
class City, which we should be. So we cannot afford to hold back and continue to find obstacles in the
way, for whatever it may be, because some people out there might even perceive it as a compromise
involving politics, the instability of the City, because we can't even come to an agreement. There is a
process. I think it's been a bumpy ride in that process, but now, even -- a board that is an advisory board
to this legislative body -- hearing the discussion, it wasn't a five/three. It was a four/four tie -- saying,
hey, go ahead with it and, you know, let the chips fall where they may. We have a golden opportunity to
bring more recurring revenue that later on, we could look at either capital improvement, construction .
improvement, reducing taxes in our City. But to continue to hold back RFP's -- and this is the only one
that has gone to a point where it's just about to be baked. You know, to put it back in the blender, put it
back in the oven again, it's going to get to a point where, you know, it's really going to send a bad
message to not only local, national, international investors that we don't -- why should we go back to the
City? So I am prepared to move this resolution when -- when -- my colleagues have an opportunity to
support it or not support it. But I think that we need to start moving forward on this and get it done.
Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion and a second. Discussion. Under discussion. I'm going to make
sure, and I'm going to ask again and on the record, the number one priority is it has to be a mega yacht
marina as part of it. That's got to be one.
Ms. Bianchino: Absolutely.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's in there.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's got to be it, and that's it. And then whatever other ancillary services as you
have put here on the United Development -- on the United Development Project process.
Ms. Bianchino: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: And this will have to come back to us, and will have to go to the voters, also. We
also have the right that if it's not the right thing for the City, we don't believe it's going to produce what
the City is expecting to be produced by this project, we can vote it down.
Ms. Bianchino: Absolutely.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: The way this is structured, what you're hoping is to get responses on the mega yacht
marina, on the hotel, on every facility, or only the mega yacht marina?
104 12/ 14/00
•
Ms. Bianchino: The way it's structured, Commissioner, is that a development team most likely will be
submitting -- it will be -- most likely consist of a --
Commissioner Regalado: No. You can't -- "most likely"? I mean --
Ms. Bianchino: No. I can't --
Commissioner Regalado: That's if somebody wants?
Ms. Bianchino: No. I can't predict how this is going --
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm asking.
Ms. Bianchino: Can I tell you what the -- Normally --
Commissioner Regalado: It seems to me that the priority that we have heard here is the mega yacht
marina. What I'm asking is, do you hope to get a package including a hotel, a restaurant, a facility,
whatever? That's what -- that's my question. What do you hope to get back?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, the only requisite that we expect to get back is the mega
yacht marina, and whatever a developer feels that is consistent with the uses for the upland they feel will
make sense. So it's up to the developer to come up with a plan as to what would coincide with that mega
yacht marina. That will be evaluated by a committee, and they'll come back with a recommendation of
the best combination of mega yacht marina and whatever upland uses are most appropriate. Now, those
could be a hotel, but maybe it's not a hotel. Maybe it's something else. We left that pretty much open to
the developers, because we don't feel that we -- we should really be telling them exactly what it is that
would coincide with a mega yacht marina. Although, you know, if a hotel is the best, then, you know, the
Evaluation Committee will make that pick.
Commissioner Regalado: The Evaluation Committee?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: And what will be the role of the City Commission?
Vice Chairman Gort: We make the final decision.
Mr. Gimenez: You would -- you would -- you would have the final say-so as to whether that project is the
project that wins the award and can commence the work.
Commissioner Regalado: One project, or are we going to have the choices of many projects?
Mr. Gimenez: They will rank them, and I guess the process -- They will rank them, and what?
Ms. Bianchino: I think that the Law Department needs to answer this question.
105 12/14/00
Ralp Diaz: Assistant City Attorney: What actually happens is that the Manager, after the committee
reviews all the applications or the responses, the Manager then selects a proposal or more than one
proposal and brings it to the City Commission. They're not ranked. In other words, he would select one
or two and say, "These are the two that I'm suggesting that you select." And then you, the Commission
has the final say as to what they will -- or three. I mean, the Manager has the authority to bring back to
the Commission either one proposal or more. But it's not a ranked series of proposals, not one, two, three.
In other words, he can suggest that these two are acceptable as far as the City is concerned, as far as the
Manager is concerned, and then the City Commission makes the final decision.
Vice Chairman Gort: The Commission can request that we would like to see all of them.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Gort: And we make the final decision.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, who -- I mean, we take the brunt, because we raise taxes, and we don't
have the possibility of deciding who gives more to the City. The Administration does. That is what the
Attorney just said.
Mr. Gimenez: In the end, the Commission has the ultimate authority --
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. In the end, the Commission votes for your options. But Commissioner
-- Vice Chairman Gort says that we could request to see all of them. And he's saying, "no." The City
Attorney is saying, "no."
i Mr. Diaz: That is correct. I don't think you can request -- the Manager has the option.
Commissioner Regalado: There you have it.
Mr. Diaz: It's -- Through the UDP (Unified Development Plan) process, the Manager makes a
recommendation.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Attorney --
Mr. Diaz: If you do not like that recommendation, you send it back to the committee.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Attorney, let me ask you a question.
Mr. Diaz: Mm-hmm.
Vice Chairman Gort: And maybe I'm --
Commissioner Regalado: So we vote and the Manager decides. That's --
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, wait a minute. No. My understanding --
106 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Regalado: That's what you're asking here.
Ms. Bianchino: No, no.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no. We make -- the final decision is made by us.
Commissioner Regalado: No, it's not.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding --
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, it is.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, we can make sure that it goes out -- that the final decision is ours. I mean,
that's why we sit here.
Mr. Diaz: It is.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're the ones that are responsible to them.
Commissioner Winton: The final decision is made by us. It is not made by anybody but us.
Mr. Diaz: It is.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, but what -- wait a minute. But he's got a --
Commissioner Winton: The final decision is not made by the Manager.
Vice Chairman Gort: But he's got a good point. The point is if you have three or four -- See, but this is a
little different from what we've had in the past, where we used to specify, "This is what we want and tell
us how much you're going to give the City." What we're saying is we're telling the world out there, "This
is 25 acres of land where you have to build a marina. You come up with a master plan. You come up
with an idea. What are you going to develop that's going to produce the most for the City?" I personally
would like to see all of them. We'll have a --
Commissioner Regalado: But you can't.
Vice Chairman Gort: Who says we can't?
Commissioner Regalado: The Attorney.
Vice Chairman Gort: Where in the Charter does it say we can't do that?
Mr. Diaz: The Charter sets out the UDP process. And the way the UDP process is set out in the Charter,
the Manager, after this committee that is selected by you reviews all proposals.
107 12/14/00
•
n
L J
Commissioner Regalado: No, we did not select a committee. Excuse me.
Mr. Diaz: Yes, it --
Vice Chairman Gort: But we do.
Mr. Diaz: Yes, you do. You do it today.
Vice Chairman Gort: We do it today.
Ms. Bianchino: No -- yeah, but recommended by the Manager.
Commissioner Regalado: No, we did not select a committee.
Mr. Diaz: Well, it's recommended by the --
Commissioner Regalado: The Manager recommended the members.
Mr. Diaz: That's true.
Commissioner Regalado: And that's what I'm saying.
Mr. Diaz: That's true. The Manager does recommend --
Commissioner Regalado: I'm saying that the role of the Commission is diminished. That's all I'm
saying. You just said I'm right. Right?
Commissioner Winton: The role of the committee -- of the Commission is set out by the Charter. So it
can't be something different than the Charter says, Tomas.
Commissioner Regalado: No. This is not about the Charter. This is about the process. What I'm talking
about is about the process. See, the Attorney says the City Manager can say you can have one option, two
option or three option. But the City Manager can say, you can have one option. By Charter, we can vote
in favor or against. And what I'm saying is that the City Commission should have more latitude, more
information, more knowledge of what is going on, on that process. That's all I'm saying.
Vice Chairman Gort: Whatever comes back to us, if we don't like it, we vote against it, and that's it.
Commissioner Winton: And if it's something -- You know, we have the Charter Review Committee
going. So if there's a process here tied to this UD -- what's it called?
Mr. Diaz: The UDP process.
Commissioner Winton: -- UDP process, make sure that gets brought forward, Commissioner Regalado, so
we can look at that then.
108 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me try to first of all deal with one or two
management issues. The cone of silence, Mr. Attorney, applies to this document?
Mr. Diaz: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: How can we amend this to ensure that the cone of silence does not apply until after
the submissions have been made? Let me tell you something. I participated some years ago in bringing
the cone of silence to Dade County. It's totally out of control now. I'm saying this to the Manager. This
thing is out of control. There's a cone of silence on sealed bids. There's no reason to have a cone of
silence on a sealed bid. This thing just doesn't make sense anymore. Somebody learned a word, and now,
it's being stamped all over documents. Dena, honestly, candidly, does not the cone of silence frustrate the
City staff's ability to even make presentations to potential bidders on this project?
Ms. Bianchino: It does. The only way we can make presentations, sir, is for people who have already
indicated an interest in the project, and we can advertise in various publications. But we cannot
communicate with them directly, as you're saying.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but see, that's a nonsensical kind of thing. And somewhere along the line,
whether we're creating the problem, or the Law Department is creating it, or the Manager and staff, we
need to own up to it. The cone of silence should not apply to this document until after the bids or the
proposals have been submitted. Mr. Attorney, is that legally possible, from your point of view?
Mr. Diaz: I don't believe at this point, unless the County Commission changes their --
Commissioner Teele: The what?
Mr. Diaz: Unless the County Commission changes. It's up to the County. They have set up the cone of
silence.
Commissioner Winton: Why can't we -- But how does the County govern -- This is the City. We're not
the County. I mean, we're our own government here.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. We brought the cone of silence in on airport proposals, because the only
people who could get to bid on the popcorn deal or this deal -- you know. And we said, "Hey, hold it,"
you know? But there's no reason to have a cone -- If you're going to -- Aren't you going to do ads in the
New York Times, the Wall Street Journal? Well, what are -- who are they going to call and talk to?
Ms. Bianchino: They can communicate with us in writing.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. See, so in other words, nobody can call you and say, "Hey, I saw this in the
New York Times today. What do you all have in mind on" -- it doesn't make sense. It's nonsensical.
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute. Let me.
109 12/ 14/00
Mr. Gimenez: Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Gort: Our Attorney --
Mr. Gimenez: It does make sense. It's not our --
Vice Chairman Gort: Our Attorney has got a -- Go ahead, Mr. Attorney.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner Teele, you're correct. When the County first came up
with the idea of the cone of silence, it was not designed to be applicable to municipalities within the
County. When it was adopted, inadvertently, it was placed into a section of the County Code, which
would make it applicable to municipalities within the County. Commissioner Morales has indicated a
willingness to try to remove that, so that cities would enact those rules on their own, whether they deemed
it appropriate or not. And in fact, Commissioner Gort has asked me to prepare a resolution, which is
going to hopefully be considered as a pocket item today that would ask the County to, in fact, take it out of
that provision -- out of that section of the County Code, and therefore, make it not applicable.
Commissioner Teele: All right. You know, I've read this document, and I've read it closely. I've
discussed it with the Manager's staff. We've got to make sure that we know what we're doing and things
make sense to people that we're trying to talk to. On page 30 -- And I'm really surprised. You know,
again, my frustration is with my four colleagues much more so than with the staff. It -- You know, why
would we put a gun to our head and cock the trigger? Well, maybe there's a reason for that, too. On page
30, at the anticipated schedule, the Commission has exactly, by reading this, 24 hours to make its decision.
Can you amend this, Madam Manager?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: If my colleagues, who are all gung-ho to run this thing through don't pick it up,
maybe I should leave it alone. But I just think it's not right for the process. I mean --
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, you made a very good point, I thought. And we can -- What we can do is
set up a special workshop that would give the Commission the opportunity to get all the information they
want sometime in early September, if you choose.
Commissioner Teele: I don't -- I mean, I'm going to vote against this. But I think that whoever is moving
this needs to change that time line, because the Commission should have at least two weeks or something
to review this. In other words, this thing says the Manager gives it to us on the 131". On the 13th, we vote.
That's the way most things important do happen around here, by the way. We have to approve it, or -- or
the contractor is going to sue us. That'll come up later on today, I guess. But that time line just makes no
sense. So let's -- Can you agree to work on that and give us a better date?
Ms. Bianchino: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: Give the majority of the Commission a better date on this?
Ms. Bianchino: Absolutely.
110 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me bring another point, Commissioner Teele, if you don't mind, while you're
on this subject. I think it's -- excuse me -- it's a very important subject. You're looking at the September
13th and maybe later on, on the 201h. And then to take it to election on November 6th, you're going to give
the City and us a month to sell this to the public?
Commissioner Teele: You need to amend it. You don't want to put that kind of timetable on you. You
got a year, but you got -- the process has eleven months, but you got one day.
Ms. Bianchino: No, no, no. We -- Well, yes. The way this is --
Vice Chairman Gort: What do you mean, "No, no"?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes. I didn't understand your question.
Vice Chairman Gort: I mean, when we tried -- when we went to Watson Island -- Parrot Jungle -- I think
we had about three months, and we barely -- almost didn't make it.
Ms. Bianchino: We can -- Right now, this RFP --
Vice Chairman Gort: There's no way we're going to do this in a month and sell it to the public.
Ms. Bianchino: What we can do, if you'd like -- This RFP is currently out on the street, so to speak, for
six months. That's a significantly long period of time. We can lessen that to five or four and a half, and
give more time for the selling of the referendum.
Vice Chairman Gort: I am not a developer, but I'm sure there's plenty of developers in here, and Johnny
can help me on this one. When you give someone 25 acres and you tell them, "I want this, and you come
up with whatever you want," I know planners, architects and dreamers will take a while before they can
put something that's really worth their while. And this is something we also need to look at.
Ms. Bianchino: Well that would be part of their submission. All those drawings and information would
be part of their submission. What we have -- we can -- if you would like, we can lessen the time the RFP
is out and spend more time educating the public. One of the things that we're going to do on this that I
don't think has been done a lot in the past is the City is going to -- the staff is going to become very
actively involved in what I would call a community information program, because we're -- we can't
advertise or market, but we can inform, and we would play a role in that.
Vice Chairman Gort: But don't forget, the private sector is a little different from the public sector. I'm
pretty sure if someone in the private sector, if they're going to do the -- they're going to use their
consultants. They're going to look at the feasibility of the project, how good it really is. They're going to
be doing a lot of questions. They're going to -- I don't think that six months, that really is not a short
time. I really -- and not -- developers, I think there's plenty of developers in here, and you're one, Johnny,
and you can tell me if you can put something together like this and so on.
111 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, if I may finish here. Thank you, on that point. Again, I think the
maker of the motion probably should be thinking about a date; along with the staff, that makes -- gives the
Commission a little more than a day to think about this. Let me understand very clearly. Does the word
"mega marina" appear in the notice of this document?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir. Yes, it will.
Commissioner Teele: Well just show, point that to me. I --
Ms. Bianchino: The notice, the notice would be the advertisements in the title of the document. We will
put in there, based on your input, the words, "mega yacht marina."
Commissioner Teele: OK. But right now, that's not in there; is that right?
Ms. Bianchino: It's in the body of the document. It's not in the title. We're happy to change the title.
Vice Chairman Gort: Read me the title as it reads now, ma'am, please.
Ms. Bianchino: It just uses the word, "marina," not "mega yacht." It's Watson Island Northwest
Quadrant and Marina Redevelopment Site. We would propose to say "Mega Yacht Marina."
Commissioner Teele: Well, to the maker of the motion, I would strongly recommend that you all give the
Manager leave to change the title to something that is more marketable. I mean, "The Northwest
Quadrant" has absolutely no bearing to anybody in Boston, or --
Commissioner Sanchez: If it's your amendment, Mr. Teele, I will accept your amendment.
Commissioner Teele: I'm not going to make it. I think -- I'm trying to make this a much better document
for you. I mean, I'm going to vote against it, but I think it doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to
send out something like this that really just doesn't reflect, you know, what it is we want. A marina is one
thing. A mega yacht marina is a totally different animal.
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, can I --
Commissioner Teele: And I think, you know, the comments of the board -- you know, I'm drawing from
the board. We asked these people to work. We ought to take them seriously. I'm trying to articulate
some of the concerns. I believe the words; "mega yacht marina" should be in the body of this. Now, the
maker of the motion, you know, that's -- Now, what the Attorney said that really is troubling to me, very
troubling is the notion that this could be one, or two or three recommendations coming up, because what I
really do believe is that no bid should be responsive if it doesn't include the mega yacht marina, I mean.
Now, if somebody is saying, "Well, you can pick this part of it, which is a hotel and this part, which is a
yacht, and this part of it, which is" -- you know -- "a ferris wheel," you know, then obviously, two of
those three don't include the mega yacht marina. And I just think -- I just think that the essence of this
bid, particularly reflecting on the Waterfront Board's input should be the mega yacht marina. And I'm not
sure how we can reconcile that, other than to say that any bid must include the mega yacht marina or a
mega yacht marina plan in it, and the mega yacht marina must be in the first phase of the plan. Now,
112 12/14/00
•
going to the final concerns that I have are you all went before the Cabinet, the Governor and Cabinet on
this, and they approved this, or some phase of this recently; is that right?
Ms. Bianchino: The Governor and Cabinet recently approved the use of Watson Island for the Children's
Museum. This would not go to the Governor and Cabinet until we had a proposal that .they could
evaluate.
Commissioner Teele: Would they -- would they not have to approve the -- Well, let me ask the question
this way: Does this document include specifically that the City may be a co -applicant for permits, et
cetera, etcetera, etcetera?
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir. It says that the City -- Well, I -- can be either the applicant or a co -applicant.
So we leave that room.
Commissioner Teele: So it's clear in there.
Ms. Bianchino: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Finally, Commissioners, you know, a lot is being made about we need to
move forward on these developments. And I think perhaps one of the most telling statements that one of
the speakers made is that we do have Wat -- we do have Parrot Jungle coming on line. And I think that's
an important development. The traffic and the other implications of that have not really been integrated,
because we don't know what there's going to be yet. I am very, very concerned about the mischief -- and
I hope Commissioner Winton will hear this. I am very concerned about the potential mischief that is
going to occur that -- not "may," but "is" going to occur when this matter goes before the voters, given
this timetable. The time line that we're adopting here is extremely aggressive. It is something that is
clearly open to mischief. I support this. I fully support where we are with the changes that I've talked
about if someone makes them. The only thing that I don't support is the time line, and I'll tell you why.
Having a Mayor's election on November 6th, and having a public referendum on November 6th opens the
door to considerable mischief. To those of you who understand how you get out the vote, and to those
who understand the role of consultants, to those who understand demagoguery, I mean, this, this, I don't
think, is well timed by this Commission. And only we can make that policy judgment. We're the ones
who have to decide that policy judgment. And I'm telling you, I'll be fine with this, but I'm going to tell
you, this is opening the door to some significant potential mischief, given the way these referendums
work, and with a Mayor's election going on, and a referendum going on. Commissioner Gort, you've
been around long enough. I think you can read between the lines. Commissioner Regalado, you know
what I'm saying, I think.
Commissioner Regalado: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: And I don't think we ought to subject the Commission and the public to that kind of
potential mischief. I would be much more comfortable if this could be put on the next election and give
the public more time to work this through, to give the potential proposers more time to develop this.
Personally, I think six months is the minimum time. I know we're talking now about cutting back to five.
But that's just where I am on it. And I am not going to -- I'm not going to cooperate with creating that. I
assume that the majority of the Commission will go forward. It will come back. But this is something
113 12/14/00
that no one can blame anybody but this Commission for if we put this out there, create this ballot issue and
create what I predict will be a serious issue as it relates to the City of Miami. So.
Commissioner Regalado: If I --
Commissioner Winton: Well -- excuse me. How is this different than all the issues that are likely to go
out there relative to Charter Review? I mean, there's a whole bunch of -- potentially a whole bunch of
issues.
Commissioner Teele: There's a simple answer and --
Commissioner Regalado: Could you yield?
Commissioner Teele: -- and an intellectual answer. The simple answer is whoever has this referendum is
going to probably put out fifty, a hundred, two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) of street money to put
this -- their referendum through, because as somebody said, this is some of the most valuable land in the
world. And it's -- and no matter how we couch this RFP, RFQ, they're not paying for the land. It's --
Commissioner Winton: I didn't get it.
Commissioner Teele: You -- you -- you --
Commissioner Winton: I'm catching on.
Commissioner Regalado: Can you yield just one second?
Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Johnny, I reported on the referendum for Watson Island and the Parrot Jungle.
The figure that Arthur has said is a conservative one. There was a huge radio, print, even TV campaign
for the merits of the project, and there were people that were against that project. There was a debate,
even an editorial debate in Spanish and in English, in The Herald and in El Nuevo Herald. And what I
think is happening here is that this time line, it is pushing us to -- it's the same scenario than the off-street
parking. We were right there, hours away from the deadline. We had to meet and approve it, and put it on
the ballot. And the people were not informed. The people were misinformed. There was money that was
collected and used, and the vote came out the way it did maybe -- who knows why. I really think, I really
think that if -- My vote is predicated on two issues. To have more time, but to change the timing of the
election. In fact, if there is a will to do this by the developer as soon as possible, they can pay for a special
referendum.
Commissioner Teele: No, not by Charter.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I'm sorry. Not by Charter. So we have the County election --
114 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Right. I don't disagree with that. That's a problem. What is the next date by
which an election could be held on this public referendum?
Mr. Diaz: I wanted to clarify that, because the Charter, the way the UDP, the Section 29-C on Watson
Island reads is the next general election. But "general election," in that context, we are taking it to mean
the general election defined in Section 10 of the Charter, which is an election, in which either a Mayor or
a City Commissioner is being elected. That way, it could be either 2001 or 2003. So.
Commissioner Winton: All right. So the reality, the greatest probability is that it will be 2003 before we
have an opportunity to vote on this again, because if we change the Charter -- but we have no guarantees
of that. So I'm going to assume for the moment that we don't get the Charter changed. We don't even
know if we want that piece of it in the Charter changed in the first place. But so I'm going to assume for
the moment that the Charter stays the way it is. And that means then, the Charter staying the way it is, the
soonest we could vote on this issue again is the end of the year 2003. All right.
Commissioner Regalado: I thought that County elections are called general elections.
Mr. Diaz: Well, there are different types of general -- obviously, the State Statute defines a "general
election" as one actually on the even number years. But in order for us to have the opportunity to vote this
year, on an odd number year, we have to go with the Charter definition, which the Charter sets out on
Section 10 that a general election, a municipal general election is on the years where the Mayor or a
Commissioner is being elected. And that is an odd year.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I have a compromise if the maker of the motion will accept it, which
is totally neutral to everybody, that may clear this for the moment. If you would allow for on May the 3rd
or some day in May the insertion of a schedule for Commission review -- this is 30 days before -- In other
words, right now, the submission -- the proposal issues the UP on June 8th. You do the site visit on
February 20th, and the proposal deadline is due on June 4th. I think the way to do this is for the
Commission to review the status of this on May, first meeting in May. That way, if we want to extend the
proposal deadlines -- because it makes no sense to change anything if we don't extend the proposal
deadline. And I think we'll have a much better feel of where we are in terms of public input, et cetera.
It's not uncommon at all to extend deadlines, anyway, once you put them out there. And I think that will
give the management, the staff, the lawyers and everybody an opportunity to tell us. They may want to
extend deadline or you may want -- I mean extend the timetable -- or you may want to stay with it. But
clearly, the votes will be whatever they are today on May 3rd for keeping it or to extend it. And I think the
only thing that will change perhaps will be the Manager's recommendation, if at all. Is that an acceptable
compromise?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir, it is. And if I -- May I also may want to add -- I also -- excuse me. I
also want to add an amendment to include -- any bid must include a mega yacht marina.
Commissioner Winton: It already does.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it does not.
Commissioner Teele: No, it doesn't.
116 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: It does not. So --
Ms. Bianchino: I'm sorry. The resolution needs to be changed on the floor.
Commissioner Sanchez: Friendly amendment to include a mega yacht marina.
Ms. Bianchino: No. To require.
Commissioner Sanchez: To require.
Ms. Bianchino: It says, "include" now. It needs to be changed to "require."
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Require. So the seconder of the motion accepts both?
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. No further discussion. All in favor --
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: On the amendment, do you accept the amendment?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah, he did.
Commissioner Winton: Yes, we did.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. All the amendments are added. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Winton: Aye.
Commissioner Sanchez: Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Aye.
Commissioner Regalado: Aye.
Commissioner Teele: One "no."
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
117 12/14/00
•
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1081
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
(Here follows body of the 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: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
ABSENT: None
Ms. Bianchino: OK. Commissioners, we have two more issues that must be dealt with, according to the
Charter on this. The first is your approval of the Evaluation Committee. We sent this to you. It is the
Manager, by Charter. It's the Manager's recommendation. The only thing the Commission can do today
is remove names from this list. So I gave you --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Ms. Bianchino: Remove. You cannot change any names.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, dear. This is by Charter, right?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah. Johnny, that's part of your work.
118 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Winton: Huh?
Commissioner Winton: So tell me again. What am I doing?
Vice Chairman Gort: (Inaudible.)
Commissioner Winton: Well, this is pretty impressive. What is the rule here?
Mr. Diaz: Well, you can remove names. You can remove names, but you're going to have to again get a
new recommendation from the Manager and come back again.
Commissioner Winton: So we can remove any name that we don't want on here, and then the Manager
has to bring a new name back. But we can't put names forward. Is that what you're saying? OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there anyone you want to remove, Johnny?
Commissioner Winton: No. I --
Commissioner Sanchez: Neither do I.
Commissioner Winton: This is very impressive.
Vice Chairman Gort: I don't know. There's a guy here that-- I don't of his expertise, Robert Parente.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, I don't want to remove any.
Vice Chairman Gort: I don't know if we might want to remove this guy. I don't have anyone. I think it's
pretty good.
Commissioner Winton: This is a great list.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: I think it's a very impressive list. In 1985, when this thing was shot down -- this
thing was out in `85/86, this Watson Island thing. And I see one of the African -Americans that was a part
of that team that got shot down. So that's, I think, very helpful. The only question that I would have is
that we heard from people that are tenants. Is anybody that's a tenant or will be a tenant -- I mean, did you
all give consideration to Parrot Jungle or anybody, or the Chamber -- not the Chamber, but the Convention
Bureau? We can't add names to the list, right? All right. Fine.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute. We can make suggestions or -- no.
Commissioner Teele: No, let's don't do that.
119 12/14/00
0 0
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1082
A MOTION APPROVING THE LIST OF NAMES SUBMITTED BY
THE ADMINISTRATION FOR APPOINTMENT AS MEMBERS OF
THE REVIEW COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE PROPOSALS
RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEGA YACHT MARINA ON WATSON
ISLAND.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: What else?
Arleen Weintraub (Director, Real Estate and Economic Development): Arleen Weintraub, Real Estate
and Economic Development. The third point on the resolution before you is selecting a certified public
accounting firm to evaluate the proposals when they come back. Our recommendation as a result of a
competitive selection process is Price Waterhouse Coopers with the minority firm of Grau and Company.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
120 12/ 14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying
aye.
99
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1083
A MOTION SELECTING THE CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM OF PRICE WATERHOUSE COOPERS, LLP IN CONJUNCTION
WITH THE MINORITY FIRM OF GRAU & CO., P.A., TO EVALUATE
PROPOSALS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR
PROPOSALS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEGA YACHT
MARINA ON WATSON ISLAND.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Got that out of the way.
121 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 18.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, we've had the --
Vice Chairman Gort: Eighteen.
Commissioner Teele: Item number 18.
Commissioner Regalado: The Virginia Key.
Commissioner Teele: Virginia Key.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: And just so that the public is aware, the Manager has withdrawn the
recommendation of the ordinance that would have removed our -- would have provided --
Vice Chairman Gort: Reduced.
Commissioner Teele: Say again?
Vice Chairman Gort: Reduced the amount of.
Commissioner Teele: Reduced the number of acreage. So the recommendation -- the only
recommendation before us now is for the full 70 -- 77 acres.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele, do you second it?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Ms. Range. Would somebody give a mike to her?
Athalie Range: Thank you very much. Those of you, who can't see me, just remember, I'm right here.
Thank you. We have-- Did we pass the resolution, or did we pass the ordinance already?
Vice Chairman Gort: Not yet, ma'am.
122 12/ 14/00
® 0
Ms. Range: Oh. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're in discussion right now.
Ms. Range: All right. Then shall we have the discussion on the ordinance and then I'll make my remarks,
or may I go on with my remarks now?
Vice Chairman Gort: Go on with your remarks because --
Ms. Range: Thank you very much. To our Honorable Vice Mayor, each of our Honorable
Commissioners, our County Manager and our Attorney, we've come today to say thank you for all of your
help, all of your services that you've rendered to us. And I think I would be remiss if at this moment I did
not personally mention Commissioner Teele, without prejudice against anybody else. And I say that
because I happen to feel that Commissioner Teele must have at some time in his life witnessed our
frustration when we came to you 18 months ago to ask you for the permission to become a commission. I
shall not forget his eagerness to pass the first resolution, which gave birth to the committee, which has
worked for some 18 months. I shall not forget his eagerness to pass the resolution, which gave us the first
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) to have the charette. And so Commissioner Teele, I say thank you
very much. And to the others, I continue to say thank you and hope that you will continue to work with
us. The ordinance, as it stands now, if it is passed, will sunset the committee as we are at this time. And if
you will read the comments that I have in the book that you will be given, you'll find that the closing
statement is asking for your kindness in allowing us to carry on as a trust. Many, many things have
happened throughout this period of time. And we're not going to belabor you, going over and over,
because we've been before you so many times, and you've received us. But we will not attempt to go
over these things now. I would certainly know that we have our members here, each of whom can answer
questions. We give Mr. Clyde Judson, along with Gene Tinnie and others who have worked on the book
that you have before you now. We're proud of our efforts there, and we hope you appreciate that we have
worked every other Monday night, except for special occasions. We have our committee who has come
faithfully to bring us to this point. And so we're not going to, as I said, belabor you with the details of the
book, because it's there for you to read in your time. We do hope and pray that you will see fit to allow us
to continue. We, as the old spiritual says, we're no ways tired. We want to see Virginia Key Beach
become what it ought to be for the entire community of the City of Miami. We are prepared to answer
any questions that you might have for us at this point. Are there questions from the committee?
Commissioner Regalado: I have a question, Commissioner Range.
Ms. Range: Certainly.
Commissioner Regalado: What are the possibilities of the trust, once its created, to work, for instance,
with the Smithsonian, with the Florida Department of State in order to get grants and become self-
sufficient in a year or in a two -years timetable?
Ms. Range: We do hope one day to become self-sufficient. And I don't -- I think I would be amiss if I
attempted to give you a timetable at this time. But as you know, we have already gone out and brought
into the City of Miami through our efforts some six million or more dollars from the office -- through the
123 12/14/00
0
office of Representative Carrie Meek. And I would like for one of our members to expound a bit more on
that question you've just asked. Gene Tinnie, can you come forward?
Gene Tinnie: Thank you Ms. Range. You see, this is just the opposite situation. I guess everybody can
see me. I'll try not to block our dear matriarch here. Yeah, as Ms. Range said in answer to your question,
I think one of the great achievements of the task force/advisory board is that we were actually able to at
least start the process of getting some funding in. The funding that Ms. Range is referring to is through
the Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which would tackle the shoreline
restoration and the environmental restoration, which is are just vital tasks that have to be done, bringing
the island back to environmental health for whatever happens there. We also, as you will recall, got a
grant from the State Division of Historical Resources for Survey and Planning, which would help us to do
the archeological survey and the -- and secure national landmark status. We work closely with the
National Parks Service and the National Parks and Conservation Association. So we're actually in a mode
to begin the process that you're talking about. This panel that Nancy, who's been one of our stalwart
allies sort of presents -- we wanted it to be blown up larger than that, but --
Commissioner Winton: Well, it's going to have to be blown up larger for me to read it, Gene.
Mr. Tinnie: I would think so. Well, we could pass it around. But essentially, what it is, it's a summary of
the various funds that we've looked at. Part of the charette -- and you'll see it in the back -- addresses
precisely the issue of self-sufficiency. We had -- one of our strong presentations was by Stan (inaudible),
whom some of you know, a former Dade County Parks employee who is now a Parks financing
consultant, and it represents one possible track towards that. So that certainly is going to be a high item
on our agenda, is moving toward self-sufficiency, or at the very least, bringing forth ideas that do not
burden the resources of the City, but will do just the opposite, which is to attract resources.
Vice Chairman Gort: So far, my understanding is, in my math and Winton's math, it's about 12 point
some million dollars.
Mr. Tinnie: Yeah. I think that that's about right. And some of that is, you know, rather exciting, because
of the nature center that's provided for in there. And as I mentioned, the -- just the restoration. We look
forward, of course, to working closely with the Army Corps. I mentioned restoration, but the way that
works, there's a percentage of that, ten percent, specifically for the environmental component can go to
amenities for the park, so that we actually are kind of in a mode that -- in other words, that could be
applied to the restoration and creating the recreational aspect that's going to be needed.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Tinnie: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Are there any other questions? Any other questions? Any further discussion?
Commissioner Teele: Close the public hearing.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Vice Chairman, if I may. In my desire to show support, I just jumped and
said that I wanted to move this item. I would ask the Clerk to have my name withdrawn from -- as the
124 12/ 14/00
® 0
mover, because I think that historically, there is a person in this Commission that has pushed this issue
throughout all these almost two years, and deserves that the history records that that person moves the
item. Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Regalado. And I would
like the honor of making the motion, given the history of how this came about. But before I do, I want to
commend not only the members of the task force, but the public members who have been supportive of
the task force. And I think one of the things that has come clearly into focus is a merger, if you will, or
convergence of traditional African -American civil rights with concerns for our environment. And I think
if nothing more good comes out of this, some great good has come through this convergence. One of the
great misunderstandings of the debate about sugar, which we won't get into was the fact that the African -
American community was not involved at all by the environmental community, something we've
discussed many, many times. And I, for one, am very pleased that so many environmentally minded
people have joined the civil rights and our matriarch, Ms. Range and others to bring this to our attention.
There is no question, Mr. Manager, that the area has not only historic significance, but it also has
environmental significance in the future. And so I would ask that the staff pay particular attention and
continue to provide the resources, Mr. Clerk, Mr. Attorney, Mr. Manager, to the trust as we now move
forward in providing the full array of support for the trust as we go forward. We had a very rough and
bumpy start in getting just office stationery, pencils and pens. So, Ms. Range, I want to at least clear the
air on that, too, that we want to provide that same -- We have a system, Madam Attorney. Does this
ordinance designate this as a tier one committee or whatever that -- Do you remember the committee
structure we have, Mr. Clerk? Does this ordinance designate this as a --
Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): No, it does not designate it as a tier one committee. In fact, it is
in the same status as our independent agencies as a trust, so it has resources appropriate to it, and sets forth
the issues that you're raising as a concern.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So you're telling us that they'll get all the resources they need?
Ms. Chairo: That you approve.
Commissioner Teele: Technically, administrative support.
Ms. Chairo: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move the item, Mr. Chairman, and again urge a unanimous vote of the
Commission.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. It's been moved and seconded. Being no further discussion -- I'd also like to
take this opportunity and thank you, because I made a statement a lot of times, we tend to forget the --
tourism continues to be one of the most important industries that we have here. And I believe that once
we get through with this, that's going to be a great tourist attraction. We need many tourist attractions in
order to attract people, more tourism down here. OK. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
125 12/14/00
• 0
Ms. Chiaro: It's an ordinance.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): It's an ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Ordinance.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's an ordinance. Read it.
Note for the Record: The Assistant City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by
title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH
THE VIRGINIA KEY BEACH PARK TRUST (THE "TRUST"), SET
FORTH THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF VIRGINIA KEY BEACH
PARK; DESIGNATE THE TRUST'S JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY,
SET FORTH THE TRUST'S PURPOSE, POWERS, AND DUTIES,
AND PROVIDE FOR COMPOSITION AND APPOINTMENTS,
TERMS OF OFFICE, VACANCIES, MEMBERSHIP ELIGIBILITY
AND ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS, OATH, QUORUM AND
VOTING, MEETINGS, INDEMNIFICATION, ABOLISHMENT, AND
"SUNSET" REVIEW OF THE TRUST EVERY FOUR YEARS; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-892 AND BY
ADDING A NEW ARTICLE, CONSISTING OF SECTIONS 38-230
THROUGH 38-242 TO CHAPTER 38 OF THE CODE; CONTAINING
A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
126 12/14/00
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of October 26, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12003.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: You've still got one --
Mr. Tinnie: Thank you very much. And Ms. Range did have one request, and that was that the -- if all the
advisory board members and friends could just be recognized briefly, if you'd raise your hands, stand or
make yourselves --
Vice Chairman Gort: No. Let's ask them to stand up. OK.
Mr. Tinnie: Thank you very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner. Teele: And I would move that the members of the committee be given an appropriate
proclamation or certificate at the next Commission meeting, signed by all five Commissioners and our
Mayor. I would so move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
127 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it
by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1084
A MOTION FORMALLY REQUESTING OF MAYOR JOE CAROLLO
TO PROVIDE EACH MEMBER OF THE NOW SUNSETTED
VIRGINIA KEY BEACH ADVISORY BOARD A PROTOCOL
DOCUMENT, NAMELY, A CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION, FOR
THE EXEMPLARY SERVICES RENDERED ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI; FURTHER REQUESTING THAT SAID
DOCUMENT BE PRESENTED TO SAID FORMER MEMBERS
DURING THE COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 11, 2001.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
voter
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Next item, the -- Nineteen we moved.
Commissioner Teele: Eighteen-B?
Vice Chairman Gort: No, it's out.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it's out.
Vice Chairman Gort: Eighteen-B is out.
Commissioner Teele: What is 19?
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no. Eighteen-B is to create the trust.
128 12/14/00
• 0
Commissioner Teele: It's out?
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying, that we still need --
Commissioner Teele: No, no.
Commissioner Regalado: No?
Commissioner Teele: That was the one the Manager -- that was --
Vice Chairman Gort: No. That was full.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. OK. So -- excuse me. Mr. Attorney, City Attorney. One -- So the Trust,
the committee becomes the trust, right?
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are we on 19?
Mr. Vilarello: No, the committee doesn't become the trust. You've created a trust, and you appoint
members.
Commissioner Regalado: And it includes the appointments of the members?
Mr. Vilarello: The City Commission appoints the new members of the trust. You'll decide.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: When?
Commissioner Teele: The next meeting.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. OK.
129 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 19. Establish special revenue funds, Miami -Dade County --
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- EMS (Emergency Management Services).
Commissioner Sanchez: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second? OK.
Commissioner Teele: Could you hold number 17 for a minute?
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call. We're holding 17. Read the ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: This is 19.
Vice Chairman Gort: Nineteen, we already passed it, right? That's what I thought.
Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty.
Vice Chairman Gort: Twenty.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Item 20.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Read the
ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Winton: I'm not sure I understand why we're doing this for this board only. You know,
we have a process in place, and if people have unexcused absences and they want to get back on, and they
tell their Commissioner they're going to do a good job, then we put them back on.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, each board can request this.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, they can?
130 12/14/00
0 i
Commissioner Sanchez: Apparently, they have taken this channel to get that done.
Commissioner Winton: Have we approved it for other boards?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK. Forget it, then.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion? Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE XI/DIVISION 11 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATION/BOARDS, COMMITTEES,
COMMISSIONS/PARKS ADVISORY BOARD," TO PROVIDE THAT
THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PARKS ADVISORY BOARD (THE
"BOARD") MAY EXCUSE THE ABSENCE OF A BOARD MEMBER
IF THE MEMBER'S ABSENCE IS DEEMED UNAVOIDABLE; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 2-1144.4 OF SAID
CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
131 12/14/00
•
i
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 21. Ordinance for new special revenue fund, Gold Seal Accreditation Project.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion? Being none, read the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED:
"GOLD SEAL ACCREDITATION PROJECT FY 2000-2001" AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ITS OPERATION IN THE AMOUNT
OF $12,000, CONSISTING OF A GRANT FROM MIAMI-DADE
COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, CHILD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE GRANT AND TO EXECUTE THE
NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE
CITY ATTORNEY, TO IMPLEMENT ACCEPTANCE OF SAID
GRANT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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.
132 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 22. An ordinance --
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion?
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 2/ARTICLE XI OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED
"ADMINISTRATION/BOARDS, COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS" TO
CHANGE THE PROCESS BY WHICH VACANCIES ON THE
COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD ARE FILLED; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 2-885 AND 2-1152 OF
SAID CODE; 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.
133 12/ 14/00
•
n
u
Commissioner Winton: And I have some members to appoint. Is that an appropriate time or should I do
that some other way, Mr. Chairman, to that board?
Vice Chairman Gort: Do you need advertising for appointment on this board?
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): This is on first reading.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. You got to pass the second reading and then you could appoint.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
134 12/14/00
i
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. Item 23. Authorizing the acceptance of the Butler Act disclaimer. Do I
have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second? Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1085
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
ACCEPT THE BUTLER ACT DISCLAIMER FROM THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF
THE STATE OF FLORIDA (THE "TRUST") ATTACHED HERETO
AND MADE A PART HEREOF, DISCLAIMING ANY INTEREST THE
TRUST MAY HAVE IN THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 2700 SOUTH BAYSHORE DRIVE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 8.28 ACRES OF
FORMERLY SUBMERGED LANDS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS,
IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID
PURPOSES.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
135 12/14/00
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.
136 12/14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 24. Authorizing acceptance of a deed. It's the same deed with the --
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1086
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
137 12/14/00
•
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.
138 12/ 14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Twenty-six. A resolution relating to Rafael Hernandez Housing and Economic
Development Corporation.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
139 12/14/00
U
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1087
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, RELATING
TO THE CONVEYANCE OF FIVE (5) CITY -OWNED VACANT
PARCELS TO THE RAFAEL HERNANDEZ HOUSING AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ("CORPORATION")
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF APPROXIMATELY FIVE (5) NEW
SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES FOR PURCHASE BY LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES; GRANTING AN EXTENSION
FROM APRIL 25, 2001 TO DECEMBER -14, 2001 TO COMPLETE
CONSTRUCTION AND SALE OF FIVE (5) SINGLE-FAMILY
HOMES PLANNED IN THE CITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE PARCEL LOCATED AT
229 NORTHWEST 30TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, IN LIEU OF
THE CITY -OWNED PARCEL LOCATED AT 1264 NORTHWEST 31ST
STREET WHICH PARCEL HAS CERTAIN TITLE DEFECTS;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THE NECESSARY DOCUMENT(S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR CONVEYANCE OF THE PARCEL, AT
NO COST TO THE CORPORATION AND SUBJECT TO TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN.
(Here follows body of the 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.
140 12/ 14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 27. A resolution approving the conveyance of City -owned parcel to New
Hope/Overtown Housing Project.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Teele? Where's Commissioner Teele? Maybe we should hold
this till. he gets back.
Note for the Record: At this point, agenda item 27 was temporarily tabled.
141 12/14/00
•
C�
Vice Chairman Gort: Twenty -seven -A. A resolution amending Resolution Number 00-170, Rayos Del
Sol Apartment Projects.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1088
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 00-170, WHICH AUTHORIZED THE CITY
MANAGER TO ALLOCATE HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP
("HOME") PROGRAM FUNDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN
THE CITY OF MIAMI, TO CHANGE THE NAME FROM PINNACLE
HOUSING GROUP, INC. TO RAYOS DEL SOL, LTD. AS THE
DEVELOPER AWARDED HOME FUNDS TO FINANCE THE RAYOS
DEL SOL APARTMENTS PROJECT AT NORTHWEST 13TH AVENUE
BETWEEN NORTHWEST 1IT AND 2ND STREETS, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, LOCATED IN THE LITTLE HAVANA NEIGHBORHOOD;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY WITH RAYOS DEL SOL, LTD. FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
142 12/ 14/00
0 i
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.
143 12/14/00
0 0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 28. A resolution authorizing a contract increase of the -- for the provisions of
security guard services.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1089
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
144 12/14/00
s
a
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: Item 29. Authorizing a --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Excuse me, sir. We have to go back to item 28.
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Sir, yes. We have -- Yes, I'm sorry (inaudible).
Vice Chairman Gort: What happened to 28?
Commissioner Sanchez: What's the matter with item 28?
Ms. Carter: Yes. We need to make a correction on the amount.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Mr. Chairman, you need a motion to reconsider.
Commissioner Sanchez: Motion to reconsider.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
145 12/ 14/00
•
0
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1090
A MOTION TO RECONSIDER VOTE PREVIOUSLY TAKEN ON
AGENDA ITEM 28 (AUTHORIZATION OF INCREASE IN THE
CONTRACT WITH INTER-AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SERVICES,
FOR THE PROVISION OF SECURITY GUARD SERVICES IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,000 FROM $130,000 TO ANNUAL
AMOUNT OF $190,000).
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 28 to be reconsidered.
Ms. Carter: Yes. And we will explain why we're increasing the amount.
Terry Buice: Terry Buice, Assistant Director of Public Facilities. We're presently using off -duty police
officers in Dinner Key Marina, and we would like to change over to security at this time. We feel like
we'll get more coverage, and we'll save about twenty thousand dollars ($20,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: The saving is what? Twenty thousand dollars ($20,000)?
Mr. Buice: It's going to be about a twenty thousand dollar ($20,000) savings, and we feel we'll double
the amount of security overseeing the marina. So -- pardon me -- we need approximately a hundred and
sixty thousand dollars ($160,000). It's in our budget at the present time. Actually; we have a hundred and
eighty thousand in our budget. So we want to change to security.
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute. Terry, you have to speak into the mike.
Mr. Buice: OK. We need approximately a hundred and sixty thousand dollars ,($160,000). It's in our
budget at the present time. We're just changing over to use --
Commissioner Sanchez: So you have to amend it from a hundred and -- you're asking a hundred and
ninety thousand. You want to amend it to a hundred and sixty --
146 12/14/00
0
Mr. Buice: We'll have to amend it -- we'll have to amend it to three hundred and fifty thousand.
Commissioner Sanchez: Three hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($350,000)?
Mr. Buice: But the hundred and sixty thousand is in our budget at the present time. We're just using off -
duty police officers.
Commissioner Winton: My -- sorry. My view is that if you all have a program that can show how the
City can save expenses, that detailed documentation should be brought before the Commission, so that we
can see current cost, new projected cost, savings to the City, and then vote. But just coming up and saying
that, "Well, you know, I can save some money for the City by doing this," that, you know, that's tough.
In fact, it's really hard to get up the stamina to vote for an increase in a contract when I can't see the data
that shows what the differential cost will be from where we are to where we're going.
Mr. Buice: Well, actually, Commissioner, the amount of money that's in our budget, it's there now. We
will spend a hundred and eighty thousand on our security --
Commissioner Winton: You ought to be showing that to me with a document that shows expenses today,
expenses tomorrow, savings or new costs, as opposed to just kind of standing up and telling us, and then
I'm going to -- I won't have any documented proof of anything, whatsoever. I'm just hearing a statement
from a staff person that says this is what's going to happen. I don't think that's a good way to do it on any
issue. I'm not picking on you, Terry.
Mr. Buice: No, I understand.
Commissioner Winton: I think your point is probably good, but we ought to have the documentation in
front of us before we make these kind of decisions.
Commissioner Regalado: And I don't know if I understood correctly. It's in your budget, and because
it's in your budget, you have to spend it?
Mr. Buice: No. We --
Commissioner Regalado: Or you're asking us --
Mr. Buice: We will spend it --
Commissioner Regalado: You're asking us to give you more money --
Mr. Buice: No.
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no.
Commissioner Regalado: -- to allocate more money of your budget so you can save money?
147 12/ 14/00
0 0
Mr. Buice: No.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Mr. Buice: No, sir.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Mr. Ginnenez: No, sir. What's being asked is that the contract be increased. He says he's going to spend
a hundred and eighty thousand dollars ($180,000) per year. And by -- he's using police officers right
now. If he increases this contract, we would be able to use security guards, and probably will use two
security guards instead of one police officer and reduce the cost by twenty thousand dollars ($20,000).
The money is in his budget. He's going to spend, if he keeps the same operation, a hundred and eighty.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that. I understand that.
Mr. Gimenez: There's no increase in the budget. Just in --
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. He's asking us to let his department to use -- to increase the contract. I
understand that. What I'm saying is that you're asking us to let you spend more money so you can save
money in order to get rid of some off -duty police officers of the City of Miami.
Commissioner Winton: I don't think that's what he's saying, but I would like to --
Commissioner Regalado: And, you know --
Commissioner Winton: I would like to move that we accept the original resolution that's in front of us,
period.
Commissioner Regalado: And --
Commissioner Winton: And the original resolution does not take into consideration this new request.
Commissioner Regalado: And I don't know -- I just am blind here. I don't know what we're doing,
because I don't know where are the facilities that you want security guards to take care of? Because I
would think, I would think that if we are talking, for instance, just an example, the Artime, in that area --
and this is an example. You don't have to say. That area, I would rather, I would rather have an off -duty
police officer in that area than a security guard, because a police officer is going to be there with a squad
car, and it will protect the area. People would respect him more than a security officer. So I don't know
where you're planning to do this. And, you know, like always --
Commissioner Winton: If we vote on Resolution 28, we don't even have to deal with this.
Commissioner Regalado: No, we don't vote. We just don't vote. I mean, I will vote against --
148 12/14/00
9 •
Commissioner Winton: Now, we have to -- there is a -- Tomas, there is a resolution before us that has
nothing to do with what he's talking about.
Ms. Carter: Exactly, exactly.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: The resolution has nothing to do with what he's talking about.
Ms. Carter: It doesn't.
Commissioner Teele: Then why are we talking about it?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: What's the motion?
Mr. Vilarello: On Resolution 20 -- it's item 28, as written. The one that you already adopted and
reconsidered.
Commissioner Winton: And so the subsequent request, which was the correction they were bringing to
the table, is going to increase this amount from one ninety or whatever this number is to three hundred and
some thousand. And we're saying we don't want to hear about this other idea, just stick to the existing
resolution.
Frank Rollason: Right.
Commissioner Winton: And if they have --
Mr. Rollason: We can go with that till next month, and then we can come back with a cleaned'up piece
that will make it right, show you the documents you want.
Commissioner Teele: And work with the union before you bring it back, so we don't have a public
discussion on it. I will say this: As a matter of City facilities, I think if there is a question, we should use
off -duty police. On the question of park facilities for not -for -profits and other organizations, I think they
should be given the opportunity to use security guards. And we need to make sure -- but if it's our
facility, we ought to use our own. I firmly agree with that.
Mr. Rollason: This is trying -- these people are for the boatyard that we've got to try to secure from the
vandalism until we can turn it over for the upland project that's coming. And --
Commissioner Teele: But it ain't up now.
Mr. Rollason: No.
149 12/ 14/00
C
Commissioner Teele: You're going to bring that up in a month.
Mr. Rollason: Yes, we will. We'll bring it up --
Commissioner Teele: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Right. So.
Commissioner Teele: So we have a motion and a second?
Vice Chairman Gort: A motion and a second. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1091
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT WITH INTER-
AMERICAN PROTECTIVE SERVICES, FOR THE PROVISION OF
SECURITY GUARD SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
PURCHASING, TO BE USED BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS,
ON AN AS -NEEDED CONTRACT BASIS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $60,000, FROM $130,000 TO AN ANNUAL AMOUNT OF
$190,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE
OPERATING BUDGETS OF THE INDIVIDUAL USER
DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
150 12/14/00
7
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on item 27, I would so move.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
151 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1092
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 40-
UNIT NEW HOPE/OVERTOWN HOUSING PROJECT;
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
CONVEY CERTAIN VACANT CITY -OWNED PARCELS AT
NORTHWEST 6TH AND 8TH STREETS BETWEEN NORTHWEST 5TH
AND 6" AVENUES, MIAMI, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN THE
OVERTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD, TO BAME DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC. (`GAME"), SAID
PARCELS MORE PARTICULARLY AND. LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN
"EXHIBIT A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF;
DIRECTING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
CONVEY THE SUBJECT PARCELS AT NO COST TO BAME, AS
AUTHORIZED BY CITY COMMISSION POLICY AND PURSUANT
TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY'S FIVE (5) YEAR CONSOLIDATED
PLAN (1999-2004), CONTINGENT UPON CONSTRUCTION
COMPLETION AND THE SALE OF THE FORTY (40) NEW SINGLE-
FAMILY HOMES WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR (24) MONTHS FROM
THE DATE OF THE ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION OR TITLE
TO THE SUBJECT PARCELS SHALL REVERT BACK TO THE CITY;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
THE NECESSARY DOCUMENT(S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, CONVEYING SAID PARCELS.
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, now, when we do these transfers and this -- I don't mean to bring up
the Commissioner that's no longer here, that was here for 20 or 30 years -- but you all said that as a matter
152 12/14/00
U
of procedure that you all convey them subject to certain things, and that if for some reason the
development doesn't go forward, there is a reverter clause in it and whatever. And I wanted to make sure
that we give them releases on the reverter clause. I want the reverter clause in, but there's a release once
they convey the property over to the homeowner; is that right?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Thank you.
153 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Twenty-nine. Authorizing the contract increase for the purchase of office supplies.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1093
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT WITH
APRICOT OFFICE SUPPLIES AND STATIONERY, INC. FOR THE
PROVISION OF OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
PURCHASING FOR USE BY VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS, IN
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000, FROM $475,000 TO AN
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $525,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM EACH OF THE OPERATING BUDGETS OF
VARIOUS USER DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY
APPROVAL.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
154 12/14/00
Cl
•
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: Judy?
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: When does it go out for --
Ms. Carter: It's already on the streets, and we're expecting to have this bid before you, at the latest, the
first meeting of February and I'm hoping for the second meeting of January.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. And that includes Office Depot?
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir. It is an open competitive bid, and we have issued it to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Staples.
Ms. Carter: Office Max.
Commissioner Sanchez: Jack Office Supplies, Pepe's Office Supplies. Thank you.
Ms. Carter: Anybody who's in our data basis has been issued the bid.
Commissioner Teele: Anybody who's going to fill out the paperwork and conform to all of the
bureaucratic rules and regulations --
Commissioner Sanchez: Amen, hallelujah.
Commissioner Teele: -- that the City Commission mandates.
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
155 12/14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 30.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: I would request that we go to item 37. We have some volunteers here who've
been working with us on Bicentennial Park. I would like to make a couple comments before we get into
the war of the lobbyists here on item 30.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 37. Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Item 37 is a resolution on Bicentennial Park for the consultants. And we have --
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning and Zoning): Yeah, I -- we have Liz Plater-Zyberk here.
Vice Chairman Gort: Resolution authorizing the -- go ahead.
Commissioner Winton: And we have the distinguished Chairman of the Department of Architecture from
the School of Miami, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk here, who is Co -Chair of the Planning Committee for
Bicentennial Park. And this is a resolution authorizing execution of professional service agreements.
We've already funded the money, and now we're trying to get the consultants hired, and that's what this is
about. And I think Elizabeth wanted to take one minute, minute and a half, and just give a quick update.
Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk: Thank you, Commissioner. Good afternoon, Commissioners. We've been
through a selection process for four requests for letters of interest, which went out from the City.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. I need your name and address.
Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Yes. Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, 1023 Southwest 251h Avenue, Miami, Florida. As I
was saying, there are four -- there were four requests for letters of interest to bring various consulting
services for proposals for Bicentennial Park. I am a Co -Chair of the committee that's working with
Commissioner Winton to bring this work to you later this spring. The topics for the four different areas of
work were urban design, rendering services, economic analysis and the public coordinator to bring -- to
enable all of this work and the public process to happen to bring it before you in several months.
Commissioner Winton: So I move the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
156 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion?
Commissioner Sanchez: None.
Vice Chairman Gort: Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Ms. Plater-Zyberk: Thank you very much.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you, Elizabeth.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1094
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT PROPOSALS
FROM PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS DESIGNATED HEREIN
AND TO PROCURE SUCH ADDITIONAL SERVICES AS MAY BE
REQUIRED TO ASSIST IN THE PREPARATION OF SCHEMATIC
MASTER PLAN PROPOSALS FOR THE BICENTENNIAL PARK/FEC
SLIP WATERFRONT RENEWAL PROCESS, IN A TOTAL
AGGREGATE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $200,000 FOR ALL
CONSULTANTS, SERVICES AND RELATED EXPENSES; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND
EXECUTE THE NECESSARY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 001000.921002.6.270.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
157 12/14/00
9
•
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
158 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 30. Resolution of protest, copiers, Citywide. Staff?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Ms. Carter will make the presentation for the administration.
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Good afternoon, Commissioners. If I might, I would like to give you
a presentation on my response to a protest that was issued by U.S. Toner and Copiers. I'd like to give you
a little background with regards to the bid, the requirements of the bid, the protest filed, as well as my
response to that protest. First of all, do know that the City of Miami had a need for approximately 91
copiers of seven different copier models. This bid was issued under Number 99-00-206. In this bid -- and
it's very important to know -- the City of Miami required 79 analog placements and 12 digital placements
throughout the City. This includes your NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Offices, your
substations, City Hall, the various Marina offices, et cetera, et cetera, totaling approximately 32 different
locations throughout the City of Miami. The magnitude of this contract with regards to the breadth as well
as the scope of it is large. In the bid requirements -- and as you know, the driving force of any contract
that is secured through a competitive bid process is that which is contained in that bid. The bid
solicitation requirements said something very simple. It said that in addition to the bid specifications for
each of the seven copier models, we also made it very clear -- and I will show you that in the document --
that a maintenance repair facility was to be located in Miami -Dade County. Consistent with that
requirement, the bid required all bidders on each of their price sheets to list the address of the maintenance
service facility that they will be providing and servicing from. Now, in looking at this, it's extremely
important that you know that this is a straight black and white bid. Well, what does that mean? It means
that the City establishes its minimum requirements, all bidders are required to meet those requirements,
and then, based upon low bid, the award is made to that bidder who is the lowest bidder meeting the
specifications of that particular procurement. According to this same bid document, which I said to you is
the driving force of anything that we award here, three point eighteen of the bid, as well as -- and this is
very important for you to know, that I don't think most people know, and that is this: Section 29-A of the
City Charter says this: That when you are procuring equipment or supplies, you shall use the competitive
sealed bidding know as the bid. It does not say and it does not allow us to issue an RFP (Request for
Proposals). For some reason, in the protest letter that was filed by Toner and Copiers, they continue to
refer to this document as an RFP. Well, an RFP is very different, because in the RFP, you have the ability
to establish various factors that are important to that particular procurement. And in that way, we can
assign weight and then evaluate those responses, based upon assigning points to each of those factors. In
this instance, we are talking about a bid, and not an RFP, because the document said so, and because
Section 29-A of the City Charter requires it. In that same City Code, it says that a responsive bidder is one
that meets all of the material specifications of that particular bid. And you will see in the bid document
that we made it very clear that award of bid shall be to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder,
consistent with the requirements of Section 29-A of the Charter and of the document itself. The City
received three bids. The lowest bid by price, no question about it, is U.S. Toner and Copiers. The second
low bidder is Copyco, and the third low bidder is Icon. Let's talk a little bit about Toner and Copier, so
that you will have a full understanding and breadth of the company. The company, first of all, is located
in North Broward County, nine miles from Palm Beach County. They have, according to their bid, six
159 12/14/00
technicians servicing Palm Beach, Dade County and Broward County. I assume those six would be
available to us, as well as all other contracts that they have in Palm Beach, Dade and Broward County.
They have been, according to the references that we have checked, in business for less than two years. If
you take a look at the bid document, we make it very clear that the bidder's minimum qualifications is that
you shall have been in business for at least two years. Copyco, on the other hand, has been in business for
more than 14 years. They are located in Miami -Dade County, in particular, Miami Lakes. And they have
74 technicians in Dade, Broward and Palm Beach County. And I assume of the 74, "X" number would be
available to us in our service. They are -- Then Icon, of course, is located in Miami, and they are the third
low bidder. Keep in mind, I might add, that Icon is a Miami local vendor, but because they were not
within ten percent, we were not in a position to consider them at all. Now, let's go back to the
maintenance service facility. We made it very clear -- and I will show you in a second -- that we require
that there be a Miami -Dade County facility, and we said that clearly in our bidder's minimum
qualifications, the determination of award, as well as other sections of the bid document that I will show
you earlier. Not only did we find that important to say that, we also asked that they list the name, the
address of that facility, and this is where it becomes very, very important. List the address of that facility
that you have said is located in Miami -Dade County. Toner and Copiers listed the address of 3306 Ponce
de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables, Suite 250. They indicated that that was their maintenance service
facility. Copyco, the second low bidder, indicated that their facility is located at 14394 Commerce Way in
Miami Lakes. They indicated very clearly that is their maintenance service facility. So on face, it
appeared as though we had facilities that were, in fact, located in Miami -Dade County. However, in that
same section, namely, 3.7 of the bid, we said that the City had the right to conduct an inspection of that
site, to ensure that, one, the equipment that was proposed was, in fact, what is going to be provided; and
also to assure ourselves that the facility that they listed was, in fact, a maintenance service facility to meet
our needs. The inspections were conducted by Milton Mizell -- and where is Milton? Milton Mizell is
our contract administrator, the technical expert on all of our copiers, and has been doing this business for
more than seven years. In fact, he knows, I think, as much about copiers as U.S. Toner, who has been in
business for less than two years. Now, 3.7-D of the bidder's minimum qualifications says that we can
inspect the facility. So, of course, Mr. Mizell went out there, and he conducted a physical inspection of all
of the facilities, not just Toner and Copiers. And we went only to the place that was listed by U.S. toners
as the maintenance facility for this particular contract. And this is what he found. Let's look at that one
more time. Now, Commissioners, I've been known to be slow, but this is not, under anybody's definition,
a maintenance service facility. Now, Commissioners, I got a problem with that: As the Chief
Procurement Officer of the City of Miami, there is an expectation that I have of all bidders, and that is
this: That you tell the truth. And I'm very concerned that this appears to be -- in fact, it is a
misrepresentation of what actually is a maintenance service facility. Now, if you take a look at this
facility, it looks like an office space facility. We have provided measurements of an 8-by-10 office. And
also, what's important to show is that this particular office is located on the second floor of the building,
has no elevator, so no copier could go up there unless it flew. And therefore, we had to make a careful -- a
careful conclusion that this was not a service and maintenance parts facility. Therefore -- therefore, based
upon the requirement that we said under the bidder's minimum qualifications that you shall have a facility
in Miami -Dade County, we also said that the basis by which we would determine who is the lowest
responsive bidder, one of which would be a location, then I had to deem that particular vendor non-
responsive. Now, let's take a look at Copyco, the second lower bidder, who, once again, we inspected
their site, and this is what we found. Now, the technicians would have been in there, but they didn't want
to be on the picture. Now, what that showed me was a bona fide maintenance service facility in Miami -
Dade County. Consistent with my authority, I deemed U.S. Toner and Copiers, although -- although the
160 12/14/00
apparent low bidder non -responsive for failing to meet the specification requirements of this bid. Now,
let's go back to the facility. I also thought that it was important to go to Coral Gables. And what we
found in Coral Gables, from the City of Coral Gables was that there is no record at all to show U.S. Toner
and Copiers having any certificate of use or any occupational license for this particular facility. Go back
to the other one. Now, so as of today, I still don't know whose office this is. Based upon my particular
determination, of course, I received a protest from U.S. Toner and Copiers. And quite frankly, I was very
surprised that I would receive the protest. Based upon this protest, these are the allegations that were
proffered by their attorney. They indicated that, well, yes, there is a requirement that there be a Miami -
Dade facility in Dade County, but that it did not require that this facility be at the time of bid submittal.
Well, I submit to you, sir that the document, the bid document itself would make it very plain and clear --
plain and clear -- that the requirement was to be at the time of bid submittal. And if you take a look at the
-- I need you to go up here. I got you walking, but I need you to (inaudible). Oh, here we go. I've never
done -- As I said to you before, Commissioners, the contention is this, is that while there -- not to take
issue with the fact that the address was -- is and is what it is -- the contention on this end or they're
contesting that, in fact, such a facility was not required at the time of bid submittal. And I want to show
you that it did by virtue of the contents of that document. Here we have a determination of award, and it
says very clearly that award -- in other words, for us to get to this point -- award will be made to the
lowest responsive and responsible bidder meeting specifications consistent with Section 29-A of the City
Charter. And it also said -- and this is very important -- that determining responsiveness and
responsibility will be based on the terms and conditions and the following: Of course, cost, but it also said
maintenance repair service facility's location. Now, right now, it doesn't say all that much about Miami -
Dade County, but it did say location was certainly going to be a consideration in determining who was
going to be responsive. These other areas here have to do with responsibility. Performance has to do with
responsibility. Performance has to do with responsibility. Performance record of copier contract has to do
with responsibility. This has to do with responsiveness. And so, so far in this section, we make it very
clear that location is going to be considered in determining responsiveness. Guys, bidder's qualifications.
I've got the two nice looking guys working for me. Now, let's go to another part of the document, and
this is the key here. Bidder's minimum qualifications. What of the minimum qualifications a bidder must
have in order to even consider bidding for this project? And it says down here location of maintenance
repair facility must be within City of Miami. We would love it to be City of Miami, but that's asking too
much, I thought. Sometimes. Miami -Dade County, OK? Now, bidder's minimum qualifications is very
clear. And we also said that you had to have at least two years of experience. They have less than two
years, based upon the information that we've been able to glean. And we also make it very clear -- and
this is the icing on the cake -- an inspection of bidder's facility and/or equipment may be made prior to
award. Well, my goodness, if I did not require it to be at time of submittal, I have no need to have it done
prior to award. Clearly, Commissioners, time of submittal was a requirement. Oh, sure, it did not say it in
the "A," "B," "C" and "D" of it, but it made it very clear in its bidder's minimum qualifications. It made
it very clear in the determination of qualifications. And it also makes it very clear in another document,
because I've always felt that when you prepare bid documents, most people don't like to read it, so I like
to repeat it sometimes two and three times, to make sure you get it. And I also say back here in -- under
the maintenance repair service -- because this is what this is -- location of service facility. Bidder shall
operate and maintain local service and parts within limits of Dade County. So in all of these places, we
have made it very clear, Commissioners, and I think we made it plain, and we made it clear as one can
make it that the requirement was for this facility to be in Miami -Dade County. Commissioners, you are
placing this City at risk to consider any kind of facility that is nine miles from Palm Beach County. The
needs of this City are such that when we have the equipment that is on -- down, cannot wait for traffic to
161 12/14/00
0
get you there. And what especially concerns me, Commissioners, is that we have, according to them, six
technicians to cover all of their contracts versus 74 technicians. So my concern is, can we expect that that
is going to be available to us? The key to this whole contract, Commissioners, is not just equipment. Any
time you're dealing with equipment, the most important thing you want to know is that your service is
going to be fulfilled. I had the opportunity as a side note to take a look at a magazine poll. And they were
talking about cars. We all love cars. And they were talking about luxury cars. And they ranked the most
popular car that these particular readers had. You know what they said? They said the Lexus. But do you
know why they said that? They said because of service. Service is the key to equipment operations. And
if we do not have service, I don't care how good the equipment is, we are placing our City in a
disadvantaged state. And I am therefore asking -- in fact, I'm urging, I'm asking and I'm encouraging,
Commissioners, that you would consider what I have said, and that you will uphold my decision to reject
the protest and to subsequently recommend award to the second lowest responsive and responsible bidder.
Do you have any questions, Commissioners?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am, no. I think you've been very clear.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney -- madam -- Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: I think you should trade professions and go into lobbying.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele.
Ms. Carter: OK. That's a second thought.
Commissioner Teele: Look, you know, this is a long day. And to be very candid with you, I don't
understand where we are on this. Look, if there is a decision that the bid is a non -responsive bid --
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: -- we do not have the authority to overrule the Manager's determination on that.
All you can have is a review by the Attorney as to whether or not the bid is non -responsive. •Is that
correct, Mr. Attorney?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): The Chief Procurement Officer comes to a conclusion and we review
it as to legal sufficiency. We have --
Commissioner Teele: Have you reviewed the bid, and is the bid non -responsive?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes. We concur with the Procurement Officer's decision.
Commissioner Teele: Can the Commission overrule a decision of non -responsiveness?
Mr. Vilarello: No.
Commissioner Teele: On that question.
162 12/ 14/00
Mr. Vilarello: No, Commissioner. What you could do is --
Commissioner Teele: OK. So if it's non -responsive, it's non -responsive. Now, we can -- we could reject
all bids, possibly, if we chose to. But once a bid is deemed to be non -responsive, one of the things I'm
trying to say is, look, we don't need to start having 30 minute debates about a non -responsive bid. If there
is -- if a defect or a flaw, or an element of responsibility, we can make that decision. So Lucia, I don't
understand what you all are going to say or do here.
Lucia Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner, if you'd just give me five minutes, we will not make this a half an
hour thing. And I'm not asking for you to award this to my client. I'm asking you to throw out the bids,
and I think I have some very --
Commissioner Teele: That's all we could do, is throw out all bids.
Ms. Dougherty: Well, that's not what you could do.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Ms. Dougherty: I mean, you could determine that they are responsive.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Excuse me.
Ms. Dougherty: Excuse me, sorry. Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: And you are?
Ms. Dougherty: Lucia Dougherty with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue, here today on behalf of U.S.
Toner and Copier. With me is Frank Garrett and Charlie Alvarez. And we have been in business since
May of 1998, so we do meet that two-year minimum requirement. We are the lowest bidder by eighteen
thousand dollars ($18,000), and as the -- staff had determined that we are non -responsive, because we did
not have a repair facility in Dade County. That is correct. We are a Broward County based company. In
your bid, you had determined that nobody can bid on this who isn't located presently in Dade County. I
don't know that that's what you really want to do, because you are then precluding yourself from getting
the very best and lowest bidder. Now, if you want to require somebody to have a -- and I wanted to bring
this one (inaudible). If you want to require somebody to have a facility in Dade County, why don't you
make it in the City of Miami itself? Because this, this provision says the bidder shall operate, maintain
local service and parts within the limits of Dade County. It didn't say it had to have it at the bid opening.
It said it shall. That means in our mind that we can then establish one. And the truth is in the industry,
what happens is that we take our facilities -- I mean our cars and our mobile units. We provide the service
on site. We bring our copiers to the site. We trade; we give a loaner in the event that the machine actually
has to be moved out. So it's totally "seemless" for the customer. The customer doesn't know whether or
not their facility is in Miami Lakes or Broward County. But all I'm saying to you is if you require a
facility in Dade County, let us put one in. We are the lowest bidder. But I'm not asking for that. What
I'm saying to you is that at this time, you should throw out these bids and allow anybody to bid on this
who may operate somewhere else other than Dade County, and to recreate a Miami or Dade County office
of a repair facility. There's no reason why we couldn't do that. And the truth is the industry now does not
163 12/ 14/00
have repair facilities on site. We bring our repair facilities to the customer. We provide all the copiers for
Nova. We provide all the copiers for Cleveland Clinic. We are not a fly by night operation as she may
indicate. And by the way, Alex, I agree, you should hire her. And this is -- So what I'm saying to you is
that I'm asking you to throw out these bids. And another reason is, is that your bid specifications did not
have the state of the art now. They've bid mostly analog. The state of the industry for copying machines
and office business machines is digital. And what we are suggesting is that you should put out new
specifications authorizing or requiring digital machines, which we actually bid, and we were still eighteen
thousand dollars ($18,000) less. You had the same incumbent bidder here, so the City's not out. The
incumbent bidder shouldn't complain, because they're still there. And you get the opportunity to have
them sharpen their pencils, maybe get a lesser, less and more responsive bidder. And if you want to have
a facility in Dade County or the City of Miami, let them create one after the bid has been awarded. So
that's our protest.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. We will now close the public hearing.
Ms. Carter: Commissioners, could I say one more thing on that at the time of --
Vice Chairman Gort: Quick. We have a long agenda to go yet, and it's 4:54.
Ms. Carter: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: What is the wish of the Commission?
Commissioner Winton: There was a point during the presentation where I got to focusing on the eighteen
thousand dollar ($18,000) savings to the City, and thinking, what's wrong with the idea of throwing out
the bids and starting over? But then what really flashed across my mind was that-- was the awful process
that goes on at County Hall where the County spends tons of time, the Commission spends tons of time
with lobbyists all over the place overturning staff decisions. And while I would like to save the City this
eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000), I think that in the long run, we may cost the City a heck of a lot more
money if we get ourselves in the position where every time there is a bidder out there and they have some
problem or some issue relative to our process, decides they want to appeal the process, and we're going to
spend all of our time with lobbyists in our offices, lobbyists standing before us trying to get bids
overturned. And frankly, that process makes me ill to think about. So I am going to go with the
recommendation of the staff. I think that in the future -- I'm not sure that the people appealing this
decision are making all bad points, by the way. I think the issue on the technology that's being offered,
the issue over being able to get companies that may come into the community on big, major contracts and
save us a heck of a lot, and potentially save us a heck of a lot of money if they don't have an operation
here, I think that makes some sense, and we need to think about those kinds of things. But I think we need
to think about them in the future, and not step back two steps and redo this whole process, and open the
floodgates to lobbyists coming into our Commission meetings all the time.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Discussion. Any discussion?
164 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: Under discussion. I'm in total agreement with the sentiments expressed by
Commissioner Winton. I'm not certain; again, that government knows all. And I commend you, Ms.
Carter, on your presentation and the passion of your presentation. I think it's really important that
professionals have a sense of their duty, and care about it. But at the same time, we need to listen to the
industry and listen to the world. I mean, the concept of a service center sounds great, but I mean, I'd
much rather have the equipment on a loaner basis right there, and the equipment go, candidly, to, you
know, Minnesota to be repaired if that's the best place to repair it, as long as we got the equipment,
replacement equipment on site or in a truck. I mean, I just think in the context of e-technology and all of
that, the best argument for this from my vantage point really is that the limits of Dade County is a
ridiculous limit. It is a ridiculous requirement. It does not reflect that we're in an e-commerce society. It
does not reflect the fact that it is closer to take a piece of equipment to Davie or Hollywood than it is to
Homestead. So I mean, you know, it sounds good, and we all get caught up in these municipal boundaries
and all of that, but it really means very, very little from an operational point of view. But I think, and I
will say this. I've not been lobbied on this issue, but I have warned three or four times, Commissioner
Winton, and I mean, I've said it very clearly that what we don't want is for City Hall of Miami to become
what Dade County has become. And clearly, the best way to do that is to show some support for the staff
on close calls. My only question is this: The duration of this contract, what is the minimum duration of
this contract?
Ms. Carter: It's three years with the option to renew for one year.
Commissioner Winton: Option --
Commissioner Teele: So this is a three-year contract.
Ms. Carter: Yes. And at that end --
Commissioner Teele: So is the eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) a
year, or --
Ms. Carter: No. It's actually seventeen thousand dollars ($17,000) for the total three-year period, not
annually. And when you look at it, that's a two point five percent different, which, in the industry, still
maintains a competitiveness between the bidders.
Commissioner Teele: So it's eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) for three years.
Ms. Carter: For the three years, yes, seventeen thousand.
Commissioner Teele: That's almost a push.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, Mr. Chairman --
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez.
165 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Sanchez: First of all, I would like for these types of protests to go to special masters or
something. I mean, they shouldn't be here, to be honest with you. I mean, I'm surprised it's gotten this
far. As we said, you know, if the Procurement Office says that they didn't meet the requirements, the
Legal Department should just kill it before it comes in front of this Commission. You know, I've studied
the documents provided to me, and, you know, the specs are clear. And if you look -- and Ms. Carter, you
did a great presentation.
Ms. Carter: Thank you very much, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, you're often not commended for what you do, and sometimes, we tend
to criticize the administration in many ways. But one of the things in the couple of years that I have been
here that we focused on is due diligence. Anyone who wants to come and do business with the City,
whatever is in black and white, whatever is written down in the specs, they must follow that spec. These
are the rules. We live in a land of rules, and you must comply with them. Of course, you could come and
make the arguments for your opinion. But clearly, looking at it -- And one of the questions that I had, and
I just found the document was did anyone go to Coral Gables and see if they had a CU, (Certificate of
Use), an occupational license? And I just found it, and I see that they have not even registered. I mean, in
the specs, it clearly says here, you know, bidder shall operate and maintain local service and parts within
the limits of Dade County. I mean, we tend to focus on businesses that are in the City or close, in the
County, and then we go and find them someplace else. But I'm listening to both sides and you make it
compelling --
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner, we absolutely intended to operate --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. I'm sorry.
Ms. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: The public hearing is closed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, listening to both sides' compelling arguments, and now that it's in front of
us -- and really, I wish it wasn't even in front of me. I mean, we should hire a retired judge to listen to
these protests, as you could see that as the contracts get bigger and bigger, people always protest, no
matter what. So it's to a point that protests, we're getting more protests and more protests because the
City is financially getting back on its feet. We're starting to re -bid a lot of the big contracts that we have
out, and we're just going to see this over and over. And we have a -- I mean, we have a very large agenda
today.
Commissioner Winton: Unless we send the right message.
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely. So, you know, I have to agree, based on the arguments made today -
- and that's why I second the motion -- that that company did not have a maintenance office in Dade
County or in the City. And that's based on my decision. You know, if anyone else wants to make a
statement or call the question.
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman just --
166 12/ 14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: The procedure is that anybody will ask you a question. Does anybody want to ask a
question?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'd ask. Lucia, what's the question?
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Two things. First of all, I don't believe a special master
would be appropriate in this instance, because we're not asking for the bid to be awarded to us. We're
asking you -- and that has to be a policy decision made by the Commission -- to throw out all of the bids.
Secondly, in response to Commissioner Sanchez' remarks is the bid says they shall operate. "Shall" is a
future word. We will. If that's a requirement, we will establish it. We shall establish. Why would you
limit yourself to only Dade County bidders? That's what this bid document does. And instead of
allowing yourself to get the lowest and most and the best equipment from somebody else who can
establish a repair facility -- and the word, "establish, shall establish," they can in the future do so. So why
would you limit yourself?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. That's it.
Commissioner Teele: I have two final questions, Mr. Chairman. Does the -- first as a matter of law and
procedures. This is not the second low bidder. This is, using your determination, this is the only low --
this is the low responsive bidder. So the record needs to be corrected on that point. Number two; is the
equipment that they're going to use digital or analog?
Ms. Carter: Based upon the specifications that we required, they are both digital and analog. Are you
speaking -- who are you speaking about? I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: The low responsive bidder.
Ms. Carter: Yes, yes. They're digital and analog, because that's what we asked for.
Commissioner Teele: So we asked for analog.
Ms. Carter: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Well, let me just say I'm supporting the maker of the motion for the
following reasons: Number one, if this bid were substantially -- if the other bid, the non -responsive bid
were substantially, substantially lower -- two and a half percent to me is not substantially lower -- I would
be willing to entertain throwing out all bids. And I do think that we need to send a very clear signal that
we're looking for the best deal for the citizens of our community, and not necessarily the one that meets
all of the -- gets the right boxes checked at the right time. But I do agree with Commissioner Winton on
this very important point. We want to make sure that our government remains somewhat aloof from some
of the things that are going on over at County Hall. And I do think that supporting the staff on these close
calls sends the right kind of message. So I'm going to support the Manager's recommendation, and I
guess the maker and seconder of the motion on this. But I do think that we should keep an open mind, and
encourage the industry to protest bids where they're appropriate. I don't think that there should be an
167 12/ 14/00
•
•
absolute presumption that we're going to rubber stamp everything that comes up here, because that, too,
sends the wrong signal.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1095
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER'S DECISION TO REJECT
THE PROTEST OF U.S. TONER AND COPIERS, INC. IN
CONNECTION WITH INVITATION FOR BIDS NO. 99-00-206 FOR
THE CITYWIDE LEASE OF COPIERS, AS SUCH PROTEST HAS
BEEN DETERMINED TO BE WITHOUT MERIT.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
168 12/14/00
11
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 31. Don't go away now. Resolution authorizing award of the bid 99-00-206
that we just heard about. Do we need any more explanation on this?
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Do I have a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Thank you so much.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1096
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF COPYCO, INC. FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
CITYWIDE COPIER SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, GRAPHIC
REPRODUCTIONS DIVISION, ON A LEASE/RENTAL CONTRACT
BASIS FOR A PERIOD OF THREE (3) YEARS, WITH THE OPTION
TO RENEW FOR AN ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR PERIOD, AT AN
ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $297,641.88; ALLOCATING
FUNDS THEREFOR, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL,
FROM THE OPERATING BUDGETS OF THE VARIOUS USER
DEPARTMENTS.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
169 12/ 14/00
9 0
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
170 12/ 14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 32. Resolution ratifying the City Manager's action, extension of the increase
of specialized flat tire --
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1097
A RESOLUTION (PENDING)
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
171 12/ 14/00
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
172 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Thirty-three. Purchase of police vehicles.
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and --
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing): Yes, sir. We would just like to exclude Exhibit B from the
documentation. Everything else remains the same and is what it is.
Vice Chairman Gort: Are we talking about on 33?
Ms. Carter: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: What are you excluding?
Ms. Carter: There is a -- there is a Exhibit B that really is attributed to our last fiscal year's bid. It has
nothing to do with this bid, and it was erroneously placed in there. Exhibit A is the appropriate exhibit.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Do I have a motion? It was moved by Commissioner Teele. Second? Who
seconded?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second. I'll second, yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. It's been seconded. Discussion.
Commissioner Sanchez: We've got to buy cars.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
173 12/14/00
0 0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1098
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, ACCEPTING THE BIDS OF GUS MACHADO
FORD, MAROONE DODGE, SHEEHAN PONTIAC-GMC, AND
HOLLYWOOD CHRYSLER JEEP, AS LISTED IN "EXHIBIT A"
ATTACHED HERETO, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF
POLICE AND GENERAL FLEET VEHICLES, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $5,901,108; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR
FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
311850.429401.6.840, AND FROM THE BUDGETS OF THE VARIOUS
USER DEPARTMENTS, SUBJECT TO BUDGETARY APPROVAL.
(Here follows body of the resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, is this the last of the cars we're going to buy for now?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thirty-four.
Ms. Carter: Certainly, this covers us for the fiscal year, right, and the needs that --
Commissioner Sanchez: What was the breakdown? I remember there was a breakdown of how many we
were going to buy. We were going to buy "X" amount.
Ms. Carter: You need to answer that.
Alex Martinez (Acting Director, GSA): Alex Martinez, Acting Director of GSA (General Services
Administration). Could you repeat the question, please?
174 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me?
Mr. Martinez: Could you repeat the question? I didn't hear.
Vice Chairman Gort: When you first came out with the purchase of the cars, we were going to purchase
"X" amount of cars in so many years. We want to know if this is the last of the orders that are going to be
placed.
Mr. Martinez: I believe this is the last year.
Commissioner Sanchez: This is the last year?
Mr. Martinez: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: The last year, or the last order for a while?
Mr. Martinez: Yes, last year.
Vice Chairman Gort: In other words, we're not going to buy cars for another five, six years?
Mr. Martinez: No, not under the contract.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. That's the question that's being asked, guys. That's why I'm telling you,
come up and give us the right answer.
Commissioner Winton: Did we vote on this?
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Commissioner, Raul Martinez, Chief of Police. I'm not sure if you're
asking about police, if you're asking if this is the last year of the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) contract
that mandates purchasing 150 cars a year.
Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly. And that contract, that contract was that -- five years? We buy cars and
then for five years --
Chief Martinez: Seven years.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- for seven years.
Chief Martinez: We keep the car for seven years. And this is the last year of the contract that mandates
the City to purchase 150 cars.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Fine. OK.
175 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Can we instruct the staff not to ever negotiate --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): So noted.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion, second. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
176 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, item 34. It's a resolution authorizing the scale fees for Dade County.
Commissioner Winton: Do we have any choice in this?
Vice Chairman Gort: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. So move.
Commissioner Winton: Right. So move. Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1099
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FOR THE
DISPOSAL OF CERTAIN SOLID WASTE COLLECTED IN AND BY
THE CITY OF MIAMI, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$8,506,716, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR, PURSUANT TO
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO WITH MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ON SEPTEMBER 29, 1995;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM ACCOUNT CODE NO.
422001.320302.6.531.
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
177 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 35 --
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, here's a question. Are we doing anything to reduce it? Are we doing
anything to reduce this? Instead of taking it all the way to Broward, is there any way that --
Fredrick Hobson (Assistant Director, Solid Waste): Not right now. I think the only way to reduce it is if
we can renegotiate something with them. I think the Commission some time ago asked the Manager to sit
down with Dade County to see whether we could work something out.
Commissioner Sanchez: To renegotiate?
Mr. Hobson: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much are we paying out per ton?
Commissioner Winton: They're going to be willing to do that.
Mr. Hobson: We're paying -- when we take it to a transfer station, we're paying fifty-six dollars ($56),
and when we take it to the dump, we're paying forty-six.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, this is a long-term deal that was negotiated some years
ago, and with automatic escalators by the County. You know, they're going to have to want to negotiate,
and I'm not sure they're going to want to negotiate this deal.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, once again, thatmas a bad deal.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, I'm sure after we have several meetings and we get some leverage, we might
be able to get --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, can we withdraw from the compact?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): From the contract, there's one exception, and that's with regard to
the Bedminster agreement, which, of course --
Commissioner Teele: Can we withdraw?
Mr. Vilarello: Unilaterally, no, sir.
Commissioner Winton: We've asked that before.
Commissioner Teele: We cannot withdraw from the compact, ever.
Mr. Vilarello: It has a term. And I -- the Manager is telling me it's 30 years. I don't recall it being 30
years. But there is a long -- it's a long-term commitment of the City under the terms of this agreement.
The County used those dollars to assist in the bonding of the improvements that they are processing this
trash with.
178 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Teele: Well, you tell us it's going to go from forty-seven dollars ($47) to fifty-seven
dollars ($57). But what is the annual fiscal impact of that ten dollars ($10)?
Mr. Gimenez: The increase?
Commissioner Teele: I mean, because what we're getting ready to do now is we're getting ready to
increase the cost of collecting garbage.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, according to what I see here, about four hundred and eighty thousand dollars
($480,000). No, no, I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: How do you figure that? I can't figure that.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm looking at a different document. Sorry.
Commissioner Winton: He was on 35.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah, I was on 35.
Mr. Hobson: Well, if they increase it, you know, ten dollars ($10), you know, we're talking about
probably --
Vice Chairman Gort: How many tons do we send?
Mr. Hobson: Beg pardon?
Vice Chairman Gort: How many tons? What's the tonnage a year?
Mr. Hobson: The tonnage is I think around -- I'm not sure right now, because it varies, depends on the --
Commissioner Teele: Well, how were you going to give a number if you don't know the tonnage?
Mr. Hobson: I can get that.
Vice Chairman Gort: What's the tonnage we do every year? How much do we dispose? How many
tons?
Mr. Hobson: Let me see. We do about -- let's see -- eight million -- we do about probably sixteen,
sixteen million tons.
Vice Chairman Gort: How many?
Mr. Hobson: Sixteen --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, no, no, no.
179 12/ 14/00
0
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, no.
Mr. Gimenez: (Inaudible.)
Vice Chairman Gort: What's the tonnage more or less?
Mr. Hobson: The tipping fee right now is eight point five million dollars ($8.5 million).
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Hobson: And we, you know, we --
Commissioner Teele: Well, I can figure it out. I just --
Commissioner Winton: So now you can do the math.
Commissioner Teele: I don't know how to do the math, but I can tell -- Do you know how to do the
math? I can tell you how to do it. Figure out -- 47 is what percent of 57?
Mr. Hobson: That's about 80, 85 percent.
Commissioner Teele: Eighty-five percent?
Mr. Hobson: About 80, 80 percent.
Commissioner Teele: Eight percent?
Mr. Hobson: Eighty. Between 80 and 82 percent.
Mr. Gimenez: It's eight point two percent.
Commissioner Teele: It's eight point two percent? So what's eight point two percent of eight million?
Because you're increasing it to that amount of money. Your memo says not to exceed eight point five
million dollars ($8.5 million). So you take eight percent of that. That's going to be six hundred and forty
thousand dollars ($640,000). So the spread must be about six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) a year
increase.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, it's going to be more than that.
Commissioner Teele: You think it's more than that?
Mr. Gimenez: My math is like seven hundred and twenty-two thousand.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Well, you know, we're adding --
180 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Teele: It sounds like we're adding a quarter of -- three quarters of a million dollars onto
our solid waste budget. And, I mean, these are the things that we do, and we want to know why is the
budget so high, but it's on automatic pilot. Who's presiding? You are? All right. Is there objection to
the item? You have the answer?
Commissioner Winton: We already voted.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, we haven't voted on it. Mr. City Clerk?
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Yes, we did.
Commissioner Sanchez: We did vote on it? What item are we on now?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, we voted. We went voted and went to the -- to 35.
Commissioner Teele: Frank Rollason, do you have the answer?
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): The forty-seven is at the dump, and the fifty-seven is at the
transfer station.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, god.
Mr. Rollason: Because we have to pay the difference of now having to have it --
Commissioner Winton: Oh. So that's not the increase.
Mr. Hobson: No.
Commissioner Winton: The increase is something else.
Commissioner Teele: The increase is something else.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Teele: All right. We'll figure it out. Mr. Patterson would know.
Mr. Hobson: The increase is actually two and a half percent.
Commissioner Teele: Huh?
Commissioner Winton: The increase is two and a half percent?
Mr. Hobson: It's approximately two and a half percent.
Commissioner Teele: Two and a half percent?
181 12/14/00
Mr. Hobson: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Over the eight million.
Mr. Rollason: I assume by the existing contract.
Mr. Hobson: The existing contract allows --
Mr. Rollason: This is an incremental increase.
Mr. Hobson: Yes. The existing contract allows them to increase it when they want by two and a half
percent.
Commissioner Teele: We have a hard time hearing you, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Two and a half percent.
Mr. Hobson: The existing contract allows Dade County to increase it by two and a halve percent.
Commissioner Winton: Over the eight million. So there's our answer.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Well, we would really appreciate it if you would just give us a memo or
something and let us know, because, I mean, at the end of the day, the number one issue that we all have
to deal with are our residents complaining about, you know, these increases in the solid waste fee. And
one of the things that we asked the Manager to do several times was to put in the bill how much money is
going to the County. In other words, when we send out -- did you do that?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, we did.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So the public needs to know that this isn't money coming to the City. We're
just a pass -through. The increase is all going to Dade County, right?
Mr. Gimenez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Mr. Hobson: And unfortunately, Commissioner, we don't even know if it's going to increase. We just
know at the end of the fiscal year after we have prepared our budget.
Commissioner Teele: Boy, that's tough.
182 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Number 35.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commissioner --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: -- Winton. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Is there objection? All those in
favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1100
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT WITH CAZO CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ELIZABETH VIRRICK
COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT (SECOND BIDDING), 1N AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $480,000, FROM $2,063,716.41 TO
$2,543,716.41; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 331316, AS APPROPRIATED BY
THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROJECTS ORDINANCES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
183 12/14/00
LI
•
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
184 12/14/00
46. ACCEPT PLAT ENTILTLED SAMANTHA REMI PARK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item number 36, a plat.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commission --
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Seconded. Is there objection? Reflect Commissioner Gort on the dais. All those in
favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Yield.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 1101
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED SAMANTHA
REMI PARK, A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, SUBJECT
TO ALL OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PLAT AND STREET
COMMITTEE, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON
SAID PLAT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT; AND
PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF SAID PLAT IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
185 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 37.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thirty-seven was passed, 38 was passed, also 39. Forty-two.
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty. (Inaudible) 40 is out, 41 is out.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thirty-two is a resolution, four/fifths vote.
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty-three.
Commissioner Regalado: Forty-two? Forty-two? That's what we need to do now?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: Federal case. I'm not going to move it, so I don't know if we can start
discussing that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well it's -- apparently, it's ratifying, so it's been --
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty-two, yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, it's been paid already, but who authorized that? I mean, eighteen
thousand dollars ($18,000) for clipping service. I mean, my staff does my clipping service of all the
newspapers and stuff. And the other issue is, I mean, we have a Media Department here that could do
that, also. I mean, did we authorize this as a Commission? No. It never came to us. Right?
Genaro "Chip" Iglesias: No. Commissioners, Chip Iglesias, Chief of Staff, City Manager. This is an
item, a service that was --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, just -- Chip, let me -- Mr. City Manager, you did not authorize this, did you?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): No, sir, I did not.
Commissioner Sanchez: Just for the record.
Mr. Gimenez: I might have authorized the payment of it, but I did not authorize the incurring of this
expense.
186 12/14/00
• 0
Commissioner Regalado: But wait a minute. You already paid?
Mr. Iglesias: There's only -- there's only --
Commissioner Sanchez: It's ratifying.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no. He said that he authorized the payment.
Mr. Gimenez: I'm sorry, I'm sorry; we haven't paid that.
Mr. Iglesias: There's been a portion that has been paid, a minimal portion.
Commissioner Teele: What attorney approved this contract? Mr. Attorney? I didn't hear you.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): There was no legal review of this contract.
Mr. Iglesias: If I could just
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. I don't understand. The City Manager said that he has authorized
payment, and you said part of it. What are --
Mr. Iglesias: If I could just give you a snapshot of what happened, it might clear up a lot of the questions
that you've asked, and then we can -- Basically, this is a service that was engaged by the previous
administration. It was a clipping service for articles throughout the whole country. The contract was not
approved by the Commission. It was signed at the Manager's Office level, and it had certain key words.
Those clippings would come to the Manager's Office. The portion of the payment that I said I was
correcting on the question of whether it was paid, they actually had a direct payment for around five
hundred and sixteen dollars ($516) originally on this item, and there was about another eight hundred
dollars ($800) that was also paid. The total bill that's owed on this item is eighteen thousand dollars
($18,000). Basically, what happened is the clipping service, based on the key words that were requested
by the previous administration, one was "Elian," and at one point, they changed the key words to
"Warshaw, O'Brien," kicked up the amount of clips that came in, totaling the bill to eighteen thousand
dollars ($18,000). Now, the issue that -- the reason why we have this before you is this contract never
came for Commission approval.. It was signed at the Manager's level. It wasn't signed by the Manager,
and now we have a bill of eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000).
Commissioner Teele: Who signed it?
Mr. Iglesias: The contract was signed by the former Chief of Staff, John Lindsay, and the contract never
came to the Commission. The service was provided to the City. And like I said, there were two issues
that kicked up the amount of clips that came in. Number one, the key word was changed at one point to
" Blian Gonzalez." Obviously, that sent in about 8,000 clips. The second factor here that kicked up the
price was when they changed the key word on April 26th to "Warshaw, O'Brien." That kicked up about
another seven thousand dollars ($7,000); thus the remaining balance of the eighteen thousand dollars
187 12/14/00
® 0
($18,000) that is owed. And at this time, obviously, we don't have authorization to pay this. This never
came before the Commission, and we're bringing this item to you for authorization.
Commissioner Regalado: But I mean, we're really lucky, you know, Chip? We're so lucky that we don't
have that contract now, because some geniuses, the one that added the "Elian" word as a key word could
have added the word, "chad," "hanging chad," or "dimple chad," or "pregnant chad." And imagine, the
bill would be like eighty thousand by now. But seriously, you know, first of all, I don't think that we
should pay that. It was an illegal, it was a special "ups" from a meeting, and that's part of the story. Paul
Harvey always says, "I'll tell you the rest of the story." And it's a little embarrassing, but it has to be told.
And what I think, first of all, the larger, larger issue here is, why did we need a clipping service?
Mr. Gimenez: I haven't the faintest idea. That was something before my time. And as soon as we found
out we had this clipping service, we shut it down. However, these expenses were incurred. 'How they
were incurred -- I mean, they were incurred. And, you know, as a City, the vendor was working under the
assumption that -- under our good faith of the City and that we would pay them. So, I mean, that's why
this is coming up, because we have to -- I think we have a moral responsibility to pay the clipping service.
I don't think it was a good idea, and we don't have the clipping service anymore.
Commissioner Winton: I think we have two responsibilities. I think we have a moral responsibility, and
we have a practical responsibility. And the practical responsibility relates to our ability to do contracts in
the future. And if we get into a position where the City gets recognized as one where contracts aren't
honored and you won't pay them, then can you imagine the documentation that all of these vendors are
going to require to know that the person that signed the contract is legitimate? We'll never get contracts
signed. So the people that --
Commissioner Regalado: But -- but --
Commissioner Winton: The people that did this are all gone. And --
Commissioner Regalado: No, they're not. Excuse me. They're not.
Commissioner Winton: Warshaw, O'Brien and Lindsay are all gone.
Commissioner Regalado: Look at the other key word.
Commissioner Winton: What's the other key word?
Commissioner Teele: Elian?
Commissioner Regalado: No. Elian is gone. "Carollo" is the other key word, and this is the other part of
the story. And it's -- it's really embarrassing.
Commissioner Winton: Well, get the other part out so I know what you're talking about.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. We are told that the Mayor was interested in getting coverage for his role
as Mayor and for the City. In fact, I understand that there were meetings that were called by the former
188 12/14/00
0
City Manager where the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief were there in order to generate positive stories for
the City of Miami. I don't know, Chief, if you ever attended that.
Mr. Gimenez: Yes, sir, I did. There was an effort by the former City Manager to put together some high
level people. We met; you know, every week to generate positive stories, you know, for the City. And
that was orchestrated, organized by the City Manager.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. At any time was the clipping service or the need for the clipping was
discussed at that meeting, or it wasn't?
Mr. Gimenez: Sir, I didn't know anything about a clipping service until I took the office of City Manager,
and I found these clippings coming to me, and I didn't know what they were or why they were being paid.
And so we stopped it. I mean, it was something unnecessary.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. For the little information that I have, it means that what -- my
understanding is that in those meetings, of course, the City Manager had the task of not only generating
positive stories about the City of Miami, but getting the name of the Mayor -- that's a political issue. I'm
not going to involve you in that -- getting the name of the Mayor in the paper, et cetera. And it was
decided that a clipping service would be hired by the City. But this was a very unique clipping service,
because it didn't use faxes or copies, but originals. If L.A. Times would publish a story about the Mayor, it
was sent directly by Fed Ex -- that was my understanding -- or mail the original paper, the story in the
paper, not a fax, nor a copy. That is what --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gimenez: This particular clipping service was actually -- whenever any of the key words were
mentioned mentioned in, I guess -- I mean I don't know how far, but I mean it seemed to be a pretty big
scope -- they would actually send the originals, yeah, attached to -- on a backing.
Commissioner Regalado: And, you know, there's no one that we can blame directly for that decision, and
Johnny is right, that we have to pay. But I said we shouldn't pay because of the moral issue, not a
practical issue. And the moral issue is that a line has to be drawn between the administration, the Mayor
and the City Commission, which has the responsibility to allocate funds. And we take the brunt of any
and all decisions about money that are made in the City of Miami. And that decision of hiring a very
unique and expensive clipping service while we have a Media Relations Office that has two or three full-
time employees with a budget now close to one million dollars ($1,000,000), why in the world we needed
a clipping service? It's not -- I'm just saying for the future. But what I'm saying is that in the past, in the
past administration, and because -- and with the same Mayor that we have now, special covert operations
were done behind the Commission. And that is wrong, because we have this responsibility, this
embarrassing responsibility of approving funds of something that has been wrongly done by somebody in
the administration. And, you know, if we happily approve this, it will be sending a message, not to you,
but maybe to the next Managers that they can do anything they want, because we will approve it
eventually. I tell you, I was a member of the White House Press Corps during the Reagan years and the
Bush years. And the White House has 10 to 11 employees. They have people that do clippings with all
the media throughout the country. I don't think that our Media Relations cannot do a clipping service for
the City of Miami, using all the assets that they have, the Internet and whatever. So, you know, you guys
189 12/14/00
want to pay it because we have to pay it, fine by me. But I think, I think that this is something that was
done behind the back of the City Commission, and now we have to take the responsibility for something
very wrong that was done, just to advance the political agenda of the Mayor of Miami. That's it. Nothing
more, nothing less. He wanted to know where his name was being published, and the taxpayers of Miami
now have to take this hit. So go ahead and pay. I mean, I'm --
Commissioner Winton: I move --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. I have Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, I -- look, I know that we have to ratify it because we have to pay it. But
there is a serious implication here. One is it was over four thousand, five hundred dollars ($4,500), and it
never got this Commission's approval. That is a clear violation of the City Charter. I don't think anyone
here will dispute that. That's eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) of taxpayer money. OK? Now, I'll tell
you one right that we do have -- at least I have -- and that is the legal right not to pay this, because
somewhere along the line, it was over four thousand, five hundred dollars ($4,500) that was never
approved by this Commission. And somebody's feet need to be held to the fire on this one, because you
know what? I am not going to -- this is taxpayers' money. OK? I made the argument very simple. My
staff clips every article that pertains to this City, or the economy, or any major impact that has to this City,
my staff clips it every day. And she doesn't make eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000). So analyzing the
situation --
Mr. Gimenez: The person's name is on the contract does not work for the City anymore. He is gone, and,
you know, that's the only person that we can hold, you know, accountable for this. And I agree with your
reasoning. However, I'm bringing it to you because it's an item --
Commissioner Sanchez: But Carlos, what's to say -- the people that are here today and people watching
on Channel 9 saying, "Is that the only time that that's happened? Has there been any more violations of
the City Charter with my taxpayer money?"
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a question. Legally, are we obligated to -- we're not obligated to --
Mr. Vilarello: The City can only be obligated by a contract properly executed and authorized. Those that
exceed forty-five hundred have to come before the City Commission. And that didn't happen in this case.
So you have a legal defense to this invoice from this clipping company.
Vice Chairman Gort: So I think if you want to send a message that the City will not put up with this is
you vote not to pay it.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but let me --
Commissioner Winton: Well, you're sending the message to the wrong guy.
Commissioner Teele: You're sending the message to the vendor.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
190 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: And I've got to tell you something. The City is not a prompt payer. In fact, the
City has done a tremendous job of improving over the last six months, but we are very slow payers. And
that gets factored in everybody's bid numbers. So I don't think we gain anything. Obviously, everyone
who's weighed in on this has a point. The previous Manager and the Mayor were obviously very much
involved in this. I think everyone knows that that was an edict to get positive press. And even
Commission -- even senior staff meetings began with that. Carlos, you were the Fire Chief. Didn't you
hear that you all wanted positive press coverage for different individuals in the City at one point a year or
so ago? And what --
Mr. Gimenez: What I heard from the Manager was that there was a push to get positive press coverage for
the City as a whole. Anything that happened in the City, you know, that they wanted to --
Commissioner Teele: And I think that's a fair kind of issue. But I really do think that we're sort of all
talking around what the problem is. We're spending a million dollars for Media Relations, and now we
find we've got an eighteen thousand dollar ($18,000) clipping bill, and that just doesn't sit right with
anybody. But we have to pay it. And then we need to hold the Manager; the current Manager accountable
for what is going on with some of these offices and see how we can work together. So time is getting
away. Mr. Chairman, we've got a long night. We've got a Zoning agenda.
Vice Chairman Gort: Make a motion. I'm waiting for a motion.
Commissioner Teele: I would move to ratify the action and pay the bill.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Mr. Cruz.
Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 Northwest 26th Street. In relation to all these priorities, how moneys
are spent in the City, I wrote to Miami Today newspaper. They never bothered, anyway, to publish about
how the City is. How come, like I said, I mentioned before, I go to the park on Sunday. At 6 p.m., they
close the bathroom, because there is no money to keep part-time employee there. I mean, and then they
got eighteen thousand nine and point-o-five for paper, for newspaper clipping? I can do that at home part-
time, and, you know, I'll do that, clipping and (inaudible) whatever for less money than that. I mean, this
is ridiculous. No, you got to have -- the money have to be spent in the City servicing the parks there, the
parks. Like our neighborhood is a poor neighborhood. The park has to remain open, the whole park. If
the park stays open till 10 p.m., there's got to be there a person, and the bathroom open, everything open
till 10, till 10 p.m. And that cost very little money. That doesn't cost eighteen thousand or the other
money that's being used, a million dollars ($1,000,000) for Media Relations and the whole thing. Use the
money not for the ego trips of people, but for service to taxpayers for the City of Miami.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. Yes, sir.
Don Deresz: Hi. Don Deresz, 1852 Southwest 24th Street, Miami. If you ratify this, you're sending a
message to all the residents that any City employee could sign some kind of a phony agreement with any
191 12/14/00
u
vendor and expect it to be paid. This is completely unlawful. You yourself stated it's against City
Charter.
Commissioner Winton: We didn't say it's against City Charter.
Mr. Deresz: Pardon me?
Vice Chairman Gort: That's all right. Let him finish. Let him finish. Go ahead, sir, finish.
Mr. Deresz: Pardon me? I'm sorry; I didn't hear you, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead. Finish your presentation, sir.
Mr. Deresz: I'm finished.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Deresz: But you're sending the wrong message to all the taxpayers.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Anyone else? OK. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Winton: Aye.
Commissioner Regalado: Register no.
Commissioner Teele: Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: One "no." Mr. (unintelligible), somehow --
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, this requires a four/fifths vote.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Vilarello: So it fails. There's only four members on the dais.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 43 withdrawn. Forty -three -A. We already passed it?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, you should bring this back at the next Commission meeting, please.
Vice Chairman Gort: We'll bring it back. But at the same time, I want to make sure somehow we send a
message that contracts that are not approved by this Commission aren't approved. It's not valid. Forty-
four, Orange Bowl Advisory Board.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm here. I'm sorry. I'm here. Need to vote?
Commissioner Teele: Yeah.
192
12/14/00
�I
•
•
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're going back to -- what item was that?
Commissioner Winton: Forty-two.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 42. Do we need to repeat the motion?
Mr. Vilarello: The motion failed.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. I want a roll call vote. I'm calling for a roll call.
Commissioner Sanchez: Roll call.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Roll call. Go ahead. Call the roll.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Mr. Foeman: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's to pay or not to pay, right? "No" is not to pay?
Commissioner Teele: "Yes" is to pay. "No" is --
Mr. Foeman: It's to pay.
Commissioner Teele: "No" is "yes," to pay.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Mr. Foeman: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
Mr. Foeman: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Mr. Foeman: Vice Chairman Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. It fails. OK.
193 12/14/00
0
0
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I'll tell you, I'm going to make it very simple. It didn't come through me;
I didn't approve it. I'm not paying for it.
Commissioner Winton: Have the vendor go talk to Commissioner Sanchez and Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Sanchez: Huh? What?
Commissioner Winton: I said, have the vendor go talk to you guys.
194 12/ 14/00
E
11
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 44, the Orange Bowl Advisory Board. Item 44, Orange Bowl Advisory Board. I
have a question.
Commissioner Regalado: I have an appointment.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Mr. Chairman, at the last meeting of November 16tn, you made eight
appointments to the Orange Bowl Advisory Board. We need a waiver on those eight to make sure that
they're waived as to the elector status.
Commissioner Teele: So move as to the waiver.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Mr. Foeman: Also, we need an appointment from the Commission to serve as Chairman on that board.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Let's take care of one thing at a time. So move the waiver for all members
as it relates to residence address.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Seconded. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
195 12/14/00
•
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1102
A MOTION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS
OF THE ORANGE BOWL ADVISORY BOARD; FURTHER
WAIVING THE RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS CONTAINED IN
SECTION 53-124 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, AS
AMENDED, WITH REGARD TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS.
1) SAM BURSTYN (nominated by Commissioner Teele);
2) RODOLFO CAMPS (nominated by Commissioner Regalado);
3) MARITZA GUITTEREZ (nominated by Commissioner
Regalado);
4) ADOLFO HENRIQUEZ (nominated by Vice Mayor Gort);
5) ARTHUR HERTZ (nominated by Commissioner Sanchez);
6) AL DOTSON (nominated by Commissioner Winton);
7) PAUL (BUTCH) DAVIS (nominated by
Commissioner Winton); and
8) DOUGLAS GREIST
Note for the Record: Mr. Greist was nominated by Commissioner Teele
on behalf of Mayor Carollo during the November 16, 2000 Commission
meeting by Motion 00-1043. Pursuant to City Code Sec. 53-124(a)(3),
two individuals are appointed by the Mayor who shall be qualified electors
of the City of Miami, which appointment does not require an action of the
City Commission.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Teele: Move that Commissioner Sanchez be named Chairperson.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
196 12/ 14/00
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1103
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS OF THE ORANGE BOWL
ADVISORY BOARD FOR TERMS AS DESIGNATED HEREIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on fide 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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
197 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: And I have an ordinance that I'd like to present. It's an emergency ordinance of
the City of Miami Commission amending Chapter 2 and 53 of the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, as
amended, to reduce the numbers of members required for a quorum to convene the meeting of the Orange
Bowl Advisory Board, and more particularly by amending Section 2-887 and 53-126 to said Code, and
containing a repealer provision and severability clause. So move.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Motion and a second. Discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a requirement for quorum, Johnny. That's all it is.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Excuse me. Is this an emergency ordinance?
Commissioner Sanchez: Huh?
Mr. Foeman: Is this an emergency ordinance?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, it is.
Mr. Foeman: OK. It requires two readings.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 45, we're going to wait --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it requires two readings.
Mr. Foeman: Roll call.
198 12/14/00
An Ordinance entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTERS 2 AND 53 OF THE CODE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, TO REDUCE
THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS REQUIRED FOR A QUORUM TO
CONVENE A MEETING OF THE ORANGE BOWL ADVISORY
BOARD ("BOARD"); AND MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING
SECTIONS 2-887 AND 53-126 TO SAID CODE; AND CONTAINING
A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, and seconded by Commissioner Teele, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Whereupon, the Commission, on motion of Commissioner Sanchez, and seconded by Commissioner
Teele, adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12004.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
199 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 46.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're not going to make the appointments today?
Vice Chairman Gort: No. Let's go to 46. We'll do that later. Item 46, (inaudible) children's museum
rental payment.
Commissioner Teele: Who?
Commissioner Sanchez: That's a good one.
Arleen Weintraub (Acting Director, Real Estate & Economic Development): Arleen Weintraub, Acting
Director of Department of Real Estate and Economic Development. Back in October, the City
Commission asked us to conduct a survey nationally of what other children's museums are paying, and we
did that. We contacted 25 museums, children's museums, specifically, and we heard back from 12. We
also contacted an organization that operates as a clearinghouse, and we were provided all the statistical
data from that group, and that's called the Association of Youth Museums. What we found was that no
museum -- no youth museum in the country on publicly owned property is paying a rental payment. We
did find one museum that when they reach a certain threshold -- and it's in Jersey City -- they pay a
percentage of the gross to the City. However, it was also found that that only occurred in their inaugural
year of operation. And after that time, attendance levels have fallen off somewhat. With that information
in mind, we are recommending today that like other projects, and specifically on Watson Island, the Parrot
Jungle and Gardens Project and our Aviation and Regional Visitors Center -- and Visitors Bureau on
Watson Island, that like those projects, the youth museum pay a payment in lieu of taxes to the City.
What we have included in your packet is really a guide of how that may be calculated. And I think there's
certainly room for taking a look at a formula and several different ways to calculate such a payment.
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Are you comparing the children's museum to Parrot Jungle, in
terms of economic feasibility?
Ms. Weintraub: Absolutely not. No, not at all.
Commissioner Regalado: So you are not prorating what you're asking the children's museum with what
Watson Island pays?
Ms. Weintraub: No, not at all.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean with Parrot Jungle?
200 12/ 14/00
Ms. Weintraub: No. I was -- the comparison was that -- other projects on our publicly owned property,
and specifically on Watson Island. I would say that the better comparison, which we are not making,
because I don't think it's a true comparison either, but it would be to other not -for -profits. And the
Aviation and Regional Visitor Center includes the Greater Miami Convention and Visitor Bureau.
They're not -for -profit.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, if I may, Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that all the members of the Commission
have a lot of ideas and a lot to say about this, and I will try to follow the will of the Commission. But I
just want to say something very briefly about this idea. The land in Watson Island belongs to the people
of Miami. It doesn't belong to the administration, or the Commission, or the Mayor, but it belongs to the
people of Miami. If we were to approve this -- and I hope that we will, what I think that we should be
seeking from the children's museum is a partnership with the City of Miami, because if you're going to
charge them fifty thousand or forty thousand a year, that will not reduce taxes or fees for the residents of
Miami. I will suggest to charge them more than that, but in services. Every and any resident of the City
of Miami will pay half when going to the children's museum. Every inner City program in the Parks
Department will have the possibility of attending workshops and events of the children's museum. We
have to put that land to be used by the people of Miami. If we are going to charge them some money, I
think that we are defeating the process, because we are going to have then a facility that for poor children
of Model City, or Liberty City, or Overtown, or Wynwood, or East Little Havana or Flagami will be very
difficult to attend with their parents, because it will cost them money. And the purpose of that land is to
serve the people of the City of Miami. It has been said that, you know, there is a lot of one -dollar ($I)
deals in the City of Miami in the past. Well, that might be true. I would suggest a two -dollar ($2) contract
a year for the museum, but in return, services. Half a price for all City of Miami residents, and especially
-- and especially and more importantly -- workshops for and passes for all the summer camps in the City
of Miami parks, special projects during Christmas for inner City kids. That is, in essence, that you are
supposed to give us in return for the land thousands and thousands of dollars in services to the children of
Miami. That is my idea. That is what I think a children's museum should be. We are not here to discuss
fourteen thousand, fifteen thousand, twenty-five thousand with these people that are volunteers and that
have a lot of trouble getting the money to finance and operate the museum. I hope that the City of Miami
will finally make a deal with them, because every major City has a children's museum. But that
children's museum should belong to the children of the City of Miami. So that is my idea, and I would
follow the lead of the rest of the Commission.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if anyone knows the children's museum, I think it's me, because
of the long and bumpy road that its had in trying to establish themselves here in the City. If you look at all
the major youth museums throughout the United States, which are established in great places such as
Chicago, the Navy Pier, most of them all pay a dollar ($1). However, the City has to break away from
those actions in the past of one dollar ($1) and these giveaway deals that we -- you know. I suggest that
we sit down and find a way -- and one of the suggestions was payment in lieu of taxes, which came out to
like four thousand some dollars or five thousand, six hundred dollars ($5,600), which was a big burden on
them. Now, they're going to be in a site that it's going to be a very nice site for them. They're going to
maintain the parking lot. They're going to maintain the area and stuff. We have to come up with a
reasonable rent that they're comfortable with. And, you know, that's going to take this Commission to
201 12/14/00
decide whether it's, you know, a thousand, fifty dollars ($50), three thousand dollars ($3,000). But, you
know, we need to break away from these sins of the past of a dollar ($1). Although they're going to
provide a great service for our community, and they're going to be an institution that's going to be utilized
by the community as a whole, you know, I would feel comfortable and set a precedent in our City that
when we assist, we are able to at least, if not get some of the money to pay some of the expenses, be able
to provide or get more than a dollar ($1). So I am prepared to, you know, make a recommendation. I
want to hold back and let you other Commissioners say what you want to say, but I am prepared when
you're done to put an amount to this. And then if it's -- if I get your approval, then we could move on to
the next step.
Commissioner Teele: The City staff --
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: The City staff number, what is that? Sixty-four thousand? What's your number a
year? Seventy-three?
Commissioner Sanchez: That's payment in lieu of taxes.
Commissioner Teele: Seventy-three thousand?
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): Yes, that's correct, yes.
Commissioner Winton: What's the sixty-one two eighty above up in the paragraph?
Ms. Billberry: That was revised when we got the correct footage of the building, and that was an error.
The original calculation was based on approximately a 40,000 square foot building. But then we revised it
to the numbers of fifty-three thousand, which is the number of square feet of the building that's been
provided to us by the museum.
Commissioner Winton: So the real number is seventy-four thousand?
Ms. Billberry: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but that assumes a millage rate that's higher than I would like to assume.
But, look, I think the staff is doing what we charged them to do, what the Oversight Board asked us to do.
I'm not prepared to ask for any cash for this activity, but I do think that the -- I mean, you know, we
really should be providing a grant to them every year. This is a tremendous venue for our children to
have, and it's a part of -- I mean, I see this as no different from having a partnership with a park. I mean,
we don't charge people to go into our parks. And the fact that we don't run it and the children's museum
runs it, I mean, that's what the essence of a partnership is. So I mean I'm not -- I think the concept of
having a payment in lieu of taxes is something I want to be in support of. But I think the payment in lieu
202 12/14/00
of taxes should be a very clear statement similar to what Commissioner Sanchez has said. But I think that
the -- you know, I like the idea of having a payment in lieu of taxes of seventy-four thousand dollars. But
I also like the idea that they could be able to pay that in -kind, with a definitive in -kind program operated
through the Parks Department or through the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team). And I know
they've got this pilot program, the in -kind -- that's fine, we'll accept that. But beyond that, we want
seventy-four thousand more is the way I would approach it. And -- because I really do think that there are
a lot of needy children. And you know, let me tell you what's going to happen. Many children will never
get to Watson Island, whether they live in my district or many other districts. And I really do think that
we need a program that is run in conjunction with the NET offices and the Parks Department NET -wide
that is a payment in lieu of taxes. So my recommendation would be to have the payment in lieu of taxes,
but to provide a clause whereby the payment can be for in -kind, based upon needed services provided by
the City Parks Department and the NET offices with a calculated in -kind, so that this isn't just some
generic -- we're going to give everybody off, you know, the admission, which Commissioner Regalado
says, if they're residents of the City of Miami. I'm all in support of that, but that's just too hard to
quantify. And so I am not in favor of a cash payment, because I really think we ought to be trying to
provide grant assistance to you.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I said about in -kind services, the inner City parks. They do that,
and they do that. They have their own transportation, and they do that. For instance, once a week, the
City of Miami Sailing Summer Camp hosts about 30 to 40 inner City kids. And it would not be for that;
they would have never had the possibility of sailing and having a day on Biscayne Bay. So this is what
I'm suggesting. Charge them, but charge them in services, special programs for needy children. And I
still say, Miami residents, you pay half, because, I mean it's -- there's no place to take the children here in
the City of Miami or in Dade County, for that matter. So Miami residents have to have an edge.
Adrienne Pardo: We'd be happy to.
Commissioner Regalado: And so that's what I would suggest. Residents of Miami, half the cost of the
ticket.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Are we ready for a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm prepared to make a motion. I'm prepared to make a motion if --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: Let me make a couple of comments real quick. One is that I started off on this
track heavily, in fact, when I met with everyone at the children's museum, I said unequivocally, we have
to have a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) payment. But I've also tried to do as much research as I could
on the impact of museums in cities across the country. That's the reason we also asked for this
comparable analysis we asked staff to get for us in terms of what children's museums pay municipalities
in other cities in the country, and what came back, I guess surprised me a bit, because the answer seems to
be that they do get a dollar ($1) a year lease rates on land. They don't have to pay PILOT fees. And I
think that what all of my colleagues have said here today makes an awful lot of sense, and I'm going to
support that. However, I don't -- I just want the rest of the museum people to understand a couple of
things. One, there is no question that those cities that have done a good job of attracting schools of higher
203 12/14/00
education, and museums, and artists into their downtowns are those cities that have prospered the most,
and it's brought a tremendous amount of tourism dollars into the community, unlike -- well, those kinds of
facilities have brought a lot of tourist dollars into communities. So we want to do that in our downtown
area. But we don't have the data yet. We've got this dilemma. The dilemma we have is we saw a graph
up here, or a model at the last Commission meeting that showed where one-third -- actually in the core,
about half of the land mass in the core of Miami is tax-exempt. So we've got this problem on tax-exempt
properties in the City that some way or another, we have to resolve. And we want to go attract more tax-
exempt entities into the City because it's going to help in other areas. I don't know how to solve this
dilemma yet, but I have asked staff to continue to do additional research in major cities around the country
to find out, one, how they were able to attract many colleges and universities and parts of their campuses
into their downtown areas, and the same with museums, because we know that museums want to relocate
into downtown. But we have to figure out how that process works, and how we're going to be able to
afford to do this thing. So the point I want to make to the rest of the museums is even though I'm going to
vote on this issue now today, I'm not necessarily prepared to vote the same way on all the rest of the
museums that may be coming until I have all the data or we have all the data that shows how cities have
made that process work. End of story.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner, if you're ready for the motion, go for it, because I was a bad guy
when the museum was in front of us, and I was the only vote against it when they were going to the
Roads, in your district at that time. And I promised to them that we would try to find another location. So
if you're ready for a motion --
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman =-
Vice Chairman Gort: The one thing that I want a lot of people to understand is there's a lot of requests of
the City of Miami to create regional facilities, and I don't have any problem on that. But any regional
facility that we create, I want to make sure that the residents of the City of Miami receive the benefits,
because one of the biggest problems we have with our neighborhoods has been because of the expansion
of Miami -Dade County, because of the expressways that have ruined many of our neighborhoods -- the
Wynwood, the Overtown, Allapattah, West Little Havana -- and I want to make sure that whatever
regional facility that we create, it gets paid fairly, and the residents of the City of Miami, they get their
benefit. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Presenting this motion, it will be the following, as long as we could agree upon.
It will be a cash payment yearly to the City of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) and the remaining sum of
seventy-three -- the subtracting of the seventy-three, which is fifty-eight in in -kind donation to the City. Is
that acceptable to you?
Ms. Pardo: It was my understanding from the conversation just now that you weren't going to ask for
monetary payment, but it would be in -kind.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's my motion.
Commissioner Regalado: I will not, I will not vote for that motion, because I think that again, we're
sending a wrong message to the world. If we want to be an international City, we need a museum. And
we do need more than seventy thousand dollars ($70,000), but we need it in services. And that would be
204 12/14/00
my motion -- for the administration to negotiate a deal, and everything will be in services, and always,
always, my -- this is my thinking -- City of Miami residents have a price.
Ms. Pardo: Absolutely.
Commissioner Regalado: Always. And I will not vote for any money that the City will be charging,
because if we want it used -- if we want to make money out of Watson Island, let's do an RFP (Request
for Proposals) for a huge hotel and a restaurant, and then we're going to get more than fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000). We'll probably get fifty thousand or a hundred and fifty thousand.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, that's my motion. If it doesn't get a second, I'm prepared to make another
motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: It does not get a second. OK. It dies. Here's another motion: Twelve thousand
dollars annually and thirty-five thousand dollars in in -kind donation. That's a thousand dollars ($1,000) a
month, and thirty-five thousand dollars in in -kind donation to the community.
Commissioner Teele: Let's do this: Why don't we ask the Manager to -- You've heard everything
everybody's got to say. Does this have to be done today?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Why?
Commissioner Regalado: Because of the (unintelligible).
Unidentified Speaker: So we can proceed with our leases.
Ms. Pardo: Right. So we could move forward and proceed with the leases. And hopefully, you know,
we'd also like a direction from the Commission if you could instruct staff to come back with --
Commissioner Teele: What leases? Are you talking about a lease with us?
Ms. Pardo: Well, we need to have the negotiated leases between the City and MSEA (Miami Sports and
Exhibition Authority), and then MSEA and the children's museum brought back to the Commission for
approval.
t
Commissioner Teele: Hold up. You know, it would be nice to have it today, but I don't think you ought
to get it today. I think we ought to ask the Manager to take all of this under consideration and to propose a
payment that embodies what Commissioner Regalado has said, what Commissioner Sanchez, and Winton
205 12/ 14/00
and myself, and somewhere in the middle is a.good deal. But, you know, we don't have the time to try to
sit here and go through the right numbers. I'm with Commissioner Regalado on the sense that I don't
think that they ought to pay anything. I think there should be a payment in lieu of taxes provision in there.
It should be specific, it should have a dollar amount and as far as I'm concerned, in addition to the things
that have been said, in addition to the 50 percent or substantial discount for the citizens of Miami, I think
there should be a specific in -kind that is coordinated through the NET offices and the Parks Department,
targeted to needy children, or children that otherwise would not use this facility. I don't need for you to,
you know, have the equivalent of the junior museum or the -- in the black community, we call that the
Jack and Jills to come, because everybody -- and Jack and Jill's mother and father can afford for them to
come. So we need to get some kids that are in -- that are in public housing, that are in the recesses of our
community that otherwise wouldn't be able to come. And I think that certainly meets what it is we're all
trying to say and do.
Ms. Pardo: Commissioner Teele, we would be happy to do that. That's why we had provided this board
in front of you and we had handed out the handout, that it would be absolutely --
Commissioner Teele: Well, we'll take all of that -- now, that's not the payment in lieu of taxes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Pardo: And we will -- we have heard you, and we will also provide more.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead. Excuse me. Excuse me.
Ms. Pardo: The timing was the grants that they have.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Teele, let me tell you --
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Teele --
Vice Chairman Gort: We have a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait. My motion stays, but let me tell you something. If anybody has carried
the flag on this museum, it has been me. OK?
Ms. Pardo: You definitely have.
Commissioner Sanchez: And I've said it many times to this Commissioner. I will never, as long as I'm a
Commissioner, will ever, ever do another dollar deal here. You're getting prime property. OK? You're
going to provide a service for the community. A thousand dollars ($1,000) to pay there, you could afford
that. That's not the understanding or the impression that I got from what's going around. But let me tell
you something. We cannot afford, this City cannot afford to continue to practice the ill practice that -- I'm
sure a lot of the Commissioners were not here, but they still talk about it. If we give you that property for
a dollar ($1), I guarantee you that it'll be in the paper, it'll be out on the streets that this City continues on
206 12/14/00
bad habits that will come back to haunt us. The property that you're getting, it's a very prime property.
You should be lucky that you've gotten that property, because I think you're going to provide a great
service for this community. And let me tell you something. A thousand dollars ($1,000) a month isn't
going to kill you. OK?
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Sanchez --
Commissioner Sanchez: And the rest of the money could come from in -kind donations to our community.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Sanchez --
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Wait a minute. There's a motion. Pass that out to Commissioner
Teele, and I'll second the motion.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Sanchez, in terms of this property, the difference between a dollar
($1) a year and fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) a year for this property is nothing.
Vice Chairman Gort: He came down to twelve.
Commissioner Winton: It's the same. If the Herald or anybody else is going to criticize this, we will have
equal criticism over twelve thousand dollars ($12,000) a year or one dollar ($1) a year, because they're
virtually the same number given.the value of this property.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, you can't compare a dollar ($1) to twelve thousand dollars ($12,000).
At least it pays for someone to at least clean the property and maintaining the (inaudible).
Commissioner Winton: But what we're getting, what Commissioner Regalado is asking for is seventy-
five thousand dollars ($75,000) of in -kind services to our community. And seventy-five thousand dollars
is the equivalent of the PILOT. So what we're getting is really a PILOT payment to the City, and we're
turning around and giving that PILOT amount back to underprivileged kids and residents of the City of
Miami, whether they're underprivileged or not underprivileged, frankly, in terms of half price for City
residents. So that's a benefit that could help draw more families into our community. And so that's the
only reason, Joe that I'm thinking about this, this way.
Ms. Pardo: And we would be happy to do that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Would you accept that?
Unidentified Speaker: We would accept that.
Commissioner Sanchez: They agree to it.
Commissioner Teele: Did you all agree to this on the record?
Ms. Pardo: Yes, what Commissioner Winton had just said, that we --
207 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: The motion is for twelve thousand dollars ($12,000) a year.
Commissioner Sanchez: Twelve thousand dollars ($12,000) annually and thirty-five thousand dollars in
in -kind donations.
Commissioner Winton: Well, get the math right, though. If it's going to be twelve thousand annually, at
least get sixty thousand in in -kind -- sixty-two thousand.
Commissioner Regalado: Why are we taking money away from the kids? I just want to know that.
Commissioner Teele: That's the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because it's my motion. If it dies, if you don't agree with my motion and it dies,
I'll present another motion.
Commissioner Teele: That's the motion. Do you all accept the -- do you all recommend the --
Unidentified Speaker: What is the will of the Commission?
Commissioner Sanchez: Twelve thousand dollars ($12,000) -- let me -- let's get this straight.
Commissioner Regalado: The will of the Commission is when we vote.
Commissioner Sanchez: Twelve thousand dollars ($12,000) annually.
Commissioner Regalado: We haven't voted.
Commissioner Sanchez: In cash to the City. And thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000) in in -kind
donation to the community. That's a total of forty-seven thousand dollars ($47,000). You say you bring
in total project value of forty-nine thousand, two hundred dollars ($49,200).
Ms. Pardo: Right. We were proposing in -kind -- I have to ask my client.
Commissioner Regalado: I propose seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) of in -kind services, including
half price for all City of Miami residents and special programs for City of Miami Parks Department
summer, and winter and spring camps. That's what I propose.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: The question has been called.
Ms. Pardo: And we would --
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
208 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All opposed, say "no."
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Commissioner Teele: Noes have it. All right. So why don't we let the Manager sit down --
Commissioner Regalado: I have a motion.
Commissioner Teele: Motion.
Commissioner Regalado: That the figure presented to us by the administration will be charged to the
children's museum in in -kind services. One of the main --
Commissioner Winton: That's seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000).
Commissioner Regalado: The main condition will be City of Miami residents half price all year round.
Ms. Pardo: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: And to work with the Parks Department in the partnership to bring the City of
Miami Parks department summer, and special winter and special spring programs, to have a complete day
of visit to the museum for the inner kids of the Parks Department. Mind you, mind you, I'm telling you
that we have about 5,000 kids attending the summer programs in the Parks Department, so brace yourself.
But it is important, because these kids --
Commissioner Teele: Hold it. Make just the motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: Make the motion.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, I'm telling them, I'm telling them that it's --
Commissioner Winton: We get it; we get it.
Commissioner Regalado: My motion will be what the administration said, in -kind services. But
remember, half price for all Miami residents.
Commissioner Winton: Got it.
Ms. Pardo: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: In conjunction with the Parks Department and the NET offices.
209 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) annually for primarily Citywide, targeted
toward truly needed children, plus one dollar ($1) a year.
Commissioner Regalado: Two.
Commissioner Teele: Two dollars ($2) a year.
Commissioner Regalado: Because Commissioner Sanchez doesn't want it. Two.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, not even two. Are you ready? Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question. All those in favor --
Commissioner Regalado: Call the roll.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no. Go ahead, call the question.
Commissioner Winton: No. Call the question.
Commissioner Teele: Roll call.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1104
A MOTION RELATED TO THE PROPOSED MIAMI CHILDREN'S
MUSEUM IN WATSON ISLAND, ESTABLISHING AN AMOUNT OF
$75,000 ANNUALLY TO BE PROVIDED IN THE FORM OF IN -KIND
SERVICES AS FOLLOWS:
1. YEAR ROUND HALF PRICE RATE TO BE PROVIDED TO ALL
CITY OF MIAMI RESIDENTS.
2. SPECIAL PROGRAMS TO BE MONITORED BY THE CITY OF
MIAMI PARKS DEPARTMENT WHICH WILL DESIGNATE
COMPLETE DAY VISITS TO MUSEUM FOR APPROXIMATELY
5,000 INNER CITY CHILDREN WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE
SUMMER, WINTER AND SPRING CAMPS.
FURTHER ESTABLISHING AN AMOUNT OF TWO DOLLARS ($2)
A YEAR AS THE RENTAL FEE.
210 12/14/00
6
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Vice Chairman Gort: And the reason my vote is "no," this is not the conversation they had in the past, and
it's unfortunate things were changed at the last moment. But I want to make sure, because the problem
that we had in the past, also, and we had the same deal of in -kind on Watson Island, and that in -kind was
never really utilized. We want to make sure that this in -kind has accountability, and there's a specific
program, and that it's used. Because I don't know if you all remember that we used to have -- when I first
got in here, we inherited a contract with a helicopter company that was supposed to provide "X" amount
in in -kind, and it was never collected. OK?
e
Commissioner Winton: Then we need to -- you made a great point there.
Commissioner Sanchez: And this is subject to the Oversight Board approval?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: We need to see the documentation on how this in -kind is going to work as soon as
possible, like at the next Commission meeting so that it becomes an absolute part of the contract, because
we don't want to have the same kind of stuff that happened in the past relative to this in -kind business
going on.
211 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Chairman, you yield back.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Item 47 was pulled. Forty-eight, elected officials planning retreat. It's
going to be in Hawaii. What day?
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. We just need some dates for the planning retreat. If you recall,
when you passed the resolution confirming my appointment as Manager, part of the resolution called for
us to have a planning retreat, a one -day retreat in the month of January. So we're looking for some date in
the late, late January phase.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, just for your information, I'll be out of town on the 15t" through the 191h
I'll be out that whole week of January.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, where are you going to do this retreat?
Vice Chairman Gort: Hawaii.
Commissioner Regalado: Where? Hello? Where are you going to do this retreat?
Commissioner Winton: Hawaii, Allapattah.
Mr. Gimenez: We're going to find a location somewhere within the City, not at this hall. The next item is
approving a facilitator for that. We're looking for the dates --
Commissioner Teele: Joaquin Avino.
Mr. Gimenez: Twenty-second, 23rd, 24t", the 26", the 29t', 30', the 31", if possible.
Commissioner Regalado: Is it going to be -- I know it's very difficult for most of you, but I'm asking can
we do this on a Saturday?
Commissioner Teele: Huh?
Commissioner Regalado: Because if we do it on a weekday, I have to go in and out, because of my -- so -
- but I know, Johnny, that you have -- but is it OK with you?
Commissioner Teele: January 27th9
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager I --
Commissioner Teele: I move that the date of the retreat be not prior to 10 a.m., Saturday, January 271h
Commissioner Winton: Second.
212 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: I seconded already.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1105
A MOTION SCHEDULING THE ELECTED OFFICIALS PLANNING
RETREAT ON SATURDAY, JANUARY 27, 2001, NO EARLIER
THAN 10 A.M.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty -eight -A.
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. --
Commissioner Regalado: Are you going to order lunch from outside of the City of Miami?
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no. We will use a facility. I'm sure we're going to use a facility that will be --
Commissioner Teele: Why don't we use the Knight Center. We never use that.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah, it should be the Knight Center.
Commissioner Teele: Isn't the Knight Center a location?
213 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Jackson's Barbecue.
Commissioner Teele: Huh?
Commissioner Winton: People's Barbecue, Jackson's Barbecue.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, you got People's Barbecue in there.
Commissioner Teele: Move item 48-A, Mr. Chairman.
214 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Move item 48-A, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty -eight -A. Osterholt Consulting.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there second?
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any discussion, further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying
aye.
19
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1106
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, WITH OSTERHOLT CONSULTING, INC. TO PROVIDE
CONSULTING SERVICES REQUIRED FOR THE JANUARY 2001
ELECTED OFFICIALS RETREAT; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000, FROM
ACCOUNT NO. 001000921002.6.270, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
215 12/14/00
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
216 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Forty-nine. Authorizing agreement with Calle Ocho Celebrity Walk of Fame.
Commissioner Teele: Move to deny.
Vice Chairman Gort: Motion to deny.
Commissioner Sanchez: I think we want to let it -- It's in my district.
Commissioner Teele: I'm only joking. How are you going to deny this?
Commissioner Sanchez: Are you in -- I mean, do you agree with it? You have no problem?
Jaime Roiz: To deny what?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no. I mean -- not to deny it, but you're in support?
Mr. Roiz: Of what?
Commissioner Sanchez: Wasn't it an approval?
Commissioner Teele: You all are serious, huh?
Mr. Roiz: We're asking for -- We're asking for an open bid.
Vice Chairman Gort: Hold it, hold it, hold it. Excuse me.
Commissioner Sanchez: What are you asking for?
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. I'm conducting the meeting.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager -Operations): Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Mr. Rollason: Frank Rollason, Assistant City Manager. We have a resolution to go forward with a
contract as directed by the Commission at the last time we came, was to go back and to negotiate a
contract. We've done that, and made changes to the contract that are satisfactory to the administration and
satisfactory to the City Attorney, and we recommend going forward with it.
217 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank, the reason why I asked -- and I apologize.
Mr. Roiz: We're against that.
Mr. Rollason: No, I understand. There's --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, I -- Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Roiz: We want an open bid.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. I'm conducting the meeting.
Mr. Roiz: Excuse me. I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go through the Chair. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I may have inappropriately said, "Move to deny," because I thought there was total
unanimity --
Mr. Rollason: Right.
Commissioner Teele: -- on this. I apologize to you, but I'm certainly going to support the Manager's
recommendation and move to approve.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second, second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Discussion. Yes, sir.
Mr. Roiz: Yes, sir. I'm here representing Calle Ocho, Stars of Calle Ocho. I'm vice president. My name
is Jaime Roiz, 9972 Northwest 51h Lane. I'm representing Guido Rodriguez over here from Calle Ocho.
We have a proven record of over seven years of giving Stars on Calle Ocho. We had a previous contract.
While awarded previously, we have done quite well in Calle Ocho. We have given a broad international
and national promotional exposure and awareness to Calle Ocho and Little Havana. We have right here
over 150 signatures from business owners in Calle Ocho, attesting to the benefits they have received and
requesting that Stars of Calle Ocho, under the direction of Guido Rodriguez be again reinstated. And this
is the proof of the pudding, what we have done for Calle Ocho and the recipients of the benefits,
themselves. Not only that, we have given 17 stars in the past to Calle Ocho. And in the past, several of
yourselves, Commissioners, attended, including Tomas Regalado, Commissioner Sanchez and Mayor
218 12/14/00
Carollo in the past, and given keys of the City. So you have worked with us quite well, and we have
shown our credibility, not only to yourself, but to the media, to the City, to the sponsors, the corporate
sponsors and the like. In front of me right here, I have over 17 stars that have accepted already celebrity
for next year, all the way from -- all the way from Tito Puentes to Don Francisco, Jennifer Lopez, and
Ricky Martin that they have already accepted for next year. So we have a proven record of reliability with
the City, as I stated before, in different ways. And we don't think it is reasonable or makes any sense in
the world to be ignored when we have this proven record. Not only that, but should you award this to
another entity which has no proven record with yourself, whatsoever, we will be placed in a quandary,
both yourselves, and I and ourselves, because we have a contract with the McDonald's at 14th Avenue and
51h Street, and we will continue giving stars with those premises. And here you will have two different
entities giving stars. This will dilute the promotional value. This will dilute the benefit. This will confuse
the recipients. It will confuse the City. It will confuse anybody else, and it will work against everybody
else. So why is this award given to an entity that is not proven, when you have a proven record of success
in front of you that many of you know personally? It simply makes no sense, unless you're able to bring
some kind of information in an open quorum that we may all benefit.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you, sir. You concluded? Thank you. Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, once again, I apologize. I had a letter, Mr. Guido, that you
sent me dated back December the I Ith, 2000. And it's addressed to me, and it reads: "As part of the
settlement of the lawsuit by Ms. Carolina Navarro against me, I, Guido Rodriguez, hereby retract my letter
of June 15, 1999 regarding Ms. Carolina Navarro." I was a bit confused. I thought you were retracting
yourself from the process. But then it continues to read, and this is -- your legal battle between Ms.
Navarro has been going on for quite some time. And, of course, we have been dragged into the middle of
this litigation process between both parties. But it continues to read: "The allegations contained therein
have been shown to be untrue. Ms. Navarro is quite capable of performing the terms and conditions of
any agreement she makes with the City of Miami, and I so acknowledge. Sincerely and respectfully." It's
got your name on the bottom, and I believe this is your signature. Is this your signature?
Guido Rodriguez: Yes. But that -- I never mentioned --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Mr. Rodriguez: -- that the contract has to be awarded to --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Name and address.
Mr. Rodriguez: OK. My name is Guido Rodriguez. 7360 Southwest 22°6 Street, Miami, Florida. I'm
president of Stars of Calle Ocho, have been doing the project up there, Calle Ocho Celebrity Walk of
Fame. And that letter is a settlement between Ms. Navarro and myself. Don't have anything to do with
the Stars of Calle Ocho or Celebrity Walk of Fame. You know, I sent a letter to you about two years ago
with some facts that I had, you know, because the settlement, I have to say it was untrue. But I never
mentioned, you know, you have to give the contract to her. I have been doing this for six years.
Everybody know I am Stars of Calle Ocho. Why give it to somebody else at this time?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir.
219 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. I just wanted to clarify this. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Rollason: Aside from the private battles that have been going on, our position from staff is that the
Stars have been in neglect for some period of time. It's time to get the thing moving again. There were
certain commitments that were given by individuals for us to go forward once these things were settled.
Staff s direction was to go forward. We did that. And we also made it to where this contract is non-
exclusive, to where we could enter into another contract with somebody else if we so desired. And one of
the concerns that the Commission had was stars going in areas that they would have no control over, on
private property. These are -- this contract deals with the public right-of-way. That's what the
Commission was -- directed us to be involved in, and that's what this contract covers.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: One question, Frank. In the past, several years ago, the Commission would
suggest names for the stars. Is that what is included --
Mr. Rollason: Yes. There's a methodology, and they can speak to that. But that is included in here.
Jorge Rodriguez-Chomat: Commissioners, my name is Jorge Rodriguez-Chomat, 825 Brickell Bay Drive,
Suite 1750, Miami, Florida. Only to bring some clarity to what's going on. Last Thursday, before Judge
Levine in the Circuit Court Courthouse, Mr. Guido Rodriguez agreed to the entry of a judgment against
him in the sum of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). And he also agreed to provide that letter that you have
read, because everything he has said against my client, Ms. Navarro, were a bunch of untruthfulness, to
put it very kindly. Now, part of the judgment, one of the causes of action was for a malicious interference
with the negotiations between Ms. Navarro and your City. And that's precisely what he's doing here
again, interfering in the contractual negotiations between the City and Ms. Navarro. Their company is not
in the agenda today. Today, we're talking about the contract between Ms. Navarro, her company and the
City. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. But you understand this is a public hearing, and anyone can speak
and give their opinions.
Mr. Rodriguez-Chomat: I understand.
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, staff has made a recommendation. Staff has talked to him and --
Commissioner Sanchez: Motion and a second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a motion and a second? Is there any further discussion?
Commissioner Teele: I've moved it, but I thought this was a good thing, and I still do. Were you all
partners in business or something?
220 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. Rodriguez: We was partners in business before.
Commissioner Teele: And so this letter that has been read into the record is a private letter between you?
Mr. Rodriguez: A private letter, don't have anything to do with the Stars of Calle Ocho or Celebrity Walk
of Fame. Nothing at all.
Mr. Rodriguez-Chomat: Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: Any chance you all might work it out a little later?
Mr. Rodriguez: I don't know. But, you know, after six years doing the same, you know, you got -- you
form a list of the names of the people who're going to receive a star on Calle Ocho.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me give you a little history of this. It goes way back. My understanding is at
one time -- this began about six or seven years ago by another company. That other company was not able
to keep up.
Commissioner Teele: But they keep looking at each other so nice and everything. They're still --
Vice Chairman Gort: They were not able to keep up. Well, I guess the judgment will do that to you.
They weren't able to perform. So they came as partners, and the City, in order to make sure that they
could be in compliance with all the requirements in using, utilizing the public right-of-way, created a
contract, which they had to go by. And I don't know what happened to those contracts. I think they split
and they quit doing it. They did a few of the stars on the public right-of-way, and then they split. They
had their problem, which now they're talking about and they're settling. My understanding is Mr. Guido
Rodriguez went and made a contract and did separate things with the private sector in the private right-of-
way, in the private -- with McDonald's. And he's been doing his stars in McDonald's. This is a different
ballgame, and this what's taking place right now. OK?
Mr. Rodriguez-Chomat: Commissioner, to answer your question, that letter is part of a very public record.
It's part of the final judgment against Mr. Rodriguez.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We got to look in the legal matter.
Commissioner Teele: Call the question. Let's go.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you very much.
221 12/ 14/00
Mr. Rodriguez-Chomat: Thank you.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1107
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT ° (S), APPROVING THE REQUEST OF THE
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CALLE OCHO CELEBRITY WALK OF
FAME, SUBJECT TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS, TO CONSTRUCT,
INSTALL AND MAINTAIN NON-STANDARD IMPROVEMENTS
WITHIN THE DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THE SIDEWALK
AREA OF SOUTHWEST STH STREET FROM SOUTHWEST 12TH TO
SOUTHWEST 27TH AVENUES, MIAMI, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF
MARBLE STARS HONORING ENTERTAINMENT CELEBRITIES,
WITH PREFERENCE TO THOSE CELEBRITIES RESIDING IN
SOUTH FLORIDA; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY
THE ATTACHED FORM, WITH CALLE OCHO CELEBRITY WALK
OF FAME, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
222 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: OK, guys. You want to take five and go into PZ or --
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, we have item number 19, I think.
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 17 and -- and 40-what?
Robert Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager): Five.
Vice Chairman Gort: And 45.
Mr. Nachlinger: Thank you, sir. Bob Nachlinger, Assistant City Manager. Are we on 17 or 45?
Vice Chairman Gort: We're on 17.
Mr. Nachlinger: Thank you. Seventeen is an emergency ordinance appropriating the strategic initiatives
reserves. It's been amended, and you, I believe, have an amended draft. Also appropriating seven hundred
and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) to the Model City's project for 41St Street, between 12th to 17th
Avenues. The twelve and a half million dollars was items that were approved last time at the City
Commission meeting, and also approved by the Financial Oversight Board. And there's this item, plus
one Fire item also in this appropriation. If you have any questions, I'll be pleased to answer.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: How much strategic reserves dollars are left?
Mr. Nachlinger: Eight million, six hundred and twenty-five thousand.
223 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Well, I would again say that I really do think that the six million dollars
($6,000,000) for downtown and the Design District should more appropriately come from capital funds or
leftover dollars. And I would ask that you all look at that. I mean, I'll move it, but I would ask that you
look at that over the holiday period again. And it's not to take anything from downtown in that, but to
come up with a more appropriate -- And the other issue is that I really do think that we need to be looking
closely with the water and sewer issues in Public Works that we've discussed as a part of our strategic --
the use of strategic reserve dollars. The whole concept of the strategic reserve is to either improve
efficiency or to leverage more dollars. And I'm just hard-pressed to see how we're leveraging dollars in
some of these. But the Oversight Board has approved it, so, Mr. Chairman, with your permission; I will
move the item as amended.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Seconded. Any further discussion?
Commissioner Regalado: One question. When will we know what was left from last year's budget
exactly?
Mr. Nachlinger: We should have that in a reso -- excuse me -- an ordinance to you at your next
Commission meeting, January the 11 cn
Commissioner Regalado: So in January, we can start planning special projects or emergency projects, in
terms of infrastructure that is needed in the City of Miami? Is that what you're saying? Or we can --
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Ices, sir. We'll have a clear, clear understanding of what the surplus is,
and, you know, we can do some planning.
Commissioner Regalado: City Attorney, do we need to do this by resolution, the different projects, one by
one, or should we communicate with the Manager the priorities?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, if you would allow me, if you may. If we could pass this item,
which is a different item from what Commissioner Regalado is raising, I will support a motion by
Commissioner Regalado to ask that the Manager look --
Vice Chairman Gort: I thought there was discussion on this item.
Commissioner Teele: After the discussion of this item.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. Ordinance.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner, this is an emergency ordinance.
224 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: The ordinance. Read it, yeah.
Mr. Vilarello: And for the record, it is different from what is in your package by the appropriation of
dollars with regard to the Model City street improvements. The title is an emergency ordinance of the
Miami City Commission amending Ordinance Number 11970.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 11970, AS
AMENDED, THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2001 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUSTING
SAID APPROPRIATIONS RELATING TO OPERATIONAL AND
BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS OF CERTAIN CITY
DEPARTMENTS AS MORE PARTICULARLY SET FORTH HEREIN;
REVISING ONGOING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; AND
ESTABLISHING NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO
BEGIN DURING FISCAL YEAR 2001; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, for adoption as an
emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was
agreed to by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
225 12/14/00
Whereupon, the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele, and seconded by Commissioner Sanchez,
adopted said ordinance by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado .
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12005.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: There's two other housekeeping matters. On the matter by Commissioner
Regalado, I would move or I would second the motion that requests that the Manager look at Public
Works, public infrastructure improvements in the amount of approximately seven hundred and fifty to one
million dollars ($1,000,000), looking to ensure some conformity, district -wide, throughout the City if -- as
funds are available in recommending -- in bringing forth a recommendation on January the 1 lt", relating to
any leftover dollars from last years. That is that those funds will be prioritized toward public works
infrastructure improvement, as contained in the Moody's report, where it reflects that the City has not
done a good job of dealing with infrastructure improvements, and that the Manager specifically look at
trying to provide some equity, based upon need first, among the five districts throughout the City.
Commissioner Regalado: If I may, I would amend the amount for two million dollars ($2,000,000)
divided in five districts.
Commissioner Teele: Well, what I said is "up to." So let them determine how much it is.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: But if you take my amount, it's five million dollars ($5,000,000), up to five million
dollars ($5,000,000), so.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, you said five million dollars ($5,000,000).
226 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: No. I said up to -- from -- between seven hundred and fifty and a million dollars
($1,000,000).
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. That's what I'm --
Commissioner Teele: Five districts, that's five million dollars ($5,000,000).
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. You mean for each district.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. I misunderstood. OK. OK. I'll --
Commissioner Teele: You're getting ready to knock out three million of them. But we didn't tell them an
amount, because it can't be more than what he's got available.
Commissioner Regalado: No, I -- that's what I'm saying. That's why I said that. But, I didn't hear the
part of "each district." So I'll go with the vote.
Commissioner Teele: But the point is need, and need should be the number one criteria. If one district
has got a project that needs three million dollars ($3,000,000) and the others come out at one and a half or
two million, I'm going to support the need issue first.
Commissioner Regalado: Of course.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? All in favor state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
227 12/14/00
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1108
A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO REVIEW PUBLIC WORKS INFRASTRUCTURE
IMPROVEMENTS AS CONTAINED IN MOODY'S REPORT
REFLECTING THAT THE CITY HAS NOT DONE A GOOD JOB OF
DEALING WITH INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, WITH A
VIEW TO ENSURE, AS FUNDS BECOME AVAILABLE, SOME
CONFORMITY DISTRICT -WIDE THROUGHOUT THE CITY;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO BRING BACK A
RECOMMENDATION ON JANUARY 11, 2001 REGARDING ANY
CARRYOVER FUNDS FROM LAST YEAR; FURTHER DIRECTING
THE MANAGER TO PRIORITIZE SAID FUNDS FOR PUBLIC
WORKS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, IN A TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $5,000,000 (APPROXIMATELY $750,000 TO
$1,000,000 PER DISTRICT), ON AN EQUITABLE BASIS, BASED
UPON NEED FIRST, AMONG THE FIVE CITY COMMISSION
DISTRICTS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
228 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And this is a companion item to the one that just passed, which is a resolution of the
City of Miami authorizing the allocation of funds not to exceed the seven hundred and fifty for the
emergency roadwork improvements at Northwest 41" Street between Northwest 12th and 19th Avenues,
authorizing the City -- in the City of Miami -- authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements in the
form acceptable to the City Attorney for the design and engineering services for the said purpose, and
further directing the Manager to schedule a public hearing to waive competitive bidding procedures for the
selection of a contractor for the said improvement at the January 11, 2001 said City Commission meeting.
I would so move.
Robert Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager): Seventeenth, 17th Avenue, not 19th
Commissioner Teele: I said -- 17th, yeah. I would so move.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Motion and a second. Discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying
aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
229 12/ 14/00
C�
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1109
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $750,000, FOR EMERGENCY ROADWAY
IMPROVEMENTS AT NORTHWEST 41IT STREET BETWEEN
NORTHWEST 12TH AND 171H AVENUES, MIAMI, FLORIDA;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT
(S), IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR SAID PURPOSE;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SCHEDULE A
PUBLIC HEARING TO WAIVE COMPETITIVE BIDDING
PROCEDURES FOR THE SELECTION OF A CONTRACTOR FOR
SAID IMPROVEMENTS AT THE JANUARY 11, 2001 CITY
COMMISSION MEETING.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We have to go in the -- we'll go into our items and the pocket items, and then
we'll go into PZ (Planning and Zoning).
Commissioner Regalado: You want to do, Mr. Chairman --
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm sorry. We have 45.
Commissioner Regalado: Do you want to do PZ first, and then do the items? Or --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, let's get out of this, because we have people waiting, and then we'll do PZ.
230 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Teele: On the items in the Commission, if I could dispense of one item for you. One of
the items in my packet was a discussion item about the 17th Avenue that we just took care of. And I know
that you all have been here all day, and I apologize for taking it up without letting you say anything, but I
know your homeowner association would like to at least know that you were here.
Saul Collier: Yes. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: And would you just give it for the record, and your address.
Mr. Collier: Yes. I would just like to say thank you to the Commissioner for --
Vice Chairman Gort: Name and address.
Mr. Collier: My name is Saul Collier. My address is 1368 Northwest 41 Street, Miami, Florida. And I'm
here from the Homeowners Association of the Earlington Heights Development. And we'd just like to
thank the Commissioners and all of you for allowing us to be here today. And we want just to thank you
for taking this under consideration, because this is a project that we've been working on for about three
years, and we're just glad to see that some form of termination seems to be in progress. So we just want
to thank you again for your consideration.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, for the --
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. And you've been here since what time? You've been here since
what time? Put it on the record.
Mr. Collier: We got here about 4 o'clock.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Collier: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, for the record, this project was a project that was announced in this
Commission, meeting three years ago as under design --
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
231 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: -- under construction, and these fine citizens have really been put out. And I
appreciate very much your professionalism and your patience.
Mr. Collier: And thank you for allowing us to be here. Thank you much.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Collier: OK.
232 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Item 45.
Robert Nachlinger (Assistant City Manager): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bob Nachlinger, Assistant City
Manager. The item I would like to speak to has been alluded to several times today, and that's the
upgrade of the City's bond rating from B-A-1 to B-A-A-3. It's probably the best Christmas present that
I've ever received. I'd like to read a few excerpts from that into the record, if possible. It begins:
December 11, 2000. Moody's Investor Services has upgraded to B-double A-3 from B-A-1 the underlying
credit rating of Miami's 119.2 million dollar ($119.2 million) general obligation bonds. The upgrade
recognizes the progress the City has made in restoring financial balance with the assistance of the
Government -- Governor -appointed Oversight Board, movement towards stability in what has been a
turbulent period of turnover in key positions, as well as a diverse and well performing economy. Moody's
further says that: Earlier in 2000, the City has adopted an anti -deficiency and a financial integrity
ordinance which institutionalizes the financial concepts related to spending reserves, long-term financial
and capital planning, internal oversight, and structurally balanced budgets. Moody's believes that the
adherence to these principles provides the framework for sustaining long-term financial stability.
Continuing, when they talk about the economy, they note that: A resurgence in residential, commercial
and public development has constituted -- excuse me -- has contributed to a tax base growth averaging six
point two percent over the past three years, and with current private construction estimated at seven
hundred and fifty million dollars ($750, 000, 000), and additional planned projects expected to benefit
future near -term tax base expansion. An item we just talked about is: Over twenty-one million in
strategic initiative funds derived largely from land sale revenue and to be used for deriving future new
revenue or adding to tax base expansion is a positive tool for the City. Officials' successful efforts in
aiding expansion to the City's tax base will provide an important underpinning of ongoing financial
flexibility. The press release goes on for about four pages. It's a wonderful document, and recognizes all
the work that the Commission has helped us, the administration do to get the City back into financial
health. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. And that was a very good trip you took, and I'm
glad you took Commissioner Sanchez over there, and the Mayor went along also. Do I have any questions
on the presentation? OK.
233 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, I have two pocket items. One is respectfully requesting that
the City Commission consider the cap --
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask you a question. Why don't we do the Commission's agenda pocket
items at the same time? So let me take District 2.
Commissioner Sanchez: I have nothing. I don't think you have anything either, do you?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, I do.
Commissioner Sanchez: You do?
Vice Chairman Gort: I've got quite a few, but like always, I'll be last. Go ahead, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it's Johnny.
Vice Chairman Gort: Johnny.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, do you have any Commissioner items?
Commissioner Winton: Yes, I do. I have a pocket item. Where did it go? Has this been passed out?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: OK. And staff -- Lori, you're going to -- this is a temporary use agreement
between the City of Miami and Barry University, relative to the Rowing Club site.
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): That's correct. The Rowing Club's lease expired on
December lst, and we would like to continue to provide rowing opportunities at the site. So we're
requesting permission for the Manager to negotiate a temporary use agreement with the Barry University
while we would undertake a negotiation of a revocable license, and we will bring that revocable license
back to you.
Commissioner Regalado: When?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: When? Excuse me. I'll second it. When?
234 12/14/00
0
Ms. Billberry: The revocable license? We anticipate this being for four months, up until April 30th. We
have provided that the Manager could extend it, because we do have to go to the Waterfront Board, also,
on the revocable license, and they also have to obtain certain approvals.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is that the famous Rowing Club?
Ms. Billberry: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: That's the famous --
Commissioner Sanchez: The one hundred dollar ($100) --
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, the one --
Commissioner Winton: That's a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) in back taxes owed.
Commissioner Sanchez: See, that's why no dollar or two dollars ($2), because it comes back.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but that's a private entity. You can't go there, neither can I, and as a
matter of fact, people rent the facility every weekend to do weddings and stuff there. So.
Commissioner Winton: So this is going to solve that problem.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in
favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Ms. Billberry: Thank you.
235 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1110
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE A
TEMPORARY USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI
AND BARRY UNIVERSITY, FOR THE USE OF A PORTION OF
PROPERTY ON VIRGINIA KEY LOCATED AT 3601
RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY, AT A FEE OF $500 PER MONTH,
FOR A PERIOD OF FOUR MONTHS (WHILE THE CITY
NEGOTIATES A REVOCABLE LICENSE FOR CONSIDERATION BY
THE COMMISSION) FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPERATING AND
MAINTAINING WATER RECREATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITIES WHICH SHALL INCLUDE PRIVATE
INSTRUCTION, CLINICS, CLASSES AND SPECIAL EVENTS
(ROWING, SAILING, KAYAKING, WATER SAFETY, SWIMMING,
AND SCUBA/SNORKELING).
(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.
236 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: What else, Johnny?
Commissioner Winton: In addition, second reading on the aggressive panhandling ordinance. Mr. City
Attorney.
Vice Chairman Gort: Read it.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Read it.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Vice Chairman Gort: Roll call.
237 12/14/00
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 37 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA,
AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "OFFENSES -MISCELLANEOUS" TO
ADD A NEW SECTION TO MAKE IT UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON
TO AGGRESSIVELY PANHANDLE; MORE PARTICULARLY BY
ADDING NEW SECTION 37-6 TO SAID CODE; 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 November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner
Sanchez, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: 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 DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12006.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. I've got a question. Chief, when would you plan to start
implementing this ordinance? Thirty days from now?
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Commissioner, it takes effect 30 days after you approve it, so it's 30
days from now. We, in fact, we're doing training right now to our police officers so they can be ready to
enforce the ordinance as we speak. But we have to wait.
Commissioner Regalado: What is "aggressive"?
Chief Martinez: "Aggressive panhandling," it's -- and the ordinance, it's described in the ordinance what
is basically, you know, grabbing people, shouting obscenities, you know. It's not just putting the hand out
asking for money. You have to do something, you know, to stop their -- the pedestrian traffic. So you
have to get out from pedestrian, walk out into the street. There are certain issues that -- you know, I can
pull the ordinance again and --
23 8 12/ 14/00
•
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no. I'm just asking what is "aggressive," because the other day, a
police officer was standing near a place that I was, and there was a guy knocking and knocking on the
window of the car of a person. And the person would not open the window, and that person would keep
knocking and banging on the door. That's aggressive, right?
Chief Martinez: Yes. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
239 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: OK. Mr. Chairman, I have another issue here. It's a resolution for the
appointment to the --
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Well this -- you haven't voted on this.
Commissioner Winton: Sorry. I'm trying to get this done.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, we did.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Yes.
Raul Martinez (Chief of Police): Yeah, I think they voted on it.
Commissioner Winton: We did vote, I'm told.
Mr. Foeman: Yes, we did.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, as I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted by
our City Attorney, I have a resolution for appointment to the Jobs and Education Partnership Board. We
have seven individuals that the -- I'm the appointed member to the South Florida Training and
Employment Consortium. I think that's what it's called. And every year, there's a number of
appointments that we make. And we are bringing these seven forward. And the names are Marie Bell,
James Rashey, Carla Harris, John Thacker, Victoria Villalba -- what is it?
Commissioner Regalado: Villalba.
Commissioner Winton: Villalba. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: So you're making a motion to --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Winton: James Rashey is a substitute for Joe Burke.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion to -- is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
240 12/ 14/00
0 •
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1111
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING
THE APPOINTMENT OF CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS MEMBERS
OF THE JOBS AND EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP REGIONAL
BOARD, WITH 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
241 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Anything else?
Commissioner Winton: One more item real quickly. I have a number of board appointments to make.
Cultural and Fine Arts Board, Jessica Shapiro.
Vice Chairman Gort: Do I have -- there's a motion to --
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- to approve. Second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1112
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE CULTURAL AND FINE
ARTS BOARD 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 Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
242 12/ 14/00
0
Commissioner Winton: Community Relations Board. Linda Romero, Reverend Willy Leonard, Torris
Cooper and Anthony Robbins.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you. Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. All in favor state it by saying
aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1113
A MOTION APPOINTING THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS AS
MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY RELATIONS BOARD: LINDA
ROMERO, REVEREND WILLY LEONARD, TORRIS COOPER AND
ANTHONY ROBBINS.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
243 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: ITB (International Trade Board) Board. And this is something, I think, really
great for our City. You know, Governor Jeb Bush's top economic official, who was appointed by Bush
Service Director of Office and Tourism, Trade and Economic Development, that's Tony Villamil, who
I'm moving for appointment to the International Trade Board.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excellent choice.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1114
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
AN INDIVIDUAL AS A MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL
TRADE BOARD 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 Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
244 12/ 14/00
i
63 APPOINT JQEGANGI7ZZA A,�_yAlLAN ISHULM�ASIVIEMBERS"OfnZQNINGBQARD
Commissioner Winton: And the last one, Zoning Board. Mr. Joseph Ganguzza and Allan Shulman.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion and second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor,
state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: I'm done.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1115
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPOINTING
CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS AS REGULAR MEMBERS OF THE
ZONING BOARD 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
245 12/14/00
11
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. It's a resolution requesting that the City
Commission consider a cap of five thousand dollars ($5,000) per event day as user fee for the presentation
of two professional soccer matches at the Orange Bowl Stadium. Mr. Attorney, could you read the
resolution?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending resolution into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: And this is to promote more events at the Orange Bowl. So move. Is there a
second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state
it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
246 12/ 14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1116
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION RELATED TO
PROFESSIONAL SOCCER MATCHES, PRESENTED BY
INTERFOREVER SPORTS, INC. TO BE HELD JANUARY 6TH AND
FEBRUARY 3RD, 2001, AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM;
AUTHORIZING A CAP ON THE BASIC USE FEE OF $5,000 PER
EVENT DAY, CONTINGENT UPON THE ORGANIZERS (1) PAYING
FOR ALL NECESSARY COSTS OF CITY SERVICES AND
APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT, (2)
OBTAINING INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE
AMOUNT AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS
DESIGNEE, AND (3) COMPLYING WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND
LIMITATIONS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY
MANAGER OR DESIGNEE; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM
ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, FOR SAID PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Winton, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
247 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Also, I'd like to direct the City Manager to look at the facility of possibly
creating an entertainment district in Little Havana. So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second? Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye." Can I give a recommendation to
Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me?
Vice Chairman Gort: Can I give you a recommendation --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- to select the --
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I figured, you know, since we have so many throughout the City, and Little
Havana is developing so well with a lot of the events that we have, why not throw one in there? I think
it'll be good for the City.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'd like -- excuse me. Once again, I'd like to give you --
Commissioner Teele: Now, you realize the entertainment districts --
Commissioner Sanchez: Uh, uh, uh, bite your tongue.
Commissioner Teele: -- stay open very late at night. And --
Commissioner Winton: And sell liquor after midnight.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, this is just -- hey, this is just directing the City Manager to look into it and
come back with recommendations.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'd like to give you a suggestion to set up a pilot program between 121h and 17th
Avenue, which was the original Latin Quarter.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, it's -- I don't want to --
Vice Chairman Gort: No? Anywhere?
248 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Not anywhere, but I don't want to limit it. I want to --
Commissioner Winton: Let the staff look at it all.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1117
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REVIEW
PROPOSED CREATION OF AN ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT IN
LITTLE HAVANA AND COME BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION
WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR A PILOT PROJECT
REGARDING SAME.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
249 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I have sort of an urgent matter. And I
just got a visit from Mr. Pablo Ortiz. He's the principal of Fairlawn Elementary School. This is the
school that is right next to West End Park. And currently, capital improvements are taking place at that
school in the Flagami Area, District 4, in order to remedy the situation of the flooding in the area. Those
projects are being done by the School Board, but the school is requesting a temporary easement to provide
access to the construction site at the southwest portion of West End Park for a period of 120 days. And
the terns of this leasing will be negotiated by the City Manager. That will be the only way that they will
be able to finish the construction on the school in time for coming back at the recess and in February. So
and that, of course, will be paid by the School Board. So it's nothing free. But we need to do this in order
to facilitate the construction. I'm told that this will not in any way affect the activities of West End Park,
because we're talking of the southwest end of the park. So that would be a motion directing the Manager
to negotiate this contract with this school. And the contractor, I think, is National Roofing. Mr. Godoy is
there. Mr. Ortiz, the principal was here just a few minutes ago. So I'll move that.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded.
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): May we include an amount at this time?
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know.
Ms. Billberry: Well, we ran some quick numbers and -- I'm sorry -- Mr. Godoy has agreed to the number
of two thousand, two fifty-six a month.
Commissioner Regalado: Fine.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
250 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1118
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A GRANT OF TEMPORARY ACCESS EASEMENT, IN A
FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH
NATIONAL ROOFING OF SOUTH FLORIDA, INC., A FLORIDA
CORPORATION ("GRANTEE"), TO ALLOW GRANTEE THE RIGHT
TO ENTER AND CROSS AN APPROXIMATELY 14,400 SQUARE
FOOT AREA IN WEST END PARK, LOCATED AT 6030
SOUTHWEST 2ND STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS DEPICTED IN
"EXHIBIT A, ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF,
SUBJECT TO GRANTEE PAYING A MONTHLY FEE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2,256.00
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
251 12/14/00
0 9
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: I've got other items, Mr. Chairman, and one of them is about the Josefina
Castano Kidney Foundation. This is a newly created 501 group, and they are seeking to rent an office in
the Manuel Artime Building. And they are being charged in the 970 Southwest 1st Street, eight dollars and
fifty cents ($8.50) per square feet on for -profit. But these are not -for -profit. A 25 discount from the
above rate is for non -profits. My question is to the Manager, is there any way that we can reduce that, or
are those set prices? I know that we were -- that we approved that. But since this is a new group that just
got the 501 certificate, do we have like one or two months that we can help them with a reduction in rates?
Lori Billberry (Director, Asset Management): Lori Billberry, Director of Asset Management. As you
may recall, back in January of this year, the Commission did approve those new rates, which is, in the 970
Building, eight -fifty a square foot, with a 25 percent discount for non -profits. The 25 percent discount is
six thirty-eight a square foot. Part of that resolution that established those rates allowed the Manager to
enter into revocable license agreements with entities that would pay those rates without seeking additional
Commission approval. The Commission can at its discretion approve a two -month waiver as part of that.
That's up to the Commission.
Commissioner Winton: Do we charge them anything over and above the six thirty-seven? Do they pay
operating expenses, real estate taxes?
Ms. Billberry: No. No.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Regalado, we can barely pay for our own maintenance cost on this
charge. I'm telling you that's a -- we're lucky if it isn't costing us more to operate this building than the
amount we're charging in rent. So if they can't afford to pay this --
Commissioner Regalado: Do you know that in the 970 Building, there is only one elevator that it has been
out of service for five weeks? And the people have to be carried -- the blind people, by the way -- have to
be led by the stairs or carried, those who cannot walk.
Commissioner Winton: Well, given the rental rates we charge, it doesn't surprise me at all.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, it's either, you know --
Commissioner Winton: You either have to -- if you're going to -- you either have to -- you either have to
charge what it cost you to operate these buildings --
Commissioner Regalado: Or close them.
Commissioner Winton: -- or close them.
Commissioner Regalado: Or close them.
252 12/14/00
0
11
Commissioner Winton: That's right. Right. But if you discount it, you can't afford to keep them up
properly.
Commissioner Regalado: No, but my question was, can they be moved to the other building, which is the
older building, which is cheaper? But they are told that they cannot, although we have some vacancies
there, to the 900 Building.
Ms. Billberry: At the 900 Building, we do not have vacancies in the amount of space that they had
requested at the 970 Building. And they were requesting a room on the fourth floor, which was 1,690
square feet, and we have nothing of that size at the 900 Building.
Commissioner Regalado: Can you accommodate them on a smaller?
Ms. Billberry: That depends on their needs.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. So --
Vice Chairman Gort: What size do you have available?
Commissioner Winton: What size do you have available?
Ms. Billberry: We have a 308 square foot, 263, 506 and 266.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Ms. Billberry: I mean, none of them are even close --
Commissioner Winton: Doesn't sound like it.
Ms. Billberry: -- to what they've --
Commissioner Regalado: All right. So we'll tell them to meet with you again and see what they do.
Vice Chairman Gort: Maybe they can go to the 506.
Commissioner Winton: And pay.
253 12/14/00
Commissioner Regalado: OK. The other item, Mr. Chairman, next March the loth, Telemundo Network
is organizing a boxing match that would be televised nationally. And they -- this is for the benefit of the
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, the celebrity boxing event. They are requesting fee waivers for the Coconut
Grove Convention Center. Part of it, not the whole. They will be paying all the staff, all the support
personnel. They only request to waive the rental, itself.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: We did that --
Commissioner Teele: I would move that the waiver be awarded, provided Commissioner Regalado and
Mayor Carollo would be the --
Commissioner Sanchez: The main event, the main event.
Commissioner Regalado: No, because -- no, because --
Commissioner Teele: That it's included as the main fund-raising event.
Commissioner Regalado: No, because we have different categories. I think as a heavy weight. I'm a
heavy weight, and he is a lightweight.
Commissioner Teele: Hey, Tomas, hey, hey, I'm sorry. I didn't mean it. I didn't mean it. I didn't mean
it. I didn't mean it. I didn't mean it.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK, all right, let's go. What do we need? Motion.
Commissioner Regalado: No, and it will be televised, by the way.
Commissioner Teele: I move the waiver.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much are we talking about waiving?
Terry Buice (Assistant Director, Public Facilities): Terry Buice, Assistant Director.
Commissioner Regalado: Four hundred, five hundred.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much are we talking about waiving?
Terry Buice: The non-profit fee for the main hall. We haven't been given their requirements as of yet,
but the main hall, non-profit is forty-five hundred dollars ($4,500).
254 12/14/00
0 0
Commissioner Regalado: They don't want the main hall. They want something smaller, because it's for
the benefit of --
Commissioner Teele: So it's less than forty-five hundred.
Commissioner Regalado: It's less than forty-five hundred.
Mr. Buice: Right. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Second the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Discussion.
Commissioner Winton: Well, how much is it going to be in the smaller hall or whatever that is?
Mr. Buice: In the -- we have it broken down. The main hall and the north hall would be five thousand.
Commissioner Winton: Going in the wrong direction.
Mr. Buice: Oh, I'm sorry. No, no, I'm sorry, thirty-five hundred.
Commissioner Winton: Thirty-five hundred. And this is to raise funds for --
Commissioner Regalado: Cystic Fibrosis.
Commissioner Winton: -- for Cystic Fibrosis?
Commissioner Regalado: The Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. We could tell them to go to Hialeah
Auditorium. That's fine by me.
Mr. Buice: Well, we have numerous non-profit and charitable organizations going into Coconut Grove
Convention Center, and they all pay the non-profit rate.
Commissioner Winton: They all do. So.
Mr. Buice: If we do it for one, we feel we'd have to do it for all of them.
Commissioner Winton: That's absolutely right.
Mr. Buice: We do over two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) worth of business a year with non-profit
and charitable groups.
Commissioner Winton: I didn't hear you. We do over two hundred?
Mr. Buice: We net over two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000).
255 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Winton: A year?
Mr. Buice: A year.
Commissioner Winton: In rental fees.
Mr. Buice: With non-profit and charitable groups. Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, here's the thing. Non-profit organizations, if you allow one, then you
got to let everybody else. We have stopped that at Bayfront Park, because if you allow it for one, man,
you can't -- you got to allow it for everybody. So my policy is --
Commissioner Winton: You pay.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- I don't waive any fees.
Commissioner Winton: And I think that's a good policy.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: We have a motion, so let's go ahead and vote.
Commissioner Sanchez: There's a motion and a second?
Commissioner Regalado: There is a motion and there is a second.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Cystic Fibrosis?
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Regalado: Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Aye. "Nays?"
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Vice Chairman Gort: Two "nays."
256 12/14/00
U
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1119
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, RELATED
TO THE CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION ("ORGANIZER")
CELELBRITY BOXING EVENT HELD ON MARCH 10, 2001, AND
TELEVISED BY TELEMUNDO NETWORK AT THE COCONUT
GROVE CONVENTION CENTER; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO WAIVE THE RENTAL FEE, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$4,500 FOR THE USE OF A SMALL HALL AT THE CONVENTION
CENTER; THE AUTHORIZATION IS CONDITIONED UPON THE
ORGANIZER (1) PAYING FOR ALL NECESSARY COSTS OF THE
CITY SERVICES AND APPLICABLE FEES ASSOCIATED WITH
THE EVENT NOT WANED HEREIN AND, (2) OBTAINING
INSURANCE TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT AS
PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
NAYS: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
ABSENT:- None
257 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Anything else?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. I have a resolution of the City Commission accepting the plat entitled
Wal-Gate Replat. This is a subdivision in the City of Miami. And what this does is that will permit the
beginning of construction of the Walgreen's on Coral Way and 361h Avenue. And this is a resolution done
by the City Attorney, and Public Works has been advised of this. They have discussed this with Public
Works. As a matter of fact, it was sent from Commissioner Winton's office to my office, because of the
fact that this is in District 4.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Regalado: So I'll move that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? They're in compliance
with all the requirements of the City for replatting?
John Jackson (Director, Public Works): Yes. John Jackson, Director of Public Works. Yes, they are.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1120
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED "WAL-
GATE REPLAT," A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI,
SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PLAT AND
STREET COMMITTEE, AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS
SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY MANAGER AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT;
AND PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF SAID PLAT IN
THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
258 12/14/00
LI
E
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
259 12/14/00
i
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: I have a -- Mr. Chairman, I have here a letter -- well, actually, I have several
letters of residents of the Half Moon Towers Condominium Association, 5055 Northwest 7th Street. And
let me tell you a story about this.
Commissioner Winton: What's this address again?
Commissioner Regalado: 5055 Northwest 71h Street. This is in District 1, Commissioner -- Vice
Chairman Gort's district. But the reason that they came to me is because they went to my TV program to
complain about several situations that they have, and they have communicated that to Commissioner
Regalado and myself. And on the air, they complained about Antonio Maceo Park, which is an issue that
can be easily resolved if we follow the recommendation of the Parks Director. But also, the vacant lot
adjacent to Half Moon Towers, 5055 Northwest 7th Street and Moon Tower, 5038 Northwest 7th Street,
condominium buildings. They complain of trucks in and out, dumping rocks and landfill, and also
complaints of homeless people, and rats and other animals, because of the situation of the vacant lot. I
went there yesterday, because I was told that it was -- it had been cleaned. And apparently, that is true.
But there -- when I went there at 11:15 on Tuesday morning, there were three homeless actually living
there, because they have several tables, they have a hammock, they have some furniture. There is also
some tires that are -- either they were illegally dumped there, or somebody left them there -- about six to
seven tires spread in the area, and in the back, some high grass, which I don't know to whom it belongs, to
what kind of owner or whatever it belongs. I'm told by a memo that I received just today, today, that the
owners have until February I", I think, to clean the lot, and if they don't do that, the City will proceed to
clean it and build it. Is that an exact -- that's what the memo from the Manager said.
Dennis Wheeler (Acting Director, NET): My name is Dennis Wheeler. I'm the Acting Director of NET
(Neighborhood Enhancement Team). To answer that question, I'm going to have to give you a Reader's
Digest version of what has went on with that property since when they were taken to the Code
Enforcement on July 26th. On July 261h, the owner of the property at 4865, I believe, was taken to the
Code Enforcement Board for debris, overgrown lot, and vehicles parked on that particular lot. They were
found guilty at the Code Enforcement Board, and given 15 days to come into compliance. During that 15
days, the owner, Ms. Weiss, went into the hospital and asked for an additional 15 days to come into
compliance. Subsequent to that, there was a meeting with myself, Fausto (unintelligible), Ms. Weiss and
the inspector at the property, where we discussed the resolution of that property and how we were going to
handle the cleaning of that property. The agreement at that time was that they were going to cut the grass,
remove a construction trailer there, remove all the debris. And when I say "debris," the trash that the
illegal dumpers come in there and dump on that property. There was also an agreement with the City --
they have some concrete fill there -- that they plan on using that concrete to backfill about five acres of the
Blue Lagoon Lake. At that meeting, there was a gentleman by the name of David Edmund who is a --
actually, he's retired from DERM (Department of Environmental Resource Management), and he said it
would take approximately, through the permitting process, he gave us a time frame of about the middle of
260 12/ 14/00
February to go through the permitting process to be able to put that fill in the lake. So that was a part of
the agreement. Also, I was informed by someone that that was not clean fill, and they would not be able
to dump it in the lake. So I called the Assistant Director of DERM and asked him if they would send
someone out there to look at that fill and advise me whether it would be clean fill and then they would be
able to put it in the lake. They did, and they said that if they got the permitting, they would be able to put
it in the lake. So the agreement is that in the middle of February, if they have went through the permitting
process, they have shown good faith to the City and they can complete the permitting process, then they
will be in compliance. And I think also very important to note -- and I was out at that property, also,
yesterday about 10:30. I did see the tires. But there was a lot of tires there when we came into the
agreement. The agreement has been with Ms. Weiss that they would maintain the property. They do
maintain the property, they keep it cut, and when we call them and ask them to remove the debris, they
remove the illegal dumping of trash. So it is my intentions in the middle of February to sit down with all
parties concerned and to see if -- where they stand in the permitting process, and to see if they have lived
up to their end of the agreement.
Commissioner Regalado: Chief, one, I'm a little surprised, because we're not supposed to give medals.
Mr. Wheeler: Sir?
Commissioner Regalado: We are not supposed to give medals to people that keep their property clean.
It's understandable we go after the people that don't keep their property clean. We do that all the time.
So I'm just thinking that it's not that big of a thing if she keeps the property clean. I mean, that's the way
it has to be done.
Mr. Wheeler: And sir, I agree with you. I'm not trying to give anybody a medal. I'm trying to state the
facts. And the -- when I visited the property yesterday, I think the grass that we saw that was not
maintained was another adjacent property owner who is not maintaining his property.
Commissioner Regalado: You have to go after him, too.
Mr. Wheeler: He was cited yesterday, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Good. So what's the drop date on this case? February?
Mr. Wheeler: As I stated earlier, the agreement was that they would be -- almost have the permit finaled
by the middle of February. At that time, I will sit down with all parties concerned to see if they have
negotiated in good faith with the City.
Commissioner Regalado: So February is the drop date. That's middle of February, it's either they clean
or we clean. That's all there is --
Mr. Wheeler: I don't have any intentions of cleaning that property. The property is clean. But what I
have intentions of doing, if they have not dealt in good faith with the City is taking them back to the Code
Enforcement Board and to bring them in compliance.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
261 12/14/00
0 i
Caroline Weiss: Can I respond?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: Sure.
Ms. Weiss: My name is Caroline Weiss. This memo was written for the heirs of the City Commissioners
and members of the City of Miami. I would like to ask each one of you kindly to read this memo
carefully. This was not prepared to do anything else but reflect that I have been very "coordinatedly" with
Mr. Dennis Wheeler and the other inspectors, and also with the neighbors. I think I do have a tremendous
hardship there, and I'm not looking for any medals. But as owner of a property, I do have the right to
protect my property interest, just like you have the right to protect your home. But in this instance, I do
not have the right to protect my property, because the property is left open. And this has been litigated in
court since 1997. So I think this hardship that is existing here is not someone that's leaving it wide open
for Tom, Dick and Harry. And Commissioner Regalado, I would like to address the men that you may
have seen there. There is one table there, eight tires, and I have just went through a cost of fourteen
hundred dollars ($1,400) or more, and recently, as my memo reflects, over fifteen thousand dollars
($15,000). But as long as I am not able to keep that property closed, we will continue to have the
problem. Please take a note of the memo I have written. I do not need to air it for the general public, but I
will be very happy to meet with Mr. Dennis Wheeler at such time in the middle of February and bring him
up to date. Everything that I have put in here is the truth, to work together with the City of Miami, what
the facts reflect, and the neighborhood, of the neighbors, which I have been there for the past 20 years
paying taxes. So I am not there lightly. I pay over a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) in property
taxes. And I think if concession has to be given, I should be given those concessions. Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. So we'll wait until the middle of February for the property. That's what
we will tell the residents in that area. And, ma'am, I think that what you wrote here that, "It's with much
surprise that you, Commissioner Regalado, have taken_ this matter to be brought up when this property is
not in your district, " ma'am, I was elected to serve the City of Miami.
Ms. Weiss: That is correct.
Commissioner Regalado: You don't have any right to question my judgment of bringing any items to the
City Commission. Please, don't do that.
Ms. Weiss: Commissioner, I'm not questioning your judgment.
Commissioner Regalado: You are.
Ms. Weiss: But I thought that the facts in this matter, which the City of Miami Police Department and
everyone has known about it.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, the thing is that -- look. The thing is that I have a TV program, and a
radio program, and I am exposed directly on the air to people that complain. And to those people who
complain on the air, I have to respond. And this is why I did that. So.
262 12/ 14/00
Ms. Weiss: I think here I have a personal vendetta with Jose Milton, and this is what this tug-of-war is all
about, and nothing more.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Ms. Weiss: Thank you, gentlemen.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: The other issue would have to do with Northwest 71h Street.
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute, Commissioner Regalado, before you go on. That park, Maceo Park,
we do have a problem.
Commissioner Regalado: This is about Maceo Park.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: And this is about Maceo Park, which was another issue brought. And the
problem with Maceo Park is that it's -- it cannot be closed at night, because the Parks Department does not
have the support and the employees to do that. They open in the morning, but they cannot close it at
night. If they would close that, no drug dealings would be allowed, of course, inside the park, which are
going on. The people from El Cid on this are complaining. So the solution to this is for a police officer to
close the park every day. They go by Northwest 7ch Street, and they can do that. They can get the key
from the Parks Department, and they can close at dusk the park. It's very easy, and that would be the
whole remedy, because that's the only access. Either they come by the lake or through that gate.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Yes, sir. The Police Chief has agreed that police officers will close that
park at sunset.
Vice Chairman Gort: Because the major problem is even if the Parks Department tried to close it, the
employers, they would not listen to them. They don't pay attention to them. So it has to be a police
officer. OK. Thank you.
263 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Anything else?
Commissioner Regalado: And the last thing, Mr. Chairman, is a discussion concerning the Net 9 program,
Miami Neighborhoods. I -- yesterday, I received a tape. I have not been able to see it. It's about
downtown Miami. And I received today a memo from the Manager regarding some questions that I -- that
I had. OK, this is the one. And I was surprised when I got a memo giving -- signed by you, giving some
times where the Miami's Neighborhoods Program will be run in Net 9. I thought that we would have been
informed beforehand, but we were informed after the fact that it went on the air. I -- I just think, Mr.
Manager, that what I said in the memo that I sent you -- and I don't want to take more time. And this is
why we -- I introduced a resolution that the Commissioners' items should be done, beginning in January,
after the consent agenda, because this is what happens. We have people here and we are being very rude
with the people, and we are prolonging this. But there are small things. Probably nobody cares about this,
but I do. And for that reason, I -- I feel that I tried to do something that I thought was nice for the City of
Miami by coming up with the idea of doing Miami's Neighborhoods. I tried to do something for -- that I
thought was good for the City of Miami, coming up with the idea of doing Commissioners' districts,
because that way, the members of the Commission and the Mayor could inform their constituents. I even
went and asked for money to finance and produce Miami's Neighborhoods. And I thought that because of
what I do for a living, at least I would be called to give you some input, but that has not been the case.
And I'm sorry that I have taken your time to answer those memos. Mr. Manager, I promise you that I will
not place on the agenda any more items about Miami's Neighborhoods series, or any other programming
of Net 9. You do whatever you think. You do, you have the expertise, you have the department to run it.
I think it's very rude of your administration not to keep the Commission informed. I think that this is a
mockery, because it's been months, and months and months since this Commission approved that. And
I'm not going to be anymore the one that will bring these issues here, because, you know, we are wasting
time. Whatever we say here today is not going to be implemented, is not going to be heard, is not going to
be addressed by you or the department running that program. So I will not have any more items regarding
Net 9 in my Commissioner's sheet. Thank you.
Carlos Gimenez (City Manager): Commissioner, I'm sorry that you feel that way. We thought --
Commissioner Regalado: I do feel that way. I feel very strongly. I would rather, you know, move on,
Mr. Manager, because I think -- I think that I've tried to do something that I thought it was nice, but, you
know, I have been made fun of, and I do not, I do not want -- don't look surprised. You don't want me
talking.
Mr. Gimenez: Sir, you have not been made fun of We were simply following the direction that you've
asked us to do. We produced the Miami's Neighborhoods. The first one was the downtown
neighborhood, and which it just came out. I'm sorry you feel that way.
Commissioner Winton: Well, I was going to say I thought you did at least one, because I know you all --
you interviewed me, and I haven't seen it on Net 9, but I got a tape of it. So I thought it was moving
forward.
264 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Which is the next project?
Mr. Gimenez: It was supposed to be the -- The issue was that we were directed to do a Commissioner's --
Commissioner Sanchez: Different --
Mr. Gimenez: Right. And then on June 29th, we were told -- we were asked to do Miami's
Neighborhoods, and basically given that as a priority. We started out with downtown, and we had
Commissioner Winton, and Commissioner Gort, the Mayor.
Commissioner Winton: And by the way, I didn't ask him to start with downtown. So.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it's --
Mr. Gimenez: And we produced the program, and we, because of the resources, did not, you know, move
forward with the district. But we would be happy to move forward with the district shows if they want
that. And, you know, we'll take any direction you want from the Commission. I guess there must be a big
understanding here, and I'm sorry, you know, how it came out.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me tell you, I think the -- we should go ahead and continue, and the reason
being is there's a lot of good things that happen within the City of Miami. And unfortunately, the press
does not pick it up. It will only get picked up when it's a negative issue. Then we get picked up
immediately. So it's the City's responsibility -- and I've stated this before. Two weeks ago, when we
used to have Lou Price here, many, many years ago, that we all, we knew about it. We had a department
that had all the resources, and if we have to put -- allocate more resources, I think it's worth it, because it's
marketing that we need to do for the City, and we need to do that.
265 12/14/00
72. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO DEFEND
INTERESTS OF CITY, INCLUDING INVESTIGATION, NOTICE OR OTHER ACTION
AUTHORIZED BY LAW OR IN EQUITY TO OBTAIN RELIEF AND/OR TO REMEDY ANY LOSS
OR DAMAGES TO CITY CAUSED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN
SUSTAINED RELATED TO WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY (WASA), INCLUDING
DIVERSION OF DOLLARS OR EQUITY CHARGE -BACKS; AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO
RETAIN COUNSEL, $50,000.
Vice Chairman Gort: Guys, I've got about seven items, and I'll try to read mine fast.
Commissioner Teele: Say again, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, go ahead.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The evening is late, and, of course, this is what we want
to guard against, you know, getting ourselves frustrated here. Mr. Chairman, in the list, I have a
resolution that is set forth as item number "C" and "D" and "E."
Note for the Record: Commissioner Teele read the pending resolution into the public record by title
only.
Commissioner Teele: I would so move. And Mr. Chairman, for the purpose of at least putting the City in
a position to be able to defend its interests and to -- to protect the City residents in terms of what's really
going on with water and sewer, and I would so move.
Commissioner Winton: I will second the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Further discussion? Being none, all in favor -- discussion?
All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
266 12/ 14/00
L]
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1121
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING
THE CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ANY AND ALL ACTIONS
NECESSARY OR PERMITTED, TO PROTECT, PRESERVE AND
DEFEND THE INTERESTS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY INVESTIGATION, NOTICE OR
OTHER ACTION AUTHORIZED BY LAW OR IN EQUITY, TO
OBTAIN RELIEF AND/OR TO REMEDY ANY LOSS OR DAMAGES
TO THE CITY OF MIAMI CAUSED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED RELATED TO THE
WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY ("WASA"), INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO ANY DIVERSION OF DOLLARS OR EQUITY
CHARGE -BACKS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO
RETAIN COUNSEL, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $50,000
FOR SAID PURPOSE; AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER
AND THE CITY CLERK TO COMPLY WITH 164.1052, FLA. STAT.
(1999), RELATING TO THE PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR THE
INITIATION OF A CONFLICT RESOLUTION CONCERNING
GOVERNMENTAL DISPUTES.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, I have one question pertaining to WASA (Water and Sewer
Authority), and other companies that are doing work in our City. I know this Commission has addressed
the problem before. Some of these companies are coming in; they're doing their work --
Vice Chairman Gort: I have that in my item.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I'm glad you have it on your item, but I see it more often than ever now
where these companies are coming in, doing their work, paving over the damage that they do, and they
267 12/14/00
take off. And really, we have a lot of streets, local streets that are looking like third world country streets.
And I don't know what we could about them. I'm glad Commissioner Gort has something on the agenda
to address the problem, but we have discussed this item, and we have brought it to your attention many
times before. And we need to take some type of step, because, I mean, it's really getting out of hand.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Commissioner Teele, your next item.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, on the item that just passed, and on the next item, I think we need to
be very clear. I'm a little nervous, I'll be honest, because the distinguished former Manager of the
County, who actually was the person who recommended to the County Commission that WASA go from
an indirect fee which the airport limits to about three percent to a utility based rate of return concept,
which generates upwards of eight, to ten to 12 percent.
Commissioner Winton: And killing us.
Commissioner Teele: Which generates about forty to fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) a year for the
County's general fund. And I'm not trying to count their money. There's an old saying in poker, it's bad
form to count somebody else's money. But the fact of the matter is the streets of the City of Miami are
being torn up. The County is taking the money out of the account to pay for these indirect and these
charges, but yet the City of Miami has not really stood up and defended the right. The seven hundred and
fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) that we've just passed, which was a part of the capital improvement
plan, just moving it up, is a direct reflection of a road that the Water and Sewer Department ten or 12
years ago went in, and the City never properly repaired it. Now, I really do think -- and Mr. Jackson, I
hope you'll listen to me, because I'm saying this primarily for your benefit, Mr. Public Works Director. I
hope you'll listen to this. Mr. Jackson just got the Department. So anything that I say is not directed at
you, or your management, or your management style yet. I mean, you know, a year from now or so,
you've got to take some of the responsibility. But I really believe, Mr. Manager, we need to either support
Mr. Jackson, or shut down the Public Works Department and contract it out, because this has gone on long
enough. The issue that Commissioner Gort is going to talk about -- and we keep defining the symptom of
the problem. And the problem is simply this: We need to bring in some very sophisticated -- We're
dealing with one of the most sophisticated governments in the United States. Miami -Dade County is a
very mature and a very, very sophisticated government. And we cannot protect our citizens if we don't
have that kind of infrastructure. We need to look at this short-term and long-term, in terms of bringing in
some architect -- some engineering firms that don't do business with Dade County, and look at the whole
structure as it relates to what Commissioner Gort is going to be talking about later, as it relates to utility
fees. We need to have inconvenience fees. I pointed out to Mr. -- to the Assistant Manager today, Bob
Nachlinger and Frank Rollason the fact that the County, in fact, paid an inconvenience fee to the City. I
directed it. Joaquin Avino endorsed it. When we went across Brickell Avenue, right there at that church,
at that pump station during that emergency, we paid the City money. So the precedent has been there.
The City is being really raped in this process. And it really has to do with the lack of recommendations in
policy both by the Budget Office, by the City Budget Office, and the City Public Works Department in
formulating a complete solution.
268 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Now, I'm also asking for a resolution calling for a joint meeting between certain
officials of the City and Miami -Dade to be held before January 30th to discuss items relating to
governmental entities, including but not limited to pending litigation, and various financial matters such as
the parking surcharge, the HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) payment in lieu of
taxes, PILOT Program, the trade center, the baseball stadium, the 55-acre FEC track, the Tax Increment
District, Miami River, and such other matters not limited to those matters with the following officials.
And before, we went through this, and we never designated. And I'm going to take -- step up and take the
responsibility for the Commission with Mayor Carollo, Mayor Penelas, Commissioner Teele, and a
Commissioner from Miami -Dade selected by Mayor Penelas, as well as the two Managers, the two
Attorneys to attempt to develop a plan to solve a lot of these issues. There's no reason for us to start
talking about suing each other if we can solve these issues. The County's got issues they want to talk
about suing us on. But we've got to engage our attorneys if we want to be prepared. And I would just so
move that we move this forward for --
Commissioner Winton: I'll second the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Moved and seconded. Discussion.
Commissioner Sanchez: And we're allocating fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) towards that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we're authorizing the --
Vice Chairman Gort: Up to.
Commissioner Teele: -- up to fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) by the City Attorney.
Commissioner Sanchez: Which I guarantee you; you're going to have to come up with more money,
because the County is the 800-pound gorilla.
Commissioner Winton: It's interesting. Commissioner Teele, you were talking about Water and Sewer,
and how they're really sticking it to us here in the City, and they are, because the Water and Sewer
269 12/14/00
Department's a profit center for the County now. But in today's Miami Today, it says Miami -Dade
County Commission agreed last week to put some money back in the pockets of the Water and Sewer
Department workers who have saved money for the Water and Sewer Authority. Well, they gave all the
Water and Sewer Authority workers a bonus. I'm not opposed to giving the Water and Sewer Authorities
a bonus. I think that's a great idea. But I am opposed --
Vice Chairman Gort: Give the City first.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, yeah, let's get the fee structure in line with what the development
community needs to redevelop our neighborhoods that are trying so desperately to redevelop, and stop
gouging us on water and sewer connection fees when we're redoing our parks. And then if there's money
left over, give out the bonuses.
Commissioner Regalado: If I may, just a brief comment. The Water and Sewer Department is moving
from LeJeune, and they want to sell that building. But I understand, Mr. City Attorney, that it has a deed
restriction.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): That property was transferred to the County with a restriction on it
that it be used only for water and sewer purposes.
Commissioner Teele: It was transferred by who though?
Mr. Vilarello: The City.
Commissioner Teele: That's the point.
Commissioner Regalado: By the City. If we were to deal with them or make a deal with them, can we
exchange the deed restriction on that property for the marine stadium deed restriction?
Commissioner Teele: I think these are the kind of things you need to be real careful about in this context.
And I'll say because -- you know, once the -- let me tell you what Dempsey Barron used to -- Once he
knew what you wanted, then that's the one thing that he wouldn't give you. And he'd negotiate everything
else and hold you hostage.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I mean, you know --
Commissioner Regalado: If you start saying that's what you want, trust me, they got two guys over there
and probably two lobbyists in here that will be on the phone tonight, calling back to say, "This is what
they want."
Commissioner Winton: And I think these are the -- right. And these are the kind of --
Commissioner Regalado: Or you can get money. Or you can get money.
270 12/14/00
•
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Regalado, you ought to- make these suggestions in private to the
Manager, not be bringing these suggestions out in public. If you have those ideas, give them to the
Manager or give them to the City Attorney, but not --
Commissioner Regalado: But the City Attorney is -- the City Attorney will be dealing with that issue in
that meeting. So I guess that --
Commissioner Winton: Fine. But not public.
Commissioner Regalado: But my other issue is we never have received a discount as according to the
contract that was signed many, many years ago, when the City gave Water and Sewer to the County.
Have we ever received any discount, Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Vilarello: My understanding is that no. However, it was tied to a bond issue that was in place, which
has since been satisfied. So that discount does not appear to be applicable.
Commissioner Regalado: But it was never given.
Mr. Vilarello: I don't know the answer to that, Commissioner.
Commissioner Teele: Tell him about latches one day. On the motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Gentlemen, on the motion. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
271 12/14/00
11
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1122
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION CALLING
FOR A JOINT MEETING BETWEEN CERTAIN OFFICIALS OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY TO BE HELD
BEFORE JANUARY 30, 2001, TO DISCUSS ISSUES CONCERNING
BOTH GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO PENDING LITIGATION AND VARIOUS FINANCIAL
MATTERS, SUCH AS THE PARKING SURCHARGE, THE U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES (US HUD PILOT) PROGRAM, THE
TRADE CENTER, THE BASEBALL STADIUM, THE 55-ACRE FEC
RAIL TRACK, THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT, THE MIAMI
RIVER, AND THE PORT OF MIAMI EXPANSION; DESIGNATING
ATTENDANCE OF THE FOLLOWING OFFICIALS: MAYOR JOE
CAROLLO, MAYOR ALEX PENELAS, COMMISSIONER ARTHUR
E. TEELE, JR., A COMMISSIONER FROM MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
SELECTED BY MAYOR ALEX PENELAS, MIAMI CITY MANAGER
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY MANAGER
MERRETT R. STIERHEIM, MIAMI CITY ATTORNEY ALEJANDRO
VILARELLO, AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ATTORNEY ROBERT
GINSBURG; DIRECTING THE ISSUANCE OF A JOINT REPORT BY
BOTH THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY AND CITY MANAGERS, NO
LATER THAN NINETY DAYS AFTER THE MEETING; AND
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO TRANSMIT A COPY
OF THIS RESOLUTION TO THE OFFICIALS 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
272 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort; My suggestion is, I think there's five or six Commissioners that have jurisdiction
within the City of Miami. And once you get settled in your agreements, we need to talk to them.
273 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other issues? Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. Very quickly, several other matters. A resolution of the City of Miami.
Commission expressing its intent to co -designate Northwest 55t" Street between 17th Avenue and 19th
Avenue as Mable Dean Barlow Street, directing the City Manager and instructing the City administration
to initiate the formal procedures to implement said co -designation. So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by
saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1123
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING
ITS INTENT TO CO -DESIGNATE NORTHWEST 55TH STREET,
BETWEEN 17114 AND 19TH AVENUES, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS
MABLE DEAN BARLOW STREET AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE ADMINISTRATION TO INITIATE
THE FORMAL PROCESS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SAID
CO -DESIGNATION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
274 12/ 14/00
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
275 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, this is the Manager's item. A resolution of the City Commission
approving a time extension not to exceed 90 days for the Outdoor Advertising Review Board, and
directing that the City Manager continue to provide all necessary assistance for the Review Board. The
scope of the stated Review Board shall continue for the purpose of reviewing City policies affecting
outdoor advertising, and reporting back to the City within 90 days. So move.
Commissioner Winton: What did that do again?
Commissioner Teele: Extended them for 90 days.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1124
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXTENDING
THE DATE FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 90 DAYS FOR
WHICH THE OUTDOOR ADVERTISING REVIEW BOARD SHALL
PRESENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION A REPORT DETAILING ITS
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REGULATION OF OUTDOOR
ADVERTISING, AS DIRECTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 00-842,
ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 14, 2000; DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO CONTINUE THE PROVISION OF ALL NECESSARY
STAFF AND PERSONNEL ASSISTANCE TO THE REVIEW BOARD
FOR SUCH PURPOSE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
276 12/14/00
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
277 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: This is a follow onto the resolution, I think, by Commissioner Winton and myself
relating to Power Studios. A resolution of the City of Miami, with attachments, granting for one year a
temporary encroachment consisting of two emergency access fire escape stairwells within the dedicated
right-of-way on Northeast 37th Street alley to Power Studies Limited Liability Corporation at 3701
Northeast 2"d Avenue, subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 54-191 of the City of Miami
Code, which requires a covenant, liability insurance, and a hold harmless and indemnification agreements,
and additional requirements set forth herein.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1125
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI "CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), GRANTING FOR ONE (1) YEAR A
TEMPORARY ENCROACHMENT CONSISTING OF TWO (2)
EMERGENCY ACCESS FIRE ESCAPE STAIRWELLS WITHIN THE
DEDICATED RIGHT-OF-WAY (NORTHEAST 37TH STREET
ALLEY), FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3701 NORTHEAST
2ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, WHICH IS OWNED BY POWER
STUDIOS MIAMI, LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION, SUBJECT
TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 54-191 OF
THE MIAMI CITY CODE, WHICH REQUIRES A COVENANT,
LIABILITY INSURANCE AND HOLD HARMLESS AND
INDEMNITY AGREEMENT, AND ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, 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.)
278 12/14/00
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
279 12/ 14/00
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, this is -- would somebody from Community Development -- this is
coming up from Community Development as a glitch cleanup. This does not appropriate any new money.
This is funds that were appropriated almost a year ago. It's a resolution of the City of Miami allocating
fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) of Community Development Block Grant from a special Economic
Development Project in the Edison/Little River to assist Georges Williams Enterprise; said funds to be
reallocated from the previously approved award to the said business through the Commercial
Revitalization Program authorized by Resolution 00-535, adopted June 29, 2000; further authorizing the
City Manager to enter into a contract with the business in a form acceptable to the City Attorney for this
purpose. And I would so move. This is a re --
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion. Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1126
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE REALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY
DEELOPMENT LOCK GRANT ("CDBG") FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $50,000, FOR THE COMMERCIAL REVITALIZATION
PROGRAM, TO ASSIST, AS A SPECIAL ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, GEORGES WILLIAM ENTERPRISES,
LOCATED AT 4600 NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
IN THE EDISON LITTLE RIVER /LITTLE HAITI AREA; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH GEORGES WILLIAM ENTERPRISES, 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.)
280 12/14/00
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
281 12/14/00
0
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, finally, the Mayor's Office has asked that -- and Mr. Manager, I
want to say this, and I want to say this very respectfully to you and to the Mayor. But I think it's
extremely offensive for the Manager's Office and any office of the Manager to engage in activities that
really -- that are in a Commission district in which the Commissioner has no knowledge of it. I think, you
know, it's not only bad form; it's really bad for the City. However, the Mayor is asking this -- and I found
about this, I guess, through this -- that a resolution of the City authorizing the City of Miami's co-
sponsorship of a Christmas experience in Overtown, conducted by Zo's Summer Groove Foundation to be
held on Sunday -- and it's two different days in here. Is it the 17th or the 9th -- or the -- on Sunday, the
17th, December 17th at Gibson Park. And I would so move.
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I'm also aware on this -- is that there is a Miami Arena Magic
Holidays. I would ask Commissioner Winton that in the future; if you would ensure that the City of
Miami and the officers of the City are reflected on official programs that you all put out. I mean, I just
think --
Commissioner Winton: Great point. I agree. That's right.
Commissioner Teele: I think it's bad form.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, not to be petty.
Commissioner Winton: I looked at it, and I didn't think of that. And you're --
Commissioner Teele: But this is not political one-ups-manship. This is just a way to be dignified and do
things in a --
Commissioner Winton: Right. I couldn't agree with you more. That's absolutely correct. And I'll call
tomorrow and make sure that happens.
Vice Chairman Gort: Further discussion on the motion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
282 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: I think, Mr. Manager, what Commissioner Teele has stated, I think it's very
important. We all get elected at the district level, and anything that happens in our district, we should be
aware of it. I mean, we hate to be caught by surprise on any events or anything taking place in our district,
and we're the last ones to find out about it.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1127
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MIAMI'S CO-SPONSORSHIP OF "A
CHRISTMAS EXPERIENCE IN OVERTOWN," CONDUCTED BY
ZO'S SUMMER GROOVE FOUNDATION, TO BE HELD ON
DECEMBER 17, 2000, AT GIBSON PARK.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
283 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Any other items? I have about 15 of them. I promise I'll be fast.
Commissioner Winton: Well, so much for my staff Christmas party.
Vice Chairman Gort: Johnny, you should have had your Christmas party. The one thing that I want to
discuss, and what I'd like to do, Mr. Manager, I requested about a month ago -- this is what we all have
talked about -- all this drilling and opening of the streets, and they ruin the street and sidewalk in our
neighborhoods and in our City. If you look at Biscayne Boulevard, which is the entrance to downtown
Miami, it looks like a third world country or worse. And we -- I asked you to come up with some
corrective actions in the administration. And I don't want to take the time to do so today. We have too
many people still waiting for seats here. But I want you to please'very carefully consider -- and I think it's
the opinion of all of us -- that the City of Miami is being abused. These things do not take place in Coral
Gables or in any other cities. I know we're different, but I think some respect should be shown to us. And
I hope you're doing the corrective actions, and you're coming up with a system where if they don't
comply, we'll take their license away or we'll take their permits away. OK?
284 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Gort, could I make a point of clarification?
Vice Chairman Gort: It's your party.
Commissioner Winton: I'm sorry. On -- Yeah. On the flyer that you're looking at where the party for
children for City of Miami, the culprit there is our new Executive Director of MSEA (Miami Sports and
Exhibition Authority). And he really was -- his whole mission was to create a great environment, a
Christmas environment for the kids of the City of Miami. So he wasn't thinking about that kind of stuff.
And I'll make sure that he gets up to date on that, and we solve that problem in the future.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we run the risk of looking petty. I mean, but the fact of the matter is I think
everybody up here knows that there is a clear activity that's going on right now, and it's really not in good
form or taste.
Commissioner Winton: But in that one --
Commissioner Teele: And everybody is getting manipulated and used.
Commissioner Winton: In that one, that wasn't the case, is the only point I'm saying there.
285 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: Number two.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: Just very briefly, because you addressed an issue that is very important. I have
sent the Manager one, two, three, four, five, six, seven memos signed by this Manager, and -- no, signed
by this Manager. No. One by Donald Warshaw, two by Donald Warshaw and the rest -- and the rest --
no. Three by Donald Warshaw, and the rest by Mr. Gimenez.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Commissioner Regalado: I know. But Johnny, I think -- I don't know what to say or what to do, because,
you know, I've sent the memo to the Manager regarding a broken sidewalk, somebody fell. And when I
get the memo back, I go to these people's homes. And I tell you, "Look, your sidewalk is going to be
fixed in September of the year 2000." And they're happy. But in October, they call me and they tell me
that I lied to them, that all politicians lie to them. Now, there's one in September, one in October, one in
May, one in May, one in September, one in June, one in August. I just want to just say I know that you
guys are doing your best, but you know if you're not going to do it --
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager): Well, Mr. Commissioner, I see the same thing that you see.
And I have a file in my --
Commissioner Regalado: No, you don't, Frank.
Mr. Rollason: Well, I --
Commissioner Regalado: Because you don't have to take --
Commissioner Teele: Hold it, hold it, hold it.
Commissioner Regalado: You don't have to take -- No, Arthur. You don't have to take the criticism
from the people that blame you -- in this case, me -- because I never came through for them.
Mr. Rollason: I understand.
Commissioner Regalado: And I promised them.
Mr. Rollason: But what I'm saying to you is that I see the memos. They come across my desk before
they come back to you. And I file that I have in my desk called a drive by file. And when I go out during
the day, I take that with me with those dates. It's in chronological order. And I swing by and I take a look
286 12/14/00
and see what's been done and not done, and when it's not, I get with Mr. Jackson, and we try to follow up
on -- We give when we answer those our best estimate, our best time that we try to integrate them into a
project.
Commissioner Teele: Frank, hold on. Wait a minute. Look, it's 7:30. Commissioner Regalado has got a
point. But he interrupted the Chairman, who was in the process of doing his items.
Commissioner Regalado: I know, but just a point, just to make a point.
Commissioner Regalado: And the point is this: We just passed a resolution. And I was trying to take --
because I know that Commissioner Regalado, like all of us, are frustrated. We just passed a resolution
asking you all to come back on the 1l1h of January with all of that. I would hope that somebody would
come up here and get these things and make sure that we get all that done. Commissioner Gort is
recognized to complete everything that he's got to do, because we've been very unfair to you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, gentlemen. From my training from the Army, it always taught me to let
my people first. But from now on, as District 1, I can assure you, my issues are going to come first. Then
I'll listen to you guys' issues. I lost all my thought now. No problem.
287 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: At this time, I had the fire fighters come to me, Ed Piederman and Eloy Garcia, and
they came up with the Safe Place Program that's going to be implemented by the Fire Department. So
we're going to start on the Fire Station on 361h Street and 12th Avenue. And the idea is we have a lot of
run -away kids, we have a lot of individuals with problems, and what we would like to do is this would be -
- I'd like to thank the Miami Association of Fire Fighters, along with the Exchange Club of Miami -Dade
(inaudible) America's Child Abuse as their national project for bringing this project to the City. I would
also like to mention that our former Deputy Clerk, Josephine Argudin serves as President of the Miami -
Dade Chapter. And the whole thing is you have a copy of what they would like to do. And this gives an
opportunity to fire fighters and fire stations as -- looked at as a place where people can go and get help.
And Eloy is here. He'd like to explain very briefly a little bit about this program so we can go ahead and
make a motion on it.
Eloy Garcia: Sir, I think the Fire Department wanted to take that role right now, because it is going to be
a City program. By the way, Eloy Garcia, Vice President of Miami Association of Fire Fighters Local
587. Chief Kemp, please.
Vice Chairman Gort: Sorry, Chief.
Maurice Kemp (Deputy Chief, Fire): Chief Kemp, Deputy Chief, Miami Fire Department. As the
Chairman said, this is a project where families and youth in crisis can go to a fire station for safe haven,
and stay there until we can contact the Miami Bridge. And all the youth will be notified through the
YMCA (Young Men's Christian Association) and other places where kids congregate that any place that
has this emblem is a place where they can find safe haven until they can get some professional help, which
will be provided by the Miami Bridge.
Vice Chairman Gort: A lot of the questions that are going to be asked by us about the liability, the cost
and all that, our answer is in here. It's no cost to the City of Miami. And this is an excellent program that
we're going to establish with a pilot program, but we're going to hopefully do it throughout the whole
City. Chief, do we need a motion to be a co-sponsor? And I so move.
Commissioner Teele: Moved by the Chairman. Is it moved by you, Commissioner Gort?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, it is.
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think -- Does it need a motion? I don't think that needs a motion. It's
just --
Commissioner Teele: Let's ratify it that way.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, no, we'd like the City of Miami to be co-sponsors of this program.
288 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Is there
objection? Is there discussion? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Those opposed?
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1128
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO CO-SPONSOR
"PROJECT SAFE PLACE," A PROGRAM DESIGNED TO ASSIST
YOUTH AND FAMILIES IN CRISIS SITUATIONS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
289 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Next item, Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: One of the things that we --
Commissioner Sanchez: Congratulations. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- we want to do to bring the City of Miami into being in compliance and be an
international City, I have a request from the Argentinean Council and a group of the Hispanic Committee
our of Dade County to, please, to name the Southeast 3rd Avenue between 3rd Street and Flagler as Carlos
Gardel Street. And if you all recall, Carlos Gardel was one of the best tango singers many years ago, and
very famous throughout the world.
Commissioner Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Is there discussion?
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): It's a referral to the Street Co -Designation Committee?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Referring it to the Street Co -Designation.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All those opposed have the same right.
290 12/14/00
•
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1129
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING
ITS INTENT TO CO -DESIGNATE SOUTHEAST 3RD AVENUE,
BETWEEN 3RD STREET AND WEST FLAGLER STREET, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS CARLOS GARDEL AVENUE; FURTHER DIRECTING
THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE ADMINISTRATION TO
INITIATE THE FORMAL PROCESS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF SAID CO -DESIGNATION.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
291 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir. I've been in a couple of meetings with some of the
people in the produce market, and there seems to be a lot of confusion with the
Empowerment Zone, what they're going to do. And they were under the impression that
they were going to be receiving two hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) to
work on the beautification plans that they had worked on. Unfortunately —and I don't
know how much we're involved in the Empowerment Zone, but let me tell you what's
happening. My understanding is there `s a lot of plans being forwarded to them. There's
a lot ideas that are being brought over by a committee, which my suggestion to the
committee is you better make sure that we are working with the Empowerment Zone and
we are aware of the allocations, because we need to bring all the resources together,
because if we are going to create something in an area that we have our resources, and we
can get some additional resources, I know we can do a lot better if we concentrate and
bring it all together. So my question is, are working closely with them? Because my
understanding is they have a Neighborhood Advisory Board that they go and they make
suggestions. They're doing quite a few planning in my district, which I was not aware of
it.
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manger): On the first issue, we are working closely with
them in Allapattah on the beautification. They had gone forward without recognizing that
it's going to be on City property and City right-of-way. So we are working with them
right now. We have a consultant. We're coming up with a signage plan, a beautification
plan, and I think it's going to end up being really nice. In terms of communication, we
will make it better. You have on your desk right now two status reports. And at our next
Commission meeting, Brian Feeney is going to give an update on the whole
Empowerment Zone as it relates to the City.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. I appreciate it. I think it would be very important.
And also, that we're getting our fair share of the —because my understanding is about
the70 percent of the funds come because of the City of Miami. And want to make sure
that it gets allocated correctly. Thank you.
Mariano Cruz: I am a member. Mariano Cruz.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Cruz you're a member of that?
Mr. Cruz: 1227I am a member of the board, of the Empowerment Zone.
Vice Chairman Gort: You are?
Mr. Cruz: Right. I go to the meetings, and I've seen the people of the NET
(neighborhood Enhancement Team) there.
292
Vice Chairman Gort: Who are you?
Mr. Cruz: Mariano Cruz, I told you. I've seen Eddie Borges there. I've seen Jorge Diaz,
and I've seen Officer Clayton, Clayton go into the meeting. The problem with the
Empowerment Zone is that it takes a long time to implement something there. That's a
big problem with them.
293
0
Commissioner Teele: All right. Next item, Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Next item is an item we were discussing a little while ago, which is a resolution of
the City of Miami Commission urging the Board of Miami -Dade County Commission to exempt the
municipalities from applicability of the provisions contained in Section 2-11.1 of the Code of Miami -Dade
County, Florida, as amended -- the Code -- as related to the Cone of Silence Ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: Moved by Commissioner Gort. Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Winton. Further discussion? All those in favor,
signify by the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1130
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION URGING THE
BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO
EXEMPT MUNICIPALITIES FROM THE APPLICABILITY OF THE
PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 2-11.1 OF THE CODE OF
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED (THE "CODE"),
AS IT RELATES TO THE CONE OF SILENCE ORDINANCES, OR, IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, TO RELOCATE THE CONE OF SILENCE
PROVISIONS TO A SECTION OF THE CODE NOT APPLICABLE TO
MUNICIPALITIES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
294 12/14/00
•
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
295 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: If you all recall, one of the questions that comes out in the development of
downtown Miami and to attract businesses into that area and to bring new residents is the school. There's
no school, and the school system cannot -- the School Board cannot, because of the restrictions they have,
allocated schools. So we went and we came up in the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) with the
-- we went through a process and selected companies to do a charter school. We were just approved
yesterday by the School Board System. And looking at a location, there's one location, which is right next
to the police station. And I understand this is something we're going to have to work out with the
policemen, because they have also plans for this lot in here, which is a resolution of the Miami City
Commission directing the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with the Downtown Development
Authority for the use of the property located at approximately 405 Northwest 3rd Avenue, Miami, Florida,
for the design, construction and management of a charter school; further directing the City Manager to
bring back said negotiated agreement to the City Commission for final review and approval.
Commissioner Teele: Second by Commissioner Winton. Is there objection? All those in favor, signify
by the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
296 12/14/00
9 •
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1131
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR THE USE OF CITY -OWNED
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 405 NORTHWEST
3RD AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE DESIGN,
CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEMENT OF A CHARTER SCHOOL;
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PRESENT THE
NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR ITS
FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Lastly, I have a pocket item given to me by the Chief of Police, which is the -- a
copy of a letter from Raul Martinez, Chief of Police to Mr. Wayne --
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Avino, were you going to say anything? Were you
going to bless us with your presence?
Joaquin Avino: First of all, it's a pleasure to be here.
Commissioner Teele: First of all --
Mr. Avino: My name -- Mariano, my name is Joaquin Avino. I'm with Charter Schoolhouse Developers.
We're developers of charter schools. We've had the pleasure of working with the DOA through the
process of getting a charter for the downtown area. It's going to be the first in the State of Florida,
probably the first in the nation in which a DDA or a government agency in charge of the downtown area
has gone through the process of obtaining for the purposes of developing a public school -- a charter for a
public within the downtown area. I want to congratulate Commissioner Gort and the Commission for
297 12/ 14/00
having the vision to do this, because there's really nothing that will be more conducive to the growth and
the betterment of the downtown area than a public school in the area. That's the one thing that's going to
be the glue that's going to bring the community together as it relates to that. And I'm just very proud to
be a part of that process with the City of Miami.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Mr. Avino: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: And also, Commissioner Teele, sometime in the future, we can use his advice in
talking, discussion with the County.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, the -- I really think that the DDA should be commended, not only
for going through a process, but a process that wound up selecting a local firm with a great potential.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
298 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Lastly is a copy of the -- Raul Martinez, Chief of Police, a letter to Mr. Wayne
Blanton, Executive of Boys Club and Girls Club, authorizing a contribution of a hundred thousand dollars
($100,000) form the Law Enforcement Trust, LETF. At this time, I would like to submit this for issue and
for the Commission approval.
Commissioner Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Teele: Seconded by Commissioner Sanchez. Is there objection? Looking at the
newspaper today, the Boys Club is making a real impact, and they may be in a position to give us grants
soon the way they're going. But thank you, Commissioner Gort, for bringing that forward. Is there
further discussion? All those in favor, signify by'the sign of "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Commissioner Teele: All opposed?
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1132
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING FUNDING OF THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF
MIAMI, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND, PROJECT NO. 690001, SUCH
EXPENDITURE HAVING BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE CHIEF OF
POLICE AS COMPLYING WITH SECTION 932.7055, FLORIDA
STATUTES (1999).
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
299 12/14/00
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort, I yield back. We really should try to determine what the order
of the day is, because one of our colleagues needs to leave for about 15 or 20 minutes, I'm sure. And
we've got these people here on the Zoning items. I don't know how you want to do it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let's go ahead and we could --
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's go right into PZ (Planning and Zoning)
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. Let's go into the PZ items.
300 12/14/00
0 •
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is I had a request from the PZ-1 to have them on last.
Commissioner Sanchez: Have PZ-1 last?
Vice Chairman Gort: To be heard as the last. They were waiting for some attorney.
Ines Marrero-Priegues: We're gluttons for punishment. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the
City Commission. It's my pleasure to be here before you tonight. My name is Ines Marrero. I'm an
attorney with the law firm of Akerman, Senterfitt, with offices at 1 Southeast 3rd Avenue. And I am here
on behalf of the applicant, on PZ-1, Miami River Associates. And we would request to be heard last. I
have a personal emergency. I'm going to have to dart out here. If it's the pleasure of the Commission to
grant us that courtesy, then we would be here last. Otherwise, we'll be here now.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you. PZ-2.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do you want to defer it, or you want to hear it last?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: No, heard last.
Commissioner Winton: Well, wait, wait, wait. Hearing it last and deferring is two very different things.
And I have something on my schedule that's very important to me, also. And I've been up here since 9
o'clock this morning. And I want to get the PZ items that I can get done, done as fast as I can. I don't
know -- What if we whiz through these things and you're not here? I don't understand why we can't do
PZ-1 and just get it done.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: I've been told that there is an item that will take at least two hours this evening,
because there's objectors.
Commissioner Winton: There's an item that will take two -- well, it may not take two hours.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: PZ-5. Whatever is the pleasure of the Commission.
Vice Chairman Gort: They can defer it for later. OK. Thank you.
301 12/14/00
Chairman Gort: Item 2, PZ-2.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): For the record, Lourdes Slazyk, Department
of Planning and Zoning. Item PZ-2 is a major use special permit for the Ten Sixty Brickell Project. Item
PZ-3 is also for Ten Sixty Brickell. There's two different options that are being presented here tonight.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there anyone in opposition on PZ-2?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK, hold on a minute. Excuse me. I have to close -- motion to close the regular
meeting.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Motion to close the meeting.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1133
A MOTION CLOSING CONSIDERATION OF THE REGULAR
PORTION OF THE COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA IN ORDER
TO CONSIDER PLANNING AND ZONING ITEMS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
302 12/14/00
® o 9
Vice Chairman Gort: Open the PZ meeting.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. PZ-2. Is there any opposition to PZ-2?
Ms. Slazyk: Not that I know of.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Johnny? I mean, we could --
Commissioner Winton: I looked at it, and I --
Ms. Slazyk: I need to just make one clarification for the record. We found a scrivener's error in the plans.
The numbers that were submitted on PZ-2 show 1,022 parking spaces, and PZ-3, 1,207. But the plans
show -- were one level short in the garage, and I would just add a condition that the plans be modified to
match the numbers, because we want those parking spaces to be provided.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Winton: Second, moving staff recommendations.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion to move the staff recommendations and all the --
Commissioner Winton: And the change.
Vice Chairman Gort: And the change. Is anyone here to address PZ-2? Anyone here to address PZ-2?
Being none, all in favor, state it by saying "aye."
303 12/14/00
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who
moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1134
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5,13 AND 17 OF
ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE 1060 BRICKELL
PROJECT, A PHASED PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 1050-1060 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 1051
SOUTHEAST MIAMI AVENUE ROAD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE
COMPRISED OF TWO TOWERS WITH NOT MORE THAN 543
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL SPACE,
25,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND OFFICE USES AND 1,022
PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE HEREIN
RESOLUTION; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT;
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Great presentation.
304 12/14/00
•
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): PZ-3 is also for Ten Sixty Brickell. It
includes a little more land. That has to do with an option they have or they're trying to negotiate for
purchase of the property next door. We would also recommend approval with the same condition.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second, with conditions.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. Anyone to address PZ-3?
Commissioner Sanchez: Anyone in opposition? No.
Vice Chairman Gort: Being none --
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question.
Vice Chairman Gort: -- all in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
305 12/14/00
0
•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1135
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5, 13 AND 17 OF
ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE TEN SIXTY
BRICKELL PROJECT, A PHASED PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 1038-1060 BRICKELL AVENUE AND 1051
SOUTHEAST MIAMI AVENUE ROAD, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE
COMPRISED OF TWO TOWERS WITH NOT MORE THAN 619
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL SPACE,
30,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND OFFICE USES AND 1,027
PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE HEREIN
REOLUTION; MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT;
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITYCLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Great presentation.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you.
306 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-4.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): PZ-4 is a major use special permit for the
Coral View Project. This is on Coral Way and 22°d Terrace between 291h and 30th Avenue. The
Department is recommending approval with the conditions in your package. One clarification for the
record. There were some modifications made to the plans during the process, and the number of parking
spaces if 421, not 29 as states in your title. This was because we had them remove parking spaces that
were fronting 22„ d Terrace. They had a covenant that said they couldn't have any vehicular ingress and
egress there. So it's 421 spaces.
Vice Chairman Gort: Four hundred and twenty-one spaces. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move, with conditions.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: Anyone in opposition to item 4? Anyone in opposition? Anything to add? All in
favor, state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
307 12/14/00
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1136
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR
USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 5,13 AND 17 OF
ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE CORAL VIEW
PROJECT, A MIXED USE PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 2960, 2980 AND 3014 SOUTHWEST 22ND
STREET AND 2963, 2975, 3001, 3015 AND 3019 SOUTHWEST 22"
TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF NOT MORE
THAN 226 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL
SPACE, 16,897 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND OTHER NON-
RESIDENTIAL USE AND 421 PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION; MAKING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;
PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
308 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-5. Bermello that was a great presentation. That was real good.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm glad they're not paying you by the hour.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): OK. PZ --
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-5.
Ms. Slazyk: PZ-5 is also a major use special permit for the One Miami Project, Phase I. I have been
asked by our Law Department to put my qualifications in the record for this item. I have a degree in
architecture from the University of Miami. I have 17 years experience in the City of Miami Planning
Department, of which five have been in the capacity of Assistant Director to the Department. During my
17 years, I have reviewed and made recommendations on applications pertaining to the comp. plan
amendment, zoning changes, special permits, variances. I've also done land use and zoning planning
studies throughout the City, all different neighborhoods. I have prepared amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance, the Comprehensive Plan, Downtown DRI (Development of Regional Impact) and the City's
Urban Design Guides and Standards. And since 1994, approximately, I've reviewed and made
recommendations on somewhere between 20 and 30 major use special permits. OK. I'm sure there's
more, but that's --
Vice Chairman Gort: Do we have to state ours?
Ms. Slazyk: Pardon?
Vice Chairman Gort: Do we have to state ours?
Ms. Slazyk: I don't know.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: On the major use special permit, we're recommending approval with conditions. The project
is -- it's for two towers. One is a residential tower consisting of 425 residential units. And there is an
office tower with 600 --
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm sorry. Let me interrupt. The proponent of this project is a member of the DDA
(Downtown Development Authority) Board of Directors. Presentation has been made to us. I'm the
Chairman of the DDA. Do I have a conflict of interest in this?
Miriam Maer (Assistant City Attorney): Did you say you're the Chairman? I didn't hear your question.
309 12/14/00
•
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm the Chairman of the Downtown Development Authority. A presentation was
made with the Downtown Development Authority. Do I have a conflict of interest? The proponent is also
a member of the Board of the Downtown DDA.
Ms. Maer: OK. I don't perceive it to be a conflict.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Ms. Maer: I will verify that with the City Attorney, but why don't we just proceed.
Jeffrey Bass: Actually, Chairman --
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Bass: Very briefly. Jeffrey Bass, for the record, 46 Southwest 1" Street. Just on the conflict issue
alone. Our presentation will focus quite heavily on the downtown DRI. And, in fact, we believe that there
is a dispositive issue in -- an issue involve -- that will directly involve the DDA. So --
Vice Chairman Gort: I can understand your point of view, but I have to listen to my attorneys.
Mr. Bass: I'm fine. I just -- I didn't know whether you knew we were going there on this, so I wanted to
get that out at the outset. So --
Vice Chairman Gort: I have to get my opinion from the guys I pay for it.
Mr. Bass: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Bass: Super.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is this the one that's going to take two hours?
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead.
Ms. Slazyk: OK. As I was saying, 425 residential units, 623,348 square feet of office, and 1,834 parking
spaces. The project was reviewed by the Large Scale Development Committee, and it was recommended
for approval with conditions by the Urban Development Review Board. The primary concern from a
design standpoint from the UDRB (Urban Development Review'Board) related to the apartment building.
They wanted the project to come back to them with additional work to be done regarding articulation of
the apartment building, massing and detailing. There was a compatibility issue between the two buildings.
The Department also reviewed for design, and we agree with the Urban Development Review Board's
recommendations, and the condition the development order specifies, that we will be continuing to meet
with them, and they have to come back to us for review and approval of all the final design details, and the
landscape details, especially as they pertain to the river and bay walk. We believe that the landscape there
310 12/14/00
C
needs to be enhanced to create a friendlier landscape edge along the river and bay walk. We have also
recommended approval of a requested Waterfront Charter modification. This property -- The City Code,
City Charter allows the City Commission to modify the Waterfront Charter requirements, which require at
least 50 feet for enclosed structures from the seawall. However, the Charter also says that where the depth
of the lot is less than 200 feet, the setback shall be at least 25 percent of the lot depth. There are two
points along this property where it fronts the river, where it does go below the 200 feet. So the Waterfront
Charter requirement is not a solid 50 feet for the whole way, and there are several points along the water's
edge of the project where it does encroach into the required --
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry to interrupt you.
Commissioner Winton: By how much?
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry to interrupt you, but that's not part of this. This --
Ms. Slazyk: Part of this --
Commissioner Sanchez: That waiver?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Part of this includes a City Commission waiver at several points where they encroach a
feet, and then on the bay, they come in, they encroach a little bit further in order to match the bay walk
line to the property next door.
Commissioner Sanchez: So we have to waive it, the City Charter, right?
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. The Department has recommended approval, because the findings we have to make
are related to providing public benefit, such as direct public access, public walkways, plaza dedications,
covered parking up to the floor plain level, or comparable benefits which promote a better urban
environment and public advantages, or which preserve natural features. The Department has reviewed the
requested modification. We find that it does comply. They've provided an enhanced walkway with
seating, lighting, and landscape, which will provide public access all the way around the property, and
connect up where the bay walk continues up to Bayfront Park.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'd like to give you a suggestion. West of 2"a Avenue, there's some individuals that
would like to see some development taking place in there. And if you apply the 50-foot setback, there's
no way anything can be done.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm talking about specifically East Coast Fishery and -- OK.
Ms. Slazyk: That's why it says that where the lots are less than 200 feet in depth --
Commissioner Winton: It's 25 percent.
311 12/14/00
Ms. Slazyk: -- it.'s a 25 percent requirement, not 50 feet. That takes into account where -- these properties
that are undersized or irregular shaped. And in this particular property, the one that's before you tonight
that condition does exist. If you look in your packages at the aerial photographs and the maps for the
project, you'll see that it's a very irregular -shaped lot. It pinches down to very narrow widths at two
points. And in order to provide an adequate public walkway on the water to meet FEMA (Federal
Emergency Management Agency) requirements, public access, or access requirements for the Fire
Department for, you know, emergency vehicles, you know, the buildings were really limited in where they
could be located. Other than that --
Commissioner Winton: Could I -- I think it's important to accent the point about that this regulation isn't
just 50 feet at all places. Our rule is designed to take into consideration there are lots. For those lots that
are less than 200 feet in depth, the rule is no longer 50 feet; it's 25 percent of the depth of the lot. And the
media doesn't always report the fact.
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: In fact, I've never seen anywhere in print media the piece of the regulation that
says 25 percent of the depth of the lot for that depth which is less than 200 feet.
Ms. Slazyk: Right.
Commissioner Winton: So it's important to make sure that's well understood.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. They also -- the other important part is to take a look at the criteria under which, you
know, you all, the City Commission are the ones authorized to grant this waiver. You know, your criteria
is to look at the public access, the amenities and, you know, creating a better urban environment. And the
way this project is designed, and the way they accommodate the walkway, the Department finds that
they've complied. The other big issue on this is because this is going to be developed, obviously, in
phases; they're not going to be building both buildings at the same time. Between each phase, we want to
make sure that they do update it, update their traffic studies and make sure -- It's hard on a phase project
to anticipate other development that's going to happen around and what the impacts would be. And as
they come in for each phase they're -- you know, we're going to work closely with them to make sure they
update their traffic studies and the design details. Other than that, the rest of the conditions are in your
package, and we would recommend approval.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: How -- When we talk about the bay walk, how wide is the bay walk going to
be? We're -- you got 50 feet. You're going to 20 feet, right? And 20 is what you're asking?
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Fifty feet is what the Waterfront Charter requires that buildings be set back.
Commissioner Sanchez: Exactly.
Ms. Slazyk: The bay walk and river walk here; they're providing 20 feet.
312 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty feet.
Ms. Slazyk: Of those 20 feet, they've got some landscape and some benches. So the actual clear zone,
the clear path is about 14 feet wide in this proposal.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much is the seawall? In the --
Ms. Slazyk: Two feet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Two feet? So that takes two feet. You can't walk on the --
Vice Chairman Gort: Gentlemen, I'm sorry. Before we continue, I missed something. Anyone that's
going to testify today, please, you need to stand up. Raise your right hand to be sworn in. My apologies
for not doing it before. Attorneys go twice.
Note for the Record: All persons present to give testimony regarding agenda Item PZ-5 were duly sworn
by the City Clerk.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Go ahead, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: I just -- you know, when our founding fathers went to this great length to prepare
the City Charter, they were out to protect the public's right-of-way. They wanted to protect the water and
make sure that we were able -- Well, the founding fathers are the people that were here when they first
came to the City many, many years ago. We went from 50 to 20. Now, here's a concern that I have.
There's another --
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no. Let's get that straight.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: Describe what the Charter regulation says. The 50-foot is --
Commissioner Sanchez: It allows it. No, I got it that it allows it. It allows us to waive.
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no.
Ms. Slazyk: No. It's not a 50-foot walkway that they have to provide.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Ms. Slazyk: There has to be 50 feet between the water and the structure, the first building. If you look at
the plans in your package for this project, the buildings for the most part do comply with the Charter
requirement. It doesn't say the walkway has to be 50 feet. It says that the buildings have to be set back 50
feet or 25 percent of it, where it's less than 200. They have several points on their project where the
buildings do come into that by several feet. It's in the back on Biscayne Bay, the bay walk in front of
there that the building encroaches a bit more.
313 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: And coming from your recommendation, because I'm not an expert here -- if
anybody's the expert here about development and stuff, it's got to be Johnny. He specializes in that field.
Educate me on the issue. Now, what's to say -- and let me tell you, I support the concept as it is, because
they're pioneering into downtown residential, which I think is the rebirth of downtown and will be good
for downtown. But I want to make sure of the process. What's to say that someone who is down, maybe
half a mile from your location, on the north side of the river, wants to come in and ask for the same
waiver?
Ms. Slazyk: Just like every -- every application --
Commissioner Sanchez: Isn't it a fair question?
Ms. Slazyk: It's a fair question. Every application is reviewed on a case -by -case basis. We look --
Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Because there's one here today.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Yes, there is.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. And it's for denial by your --
Ms. Slazyk: And it's for -- And it's for denial.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Slazyk: And it's a very different case. So when we get to that case, I will explain why the
recommendation is for denial. The statement in there in promoting a better urban environment, the intent
of that is -- and the setback of buildings for 50 feet -- was to create an open feeling when you're walking
down the river or the bay, to not feel like the buildings are crowded up on top of you. For the most part,
this project complies with that. The buildings are set back for the majority of the length. Remember,
they've got their river walk here. Then they have vehicular access lanes, which have to accommodate
their vehicles and fire trucks. So before they even hit the building, there is distances of, you know, 30, 40
and 50 feet for different portions of the property. So the intent of what the Waterfront Charter
requirement was, that they have the buildings set back 50 feet, was to be able to feel, you know, that open
feeling in the urban -- you know, the environment, as you're walking along the river or the bay. The other
project is different. I won't get into that now, because it's -- we'll get to that when we get there. But this
one complies with the intent of that. And the portions where they're asking for the modifications, the
modification on the bay side is in order for the building to come up and maintain the same configuration
of bay walk that continues on down into the park. On the riverside, they're providing the more open
feeling. They've provided the public access, the amenities, the landscape, benches and lighting. Those
are the things that promote the kind of urban environment and will make it comfortable for people to walk
down, you know, that part of the river walk, and go around, and feel comfortable going to the park.
Commissioner Sanchez: So looking down the future visionary, I can walk along all that walkway onto
Bayfront Park, continue all the way.
314 12/14/00
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Right now, there is -- there are several breaks in the river and bay walk, because
properties were built right up to the water before this Waterfront Charter requirement. As those properties
are redeveloped, they have to put their pieces of the bay and river walk in, as well. And there are guides
and standards, City guides and standards that this river walk and bay walk do comply with. If the Charter
requirement is 50 feet, that's not the bay walk requirement. Bay walk and river requirements are not 50
feet. So the 20 feet does comply with the City's guides and standards for bay walk and river walk.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm learning here. And as we go, I see more people challenging the limits of the
setback more as we go along, you know. They --
Ms. Slazyk: This isn't really a setback. A setback is something that is required in the Zoning Ordinance.
It's setbacks from streets and from other properties next door, and front setbacks. This is a Waterfront
Charter requirement. It is not a setback. So what they're asking for here is not a variance. A variance,
you have to show hardship in order to get it approved. They're not asking for a variance. They're asking
for a modification of the Waterfront Charter requirement, which is something that you don't have to show
hardship for. They just have to show that they comply with the criteria that I just read to you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do they meet the parking requirements?
Ms. Slazyk: They meet and exceed their parking requirements.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much do they exceed? You're looking at a --
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. I'm going to have to get -- I'm going to have to get the book.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- 30-story office tower, 49-story, 425 residential unit tower with related
amenities and 12-story parking garage, which will include 1,834 parking spaces? Is that it?
Ms. Slazyk: Right. That's --
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Is there any other question of staff? OK. The procedure is first we'll listen from
the staff, we listen from the applicant and then we listen to anyone in opposition.
Mr. Bass: Would it be the preference of the Chair that if I have questions of staff, I should ask those
during the course --
Vice Chairman Gort: During your presentation. I'd appreciate it.
Ms. Bass: And as it relates to legal arguments about whether or not this board can even go forward now,
would you like to hear those now or --
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm not a judge. I'm not too familiar. What I would like to do, if possible, is when
your presentation comes, you can do whatever question you need of any one of us or staff. It's fine, OK?
315 12/14/00
E
11
Mr. Bass: OK. Because some of the legal arguments might just dispose of this whole matter.
Vice Chairman Gort: Beg your pardon?
Mr. Bass: Some of the legal arguments might call into question whether or not we can even go forward
right now. And so if the Chair wanted to hear those first --
Vice Chairman Gort: What you're telling me is that this might not be heard here legally? That it's illegal
in front of us?
Mr. Bass: I'm saying it might be a nullity to go forward. But I can present that during my remarks if
you'd like. OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Madam Attorney. I mean, if you think we're doing it illegally, you should present it
now and let our Attorney rule.
Mr. Bass: OK.
Ms. Maer: It's up to you, Mr. Chair, how you want to do it. He has not -- he has not --
Vice Chairman Gort: If we're not complying legally, I think that you have to tell us we're not, and -- if
we are or not.
Mr. Bass: I could do that in about three minutes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go right ahead, sir.
Mr. Bass: OK. Let me just get --
Ms. Maer: These are not legal issues that he has addressed to us at the time of the Planning Advisory
Board meeting, nor since that time, just so you know.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Question. What is your opinion?
Ms. Maer: I don't know what the issues are. However, it doesn't matter to me whether you'd like him to
address them now to me, or whether you'd like him to wait.
Vice Chairman Gort: No. My question to you is: You've heard his arguments before?
Ms. Maer: No, I have not.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, he could present them and put them on the record. That's what he wants to
do.
316 12/14/00
Mr. Bass: Yeah, let me just put them on the record now. I put a call in to the City Attorney's Office
today, and I wanted to let them know in advance, and I'll just -- I'll just walk you through them very
quickly. We're here today -- let me just for the record, my name, my address and all the procedural
niceties. My name is Jeffrey Bass. My address is 46 Southwest Vt Street. I'm here today representing
Crescent Miami Center, LLC, which is the entity that owns the Miami Center Office Building, which is
located at 201 South Biscayne Boulevard, the immediate neighbor to the proposed project. I'm here
today, joined by Mr. Barry Gruebbel and Chris Baird (phonetic) from Crescent. They've flown in from
Texas specifically for this hearing. Obviously, their investment in Miami is self-evident. I'm also here
representing Bass Hotels and Resorts, PLC, the owner of the Intercontinental Hotel. And I'm joined here
today -- several people from the Intercontinental Hotel. I'm also representing the first -- I'm sorry -- the
SRI Miami Venture, LLC, the owner of First Union Financial Center, whose address is 200 South
Biscayne Boulevard, another immediate neighbor, the three premier Class "A" properties in this area.
And let me -- I want to introduce everybody else. I'll save that. We're here right now seeking an
amendment to a major use special permit. That is what the application is. I'm here to tell you the legal
defect in this is that underlying major use special permit is a legal nullity, and I'll tell you why. Therefore,
an amendment to a legal nullity is a legal nullity, and we're wasting a lot of time. And this is the DDA
issue, so let me get right to it. In 1987, this City enacted the Downtown DRI, an area -wide DRI. It was
supposed to set forth the amount of development, which was to occur within Downtown Miami from the
time of its enactment through the year 2007. That was an area -wide DRI administered by the DDA. We
all know about it. It's the Downtown Development Authority, and it's the DRI referred to as Increment 1.
I have copies for the record of the legislation enacting it. What you need to know is that at the time the
Downtown DRI Increment I was passed in 1987, this project possessed a DRI amended development
order from 1986. That is to say this project was specifically exempted from the Downtown DRI by the
plain, clear and unambiguous language of your resolutions enacting them. And I have copies of them for
the record. So the question then becomes: Is this project, not being a part of the DRI, because it was
exempted at the time of enactment, is itself a DRI? And because no DRI application has been currently
filed for this application, if you were to approve this application, you would be unlawfully approving a
DRI, which, as we all know, needs to go through state review. So in a nutshell, that is the threshold
argument that I think we need to work through, because this project was always contemplated as a
separate, stand-alone DRI. I have a copy of the development order. It lapsed in 1996. At that time, they
had two options: Seek to extend it, or seek to amend the Downtown DRI to accommodate all of the
capacity, which was under the previously approved DRI. I have all the supporting backup if anybody
wants to see it. And so I would just urge this board to weigh very heavily going forward until it
determines whether or not there is, in fact, a legal application before you. It's our position that there is
absolutely not. Why? Because at the time the Downtown DRI was enacted -- and I have a copy of their
DRI. For the record, it's Resolution 86-328, and that's a resolution amending a development order.
Commissioner Sanchez: What was the resolution, I'm sorry?
Mr. Bass: I have a copy of it here. 86-828 (sic). I've got copies for everybody. And you will see that
that resolution represents a development order, which was valid and effective at the time that the
Downtown DRI was enacted. Therefore, under the plain language of this City's resolutions -- and I have
copies of those, too, for you, as well. Those are Resolutions 87-1148 and its companion Resolution 87-
1149. Any development order, which had a valid approval, was specifically exempted. And what I'm
telling you is if you're going to throw this one in, you're going to throw a big monkey wrench into the
Downtown DRI. And I have copies of those two resolutions, as well.
317 12/14/00
Ms. Maer: Mr. Chair, if I may?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Ms. Maer: Now that I understand the gist of his argument, I would suggest to the board that you continue
in our normal course of our presentations, allow the applicant to make her presentation and we'll just take
this issue under study. Had they wanted us to be informed of it and be able to address it tonight --
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Maer: -- they certainly could have asked us this question earlier.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Yes, ma'am.
Lucia Dougherty: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Lucia Dougherty with offices at
1221 Brickell Avenue. I am joined by my partner, Adrian Pardo, and with me this evening also is Ned
Siegel and Skip Stolz (phonetic), from One Miami, as well as Tony Albanese (phonetic) from the Related
Companies. I think we can dispose of this issue pretty quickly that was raised by Mr. Bass. In 1998, we
amended that development order to take this property out of it, so it is not included in that development
order. And I think that the Planning Department can confirm that.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. That was done before the original One Miami Project was approved, before the
original major use was approved.
Commissioner Sanchez: So it has been amended.
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: So for the record, it has been amended.
Ms. Slazyk: It has been amended.
Ms. Dougherty: The project is a 34-story, 7,700 square feet office tower on Biscayne Boulevard, and 49-
story, 425-unit residential tower south of the Intercontinental Hotel at the confluence of the Miami River.
It's the first office building in downtown since the CenTrust Tower was built. And it's the only major
residential project in all of downtown, except for the Redevelopment District. The City is very
enthusiastic about this project, because it may be a catalyst to future development. And this project and
this area is the gateway to downtown, which right now, the gateway is empty parking lots. Besides having
an approval from staff, we've had an incredible amount of scrutiny on this project. We have gone --
We've had a pre -application review conference, a Large Scale Development Committee meeting, an
Urban Development Review Board, a Shoreline Review Board approval from Dade County, a Planning
Advisory Board, a Zoning Board, a Miami River Commission, all of whom recommended approval,
including your staff for this project. And incidentally, Sam Poole, the attorney for Crescent attended
every single solitary one of those meetings, including the Zoning Board, never said a word to us except
they now object at the Planning Advisory Board. This is in the Downtown Central Business District.
318 12/14/00
There has been no -- there is no height limitation. There is no FAR (floor/area ratio) limitation, and the
proposed development is totally in scale with the current downtown buildings. In fact, it's going to
beautify an area, which right now has blank walls facing the Miami River. Bernardo Fort -Brescia and his
associate, Louis Sinclair are the architects. They've done an incredible job of designing a project, which
balances the private interests of the client, as well as the public interests for this very prominent site. They
did so on a piece of property that is the most irregular piece of property in all of downtown. It has
dimensions of 174 feet, closest to Biscayne Boulevard, goes down to 123 feet in depth, goes back to 200
feet in depth, 157 feet a little later on, and towards the water, towards the bay, it's 122 feet. And I've --
Adrian has passed out some photographs, and I just invite you to look at the photographs of the existing
site. Bernardo is going to now describe the project to you, but I want him to particularly pay attention to
the incredible site constraints that we had when we had to design this project, and still have an office
building that makes sense and has floor plates that you can actually sell. And he's also going to describe
some of the public benefits that we have provided in connection with this project. Ramon Alvarez from
David Plummer and Associates is here, our traffic engineers. Dick Rogers from Curtis & Rogers, our
landscape architects are here. We are requesting a waiver of the waterfront setback requirement. And let
me just tell you something. We have done a calculation, and that's in your package, as well. And
Bernardo is going to explain it a little further. But only three point two percent of the building do we need
a waiver for. Three point two percent. For the most part, this building complies with your waterfront
setback requirements. So with that, I'd like Bernardo to describe the project, and in particular, our site
constraints and the public benefits.
Bernardo Fort -Brescia: Good evening. My name is Bernardo Fort -Brescia. I'm a principal with
Architectonica, the architectural firm involved in this, in the design of this project. I'd like to take you as
briefly as possible, but methodically, through how this project was arrived at, and why it is the way it is
designed. Let me first begin with what are the components of the project. There are two high-rise
buildings that make this project. One of them is an office building located on Biscayne Boulevard in a
similar zone of location as where the Citibank Tower is located that is fronting Biscayne Boulevard, and
parallel to that commercial zone that represents the downtown core of Miami. There's a second building
closer towards the east of the site, which you see here in gray, that is the residential building. It reaches
out to the point, and is parallel to the location where there is a hotel to the north. So in terms of uses,
essentially, we have a commercial zone of use occurring along Biscayne Boulevard, and a more residential
or hotel/resort area that is happening along the waterfront of Biscayne Bay. The project has certain
functional requirements, and based on the way office buildings are designed today, this office building has
a substantial floor plate. There's 22,000 square feet per floor, plus or minus. In addition to that, it has
what you saw today, which is a minimum of 40 feet of (inaudible) to the edge of the perimeter of the
building. And if I may stand corrected, I believe it's closer to 24,000 square feet on the floor plate. The
office building is 34 stories. It comes all the way to the ground. It doesn't have lower levels of parking.
In fact, it has a lobby, and a small restaurant, and sort of exhibit space, and a grand gallery that leaves the
whole frontage through glass out to the view of the Miami River. The residential building is a taller
building, but, of course, it has shallower floors, because an office building has about one and a half times
the floor -to -floor height as a residential building. And therefore, the buildings are -- the number of stories
is not exactly representative of the exact number of feet that these buildings represent in terms of height
and proportion to each other. They are linked by a garage, and the buildings conceal the garage in its
majority. Only a small portion of the garage fronts the newly created street. And the reason is because we
had to find a way to get into the garage. There's entrances to the garage that lead to it from this side. But
also, it creates a window, an opening from the roof deck, a heavily landscaped recreational roof deck
319 12/14/00
which looks out to the water, where you can see here the swimming pool, the gardens, the fitness center
and the tennis courts that occupy this upper deck. With this explained, I'm going to take you through
some of the various levels of this building. And -- but I use the opportunity of showing you this site plan,
because -- maybe I should show you first this diagram -- because Lucia Dougherty has told you about how
the setbacks are computed. And in fact, it is not exactly a 50-foot setback throughout in this project,
because we are dealing here with an incredibly irregular site, as you can see from the shape. It has a curve
here at the point, with a very narrow reach out to Biscayne Bay, goes in a diagonal, then it has a curve
with a very narrow space along Biscayne Boulevard, then juts in where the -- it juts into the site with the
existing parking garage of the adjacent property, and then it pulls back and around at 90 degrees towards
the back. As a result of that, if you compute the setback space on a 25 percent of the depth in the
perpendicular direction from the property line, you can see that the setback is quite varied. It is not a
straight line. And the setback requirement becomes very narrow here, and becomes deeper; then again
changes again as you see here. And this is the representation of the -- the percentage is based on the
dimensions that you see here. In fact, you can see that the property varies from 122 to 157 to 200, back to
123, back to 174. And only in this portion where you see the straight line is where the property exceeds
the 200 feet. And therefore, that's where it stabilizes at the 50-foot line. It is -- this is -- I have done an
overlay of this setback on where the buildings are located. And if you follow the dotted line, you can see
that the office building pretty much fits within the permitted setback and that only certain portions of the
residential building will project. And the reason we project is what I'm going to explain to you in terms of
how we were able to fit this building in terms of its layout. And it is probably one of the most difficult
tasks I've had in my career, because there are more requirements than may appear by looking at just the
empty site. Let me begin first by the fire requirements. The property to the north has -- is built extremely
close to the water, and it has approximately 15 feet away from the seawall. And what you see in front of it
is a fire lane. And the fire lane is the only way to service in case of emergency the whole frontage along
that building. But the property did not provide its own internal turnaround for the fire trucks. And
therefore, in the interest of safety, we have to provide a way for the fire trucks servicing the
Intercontinental Hotel to make it through our property and be able to get out to Biscayne Boulevard. It is
the only way for this to be able to occur. And therefore, it is -- we have a walkway, a pedestrian walkway
that in the event that there would be an emergency, it could be used for fire trucks to make it all the way
across. And that will be the reason when I show you the section of what happens on that walkway, and
where the landscaping is located, and the width of the walkway and the way it is handled as it crosses the
plaza that was created at the point, why it is designed the way it is. It's a safety issue. It has to occur on
this level also because there's a marina proposed along the edge of the Miami River, and those boats also
need to be serviced by fire trucks in case of a problem there. And therefore, the elevation of that walkway
brings it close to the elevation of the seawall, as you see in this drawing. There is a second aspect, which
is public access. And we have an entrance drive. And we chose to put the entrance drive in front, so that
the arrival to the building is looking out to the water. There has been a lot of criticism over many years
that in Miami, the roads are inland, and you never get the sense, like in Rio or other cities, where you see
the water. And we wanted to arrive from the waterside to the buildings. It's also an opportunity, because
that is where we have left behind most of the space, in front of the building, which provides the
compliance to a large extent of what -- with the requirements of the Code and the Charter amendment with
respect to setbacks from the water. This allows us to provide a drop-off into the building in a location that
doesn't interfere with the sidewalk traffic along Biscayne Boulevard. So the pedestrians that come along
Biscayne Boulevard, hopefully, for the future development of One Miami, across the street, will be able to
enter easily into the building without being confronted first with some kind of (unintelligible) that they
have to make it through before the get to the building. We're trying to create some urban frontage on that
320 12/14/00
site. And in conjunction with that urban frontage, what you see here in that reddish color is where we are
providing some of our commercial space with a deli, and a bar, and a restaurant, and other facilities that
occur, facing Biscayne Boulevard, so that we maximize that kind of frontage, and not have a parking
garage frontage on Biscayne Boulevard instead, or not even a drop-off. And you can see here where the
drop-off into the building occurs, the elevators that come down from the parking garage, the entrance to
the commercial garage, and the entrance to the residential garage over here. You continue along this drive
onto the drop-off of the residential building, leading into its lobbies and into the various elevator corridors
that comprise this building. Behind it, everything you see in gray are the loading dock requirements. And
we have made sure that the loading areas are not visible from the street. Not only that, we have also made
sure that the trucks can maneuver entirely within the property, so that there would be no traffic
interruption on Biscayne Boulevard. In certain areas in downtown, you do permit trucks to maneuver
outside and back into buildings. - But we have brought in through a very narrow gap here, right up against
the parking garage an entrance for the trucks, so the trucks won't have to go on the front promenade or in
this drive along the water, only the vehicles will come here, and trucks will be concealed from behind.
They'll be able to maneuver inside and load and unload in this location here, and around to this space. So
you may wonder why didn't we use all this space in the middle. Because if the difficulties I've explained
weren't enough -- an irregular site, access for fire trucks, access for vehicles with only a very narrow
frontage on Biscayne Boulevard, our interest in creating a nice urban environment along Biscayne
Boulevard -- is that right here in the middle is a major FP&L (Florida Power and Light) transfer station
that actually takes -- is where the -- is one of the major stations in the City that sends the power across the
bay to all kinds of communities. And it has to be located in this location, and it occupies this much space
in the core of the ground floor of this building. And so we had to figure out how to maneuver the trucks
around the station and bring them across for the residents to load and unload their furniture when they
move in, office buildings to be able to be serviced, trash to be delivered all around, and ramps to be
making it through to this parking garage in the center of the space. And so this tells you a little bit about
what happens on the ground floor. Now I'm going to take you through what our frontage is comprised of,
because I think one of the important features of this project is that unlike the neighbor, or unlike many
other buildings in Miami -- that may occur often in Miami -- we have an entirely transparent, animated
frontage at the base of these buildings. I've mentioned to you the commercial space, the gallery, exhibit
gallery that makes the beautiful glass lobby of this office building. We have a deli, and small convenience
stores for the residents over here, and we have a fitness center with a pool right in front, so that this whole
area will be alive with residents, with people who live in downtown that would be visible that they are
there, it is not a desolate space. And lastly, here we have a cafe that comes down to a plaza that you see
here that forms the point of the building, including the series of lobbies of the building that are also
visible. So we expect that this area will be quite lively not only during office hours, like the rest of
downtown, but at any hour, during the weekends, and at night, and -- which is what we hope -- and on
holidays, which is what we hope to bring to downtown. This is the more elaborate part of my
presentation. The rest is just to give you --to orient you on what happens with the rest of the project. You
can see here the office building with its parking behind. We have some parking that abuts to the other
parking garage, so garages abut garages. Currently, this whole area here is a solid wall. That is what you
see currently. And we are concealing that solid wall with this development. We have residences that look
out to the water here at the base of the building, so that we have the residents coming all the way to the
ground, so they conceal a large part of the parking garage. And as you move up to the upper levels, you
can see here what I meant by a large, generous floor plan. It has a curve, a nautical curve that looks out to
the waterfront and faces out towards the bay. You can see here the apartments that are through -
apartments with views of downtown and of the water, and the deck that I mentioned earlier. And lastly,
321 12/14/00
the building continues in that fashion all the way up. I'd like to tell you a little bit more before I show you
the elevations of this building about what happens on the waterfront. And I have three boards here that
are very important to explain what happens in this context. First, this is a board that tells you about the
landscape effect along the waterfront. You can see here where we meet the walkway from the
Intercontinental Hotel. This elliptical form that you see here is a plaza, an observation deck. You can see
how we managed to find a place for the fire trucks to make it through. And that's why these are palm
trees, because they have canopies that are high up, and they only have a central trunk, so that one can
bypass this location. You can see in the front, this elliptical shape rises, the tower that is the point of the
building, and makes a statement about the point of the river and the bay. There is, as you walk by, there's
rows of trees. You can see the steps and the ramps for the disabled that lead up to the lobby of the
building and to the amenities of the residential area. You can see here the drop-off with the fountain at the
arrival of the residential building. There are steps at many intervals, so that people coming from the
different retail establishments and come down to the waterfront and to the elevation of the waterfront
across in all these different points as shown here. And we have here a series of -- a cadence of a series of
palm tree arrangements that march down all the way to Biscayne Boulevard, where we created a second
plaza in this end, which is part of our property, that occurs at the termination of Biscayne Boulevard, and
makes a statement about the end of Biscayne Boulevard, which currently does not exist. You can see here
the drop-off that I mentioned earlier and the continuation of the (unintelligible) pattern along Biscayne
Boulevard, wrapping all the way down this building into the front of the lobby. The second board tells
you all about the open space on elevated deck that I mentioned, with the infinity pool looking out to the
river and to the skyline south of downtown, and the rest of the open space amenities. You notice that the
buildings are pulled away as far as possible from the northern fagade, so that there is a substantial distance
between these buildings and the next buildings to the north. They are pulled as far south as possible,
providing the maximum distance between the buildings and the building in the adjacent properties. The
third board that I show you here tells you a little bit about the flooring pattern that we created on this
walkway. We tried to give it character, give it a Miami feeling, with the use of different colors of pavers
and creating a series of interlocking curvilinear shapes that form this new promenade along the river as
you can see here. It is -- and especially marking, as you can see, the two points almost like the ends of a --
the two terminations of a path. And we hope that this kind of thing could someday evolve along the river
and pass the DuPont Plaza Hotel. I think this really concludes the majority of the presentation. I think
that many of you had wondered why some of these elevations, and you had asked for a section of what
happens in the waterfront. This tells you what happens, where boats will be docked, where the docks
would occur, the slight change of elevation to the current grade, where the walkway would occur, where
the landscape occurs, so that in the event of an emergency, this can become a fire lane for a truck. The
rise that you see here is because we all know after Andrew; we have a flood plane that we are required to
preserve. This is the elevation of the flood plane. We had to get to the flood plane in order to arrive to the
lobby so that disabled individuals could arrive comfortably and equitably to the main lobbies of the office
building and the residential building. Both lobbies are at the lowest elevation possible. There's a different
elevation for the residential than for the office, because it's closer to the east versus the other ones to the
west. And lastly -- I mean, I have other images that you may be interested in, including the view of the
two plazas that I mentioned. This is the plaza at the point of the river. You can see the cafe tables at the
base, and the kind of effect that would be looking at the point, and the view at the end of Biscayne
Boulevard with the fountain as you see here. And lastly, I'm going to show you a view of the building, of
the exterior view of the building and what we were trying to do. From the floor plans, you may have
noticed that on the upper floors, the portion of the building gets dropped, because, in fact, it rises at the
corner to create more of a spire, making a point at the end of the river and at the entrance to the City. You
322 12/14/00
can see here the office building with its fiber optic line that makes that vertical line at the point of the
curvilinear shape in glass and metal, and the view of the main high-rise residential building, which is
broken up intentionally into three volumes that actually create the effect of three interlocking buildings,
gently moving through a gap up to the point building, which is what -- where the lighting effect would
create that beacon at the entrance to Miami. And I think I've -- with this, I've given you a general
explanation of the project, and I'll be welcoming your questions. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Dougherty: We have nothing further at this time. We'd like some time for rebuttal, however.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Yes, sir.
John Shubin: I'm going to let my partner, Mr. Bass handle the balance of the presentation, but I'd like -- I
have some cross-examination for Mr. Fort -Brescia. For the record, my name is John Shubin, Shubin &
Bass, 46 Southwest lst Street. Mr. Fort -Brescia who presently owns the site, which is the subject of this
application?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think that's a question to the attorneys, not to the architect. I think it's better that
somebody else answers.
Mr. Shubin: Well, do you know if -- Mr. Siegel is present. Do you know if he's one of the owners?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes.
Mr. Shubin: And is there a contract presently on the property?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I wouldn't --
Mr. Shubin: Does somebody intend to buy the property and develop it?
Ms. Maer: Excuse me. I think that the ownership issues are included in the package as a matter of public
record. These other issues I would think are not necessarily within the expertise of Mr. Fort -Brescia.
Mr. Shubin: Well, I'm going to ask -- well, let me try to get there in s a second. This will be very quick.
Do you know if the owner of this specific parcel owns other parcels in close vicinity to this parcel? Did
you say that there is a One Miami Project contemplated across the street?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes.
Mr. Shubin: So you have personal knowledge that there is a One Miami Project?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think everybody here does. It's been published in the papers.
Mr. Shubin: OK.
323 12/14/00
•
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes.
Mr. Shubin: Then you -- And it comprises several parcels.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes.
Mr. Shubin: Of which this is one parcel.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes.
Mr. Shubin: In fact, this is known as Parcel "A"; is that correct?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Well, I only have one client that I respond to, which is the one who retained me to do
this work. And I don't know what he calls it or what people call it.
Mr. Shubin: One of the things that you told the Commission is that you undertook an analysis of the site
constraints; is that correct?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes, sir.
Mr. Shubin: Did you analyze the site constraints only for this one parcel, or for all of the parcels within
the One Miami Project?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I looked at the context in which this building sits, and the relationship to the buildings
that surround it. And I was -- my design took into account what may occur in the neighborhoods of
downtown and -- of downtown.
Mr. Shubin: But when you looked at the site constraints, did you look at it only for this parcel, or for the
other parcels within the One Miami Project?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I looked at both, but with -- but obviously, more closely the one of -- the parcel that I
was designing, where I was the architect. There are other architects involved in other projects, I presume.
Mr. Shubin: If you undertook a site analysis of the other sites, can you tell me whether these -- this
project that's contemplated for this site could be placed on the other sites? Are there any site constraints
preventing this project, as you've designed it, from being placed on the other parcels within the One
Miami assemblage?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think every architect designs a project specifically for the site that was given to him
by the owner to design for. This particular site has certain geometric configurations, certain adjacencies,
and I designed specifically for this site. I couldn't tell you whether this design is applicable to any other
site anywhere in the world, whether across the street or across the ocean.
Mr. Shubin: I'm not asking you as to the design. I'm asking you as to the footprint, the FAR, the square
footage. Could it be placed on the other sites?
324 12/14/00
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I don't think it is my business to respond what I would do with the other sites
Mr. Shubin: I'm not asking you what you would -- Could it be placed on the other sites, the footprint?
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Let -- wait a minute. It's 9:45 -- 8:45 and we've been here all day. Do
we have to allow this, cross back and forward?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I'm here to answer questions about this project, not other sites.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Ms. Maer: I think it --
Mr. Shubin: But this is important. Let me try to explain --
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. Wait a minute. Excuse me. I'd like to hear from my Attorney.
Ms. Maer: Mr. Chair, I think in general, cross-examination can be allowed, as long as it's limited to the
specific project at hand and --
Vice Chairman Gort: To this specific project and specific --
Ms. Maer: -- and stays within relevancy.
Vice Chairman Gort: And the questions should be addressed to the specific project.
Ms. Maer: Yes, correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Thank you.
Mr. Shubin: Can I explain why I'm asking this? They're making an argument with respect to the waiver,
that there are certain site constraints on this particular parcel. Right now, this parcel is part of an
assemblage that is all within one assemblage. And I'm trying to get to the issue. When they say that there
are site constraints on this particular parcel, do they mean that there's site constraints within the
assemblage, or just this parcel? I think that's directly relevant. They're asking you to waive a --
Commissioner Teele: But I think he's testified repeatedly that he's only talking about this site.
Commissioner Winton: That's what we're dealing with. We're not dealing with the rest of the sites.
We're dealing with this site.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, the assemblage is something you put on the record.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. We're not dealing with an assemblage. We're dealing with this site right
here.
325 12/14/00
•
Mr. Shubin: Well, then let me ask two questions: Could you build anything within the confines of this
site? Could you construct a residential project without seeking a waiver from the City of the setback?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think that every architect makes certain judgment calls of what one thinks is the best
solution to a site. I think that there are certain logics of design. And I think if you told me -- to build a
17-story parking garage in order to accommodate a building within a site, and I could go to Florida Power
and Light and tell them to go ahead and put the vault elsewhere, and the Fire Department to figure out a
way to demolish the ballroom in the Intercontinental, to find a turning radius within it, and not come
through our site. I mean there's always -- there's so many hypotheses one could -- and yes, once we do
some incredible illogical moves, maybe we can fit everything the way you may want it. But I think what
I've designed is what I think is a logical solution for what is a very difficult site, and I think that's what I
presented today. We've tried to minimize the levels of parking provide proper accommodation for those
residents so that residents would want to move to Miami, to provide a desirable place for to live, where --
I think that the biggest challenge of this project and its boldness is that it's actually residents to the south
of Brickell Avenue, which is finally something somebody's daring to do that, and proving that there's a
market there, and that we can have a downtown that is livable. And I think, therefore, that's what I've
done, what is --
Mr. Shubin: I asked him if he could redesign the project to fit within the parameters of the setback.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Well, it depends on what you define, projects. So why don't you tell me the program of
that project. How many residential units, how many square feet of office? Because, yeah, I can provide a
three-story office building, I guess. But tell me what is your program, and I can give you the answer.
Mr. Shubin: I think you've answered my question. I have one more question. Listen we all -- it's late for
all of us.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, listen. This could be -- I mean, we could be here for hours. OK?
Mr. Shubin: One more question. One more question.
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean your arguments --
Commissioner Winton: Let him ask his question so we can -- we're --
Commissioner Sanchez: Hold on, hold on.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think you should define the program before I answer that question. Tell me what the
program is, and I can maybe give you a question (sic) in about two months after that, the design.
Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me. You're out of order. OK? No.
Mr. Shubin: I am allowed to cross-examine. I have one more question, please.
Vice Chairman Gort: Go ahead. Get it out.
326 12/14/00
Mr. Shubin: Did you analyze the impact of this design on your neighbors, specifically the Miami Center
and the Intercontinental Hotel?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Absolutely. Yes, sir, I did.
Mr. Shubin: Did you believe that it would have any impacts on the neighboring properties, negative
impacts on the neighboring properties?
Mr. Fort -Brescia: I think it was an enhancement for the neighboring property, because currently, the
neighboring property is next to an empty site, with a blank wall, in an unsightly location that is not
friendly to the residents. I think this is an actual improvement in the value of the neighboring property.
Mr. Shubin: OK. Thank you. We're going to put on the balance of our case.
Ms. Maer: Mr. Chair, if I may?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Ms. Maer: Excuse me. Would you ask Mr. Shubin to verify that he's registered correctly with the City as
a lobbyist?
Vice Chairman Gort: Are you registered correctly with the City as a lobbyist?
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you pay your fee?
Mr. Shubin: To the best of my knowledge, we wrote a big check today, and I believe it included me.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, today. OK. For the both of you?
Mr. Shubin: For everyone.
Mr. Bass: Separate checks.
Mr. Shubin: Separate checks.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): I have one for Mr. Bass. Unless he delivered it over to the counter, I'm --
Mr. Bass: It was delivered at the counter between approximately 4:15 and 4:45 today.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, you filed at the wrong bench. Can he file at the County?
Mr. Foeman: Excuse me? No. We can --
Commissioner Sanchez: At the counter?
327 12/14/00
0 •
Mr. Foeman: We can verify whether or not it was submitted over to the counter.
Mr. Bass: We felt we wrote a check on behalf of every member of our team. I can tell you that.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Bass: I just need to say one or two words. I know everybody is frustrated. I know it's late. But,
please, we're talking about three pioneer properties, close to half a billion dollars in investment in
downtown Miami between the Miami Center, the hotel and the First Union. We're going to move along
as fast as we can. We're not here to whine. We're not here to tell you that you're negative --
Vice Chairman Gort: You're representing First Union also?
Mr. Bass: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Bass: We're not -- and we have a representative here from them, as well. We're not here to tell you
that they're blocking our chance of enjoying our property. What we're here to tell you is you have a very
specific ordinance that regulates the governing of these types of zoning requests. 1305. And part of 1305
requires them to specifically address how this project negatively impacts their neighbors. And we're
going to show you now those impacts. And it's our opinion that that standard has not been satisfied. So
that being said, I'm going to have Mr. Jack Luft --
Commissioner Sanchez: Let me ask you a question.
Mr. Bass: Sure.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because it has been long, and we're a little frustrated. Any project in those three
sites, do you think it's going to have a negative impact?
Mr. Bass: We're going to show you a much better project during the course of our -- We're not just here
to say "nay, nay, nay." We're here to show you a better -- a better design that minimizes the negative
impacts on you.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Well, why didn't you buy the land?
Mr. Bass: I wish that I could. I can't afford to buy the land.
Commissioner Sanchez: Because, you know, we get back -- We listen to all kinds of disputes here,
especially in the Brickell area when there's a building going up. You know, it's the "block my view"
syndrome, you know. Everybody comes out, "Oh, they're going to block my view."
Mr. Bass: Is that were the legitimate will of this Commission --
328 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Which it's not. I'm just using it as an example.
Mr. Bass: Then this Commission should repeal Section 1305.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. What we do here is we take consideration from both sides. We go with the
recommendation of the City. We go -- We have a legal Attorney. And it's the best recommendation they
give us. We hear both sides, and then we vote for what's in the best interest of the City.
Mr. Bass: I understand. I'm just --
Commissioner Sanchez: It's as simple as that.
Mr. Bass: They're going to tell you that there's two sides to that story. So now we're going to give you
our side. I know you -- We're all on the same team on this. It's just, unfortunately, sometimes we have
to get to the facts through an adversarial proceeding, which is this. And, you know, we'll all be friends
after. We were all friends before, but we need to show you the impacts that this project will have on these
properties. And then we have a host of other people who would like to be heard very briefly. They won't
repeat themselves. It's our understanding they've all properly registered, and we will move along right
now with Mr. Jack Luft.
Commissioner Sanchez: Welcome back, Jack.
Jack Luft: My name is Jack Luft. My address is 1900 Tigertail, Miami, Florida. I am a planning
professional with 34 years experience in the business. I'm here to testify based upon those 34 years of
expertise on the impacts of this project, my analysis of how this is going to affect the immediate area, and
some issues involving the site. There are three particular issues that I'm concerned with. I should add,
since Lourdes was kind enough to share with us her resume that I have 28 years with the City. I was
Director of Development and Asset Management. I was Director of Planning for three years, Assistant
Director for several years. I authored the Downtown Master Plan. I authored the bay and river walk
design guidelines. I authored the Waterfront Master Plan, and I wrote most of the original zoning for the
urban core. I am very familiar with this site. I'm very familiar with the issues of the immediate
surrounding area.
Commissioner Winton: I don't think phones are supposed to be on in the Commission chambers. Excuse
me, Jack. Sir, I don't think phones are supposed to be on -- that's what the sign says -- in Commission
chambers. Thank you.
Mr. Luft: This is an important project. It's a very exciting project. It's a very promising project. I know
for a fact the City has been waiting for a very long time for a project of this significance and of this
stature. At least that long, ever since Ed Ball decided to put a ramp in. It's easy to understand why this
Commission, the administration, everyone in this room, including myself is very impressed with the effort
and the commitment that's been made here. To build a project of this magnitude, downtown is going to
have a tremendous impact on this community. Everything that Bernardo said, the residential, the
signature architecture is very important. We acknowledge that, and we support that. Our issue here is not
to challenge that this project shouldn't be built. We're as eager as anyone to see something of quality that
is going to work within the fabric of the urban core be built here and be built as soon as possible. But our
329 12/14/00
excitement, our commitment to seeing this kind of change happen needs to be tempered with an
understanding of the real impacts that this will create, and whether or not those impacts, in fact, can be
mitigated. Commissioner just alluded to the fact that anything that's built on this site is going to be big
and is going to have an impact. We understand that. There's no way around it. What I would like to
share with you, though, is an analysis and the thought process that I went through that would suggest to
you that there may be some things, some adjustments. As your Planning Advisory Board has said, they
have concerns about the massing on this project. So do I. Let's go through this. This is a project -- to
simplify, I have put this on a larger aerial photograph. It's regrettable that in none of these drawings do
you see anything that's around it. So I'm expanding the context a little bit. This is an aerial photograph of
the DuPont Plaza area and the Miami River. And you see just the edge of Brickell Key to the south.
These are the two structures, the residential tower, the office tower and the parking garage that are located
on that site. The 34-story office building, the 43-story, 56 -- is it 56 or 55-story tower in the corner. You
look at this and what you see -- I would point out that this photograph was taken in May of the year,
toward -- almost at the point in time when the shadows are the shortest. These shadows are about 2
o'clock in the afternoon. What I did is I took the typical shadow study that the County requires, most
communities require, because shadows, Miami Beach, are always an issue on large buildings, and you try
to work with that. We took the One Miami shadows 2 p.m. on December 21 ", which is the shortest day of
the year. That shadow angles at 41 degrees. It's not too difficult to project from that building the shadow
cast. Regrettably, what happens from the shadow cast is that the entire public gardens, and the pool deck
and the cabana area of the Intercontinental Hotel, from 9 o'clock in the morning for the balance of the day
are in full shadow until sunset. That's 365 days a year. Now, this project has chosen to approach the site
design from several standpoints that I think bear some thinking through. I would point out that I have no
professional issue with the office building. I think it's a stunning piece of architecture, typical of what Mr.
Brescia and his firm have produced all over the world. I think their solution to the site; their siting is very
good. Where I begin to have some issues is that decisions that were made in the siting design of the
residential tower. The decision was made to bring that residential tower to the ground. That left the issue
of providing the parking for that tower at the rear, in what amounts to a triangular parking garage. And
we all know that triangular parking garages are somewhat problematic. They're certainly inefficient.
That parking garage is accessed through the commercial garage on each --
Commissioner Teele: Did you say "inefficient"?
Mr. Luft: Inefficient, triangular. Parking spaces are rectangles. Triangular buildings don't accommodate
those so efficiently. You access those parking spaces through the commercial garage. Now, I think those
people would acknowledge -- certainly, it's been my experience after reviewing several thousand projects
in the City over 28 years -- that parking garages in excess of seven levels become problematic from the
standpoint of circling through them, and up them and out of them.
Commissioner Winton: How many levels?
Mr. Luft: Seven. Beyond seven levels, it starts to become problematic in terms of efficient access and
egress. This is a 13-level parking garage. A 13-level parking garage -- you can ask the Parking Authority.
They'll confirm that. This is a 13-level parking garage. Everyone entering and leaving this garage, the
residents -- particularly, imagine the ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth floors -- is going to have
to circle this commercial garage to get there. But the biggest problem with this garage at that 13 levels is
that it puts a sheer wall. And you didn't see this in their drawings, and it certainly wasn't illustrated. It
330 12/14/00
would be helpful if we had a three dimensional model. That is a seven -story sheer wall above the deck of
the Intercontinental gardens and pool. That is a parking garage wall now. We're not talking about the
articulated walls of the architecture of the primary buildings. Seven levels, on the property line for about
70 percent of the length of that, on the southern exposure. Even without the towers, that garden would be
in virtual perpetual shade, even without the towers. The towers, however, compound the problem by the
position at the extreme eastern end adjacent to the pool area and the cabana area. Because the residential
towers was pushed all the way to the eastern end, it necessitated an access drive that takes up 80 percent.
And as you see on his section of the bay walk, regrettably, the bay walk becomes a depressed walkway,
next to a retaining wall, next to a driveway for 80 percent of the length. Now, I understand and I accept
that at least for the office tower and (inaudible) main garage, it's probably unavoidable. The hope would
be that beyond that point -- and this has always been an objective of the bay walk wherever we've
designed it -- to try to get an integration and articulation of that walkway with the adjacent property, so
that we have some activity, some energy, some life, some exchange. It certainly is not desirable. And
we've got plenty of examples of bay and river walks that don't work, because they're isolated, unfriendly
places to walk. It's too bad that on this signature site, 80 percent of that walkway is barricaded from the
property by the driveway. We would like to see at least some of this portion of this recovered and
integrated into a more active edge. There is a minimal plaza. Thank heavens for that, but it is minimal, at
the far corner. The result of that 50-plus-story tower and that seven -story sheer wall -parking garage --
what you do is you go up into the 281h floor of the Intercontinental Hotel. Now, it's important to
understand that the hotel, itself, has three faces -- one to the northeast, one to the northwest, and one due
south. That southern face of the hotel is about 150 feet from this tower. The gardens are immediately
abutting it. When you go to the 28`h floor, this is the window frame of the window that you have to gain
access to that view. This is the upper levels of the tower, of the residential tower, and this is the beginning
of the view of the office tower, and you have one slot. If you look at his property, because it's at an angle,
that what appears might be a fairly acceptable distance between the office and the tower, closes to a
narrow slot. This will be the effect for 215 rooms on the south face of the hotel from the bottom to the
top. If one goes to the sixth level of the hotel, it gets worse. From the six floor hotel rooms, one is
confronted with not a residential tower or the back end of a residential tower with walkways, but a garage
wall. That garage wall extends up to -- equivalent to the eighth level of the hotel. This is a sheer wall on
the property line and then your office tower in the distance. From the pool deck -- if you haven't been to
the garden, you should visit it. It's a lovely garden. It's an important -- it's an important factor in the
amenity space of a Class "A" world -class hotel. This is the garden. This is the pool deck. From either the
garden or the pool deck, you are confronted with, gain, a sheer wall of a parking garage on the property
line. You have virtually perpetual shade and a sheer wall of a garage. Now, everything I've ever learned
about site design and accommodating the interests of adjacent properties suggests that that is not an
acceptable treatment. What I would like to read for you is the actual text of -- where did my -- my little
pad of papers, did I put it over there?
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Mr. Luft: No. I need my leather folder.
Unidentified Speaker: Here it is, here it is.
331 12/14/00
Mr. Luft: In your special permits section in your Code, you and the administration are to be guided by
1305-A, control of potentially adverse effects, generally. For a permit of this sort, it says: Review for
appropriateness shall be given to potentially adverse effects generated on adjoining or nearby properties.
YYhere such potentially adverse effects are found, consideration shall be given to the special remedial
measures appropriate in particular circumstances of the case, including alteration of proposed design or
construction of buildings, relocation of proposed open space, or such other measures as required to
assure that the potential adverse effects will be eliminated or minimized to the maximum extent reasonably
feasible and to a degree which will avoid substantial depreciation of value of nearby property. That is the
standard that you must consider in your evaluation. Your report, in consideration of that standard says:
The project will not adversely affect living conditions in the neighborhood. That's all it says. There is no
mention of this impact. There is no consideration of it. There is no attempt to mitigate it. Now, Mr.
Sanchez said -- and I've heard it said a hundred times -- but aren't we just rearranging deck chairs? This
is downtown. This is an intense urban site. Literally, the sky is the limit for intensity. Whatever you do,
whoever does it is going to have a very large building on this site, and building is going to assuredly have
a very significant impact. Well, I looked at that issue. The original DRI proposal was for twin towers
with over 60 percent of the space across the site open. But I don't like to deal with hypotheticals. I like to
take a look at buildings that could be done. The average floor plate in this structure is about 14,000 square
feet, from twelve to fourteen thousand -- the same floor plate that's in the Bristol Towers, for example.
We understand the Bristol Towers is a signature building and very successful building. For the sake of
argument, I took the footprint of Bristol Towers, and I placed it on a parking podium. The issue here is to
create a more manageable, and more marketable and more functional parking garage, and one that
certainly doesn't require 13 levels. By extending the podium of that parking garage -- which they chose
not to do -- into a more regular form, you can get a far more efficient garage; in fact, a garage that is closer
to six or seven levels in height, approximately the height of the deck of the Intercontinental. Yes, there
would be a shadow cast, but that's a narrower shadow, and it will move. And at 2 in the afternoon, it's
about as bad as it gets. For the balance of the day, from the morning until that time, there is no impact on
the pool until late afternoon. With a simple rearrangement of the building mass of the 56-story tower at
the far corner, 25 feet from the bay edge, or in consideration of the building mass that turns the corner
sooner than that, one can gain all of the views that you want. I've looked at the view angles. These are
the view angles from the structure, the project and from the adjacent properties. This is First Union, this is
the footprint of Miami Center, and this is the footprint of Intercontinental Hotel. A building at this site
would leave approximately 160 degrees of view angle for the Intercontinental, and would literally erase
those gray walls that you saw in the photographs of the views from the hotel. That would not be an issue.
The building itself would still enjoy the unparalleled vista of 150 degrees, or approximately what they
have today to the bay, and it would enjoy vistas through to the north of the park and of the waterfront.
Without a lot of effort, I was able to look at a scheme that took the garage and created a more regular
footprint for the garage, a 92-space level for the residential tower that shrunk that parking garage by
several levels, bringing the top of this garage in line with the six levels of the Intercontinental. By putting
the podium -- by using that as a podium for the footprint of a building such as Bristol (sic) Towers, one
eliminates completely the sheer walk impact on the gardens; one preserves the views from the hotel from
the south, in large part, not completely. The views of Brickell will be lost. But these are the plusses and
minuses and gains that you have. We're here only to suggest that there are alternative solutions. They are
not radical. They don't fundamentally alter the project. And in fact, they follow some of the basic
approaches that were part of the original DRI site plan -- the podium with a tower that we thought, that
Intercontinental Hotel thought was probably what was going to be built. We're suggesting that this
332 12/14/00
• 0
project needs to move forward. Ultimately, there needs to be an approval. But the time is overdue to
consider these kinds of impacts. They are serious, they are substantial, and they will diminish
considerably the value of adjacent properties. It does not conform, even remotely, to the standard of your
own design review in your ordinance. An added benefit by moving that building off the immediate corner
is to recapture space at the corner of the bay for something more than an 80-foot wide plaza. You can
actually create a public space at the corner that would be far more substantial, part of the bookend kind of
public space that you've seen creating on the south side of the river. You can actually, by reorienting your
driveway entrance somewhat back closer to the entrance of the garage, recapture a considerable amount of
frontage along that bay walk for an active integrated edge. And that parking podium can easily have, as
they've said, as many buildings in downtown have, active restaurant space, retail space, commercial
space. That can be a very enlivening edge across there, and it would certainly change tremendously the
complexion of this river walk. Now, I'll close by simply asking you. You have a crop of hotels coming
up in the City we're all very excited about. Ritz -Carlton across the street, Mandarin Oriental, Four
Seasons. Imagine, gentlemen, if tomorrow any one of those hoteliers or those developers were to find a
seven story sheer wall on the southern exposure of their pool deck, and a 50-story tower that casts
perpetual shade 365 days over their prime amenity space for their Class "A" hotel. Then you would have
to, I guess, be sympathetic to their concerns. We're only asking you to consider that and look for
solutions. We've tried to be constructive here, not simply pointing fingers, but to suggest that there are
possible ways to approach this, and that this needs further study. Thank you very much.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Mr. Luft: All right. I was trying to be as brief as I can. I'm not known for being brief. But I'll touch on
one issue. The other -- is it up -- OK. The other part of this that I recall vividly, because I was there when
the original DRI was done, when the original schemes for the development of the full blocks were done,
the important ingredient in this thing, which is reflected in the Downtown Master Plan, which I wrote in
1989 is that where the severe traffic congestion exists, and of all the locations in downtown, the traffic is
most severe in this location. I can tell you today when I left the Intercontinental Hotel at 1:30, it took me
three light changes to get through 2°a Avenue. There is a constant backup of traffic coming around this
block back to the Brickell Bridge. This is not the area to be putting parking at one to five hundred. The
Downtown Master Plan says in Policy 6-13 and Policy 6-C that for high congestion areas, for critical
locations such as this, the parking should be constrained to the minimum of one to a thousand. The
original DRI proposal for this site, which was two million square feet had parking for the office tower at
about one to a thousand, twelve hundred spaces. This project is proposing for the office tower one to five
hundred. The master plan says you should never permit more than one to six hundred. What should be
happening in this area from a standpoint of real planning is an intercept garage at this location,
contributions and participations across the board of all the developers of these blocks to creating that
intercept garage connected to the People Mover with a sparring of active pedestrian space linking this site
to the Hyatt and joining these blocks. We should not be putting one to five hundred. We should not be
putting as many spaces on this site as the two million square foot original DRI approved project was
seeking to put. Actually, there's eighteen hundred spaces in this facility. There were twelve hundred for
the two million square foot project that was approved in '86. So what we have here is an effort by the
developer to optimize their views at the expense, clearly, of adjacent properties and to optimize parking,
which creates very large decks, inefficient decks at the expense of an overall policy of trying to manage a
traffic plan that puts the parking where it needs to be, in intercept facilities at the expressway ramps.
Thank you.
333 12/14/00
Mr. Bass: Thank you. The balance of our speakers will be under a minute. I've advised them, so they'll
move right along.
Lillian Butchart: For the record, I'm Lillian Butchart. I'm the financial controller for the Hotel
Intercontinental Miami. I have 25 years in the hotel industry experience, and I have a degree in hotel
management and also in accounting. I'm here today to represent the interests of the Hotel Intercontinental
Miami, and would like to place into public record our strenuous opposition to the proposed project in its
present configuration. We're deeply concerned about the negative economic impact of this project as
proposed and the impact it will have on our business. Although we are traditionally a business hotel,
almost a third of our business comes from leisure travelers, or business travelers who have added a leisure
component to their trip. As such, the pool, the sundeck and the gardens are a valuable amenity to the hotel
and are a key selling tool in persuading travel agents and meeting planners that come to bring business to
our hotel. In its present form, the proposed development to the adjacent land will almost completely
obliterate the sun from our pool deck and create a virtual concrete panorama for our guests unrivaled in
any first class hotel in Florida. The Intercontinental Company was one of the pioneers in downtown, and
our company has invested seventy million dollars ($70,000,000) and will have invested fifty million
dollars ($50,000,000) in the next couple of years when our current renovation is complete. I was part of
the opening team who walked into the hotel on October the I I , 1985, when occupancy was running at
seven percent. And we have invested a great deal of time and effort in creating the level of success that
we enjoy today. The Hotel Intercontinental has been an active member of the community. We've raised
two million dollars ($2,000,000) for the Make a Wish Foundation over the last six years, and we also fund
the New Year's Eve fireworks for the last ten years. We respectfully ask that you do consider our position
on this. Thank you.
Mr. Barry Gruebbel: Good evening. I'm Barry Gruebbel. I'm the Vice President of Property
Management for Crescent Real Estate. My address is 300 Crescent Court, Suite 120 in Dallas, Texas.
First, I just want to say thank you for listening to us. I know it's late, and I'll be as quick as I possibly can.
I just want you to know that from our point of view, we're very proud of being an investor in Miami. We
not only -- I don't know if you know this or not -- we also own Datran Center in South Miami. We have
about two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) invested in Miami. I will tell you that I think that what
we've done for Miami Center has brought it stable ownership. I think we've increased its values, but I
also feel that it is necessary that this property next to our property that we're considering today, my
request to you guys, to the Commission is that you look at it for its highest and best use. And I don't think
we're necessarily convinced that that's necessarily going on here today with this particular project.
Obviously, we're not anti -development. We're developers ourselves. You haven't heard any
conversation from our side about, you know, don't do the office tower when it would be under
competition with us. But we just want to see the highest and best use at a prime location. Thank you.
Thomas O'Neill: My name is Thomas O'Neill. I'm President of Hotel Consulting International. And
we're neighbors right opposite here, 2665 South Bayshore Drive. And we've been here since 1992. And
my qualifications are I'm a member of the Appraisal Institution, and the Council of Real Estate. I'm a
member of the International Society of Hospitality Consultants. I have valued a thousand hotels since
1986 and about 300 in Florida. I was asked to look at the impact of this new development on the
Intercontinental Hotel. The negative impact has not been looked at in the impact analysis that was done
previously. I looked at the water view situation and from one third of the rooms, and already, there is a
334 12/14/00
price differential of about ten to thirty dollars ($30). I estimated that the difference with the change in
view would be about five dollars ($5) in one third of the rooms -- sorry -- fifteen dollars ($15) on one third
of the rooms, which equates to about five dollars ($5) on average for the hotel. I also considered that one
to two percentage points will be lost because of the change in the gardens, the shadow from the pool, and
it's represented about six to 13 nights per day. This equates to, when you value it -- and that's what I do,
I'm an appraiser. When I value that cash flow, it comes to an impact of eleven point two million dollars
($11.2 million), which would also be an impact on the property tax valuation, as well. Thank you very
much. I do have a report for the record, which I've prepared on this, which covers -- gives greater detail
on the presentation.
Timothy Keable: Good evening. I'm Timothy Keable. I represent the First Union Tower. I work for the
Shorenstein Realty Services Company. I'm the general manager of the building, and I have been for
many, many years, both with the Hines Organization, who build the structure, as well as I assumed the
same -- similar responsibilities with Shorenstein. And I only mention that in the context of the recognition
within the City that the building, itself, regardless of the current ownership, has always been an
extraordinary neighbor for both the community and our adjacent neighbors. I think the Miami Center
folks would attest to that. I won't bore you. We obviously concur with some of the concerns of the
parties here. But I'd like to put on for the record that at the time the major use special permit for the entire
assemblage was approved, there was a representation made to this Commission that the adjacent property
owners would be approached, and would be given information, would be given an opportunity to review
each application as they came up. And that simply hasn't occurred here. The only -- the only meeting
that has been held with -- with us was done at our initiative when we learned of the application or the
hearing before the Planning Advisory Commission or Planning Advisory Board. And that meeting was at
our initiative. I'd just like to go on the record as saying we don't believe that complies with the spirit of
the representation that was made at the time this entire assemblage was approved. And I'd like the
applicant to confirm on the record at least, at the very least, an intent to do that for the benefit of all the
adjacent owners, not just ourselves. That's about where we stand on this. We had also expressed when
we did meet with the applicant our concern that the traffic improvements be limited just simply, or that we
gain an understanding of the traffic improvements proposed, and that was simply the only issue that we
addressed at the time with them. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Louis Breeding: Hi. My name is Louis Breeding. I'm with Grambell Scott (phonetic). I reside at 633
North Franklin Street in Tampa, Florida. And we're professionals in ad valorem tax representation for
commercial property owners, specifically hotels. One of the things we were asked to look at was the
analysis prepared by Sharpton Brunson and look for any; I guess negative impacts that might affect this
property. You've heard from the people today that there is significant financial impacts, negative
financial impacts on the hotel and on the office building. It's important to note from our standpoint, from
our profession that these three properties pay in excess of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) annually in
property taxes. A third of that goes to the City. The positions that you've heard today will, in fact, create
positions for these property owners to go before Dade County and argue for reductions in property tax.
They are negative impacts on their operations. It's going to affect the market value of their property. In
this state, market value is assessed value. So I guess what we're saying is not only will the owners be
affected by the proposed development as planned. Also, the City will be affected by loss in tax revenue.
Thank you.
335 12/14/00
Barry Davidson: My name is Barry Davidson. I'm an attorney or Intercontinental Hotels. I've had the
privilege of representing them for 20 years, and it was from my office on October 11, 1985 that --
Vice Chairman Gort: Your address, please, sir.
Mr. Davidson: Pardon?
Vice Chairman Gort: Your address, please.
Mr. Davidson: I apologize. One Biscayne Tower. Two South Biscayne Boulevard. At any rate, as I was
saying, Lillian Butchart left my office on that day on October 11, 1985, to cross the street to the then
moribund Pavilion Hotel, run by someone you all remember, or most of you remember, Ted Gould, that
my bank, Bank of New York, et al., took back from Mr. Gould. And from that beginning, the
Intercontinental Hotel has risen to what it is today. The only point I want to make as quickly as I can is
this: There's been suggestion by the other side, the applicant, that there has been some sort of constant
dialogue. I want you Commissioners to know that there was a dialogue begun over 18 months ago
between the applicants and Intercontinental Hotel. And indeed, I think you can, even sitting here, look at
the possibly synergies that might result from a successful dialogue. But that dialogue ceased 18 months
ago. And I attempted to restart it two months ago with counsel for the applicant, without success. So as
far as the Intercontinental goes, we have had no meaningful opportunity to interface with this applicant in
regard to possible synergies, possible adjustments, possible ways to make this project work together with
us and the office building, and improve the downtown area. Thank you.
Paul George: I'm Paul George, 1345 Southwest 141h Street, Miami. I'm one of those rare species, a
native Miamian and an historian. And just a couple of very quick remarks. I'm as verbose as Jack, but I
know the hour is really late. "A," the area we're talking about represents one of the most important areas
historically and archeologically in all of Southeast Florida. We've spent twenty-six point seven million
dollars ($26.7 million) on the other side of the river for the circle, that two point two -acre site. So much
more attention needs to be paid to the area around the north bank. We have archeological evidence, as
well as written evidence of humanity there for about four thousand years. We've done very little to take
into stock the importance of that area historically. Something else that kind of troubles me about the
project is the 50-foot setback waiver. City voters in September of 1979 voted almost two to one for a 50-
foot setback for properties in that area along the banks of the river and the bay in that area. And the only
way you could waive that would be for the public benefit. And I'm just not sure what the public benefit is
by virtue of this plan that we've seen on the part of the proposed developers of that area. Something else,
too, that I wonder about -- and I love downtown Miami. I'm down there every day. I have three offices,
whatever that means, in downtown Miami. But I've been hearing for about three years now how the
construction of various high-rises would turn it around in terms of 24-hour-a-day living, pedestrian life, et
cetera, et cetera. I've looked at the Grand. I've looked at the Omni. I've looked at the Charthouse. I've
looked at Arena Apartments. I've looked at Biscayne View. And frankly, they're fortresses, they're
automobile driven, and this place, with those proposed plans is much the same in that respect. I just don't
see it turning around in terms of a synergy between the people living there and downtown, itself. Thank
you all so much.
Commissioner Winton: So what are you proposing? Single-family homes on the site?
336 12/14/00
•
Mr. George: Not at all. But I just don't think it's a good argument saying that that's going to turn
anything around in downtown as a 24-hour-a-day thing, based on, historically, what's happened with the
other towers built down there.
Mr. Bass: Just a couple quick points, and then I'll wrap up. I do know there are other members of the
public here that would like to address the Commission. I'd like to highlight the fact that Jack Luft
testified that this parking, the intensity of this parking exceeds the ceiling set forth in your master plan. It
would be inconsistent with your master plan to put this amount of intense garage at this location. I don't
think that that could be made --
Commissioner Teele: How many spaces are you assuming are going to be put in here?
Mr. Bass: I think the number was eighteen hundred.
Commissioner Teele: And how many do you recommend?
Mr. Bass: Well, the eighteen hundred, I believe, are built at a ratio of one to five hundred. And I believe
the ceiling set forth in the master plan is -- the maximum is one to five sixty. But I'll let Mr. Luft answer
that.
Mr. Luft: We recognize that all the required parking must be on site for the residential. That's
understandable. The issue is that the parking for the office building is --
Commissioner Teele: Well, the answer to my question, Jack.
Mr. Luft: -- has been one to five hundred for the office. And we think it should be less.
Commissioner Teele: Jack, how many parking spaces are you assuming are going to be built, based upon
their design?
Mr. Luft: Eighteen hundred.
Commissioner Teele: And how many do you recommend?
Mr. Luft: We're recommending that the parking for the office building be consistent with the master plan,
which would be no more than one to six hundred, and preferably closer to one to one thousand, in
recognition of the congestion.
Commissioner Teele: How many spaces?
Mr. Luft: How many square feet in the office tower? In the officer tower? What? It would be closer to
seven hundred to a thousand spaces for the office tower.
Commissioner Teele: So they're building twelve hundred?
337 12/14/00
u
Mr. Luft: Yes.
Unidentified Speaker: Eighteen hundred.
Commissioner Teele: Is it eighteen hundred or twelve?
Mr. Luft: That includes the residential.
Commissioner Teele: Is it eighteen hundred or twelve?
Mr. Luft: It's eighteen.
Commissioner Winton: For both projects.
Mr. Bass: Very quickly. This is it. This is the standard. We're not making this up. This is the standard
set forth in the Code, in Section 1305, Subsection "A." And the analysis that is required to be done by
your staff in this matter and by the applicant in this matter does not constitute competent and substantial
evidence of the analysis, which is required under Section 1305. There are specific findings that are
required to be made. We have one "conclusory" net opinion that there's no negative impact. Well, we've
proven that that's absolutely not true. We've also shown that there have been really no attempts to take
into consideration the negative impacts that we've presented. So we think there's a failure of proof
relative to 1305. 1305 suffers from another problem, as well. That is it's constitutionally vague, because
it tells you to consider a lot of things, but it doesn't tell you in what way to afford them. They mix in
ingress, and egress, and garbage and all that other stuff, and then they have this Subsection "A." But they
don't tell you which is more important. They don't tell you how to weigh them. And there's a case
directly on point --
Commissioner Teele: Sort of like the state law on how you count votes, huh?
Mr. Bass: We know that discretion is not always a great thing, when it's reposed in municipal bodies.
And that's hot off the press. And there's a case I'd like to draw your attention to. That's Effie (phonetic)
versus the City of Ocala at 438 So.2d 506, same exact situation. You had an ordinance the regulated a
certain use.
Commissioner Teele: But didn't Mr. Luft testify that he wrote all this stuff for --
Mr. Bass: I'll take that up with him after the fact. I'm saying if you believe that it's effective, they
haven't met it. But you don't even have to get there, because it's unconstitutionally vague. And that was
Effie v. Ocala, because it doesn't tell you how to judge the evidence that you hear under Section 1305. I
think we've demonstrated one thing, or at least I hope we have, and that is we spent a lot of time coming
forward with a good faith objection. We're not going to take our toys and go home. We're here. We've
assembled a good amount of talent. And what I would suggest to this board is we're ready, willing and
able to share all of our thoughts with our neighbors, just as we've shared them with each other today. And
I think that this Commission should weigh very heavily the decision to go forward and approve such a
massive development at this signature site unless and until you're sure that every last opportunity has been
made to reach a consensus. You've heard tonight that it hasn't been. A last piece of history, because
338 12/14/00
Professor George is a historian, and I think it would just be fascinating for everybody to see. I pulled the
ballot question on this Charter language that everybody is debating about. And let me hand it out, because
it's quite telling. When you look at the ballot question as it was voted on -- the Charter is legislation by
the people. An amendment to the Charter is legislation by the people. When you look at the way the
ballot question was drawn, sure, it said that this setback could be waived, but it never said by whom, under
what circumstances, what the test is. It never suggested that it would be the Commission that would
waive it. And we would suggest to you that the language that you're traveling under substantially deviates
from the intent of this, and you shouldn't waive it. There is no reason you should. There's been no
meaningful benefit demonstrated, and we would hope that you would deny this application. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. You have a few minutes for rebuttal.
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: And then staff --
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Vice Chairman Gort: Wait a minute, excuse me. Yes, ma'am.
Blanca Mesa: I believe there are some people from the general public who are not associated who would
like to speak.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Go ahead, go right ahead, yeah.
Ms. Mesa: Thank you. My name is Blanca Mesa. I'm on the board of the Dade Heritage Trust. We had
a number of representatives from community groups today who were here at 2 o'clock. Unfortunately,
they had to leave because of the late hour, and I promised that I would present them.
Vice Chairman Gort: Your address, ma'am.
Ms. Mesa: 2699 Bayshore Drive, Miami, Florida. One of the groups is the Dade Heritage Trust, and I am
on the board. And basically, we're here to say that we think the 50-foot setback is very important. This is
a signature site, as has been stated here before. The Dade Heritage Trust has been working very hard to
preserve the integrity, the fabric of the community. In this area in particular, we are working on the river
walk, bay walk that will be historic, sort of a historic linear park that would come from the Brickell area,
across the Miami Circle, across the bridge and into this. And we're depending on the river walk to be part
of that. And we really urge you to -- to send this back for more consideration, because we feel that that is
threatened. It's an integral part to the tourism, to the residents in the area that will be affected. Likewise,
Fran Bohnsack from the Miami River Marine Group was also here, has asked me to speak to their
concerns as a group. They're very concerned about the traffic that will be generated by this massive
project. It's possible that this project has attempted to cram too much into that property. And --
Commissioner Winton: Maybe we should be concerned about the amount of boat traffic going up the
river.
339 12/14/00
0
Ms. Mesa: Well, actually, that was her point. And I'll read it, so I'm not going to -- you know, as cargo
industry, we hear many complaints about bridge openings impeding traffic. If this problem is so severe,
how can the City approve two towers with eighteen hundred plus parking spaces in an area where traffic
routes have already been -- collapsed from over -capacity? And that's her statement, basically. And then
finally, I have some questions from the representative of the Sierra Club, who was here. And in terms of
"eastward-ho," they are very supportive high-rise development in the urban core. So in that sense, they do
support the project. However, they do have some questions, and we'd like to put them on the record.
How is the quality of life for our community affected by this project? Which, by the waiver, in particular,
they're concerned about. This is a Charter change. So any change has to meet the standard of "Will it
benefit the public?" And so we'd ask you to consider that Charter revision. Is it for the public benefit?
Are there different ways that this property can still save the 50-foot setback? And I would urge you -- one
more thing that's missing here, which is an actual 3D image. If you actually see that image, you'll see that
these buildings are right up against the river. This is a signature site. It's the bay. It's where the river
meets the bay. It's been important back to prehistoric times. I don't think we should move precipitously.
I think you need to consider all this.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Your time is up. Thank you.
Ms. Mesa: Excuse me?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Your time is up, ma'am.
Ms. Mesa: Oh, my time is up?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Ms. Mesa: OK. Well, I do want to present something as perspective for all --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Ms. Mesa: This is a view of the Miami River where it meets the bay, exactly where we are. I'd like you
to see it, and keep this in mind as you deliberate. And also keep the public's --
Vice Chairman Gort: Your time is up, please.
Ms. Mesa: I know. I've been waiting for five hours. I think --
Vice Chairman Gort: So have we all been waiting also, ma'am.
Ms. Mesa: I mean, everyone's had so much time. There's probably hundreds of people that are members
of these organizations. They've been waiting since 2 o'clock. Let me just finish my sentence, if you
could.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
340 12/14/00
Ms. Mesa: Please. I think the most important thing is to consider the public's right here. I mean, we have
a lot of lawyers, we have hotels, we have people talking about taxes. Let's talk about the public. Let's
talk about our downtown. We have a right to have these setbacks respected, and we have a right to have a
river walk that retains the integrity and protects the history of this community. Thank you very much, Mr.
Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Michael Bregman: Good evening. Michael Bregman, 915 Northwest 1st Avenue, Apartment H-1214 in
Miami. I'm a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. I'd like to read some statements
from the American Planning Association's Gold Coast Section. The Gold Coast Section of the Florida
Chapter of the American Planning Association is composed of local planners, architects, attorneys, City
and County officials and others interested in the planning profession. The Gold Coast Chapter was -- has
reviewed the proposed One Miami Development Project submitted by the Related Group of Florida for the
parcel of land located at the mouth of the Miami River along its north bank. At a recent meeting of our
executive board, members of that professional conference agreed with the remarks contained herein. The
proposed development is generally well designed and would be an asset to downtown Miami with its
high -density residential use and well articulated elevations. However, the project lacks the necessary
components to create a vibrant 24-hour community. As indicated in previous correspondence to the
Miami -Dade Shoreline Review Committee, the primary reason for this is the automobile oriented,
pedestrian hostile environment created by the site plan and first floor plan. The following is noted: The
first floor of the proposed development still lacks adequate visual interest, human scale and pedestrian -
oriented uses. The project continues to lack adequate pedestrian access from the ground level. The
location and elevation of the proposed driveway on the south side of the site has an extremely negative
impact on the pedestrian character of the bay walk. The pedestrian walkways are not sufficiently shaded.
The proposed fire lane creates a potentially dangerous conflict, as it is also a primary pedestrian walkway.
Although some improvements to the project have been made, the (inaudible) Gold Coast Section would
suggest the following modifications in order to address the above noted deficiencies: Relocate the
proposed driveway along the south side of the property northward underneath the structures, providing
closed store fronts, fronting the bay walk which would incorporate more pedestrian uses, such as shops,
restaurants and cafes -- is that the --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Mr. Bregman: Oh, god. -- Along the southern perimeter of the property with direct access from the
second sheer bay walk. Provide more shade along walkways through arcades, colonnades or shade trees
with expansive -- that's why I'm talking fast -- as shown by numerous examples throughout the country,
such as Albuquerque, Baltimore, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach. The redevelopment of
downtown Miami with a pedestrian -friendly environment is essential to the revitalization in downtown
Miami and deserves no thin consideration.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Bregman: Thank you.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
341 12/14/00
Mr. Bregman: OK. Actually, the -- I don't have the -- that had to be amended, so I don't have the -- that
exact copy.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Mr. Bregman: I would like to -- if I can submit some pictures. These are from Fort Lauderdale, and this
shows that where you have shops and restaurants and cafes, there's life. Where you don't have it, it's
pretty dead. Thank you.
Carlos Batista: I am Carlos Batista. I live at 915 Northwest I't Avenue. And I want to make this
presentation in two quick parts. One of them is I live and I work in downtown. And I am very excited
about this project. I think, I personally think that it's something that would benefit downtown, that we
have been looking for it for a long, long time, and that it's something that we want to see happen in the
downtown area. The second part is that as part of a committee that has been meeting now for about a year
and a half to two years, and we have been developing a priority list in which to evaluate different projects
that will happen in downtown for the urban design value of the projects, we have run this project through
an evaluation process. And I am going to give to you a copy of the results of it. These are volunteer
people, professionals who have taken the project and run it through what they -- what our responses is. Of
course, it's personal opinion, but it will give you a good overall view, a brush stroke of how other people
respond to this project on the items that we prioritized. And there is over 200 people that have
participated in developing this priority. Very quickly, because you have it in front of you, we have
evaluated on a plus five as something that is excellent; zero on something that is neutral in the way it sets
on the side; and minus -- up to -- down to minus five is something that is negative to -- we feel is negative
to this site. This is a very successful process when you run a number of people through it. It takes a little
while, but the end results are very exciting. We have put them in here, and the total, which is the value
point that each of the priorities came up with, and a range that shows you --
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT)
Mr. Batista: Right. And a range that gives you a feeling of how wide it is, the -- the distinction is.
Vice Chairman Gort: Carlos, I'm sorry, your time is up.
Mr. Batista: Our -- can I --
Vice Chairman Gort: Your time is up. Sorry.
Mr. Batista: OK. Well --
Vice Chairman Gort: Just give them the bottom line and -- OK? Thank you.
Mr. Batista: OK. But I do want to make one item -- mention one item, because it goes along with
something that Teele has said before, and that is that one of our strong recommendations is that projects
are seen not only by themselves, but on how they fit the (overall) master plan.
342 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, Carlos. Anyone else from the public would like to speak? Thank you.
You'll have a few minutes of rebuttal.
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You have been incredibly patient, so I'm going to be very
brief. Last May, we started these hearings and meetings with the City, and we started in May with our
pre -application conference. And in that meeting, the attorney for the Crescent said in that pre-ap meeting
-- he was there for the UDRB (Urban Design Review Board), the Zoning Board, the Shoreline Review
Committee, the Miami River Commission. And every single time that they were there, no one has said a
word to us., No one said a word to us about redesigning this project, or things that they would like to have
happen until today. This is not the time to do it. The time for that dialogue should have been when we
were in the planning process. And furthermore, the owner of the Intercontinental Hotel said -- no -- Jack
Luft said we never made an attempt to try to minimize the parking. That's not true. This photograph
shows you that at one time, this was one site. This parking garage has a hole in it, because it was always
intended to be one parking garage for the whole site. We attempted to meet with them to see if we could
connect our garage with their garage, to make it an internal -- so we can ingress here and egress on the
other side. That made a lot of sense to us. When we were developing our plan, we attempted to do that.
They had no -- they wanted no part of that. So what we're saying to you is that would have minimized the
parking structure as it relates to their public amenities, had they let us connect up to their parking garage.
That was never something that they wanted to consider. To have First Union come down here is a
complete surprise to me, because at that meeting that we had, their only concern was parking. We are not
changing the parking, pursuant to this plan. That should not have been an issue. And they told me or the
attorney, who was Santiago Echemendia at the time, told me they didn't have a problem with it. So I'm
somewhat surprised to see them. Bernardo Fort -Brescia is very anxious to make rebuttal on these design
issues. And if you can give us just a few minutes for that, I'd appreciate it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's keep it short, please.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Yes. Within this short period of time, I'd like to begin by saying how much I respect
what Jack Luft has done for our City, and how much I respect him as a professional. But professionals
sometimes disagree. And in this case, I think we do disagree, and I hope this doesn't -- there's nothing
personal about what I'm going to say. It is -- I'd like to first begin by reminding everybody that -- where
this site is located. It is in the -- it's downtown Miami. It is in the urban core of our City. There are
buildings in this downtown and in many downtowns in America -- name any city -- San Francisco to Los
Angeles to Atlanta -- where buildings are in close proximity to others. And this, what is happening on this
parcel is actually less density and much greater distance between building than in many of the instances,
including across the street where the First Union Building, in its proximity to One Biscayne Tower, and
from there to the old AmeriFirst Building, and I mean, this is an urban location. We are not, you know, in
a resort environment. It is what we've been trying to bring for so long, an intense, dense, lively downtown
with a skyline, with buildings next to each other, which is what makes the energy of a downtown. Within
that, I'd like to step-by-step address for you some of the concerns. Several levels of parking for a long
time was considered maximum in suburban locations, but actually, a 12-story garage is considered an
acceptable garage in many instances. I'm involved in doing one in downtown Houston right now for a
major development that we're doing over there. And just across the street, the First Union garage is an
example of a garage that is multi -story, that -- with all the difficulties that come with that. That is the
nature of the urban environment that cities have when they try to accommodate parking. I'd like also to
point out with respect to parking the ratios that we're providing. Our provision is for one per five -- two
343 12/14/00
• 0
per thousand. That is one per five hundred per net square feet. If we look at the gross, we actually are in
the range that Mr. Luft is recommending, which is -- once we add the gross in this building, we are pretty
much around the six hundred figure that he was talking about. And so we are not at all in disagreement
with that he said, because that's where we are. With respect to the residential, we're providing one point
three per apartment, plus ten percent for visitors, which is a very reasonable amount for this kind of
location. I'd like to also make a comment with respect to the access that was pointed out for the garage.
In fact, one of the things that we're trying to do is do parking sharing, the ability for visitors or additional
parking to be able to occur on weekends and off -hours for the residents who may want to have an
additional vehicle by crossing over to the commercial parking. And that increases the efficiency of the
parking condition in this building. So I think what we are providing is what is considered really a
minimum, including by the arguments of the neighbors for a develop of this kind to be commercially
viable and functional. I'd like to address also the issue of arrangement of the parking, because
interestingly enough, I'd like to -- sorry -- I'd like to point out precisely from these drawings some of the
problems that are faced. When we proposed our parking garage in that location, it was because we were
trying to bring the residential and the life of the building all the way to the ground and relate it to the
ground. Many of the arguments that were raised today about making a friendly environment and not
bringing the garage and building a garage facing the waterfront, the entrance to the river in the most
powerful snapshot of our downtown. And precisely by doing this, we avoid that. If we were to build a
garage as shown here all the way to the ground and the building on top, what you would have is the fagade
of a garage being the entrance and the welcoming sign of our sign at the entrance to the river. But I'd like
to point out further that this layout that you see here has no consideration for the impact of the proposed
tower that I saw here. In fact, if you had to draw a core in all the columns of a tower that had to make it
through a garage, this would not be the garage that you see here. You'd have to fit elevators, and fire
stairs, and sheer walls making it through the garage, and that would decrease the efficiency of what you
see here enormously. In fact, a point tower has shown -- would be going right through the middle of the
garage as you see here. In fact, the overlay that is here of the Bristol Tower would go right to the property
line on one end and definitely way into the setback that we are debating today, precisely. As a matter of
fact, the architect of this building was on one of the panels that reviewed this project and praised us
precisely for having created the indentations, the ins and outs that you've seen along the edge of the
design, and for bringing the apartments all the way down. And he made the precise point and voted in
favor of this project, the architect of the Bristol, of the Bristol Tower. But I also want to point out that this
is -- even though it is a beautiful building, it is not a building that belongs in this location for the following
reasons: This is a -- what we're trying to create is urban living. And what we are providing here are
apartments, are four hundred apartments, four hundred and twenty-five, not two hundred and fifty
apartments like the Bristol Tower. The Bristol Tower, in its curvilinear shape, sits in a much larger site
with ample space for parking that is outside the footprint of the building. The percentage of the building
on top of parking is very minimal. The majority of the parking is on the rest of the site. And this would
not be the case in an urban condition like this. Moreover, the Bristol Tower ranges from I believe four or
at the most, six, but I believe it's about four apartments per floor, and sometimes down to two, and then to
one. We're creating -- which are huge apartments, three thousand square feet, two thousand square feet,
six thousand square feet at the top, I don't know. What -- we are here creating urban living for people to
move, and live and work in downtown, not for people from elsewhere, or a vacation place. And our
apartments are averaging around eleven hundred square feet, twelve hundred square feet, some eight
hundred square feet, there's some one -bedrooms and two -bedrooms. We have a different kind of
environment for which we need a lot more perimeter. We don't have all those "his" and "hers" walk-in
closets and huge master bathrooms inside and a core in the middle. Also, remember the condition here.
344 12/14/00
•
Bristol Tower is on Brickell Avenue, with open space all the way around. Here, we have an urban
arrangement. We have a very dramatic view towards the river and towards the waterfront. We want our
apartments to look in that direction and have also a secondary view towards downtown. An arrangement
like this would force our client and related companies to -- to force fifty percent of the views to be back
towards in the opposite direction as where the preferred views are, meaning the primary direction, because
this is a very deep building. We are providing views of downtown and through apartments with views of
downtown and the water. But we want -- this would be really prejudicial to the value of this property and
the commercial and market value of the properties compared to what we have provided. In fact, this
diagram clearly shows you that, in fact, if you look at this whole entire area, the view would be of Miami
Center and in the opposite direction. And finally, with respect to the -- to the whole question of the views,
whatever they see of our building, we also see their building at the same distance. What you see from
their window to our building, we see from our building into their windows, as well. This is the nature of
an urban environment. And Miami, as downtown Miami starts getting populated, then that's the kind of
environment that you live in, and that's part of the excitement, precisely, of living in downtown, close to
other people who live, and work and enjoy the life of an urban environment instead of a suburban one.
And that's a life style choice that people make. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: But you would agree that somebody looking down at a swimming pool has a much
better view than somebody looking up at a -- from a swimming pool looking up at a building.
Commissioner Winton: A wall.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Well, I think that from our building, we also have to look at their building, I mean, and
from our deck, we have to look up at First Union and --
Commissioner Teele: Bernardo, Bernardo, you're too serious. You miss the point.
Mr. Fort -Brescia: Thank you. Yes, I get it. Sorry. And lastly, we did do our own, also, analysis of the
site and how the building relates in the context of downtown. And we did look at the density of
downtown, and the relativity of building to building. And we think we were very much in the range of
what is the proper urban design for this site. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. I understand. Lourdes, you want to make a statement?
Ms. Slazyk: For the record, I just wanted to clarify a couple points. First of all, when Mr. Shubin was
questioning about whether this project could be placed on another property within this area. There was
like a -- there was reference to whether this was a reasonable, you know, request for the waiver for this
property. I just wanted to remind you that this isn't a variance. The criteria about reasonable use for a
piece of property and the minimum variance requested is the criteria used for a variance, not for a
modification of a Waterfront Charter provision. This project requires no variances, and it complies with
the specific criteria of 1305. The findings that were made on the potentially adverse effects to this project
regarding aesthetics and traffic were mitigated through the conditions that we placed on the project.
Unfortunately, blank walls are required when buildings abut each other in downtown. It's a Code
requirement. It's a fire requirement. If one parking garage happens to be taller than another one, the
project on the other side is going to look at a blank wall. And if you look at all the buildings in
downtown, their interior sidewalls are blank. That's a requirement. If another building comes up against
345 12/14/00
it, whether it's shorter or taller, they're going to be looking at a blank wall. It's a Code requirement for
fire. Also, the parking requirements were amended so that one to a thousand is a minimum, not a
maximum anymore. The Code used to have one to six hundred minimum and one to a thousand -- or one
to six hundred maximum and one to a thousand minimum. They were amended. There are no maximums
in downtown anymore. The proposed parking at one to five hundred makes the project more competitive
in the market for office buildings. So the Department recommended accepting the one to five hundred in
order for the building to be competitive in the market. That's it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. We'll now close the public hearing. Any comments or questions,
Board Members? It's your district.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I know that it's late. I really would like to hear what Blanca -- she's
all -- We've been on the Chairman all night to try to get the meeting moved, but I realize you had a couple
of points you wanted to make, and I just wanted to make sure that you made the point that you missed.
Ms. Mesa: Well, I appreciate being called back. Thank you. Well, my point, basically, is that the many
people that were here that were from the public came to speak. They were waiting to speak, so I really
had to get in a lot of different groups' statements.
Commissioner Teele: That was the point. Mr. Chairman, she was reading a statement from the Sierra
Club representative that left.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: And that caused her time to expire. And I just wanted to give her time to make her
point.
Ms. Mesa: Right. And the Dade Heritage Trust, and the Miami River Marine Group, and there were
actually just other members of the public that were here waiting since 2 o'clock, and they didn't speak. So
I was sort of a second shift, and came in to speak. I do ,want to add a couple of other points. The City
really needs to pay attention. And the reason I passed that, I'm not saying go back to 1896, which is the
postcard, but this community has really undergone a tremendous change in the last 200 years. We have
lost so much of what really made this special. On this very property is where the Royal Palm Hotel was.
The Royal Palm had verandas that faced the Miami River. It understood, you know, the vista, and it
understood the importance of the bay. And what the River Walk does in a very minimal way is provide
that public access. And it's a public access that joins people all the way. from Bayside Shopping Center all
the way to connect to the Brickell property. And you have to understand; across the river is the Miami
Circle property, the most historic. It's going to be a world heritage site at some point. You need to
consider those aspects before you go ahead and sign off on a property that's the signature piece of the City
of Miami. The City of Miami is the signature City of this community. And this waterfront belongs to all
two million people in Miami -Dade County, and it belongs to the millions of other tourists that come to us.
So if there is an opportunity to send this back -- And these architects have been changing this as it goes
through boards. So it's not an onerous requirement to say, is there a possibility to move the road so that --
Imagine if you're there with your children and your grandmother walking on this river walk, and on one
side are mega -yachts at the marina, and on the other side -- blocking the view of the river -- and on the
other side is the road which is what you see here. That's not much of a river walk. Go to Fort Lauderdale
346 12/14/00
and you'll understand. So I want you to .please pay attention to the public's right to the waterfront of
Miami. This is the City -- my last point goes back to two years ago, around this time of the year. It goes
back to the Barnacle property. It goes back to the court order that exists that tells the City, protect the
waterfront, protect the public's right to the waterfront. You are -- There is a court order with the Attorney
General, an agreement, when you took out Bayside from public parkland, to provide waterfront access to
the public. And this is a perfect opportunity. We need to provide good waterfront. And the setback
provides that. And wait till you get the 3-D picture of this property. Wait till you see that wall on the
river. That's why setbacks are important, not just to walk on, but to provide that visual space. So, please,
send it back. Have them look at it again. Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner Teele for the
opportunity.
Unidentified Speaker: Mr. Chair, I have the same kind of conditions.
Vice Chairman Gort: Guys, look, no, come on. Commissioner Teele, you want to let him talk also?
Commissioner Teele: No. She was representing other people. That was the only reason that --
Unidentified Speaker: Well, all right.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I -- you know, I don't know how long we're going to debate this or
look at this. This is obviously an important project, and there are obviously some very important
businesses impacted. I think the case that the court, quite frankly, reversed me on as Chairman of the
Commission, was the case involving the Doral and the White Diamonds, Green Diamonds or whatever
that thing was on Miami Beach, where I supported the position of the Doral on the shade issues. But the
court ruled, you know, that many of the words that Mr. -- the architect was saying about the problems of it
being in an urban environment. And so I just wish, and I would hope that whatever decision we take
today that we could somehow frame this so we can keep the door open, because I think the openness of
the persons who are opposing this has been very professional. And what they've said is, we're not against
the project, per se. We'd just like to see the project better designed, or changes in the design. I assume
that we have some time constraint that doesn't allow for the meeting. Because the thing that you said,
Lucia that makes me most troubled is that you all never have really met. That is that the persons opposing
this development and the developer have not really met. I know that you've made it very clear that you've
had a number of public meetings. But it just seems to me, particularly when we talk about the potential of
solving one of the issues relating to parking by the joint. use or the ability to interconnect to the
Intercontinental, I don't know if they're willing to do it. But it just seems to me that there seems to be a
lot that's left that could be negotiated out.
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner, you're right. And we are still willing to talk about that. There is no
question that that is something we're willing to talk about. However, at this point, we are asking and
seeking your approval of this major use special permit so that we can go forward in trying to consummate
the deals between the parties. And we will continue to work -- If they are willing to talk about opening
that garage, we are definitely willing to consider coming in with an amendment.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we don't want to mandate or I don't, certainly, want to put a gun to their head
if they don't -- for whatever reasons -- liability insurance or --
347 12/14/00
Ms. Dougherty: I understand that. But we are willing to talk.
Commissioner Teele: -- or whatever reasons they don't want to do it. That's not the issue. Madam
Attorney, is there any way, if there were a motion for conditional approval, that we could require this to
come back to us in 90 days?
Miriam Maer (Assistant City Attorney): Mr. Commissioner, the City Zoning Ordinance mandates that the
Commission attach all reasonable conditions, as you see it, to mitigate adverse impacts on the adjacent
properties. I think perhaps you could consider, in addition to those conditions, which have already been
recommended by your professional staff -- and they're on pages 5 through 10 of Exhibit A to the
resolution -- you could consider additional conditions. In terms of a process whereby you would bring it
back in a period of time, your motion could, in fact, bring it back in a period of time. It wouldn't be --
Commissioner Teele: But we would either have to approve it, or disapprove it or --
Ms. Maer: Tonight you would --
Commissioner Teele: Tonight.
Ms. Maer: Yeah. If you approve --
Commissioner Teele: But we could require that it come back to us in, say, 90 days or something.
Ms. Maer: Perhaps you could have them come back and provide you with a report in 90 days.
Commissioner Teele: Well, the only thing that I -- I don't know what the sense of this body is, but I'm
willing, I am, for one, am willing to support a form of conditional approval, with the requirement that
there be an effort to further mitigate the parking and the design issues, based upon a redesign that would
be predicated upon some joint use or joint connectivity to the two projects, and in the manners that both
sides have outlined. Now, that would only be if, Mr. Shubin and Mr. Bass, you all would want that. I
certainly don't want to force something down your throat.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: From my viewpoint, as I've listened to all this, there is really four issues that I
would like to address back to the public. One is the -- and I'll start, not in any particular order. But the
four, river walk, the garage wall against the pool area, pedestrian friendly and parking. Starting with the
river walk, I think that there hasn't -- As the Chairman of the Bicentennial Park Planning Committee, one
of the major issues we've talked about from day one is the river walk. And I'm as committed to the river
walk and access to the water as anybody in this community. But I'm not just blindly flying into anything.
And I'm looking at this aerial photograph right here that shows the relativity of the water to the
Intercontinental's parking garage. And my question, I guess, to you all is, is the walkway at the mouth of
the river and the bay there, is that walkway designed equal to, narrower than or greater than the walkway
facing the bay that ties to the Intercontinental? That's this piece right here. Right there.
348 12/14/00
Unidentified Speaker: Greater than.
Commissioner Winton: So it's greater than. So when we're talking about sticking to very hard and fast
rules, from a practical standpoint, when you come around the corner, it narrows. So I'm just telling you
my point. I'm not asking any questions. It narrows to the same -- this narrows. So it doesn't make any
sense to have this hard and fast rule that says -- I got to come around the corner, and I'm running 50 miles
an hour on my roller blades. And I come around the corner, and I -- bam, right into the blank wall that's
there, because I created a wider walkway. Now, obviously, you can do things to mitigate the bamming
into the wall. But the point is, it still narrows. So I'm not going to hold to a hard and fast rules that says
because I already have that narrowness there, that, by God, the rest of it has to be absolutely right to the
inch, that 50 feet. So -- and the narrowest part of the walkway is right there. The rest of the walkway is
only in a couple of places where there's a couple of feet difference that we're being asked to -- what's the
term?
Unidentified Speaker: Modify.
Commissioner Winton: Modify. So I'm not so bothered by that. However, I am bothered -- I think the
opposition made a couple of good points. Michael Bregman really hit on it hard, because I was feeling the
same sense myself, and that's the pedestrian -friendly nature of this project. And I have the same -- and
I've talked about this over and over and over again since I've been here. And I have to tell you, I have the
same sense that they do, that -- and it's up to you guys to figure this out. But I don't think they're wrong.
I think that there is a design feature here, and that wall that you talked about where we have to meet the
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) standards there, so when you step up from the
walkway and you go to the roadway, you know, that's just another wall. And it doesn't create the kind of
environment that you're looking for to create that good, really positive pedestrian environment that we're
trying to create. So I do think that's a problem. The garage wall. There is no question in my mind that
that garage wall, a blank wall, just like the blank wall that's there, nobody wants a blank wall as their
immediate neighbor, particularly if that blank wall is immediately adjacent to all your common areas, like
their pool and everything. There's no question, that's a serious problem. But I've got to look back at
them and ask why you folks in opposition -- I don't know who owns the garage. But I don't understand
why, if you're opposed to that blank wall, why you're -- you all need to really consider what your options
are. From a City of Miami standpoint, we haven't had a building built in downtown in 18 years. This
Commission made a commitment at the last meeting and the meeting before, two levels of commitment.
One is they were going to put six million dollars ($6,000,000) into infrastructure improvements in
downtown just as quickly as we can. And the second is, my Commissioners, and they've talked about it
three meetings in a row, the need for this City to find significant additional dollars to improve
infrastructure downtown. Well, we're doing it so we can bring more development downtown, not less
development downtown. So if all of you don't want to get along with the neighbors and you just want to
live in an island all by yourselves, then we ought to not spend the money on infrastructure improvements.
So there's a point here about this wall. I think you all in opposition need to figure out how you can help
them solve the problem. And if the shared garage helps solve the problem, you might want to consider
thinking about it, because I'm going to have a very different view sitting here. And I'll tell you flat out;
my view is going to be very different relative to that wall if I'm hearing that the other side is saying,
"Naw, you just deal with us all alone. Yeah, this garage was originally designed for the building, but we
don't want to talk about that." Well, I'm going to think differently about the wall. Parking -- and that's
349 12/14/00
•
the last point -- but let me go back to the wall. But to the wall, that wall is a problem. No other adjacent
property owner ever wants a blank wall, seven stories high, facing their property. And that's a serious
problem. And we've talked about that very issue in lots of other neighborhoods, about building high-rise
buildings, putting the blank wall right up against neighborhoods, and that ruins property values. Our
objective here isn't to get new development to ruin the value of old development. So we really -- I think
you all have to consider that issue very, very strongly. Final point is parking. Parking is a tricky kind of
piece of this. When that -- when the original parking requirement was created by Jack, which was one per
thousand, the whole mission there was to force people to get on Metrorail or mass transit. Well, the fact is
we never built mass transit. And we won't have mass transit in I don't know how many years. Now,
there's a piece of me that says we need to be designing things that will create an environment that really
forces people to begin to get on some other mode of transit. But we don't have any other mode of transit
other than cars downtown, anyhow. So we also know that from a competitive standpoint, one per
thousand is woefully uncompetitive with every single one of our other competitive sub -markets in the
entire County. So going to two per thousand, from my viewpoint, isn't very bothersome for me in this
environment, when the suburbs are not building five per thousand or six per thousand. So I am with
Commissioner Teele. I think that, from my viewpoint, I would like to pass this with the requirement that
the developer do get back with the neighbors. And the conditions we put on it is that they do address the
issue relative to the blank wall facing their neighbor, and that they address this while pedestrian -friendly
environment that both Michael and the lady from Dade Heritage Trust talked about. And those are the
conditions that I'm most concerned about.
Vice Chairman Gort: Are you making a motion?
Commissioner Winton: I'll make that in the form of a motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Is there a second?
Ms. Slazyk: Let me clarify for the record if you want that --
Commissioner Teele: In addition to all the other staff --
Commissioner Winton: Right, right, right. In addition to all the staff requirements.
Ms. Slazyk: You want that to come back to you, or you want that to be reviewed and approved?
Commissioner Winton: Well, what I would like to not do is put a new big monkey wrench in a process
here. So if it's possible, I would like this to stay on the track, on the normal track that we're on, so that we
don't slow that down. Now, if we need to have it come back, and allowing it to stay on a normal track,
that's what I would like to do. I don't know if it's possible to do that or not.
Ms. Dougherty: Maybe we could do it this way: If we work out a solution that is acceptable to both sides
and the Planning Department, then we don't have to come back to you.
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think that's going to happen.
Ms. Dougherty: It might happen.
350 12/14/00
Commissioner Winton: Well, it might.
Ms. Slazyk: Would you like to put a time limit on it, though, that if a solution is not worked out by "X"
date, it comes back here?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. The shorter, the better.
Ms. Slazyk: Ninety days?
Commissioner Teele: I'd like to hear from the attorney from the other side of this.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, OK.
Mr. Shubin: We've repeatedly stated that we're prepared, ready, willing and able to meet to try to discuss
this. Let me tell you my concern, and then let me offer what I think is a reasonable alternative. If you
approve this, subject to a condition, in my opinion, it creates no incentive for the applicant to meet with
us, because what's the best you can do? Remove an approval? At that point, they're going to claim that
they have vested rights. What I -- and I think that's a serious issue. If it's approved, if they have any
development rights, subject to them meeting with us -- Suppose they don't negotiate in good faith, and
there's nothing that presumes that they won't, what recourse do we have at that point? And if anything,
then the appeal period will lapse, we're going to have to file our appeals, and it's simply not productive.
What I would --
Commissioner Winton: OK, go ahead.
Mr. Shubin: What I would suggest as an alternative is that recognizing that it's the holiday season that we
do everything we can to at least have two or three meetings between now and the time of your next
meeting, and let's give you a progress report. We will address the issues related to the garage. We've
heard everything that this Commission has said, but I have to tell you, as a lawyer, I would be committing
malpractice if I sat here and said, approve it and then let us talk, because once you give something, you
can't take it away without inviting a lawsuit. And we're prepared to assemble as many of these people to
meet, day and night, to try to resolve these issues before the time of the next meeting.
Ms. Dougherty: Mr. Chairman, we have one issue to discuss with them, and that is the -- that is the blank
wall. The other issue, I assume, was the Planning Department's issue about --
Commissioner Winton: Right. That's an issue with us.
Ms. Dougherty: With you. And I think that we can solve the other issue with the Planning Department.
The issue with the blank wall is the one that we need to discuss with them. We have every incentive in the
world to resolve this, because, "A," you're not going to give us a building permit until it's done; and `B,"
they're going to appeal the case. We don't want that. So we have every incentive in the world to get this
thing done. And we would urge your approval, because if we don't have it, we're really messing up with
some time constraints we have in our contracts.
351 12/14/00
Commissioner Teele: What's the amount of time that you all have to appeal, to perfect an appeal?
Vice Chairman Gort: Fifteen days.
Ms. Dougherty: Thirty days.
Mr. Shubin: Thirty days. And what we're saying is, I don't know when your next meeting is. Let's meet.
Let's come before you at the --
Commissioner Teele: The 1lth, 1 lth of January.
Mr. Shubin: Let's do everything we can to meet between now and then to resolve these issues. We've
heard what this Commission has said. We've taken notes. We know what's going on, and we will do
everything we can to resolve those issues. But it puts us in a difficult position if you approve this subject
to a condition, because that condition is essentially un-enforceable without you vacating the approval and
subjecting yourself to a vested rights claim.
Ms. Dougherty: You don't have to vacate approval. We don't get a building permit. It's as simple as
that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me, excuse me. Let's stop this. We know how attorneys disagree every
once in a while, and we can be here all night arguing for and against it. So, you guys, we have to make a
decision.
Commissioner Sanchez: Johnny, there's a motion and I believe there's a second on your motion.
Commissioner Winton: Well, I think the question is whether or not delaying this for one more month is
going to do anything. What --
Commissioner Teele: But Willy --
Commissioner Winton: Well, let me ask the Planning Department. The comment about -- I forget what it
was -- vested rights or some such thing they said. But we still have all the controls we need to block them
from developing this project if it isn't done the way we want, don't we?
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. It --
Commissioner Winton: Or do we not?
Ms. Slazyk: If you put this on as a condition, then Lucia is absolutely correct. She can't get a building
permit unless she complies. If she doesn't comply, what she would have to do is come back and ask you
all to release that condition.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
352 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: But isn't it part of the condition is that the final design details have to be
approved?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes.
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning and Zoning): It is, Commissioner. And then what you're doing, what
you've been talking about is making -- adding details to make sure that as part of those conditions that
right now are placed, you are addressing specifically the blank wall, and you're addressing the pedestrian -
friendly bay walk. So it's --
Vice Chairman Gort: And the blank wall.
Commissioner Sanchez: Look, Johnny --
Ms. Gelabert: And you've addressed also the parking.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: I leave my motion as stands.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman.
Commissioner Teele: My second is there, but couldn't we -- couldn't you agree to have this come back to
us on the l lth of January? And that way, his appeal period has not impacted. See, he's got 30 days. So
technically, he's got until the 141h of January. And we don't want to -- I don't agree with your statement
on the record, I must say. I mean, I think this developer has got every reason to negotiate in good faith.
This is not a guy that's in a Lear jet that's going to leave town, and we may or may not ever hear from him
again, you know.
Mr. Shubin: I'm not disagreeing with that.
Commissioner Teele: And I think we ought to put that on the record.
Mr. Shubin: I'm just saying from the standpoint of -- And I said that there's no reason for me to believe
they won't negotiate it in good faith. But at the very minimum -- I mean, we've been in this position
before. This is not the first time we've come --
Commissioner Teele: No, I respect that you have a client to represent, and you have a legal obligation.
But I just think for the record, it should be stated that the applicant is well known in this community, and
is not the kind of person that is -- That's not for you to rely upon. That's for us to rely upon.
Mr. Shubin: But we'd rather dedicate our time to try to solve this problem between now and the 1lth,
rather than putting together a petition for writ of certiorari with an appendix, and dedicating our time to
preserving an appeal. And I think that's in the best interest of the City to get us to work together between
353 12/14/00
now and the 111h. If we come back and we negotiated in bad faith, throw us out of here, approve it, give
them all their approvals. But I have a serious concern. I have a very serious concern about you approving
it now, and then telling us to try to negotiate.
Commissioner Winton: I don't have a strong feel one-way or another about that issue over waiting till the
ill,,.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner, I feel that we should approve this, subject to this returning to us on
January 1 Vh with the negotiations going forward. And if the negotiations are not -- are -- what the counsel
is saying, that they're not negotiating in good faith, then we've got time to --
Commissioner Winton: Actually, that process has worked us well placed in the past already.
Commissioner Sanchez: It has.
Commissioner Teele: It has.
Commissioner Sanchez: But Johnny, we got to set the ground rule that when you come back, it's not to
dispute whether the DRI (Development of Regional Impact) was amended, or was, you know, was the
Charter language --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, all that hocus-pocus.
Commissioner Sanchez: You know, we got to focus, we got to make progress. No, we got to make
progress, because in the long run, what's going to happen is that every single document that we have here
will have an exhibit number and this will probably end up in court.
Mr. Shubin: Well, then it's a two-way street, Commissioner Sanchez. I would like them to get on the
record that if we have not reached an agreement that they're not going to say that we've waived our rights
to appeal. I mean, it's a two-way street.
Commissioner Teele: That's a fair request, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Shubin: I want the attorney and I want the client to put it on the record.
Vice Chairman Gort: They don't have to put it on the record.. You can automatically appeal. You don't
need their permission to appeal this.
Mr. Shubin: I'm not saying that. I just want to know -- I don't want to be put into a trap where if we all
negotiated in good faith -- We recognize that there are some serious design issues that need resolution.
But if we're negotiating in good faith and cannot agree, the predicament that we're in is that we have to
make a value judgment on the 141h as to whether we file an appeal. You're putting us in that position
where we're simultaneously trying to protect our client's interests --
Commissioner Winton: I think we're making the decision that we're going to post --
354 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me ask you a question now. And we talked about the redesign issue. Now, I
think what we're saying here is the redesign issue needs to -- is just a blank wall on the garage, nothing
else; not the other buildings, the two towers or anything like that.
Mr. Shubin: Well, the question is --
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh.
Mr. Shubin: No, no. I'm asking you, is it your will? Because it's important for us to know this. Are you
saying that if you simply articulate --
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding, my understanding is the motion -- and that's what the motion is,
unless I interpreted it differently.
Mr. Shubin: But are you saying that if you simply articulate the wall, but there's still a seven -story
pedestal over the pool deck, it's OK?
Commissioner Teele: I don't understand what the issue is. Look, I think we're giving you everything
you're asking for. You're saying you don't want to negotiate, and they don't negotiate in good faith.
We're bringing it back to us within the 30-day period, so you're not losing your right to appeal.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's go on with the motion, guys. It's 10:25 already.
Commissioner Winton: We have a -- OK. And Commissioner Teele, I agree with you. I think the motion
should be that-- although what we're really saying is that we want the parties to get together. They're
going to come back before us on the 1 lth, and we're going to make a decision.
Ms. Dougherty: My client has asked me a point blank question to ask them. Are they going to let us go
through the garage? Ask them if they -- We're wasting our time if they're not going to permit us to go
through the garage. That's the solution.
Mr. Shubin: We have not seen a specific proposal. I have representatives from Crescent that have been
involved in this process for 18 months.
Commissioner Winton: Well, excuse me.
Ms. Dougherty: They have seen a specific proposal.
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me. They probably can't answer that question right now. And they --
there may not even be anybody here in authority to answer that question right now.,
Mr. Shubin: We have someone from Crescent who will testify they've never seen a proposal, and 18
months they've been negotiating this.
Commissioner Teele: But you know what I don't understand? I respect that you're doing a diligent job in
representing your client. But it seems that we've protected all of your rights. You're not walking out of
355 12/14/00
here with anything less than a full right to go to court and attack a proceeding. But all we're asking you to
do is negotiate over the next three weeks.
Mr. Shubin: Is that what you want us to do? Do you want us to file an appeal on the 14th.
Commissioner Teele: Absolutely not.
Mr. Shubin: OK. My point is, will they stipulate that if, for whatever reason, we have not reached an
agreement by the 111h that they will not raise a vested rights argument? What you're doing is you're
prejudging what's going to happen on the 1 lth
Commissioner Teele: But you're really representing us now. I mean, you're really trying -- Are you
suggesting -- Madam Attorney, our Attorney, is there a vested rights issue here with the conditional
approval?
Ms. Maer: Well, right at the moment, the Commission hasn't voted. If your condition is that the sides
have to meet and reach an agreement, subject to the approval of the Planning Director, or come back to
you by January 1 Ith, I don't see a vested rights issue. I may be missing something. But if that's the gist of
your motion -- and that's what I heard at some point --
Commissioner Teele: Right.
Ms. Maer: -- that if they worked everything out -- and we're talking only about the blank wall on the
garage. But those other criteria, I believe, are dealt with by the conditions already in
Commissioner Winton: OK, that's right, that's right. I'm sorry.
Ms. Maer: -- in the Planning Department recommended conditions. So the issue concerning the blank
wall and the garage, as I understood it, if both sides work it out, then it doesn't come back here. And they
have to work it out to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. And if it's not resolved, then they come
back to you, and you needed to set a time, whether it was January I Ith or some other date.
Mr. Shubin: And my point is -- and maybe I'm not explaining myself. But what happens if, on the 1 Ith,
you all conclude-- and it's conceivable, because you're not going to prejudge, I know, what happens
between now and then -- and you say, they didn't listen to you? We had some serious issues. We tried to
raise them. For whatever reason, they didn't listen to us. And you say, OK, we're going to go back and
we're going to revoke this approval. What I'm saying is, I want to know from them that if that scenario
happens that they're not going to sit,there and say, we have vested rights. You gave us an approval, we've
relied on it, we have vested rights. And Commissioner Teele --
Ms. Dougherty: I accept that. We will not say that we have an approval that is concrete, because we
won't. We will not have an approval at that point. However, I'm going to ask them, if we don't reach an
agreement, to give us a final approval.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is that good enough for you? I mean--
356 12/14/00
•
Mr. Shubin: That's fine.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's it. We have to do that.
Mr. Shubin: That's all we've been asking for, is to protect --
Commissioner Winton: You just got it.
Mr. Shubin: Perfect.
Vice Chairman Gort: Guys, we have to make the final decision. Let's go. Motion and a second. Any
further discussions?
Ms. Maer: Let me just, if I may, clarify that the motion is what I had just stated. Is that what we're now
voting on? Because there was so much discussion.
Ms. Dougherty: This is an approval --
Ms. Maer: Subject to?
Ms. Dougherty: -- subject to a condition that -- the condition is that we try to work out --
Ms. Maer: The blank wall issue.
Ms. Dougherty: -- this blank wall issue to the satisfaction of both sides and the Planning Department.
Ms. Maer: And the Planning Director, right.
Ms. Dougherty: In which case, it does not come back to you. If we don't work it out by January the 11th,
it comes back to you as a discussion item. And at that point, we are asking for either approval or --
Ms. Maer: For approval, and it's up to the Commission at that time.
Ms. Dougherty: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm not comfortable. I think it comes back to us on January 1 I1h __
Vice Chairman Gort: The 111h anyway.
Commissioner Teele: -- and the Planning -- because you got notice provisions, and this and that, and the
thing could break down. It comes back to us.
Ms. Maer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: And whether or not --
357 12/14/00
•
E
Commissioner Winton: Period. And we know whether it's yea or nay, period.
Vice Chairman Gort: And we'll make a decision.
Ms. Maer: So we're continuing it to the 11 th
Commissioner Teele: Exactly.
Ms. Dougherty: That's good. Because the notice -- I agree.
Mr. Shubin: That's fine. We have no problem with that.
Vice Chairman Gort: Any further discussion?
Commissioner Teele: Hopefully, you all will all come in, arm in arm, smiling, kissing.
Vice Chairman Gort: All in favor state it by saying "aye."
Commissioner Teele: Aye.
Commissioner Sanchez: Aye.
Commissioner Winton: Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Aye.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. No. One "no."
358 12/14/00
5
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1137
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR
USE SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 13 AND 17 OF
ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 11000, FOR THE ONE MIAMI -- PHASE I
PROJECT, A PHASED PROJECT TO BE LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 205 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, TO BE COMPRISED OF NOT MORE THAN 425
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ACCESSORY RECREATIONAL SPACE,
623,348 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE, RETAIL AND OTHER NON-
RESIDENTIAL USE AND 1,834 PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING
TRANSMITTAL OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION; MAKING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;
PROVIDING FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
(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 Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
ABSENT: None
Ms. Maer: So it's continued to the 1 lth then.
Vice Chairman Gort: One "no." OK.
Ms. Dougherty: But it is approved.
Ms. Slazyk: It's approved with the condition that it come back --
Ms. Maer: Approved, and coming back on the 11"? OK.
359 12/14/00
E
0
Mr. Shubin: No.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Shubin: This is the problem that we have.
Ms. Maer: That's the issue with regard to the appeal, right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Guys, move.
Mr. Shubin: You said --
Commissioner Teele: I said approved with the condition that it come back to us on January 11 th
Vice Chairman Gort: That's it. It's passed, guys. Come on.
Mr. Shubin: For what purpose?
Commissioner Teele: For the purpose of determining whether or not -- Madam Attorney, give me the
correct language.
Ms. Maer: Whether or not the parties have met the requirement to work out the blank wall of the arage
to the satisfaction of the two parties and the Planning Director. When it comes.back on January 1It , then
the Commission would have the opportunity to be satisfied as to their agreement. Because, you know, the
Commission would have the right at that time to reconsider, anyway. Even if you approved it today
without that condition, you'd have the right to reconsider it at your next meeting.
Mr. Shubin: If that's the operative language, I have no objection.
Commissioner Winton: That's the operative language then.
Vice Chairman Gort: Great. PZ-8.
Commissioner Sanchez: Good night.
Mr. Shubin: I couldn't have said it better myself.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-8. PZ-8.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm going to get some --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Hey, look, before all your people get on their Lear jets, and get out
of town, it might be a good time, Lucia, it may be a good time for you all to meet right now, I mean, at
least agree on how you're going to meet, because this is a pretty diverse group here.
Commissioner Sanchez: You can use my office if you want.
360 12/14/00
0
Mr. Shubin: We'll go through our calendars and set up some meeting times between now and the 1 ltn
Ms. Dougherty: OK.
Mr. Shubin: I think that's an excellent suggestion.
Commissioner Teele: You can use Commissioner Sanchez' office, my office, the Chairman's office.
Mr. Shubin: No problem.
361 12/14/00
•
Jeffrey Bass: Mr. Chairman, real quick, just a housekeeping matter. 1900 Brickell, that was supposed to
be heard at the end of the -- Everybody went home. I don't know whether we formally moved for a
deferral, OK, to --
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): PZ-14.
Mr. Bass: -- to January the 25th would be great for the neighbors.
Vice Chairman Gort: Motion to continue it to January 25th
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Mr. Bass: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Gort: Okie-doke. Thank you.
Miriam Maer (Assistant City Attorney): That was PZ-14.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-14 to be continued to January the 25th
362 12/14/00
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1138
A MOTION TO CONTINUE CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA ITEM
PZ-14 (APPEAL REGARDING A DERMOCOSMETIC SPA AS AN
ACCESSORY USE TO A HEALTH CLINIC AT 1900 BRICKELL
AVENUE) TO THE COMMISSION MEETING CURRENTLY
SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 25, 2001.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
363 12/14/00
0 •
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-8.
Commissioner Winton: What happened to 6?
Ana Gelabert (Director, Planning & Zoning): PZ-6.
Commissioner Winton: What happened to 6?
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): PZ-6 is an appeal.
Vice Chairman Gort: I don't want to listen to it.
Miriam Maer (Assistant City Attorney): PZ-6.
Vice Chairman Gort: PZ-6, I (inaudible).
Ms. Slazyk: PZ-6 is an appeal of a decision by the Zoning Administrator. Since this is an appeal, the
appellant will go first.
Vice Chairman Gort: This is an appeal on the Zoning Board and Zoning Administrator. OK. In this
procedure, we'll hear from the appellant first.
Juan Gonzalez (Acting Zoning Administrator): Yes, Mr. Chairman. Juan Gonzalez, Acting Zoning
Administrator, Planning and Zoning. In an appeal, you usually hear from the appellant and I'll -- just let
me give you a brief background. The appeal is concerning whether -- an interpretation by me of whether
they can put a freestanding billboard under the SD-6 Zoning provision. And I'm saying no, and they're
saying that's not what the Code reads.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK, sir.
Paul Warren: My name is Paul Warren. I'm President of North Star Media. I'm the applicant. My
address is 251 Maitland Avenue, Suite 208, Altamonte Springs, Florida, 32701. Honorable Vice
Chairman and Honorable Commissioners, City Attorney, and City Manager and City staff, I appreciate the
opportunity to appeal this decision of the PZA and the decision of staff to you. I have prepared a briefing
paper for you that I think will be very helpful in going through this, and I'd like to hand that out to you at
this time. To give you a little bit of orientation on the property, I've provided you a map on the back of
Page 1. That's just a standard road map. The property is at the northwest corner of 2°a Avenue and
Southwest 1" Street. And also, I have the Zoning map. You might see that a little better on Page 1, the
two pages of the Zoning map, if you can find that. All right. The -- if you would please look at that
Zoning map, Page 1 and Page 2 now, while most of the SD-6 properties are primarily located along
Biscayne Boulevard, on Page 2, I think there's one, two, three, four of them in that area. This property is
located a considerable distance to the west, away from that Biscayne corridor all together. Just one
364 12/14/00
0 0
minute, please. The current use of the property is a parking lot. It's vacant. If you'd like to see what that
looks like, if you'd turn over to the back of Page 2, it's on the backside of Page 2. And -- and we've
applied under the SD-6 Zoning Ordinance and the Code for an outdoor advertising type sign. And the
applicable section is 606.11, Paragraph 2 and the requirements of Section 926.15, which is applicable to
all outdoor advertising signs. And the size of sign that's specified in Section 606.11 specifies a sign
surface area of four hundred square feet, and we've applied for a sign of only three hundred and seventy-
eight square feet. Now, intended use for this is advertising businesses and events, sports events, any
businesses in the downtown corridor, in anywhere downtown. We expect the demand to be very high
from what we have studied in the market. We will have no trouble having advertisers. And one of the
reasons for that is, in case you're not familiar with outdoor advertising, it's in demand because of its low
cost per CPM, that meaning cost per thousand exposures of a message. Outdoor advertising is in the
range of a dollar and a quarter to two dollars ($2) per thousand exposures, whereas you go all the way up
to nine to ten dollars ($10) for newspaper, so there's one of the benefits of it.
Commissioner Winton: Excuse me.
Mr. Warren: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: I'm not sure that we want or are interested in hearing the pros and cons of outdoor
advertising.
Mr. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: We want to hear the grounds for your appealing the decision of the board.
Mr. Warren: OK.
Commissioner Winton: So I don't -- you know, I don't want to --
Mr. Warren: All right.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Mr. Warren: OK. I'm sorry. The points at issue is that we start with two main categories of signs. There
are on -site sign category and there's an off -site sign category. The majority of all signs fall under the on -
site category. In this case, we go to the Code, under 606, and I'd like to point out a couple of things in the
Code relative to outdoor advertising. We start as to whether or not, you know, billboards are going to be
allowed, outdoor advertising is going to be allowed. We look under Section 606, Paragraph 6064.2,
principal uses permitted, with limitations concerning locations along the ground floor frontage of
pedestrian streets and urban plazas. The following uses shall be permitted in locations other than the
ground floor frontage of pedestrian streets and urban plazas, except as provided in Section 604.1.1. Item
Number 10, Paragraph Number 10 is off -site signs. And it says: Off -site signs subject to the limitations
of 606.1.1. Now, before we get into that, I'd appreciate your patience if you would look at Page 5, and it
provides two very important definitions, the first being the definition for an "on -site sign." It says: Signs
relating in the subject matter to the premises on which it is located or to the products, accommodation,
services, activities on the premises. On -site signs shall not be construed to include signs erected by the
365 12/14/00
•
outdoor advertising industry in the conduct of the outdoor advertising business. Now, as you'll see in the
next definition of "off -site signs," it says: A sign other than an on -site sign. The term includes but is not
limited to signs erected by the outdoor advertising industry in the conduct of the outdoor advertising
business. Now, in visualizing and conceptual of how you -- you manage a Code like this, the way I see it
-- and I think I'm correct in this -- is you really have these two categories of on -site versus off -site. And
I'm showing you like an organization chart up here. On the on -site, you have like Signs 1, 2 -- Sign Types
1, 2, 3, 4. And off -site, you might have Sign Type 1 that's also an off -site sign. Or you might have Sign
Type 4 that's also an off -site sign. However, to make that possible, as we're going to see, you've got to --
you've got to convert that. You can't just assume that it's now an off -site sign. And that is the practice in
most sections of the Code. OK. Now, if you'll turn over to Page 8, this is the key section, 606.11,
limitation of signs. And it says: Sign limitations shall be as provided for the C-1 District, with the
following exceptions and modifications. On the left-hand side is the C-1 sign regulations. And they have
-- they establish ten types of signs under that district. But it starts with this paragraph, a very key
paragraph. It says: On -site signs only shall be permitted in the C-1 District, these districts subject to the
following requirements and limitations. Then it goes on in that next paragraph, and as you can see, that it
says that -- it's dealing clearly with on -site signs. Now, of these eleven on -site sign types, as I've red --
put in red those that are going to be modified by the 606.11 regulation. OK? So it starts out with -- the
first item under 606.11 is signs flashing or animated, revolving, whirling, banners, pennants or streamers
shall be permitted. Now, that's a modification, and it's an exception to the lead-in paragraph of the C-1
sign regulations. OK? That's -- so but that's still on -site signs. All those that are -- all those things --
signs flashing, animated, revolving, they're still on -site signs. The next one, it says: 2: Off -site signs
shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: Maximum of one street frontage, maximum four
hundred square feet of surface area per sign and all such off -site signs shall be designed to exhibit
continuously changing displays of figures, words or graphics through the use of lights, projected images,
et cetera. Then the next item is another type of sign. It says temporary civic and political campaign signs
limited to four hundred square feet of surface area, et cetera. So they also -- that temporary civic and
political is an exception and is also a modification. So of those two types, please look at Paragraph 9
under the C-1 regulations where it says temporary civic and political campaign sign. That was an on -site
sign. And by this modification and exception, it was made to also be an off -site sign. OK? So the next
item is Number 3, projecting signs. And it -- basically, it just gives a modification reducing the size of
square feet, but that's a modification. It's still an on -site sign. Number 4, this is the -- this is the item that
we're in dispute over -- ground or free-standing signs shall be limited to directional signs and temporary
civic and political campaign signs. Well, over here under the C-I regulations, under the C-1 regulations, it
is an on -site sign, and there is no modification to change that to an off -- to off -site signs or to include off -
site signs. If it had, I wouldn't even be here. OK? But it didn't do that. It's still an on -site sign. And
then it goes on and it modifies -- a kiosk, that's still an on -site sign. Now --
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. I think you have brought some of the points.
Mr. Warren: Excuse me? I couldn't -- I didn't hear you.
Vice Chairman Gort: How much more do you have to go, sir? I mean, we're going through the whole
thing.
Mr. Warren: Well, I'm just trying to make a point. If -- I mean, I would concede the whole matter right
here, just forget it, if you can show me where --
366 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Warren: -- ground of freestanding signs has been modified to become an off -site sign. All right?
And that's the issue. If they were -- if they were, then he would be right. But they're not. All right? And
now we met with staff. My application goes back to March loth. The application was essentially
approved, except they asked that we -- we made some minor changes to our site plan. If we did that and
gave them a new survey, it would be approved. So we resubmitted it, it's processed. And virtually, we
got the electrical permit approved. And then it was stopped, and we got into this discussion. So
subsequently, along with our consultant, Rosario Kennedy, we met with first Juan's assistant and
convinced him that we were correct. Then we met with Juan, and he was convinced. Then we met with
Lourdes Slazyk, and she was convinced. And then finally, in August, we had a meeting with Ana
Gelabert, the Director of Planning, and she really didn't take the time to understand what we were trying
to say. She just said no, she wasn't going to approve it, and that was it. So then we tried the PZA. We
had a vote of four to two. Now, I'd be glad to answer any questions, but I -- all I'm asking of you -- I
know you're tired and everything, but if you could just understand my position on this, that if -- if there's
any modification at all, whatever that changes ground or free-standing signs to be anything other than on -
site, I will concede the issue. And that's all I'm asking you to understand. And why this should be
approved is we are an off -site sign, and ground or freestanding signs just don't apply. The method for
erecting this as a freestanding sign or a uni-pod sign is contained within Section 926.15, Paragraph 2-C.
And it defines. It shall -- can only be a uni-pod construction type sign. There's no modification of that,
either. There's no modification of the height that it can be. We are in the -- we're 50 feet, so we meet the
height requirements. And the whole issue goes back. And that's why I'm asking you, please, take the
time to understand that according to your own practice, the -- the ground or freestanding site should have
been modified, if that was the intent. It should have been modified. Now, under the C-2 regulations,
that's exactly what was done. OK? And for example, wall signs. They -- under the C-2 regulation, you
can build an outdoor sign as a wall sign, but it did it by modification, and it defined what those
requirements were. Wall signs were never modified to be an off -site sign here.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right.
Mr. Warren: So that is the point. All I'm asking for is, let's stay with the ground rules of how you -- how
you manage these things. If you're going to modify them and make exceptions, they should be consistent.
And what -- his suggestion that the ground or freestanding signs are somehow magically off -site now just
doesn't fly, because it was never modified. So I ask you to please, if I can answer any questions for you,
I'll be glad to do it. It's not an easy thing to see in the short time that I've had to present it. But I have -- I
assure you; I've put a lot of effort and time into this. And if -- anyone who's taken the time to really read
it, you'll see exactly what I'm saying. And the point is that sign, an on -site freestanding sign was, still is,
never modified to be anything other than an on -site sign. Therefore, it cannot be applicable to restricting
us, accordingly. I think that's all I have for you.. Do you have any questions?
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Can we hear the City?
367 12/14/00
Mr. Gonzalez: Yes. Mr. Vice Chairman, Members of the Commission, Juan Gonzalez, Planning and
Zoning. I'll just take two minutes of your time here. With all due respect to Mr. Warren, what's
happened is he's tried to lead you to Cairo, Egypt going through the Pan American Highway. You're just
not going to get there. Really, if you -- all you have to do is look at 606.11. And it talks about, yes, there
is a modification in the SD-6 Zoning District where he wants to put his sign which does allow off -site
signs. It's one of these strange districts that besides a C-2 and industrial, does allow off -site signs. And it
has to be -- we put certain provisions -- that it cannot be over four hundred square feet. It has to be
electrical in nature. But the whole intent was when it was written was that it be a wall sign. We wanted
electrical off -site signs mounted on walls, so there'd be this effect of electrical wall signs and so forth. If
you look at 606.11, that's all you have to look at. You don't go back to the C-1 or anything else. If you
look at Number 2, it talks about the off -site signs, the limitations, about the electrical, the four hundred
square feet. Now, if you go down and look at Number 4, it strictly, very plainly says: Ground or
freestanding signs shall be limited to directional signs and temporary civic and political campaign signs.
Basically, they didn't want freestanding signs in the SD-6. The SD-6 basically was to allow mounted wall
signs, yes, off -site signs in nature, where they could advertise off -site projects, subject to the limitations of
the four hundred square feet electronic graphics and so forth. But it's very clear that besides political and
directional campaign signs, there should be no ground or freestanding. That's to prohibit freestanding
billboard off -site signs within the SD-6. And unfortunately, where Mr. Warren is going back to the C-1
and so forth, it doesn't make sense, because once you read this, it says: As for C-1 with the following
exceptions and modifications. It accepts it to allow off -site signs, but it also modifies it again that no
ground or freestanding signs be allowed.
Mr. Warren: May I have a rebuttal?
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Yes, sir.
Mr. Warren: May I have a rebuttal to that, just one?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes. Go ahead.
Mr. Warren: OK. If you look at my Page 11 at the top, what he's saying is contrary to the practice of the
Code. And I'm citing there relative to the C-2 District where the intent was to allow wall signs, and it said
so. And that's all I'm looking for.
Commissioner Winton: What did C-2 have to do with this?
Mr. Warren: If what he said is true, show me the -- show me the provision.
Commissioner Winton: This isn't C-2.
Mr. Warren: Excuse me?
Commissioner Winton: This is not C-2.
368 12/14/00
•
Mr. Warren: I realize. That's not the point. The point is that I'm saying that if the intent was to make
wall signs to also be permissible as outdoor advertising signs to be off -site signs, it needs to be said so in
the same manner that it was done for the C-2 District. This is how they did it for the C-2 District.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Mr. Warren: See, it says wall site signs, off -site -- I'm looking for anything like that -- shall include, the
same as. There is nothing like that. Now wall signs -- remember C --
Vice Chairman Gort: Madam Attorney -- OK. You have an opinion; our staff has an opinion. We want
to hear from our attorneys.
Ms. Maer: Under the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Administrator renders an interpretation when a
request is made such as this. And then his interpretation is appealable. In this case, Mr. Warren appealed
it to the Zoning Board, who listened to both sides and upheld the Zoning Administrator's decision. It's
been appealed here to you, and both sides are making their argument. Mr. Warren, I think, is arguing that
because certain language is used in the intent section of C-2 and is not so stated in SD-6 that that set the
standard for the Zoning Ordinance. And Mr. Gonzalez, who is charged under our Zoning Ordinance with
being the Zoning Administrator who interprets the Zoning Ordinance, is giving you his interpretation,
which is entitled to great weight, unless you find it to be arbitrary or unreasonable. That's the case law
supporting interpretations of Zoning Ordinance by the staff that works with them on a daily basis.
Commissioner Teele: Is that sort of like the State Supreme Court? They're entitled to great weight and
presumption.
Ms. Maer: His interpretation is actually in your package where he explains to you how he reads the
language in the SD-6 and comes to the conclusion that the only free-standing signs would be political or
campaign or civic, I believe it says. Otherwise, they would have to be wall signs.
Commissioner Teele: I -- I'm sorry. Mr. Chairman, I really am concerned about one aspect of this. Two
or three names got called. I didn't hear -- for the record, I've never heard one disparaging comment about
the Planning Director until tonight. She's normally very, very thoughtful, and available and I'm sure she
can speak for herself. But Ms. Slazyk, your name was thrown in that you apparently believed or gave the
advice that it was all right back in March. Do you have any recollection of this?
Ms. Slazyk: I don't have recollection of that. We had a meeting with him, with Juan Gonzalez, where
Juan gave the interpretation. And what I did from Planning at that meeting was talk about the --
Commissioner Teele: Was the interpretation the same as it is tonight?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. The intent is -- the intent of SD-6 -- You know, he was questioning that there was no
intent here. So we went back to the intent of SD-6. And when SD-6 was written, the intent of allowing
off -site signs, advertising signs like billboards was that they be mounted on buildings to create a Times
Square type atmosphere in SD-6, because that was the district where we -- this is the only district in the
City where the sign ordinance requires electronic, and flashing, and, you know, animated signs. It was --
you know, what we didn't want in SD-6 was freestanding billboards. And that's what I -- You know, I
369 12/14/00
•
spoke to the intent of the district. Juan is charged with interpreting what the words say and, you know,
whether it's allowed or not.
Commissioner Teele: But you heard the reference that you gave a little bit different view. Did you hear
the gentleman's reference to you?
Ms. Slazyk: Actually, I was out of the room, I think.
Commissioner Teele: But you came running back in.
Mr. Warren: Well, I can clarify that.
Ms. Slazyk: Well, because I have the next item. But the -- the meeting that I was at was about the intent
of the SD-6 District, and why does that district have all these sign requirements that are so different from
all the other districts.
Mr. Warren: All right. May I say something?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, the only question that I would ask of staff, really, is there any
precedent for what is being argued now in the City? Could this have been something that got
grandfathered, and then we changed it, and now he doesn't --
Mr. Gonzalez: No, Commissioner Teele. In this case, there's no sign there. So there's no grandfathering.
And one of the dangers there is, now we do have a portion, a large portion of SD-6 on Biscayne
Boulevard. If you uphold the appeal, you'll have billboards in Biscayne Boulevard.
Mr. Warren: I disagree with that. It's prohibited by your own Ordinance.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. We understand, sir. You disagree, and we understand you're going to disagree
all night, and we're both going to disagree.
Commissioner Sanchez: Based on both arguments and the City's recommendation, I move to deny.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, wait a minute. Move to deny the appeal is what you're saying.
Commissioner Winton: Move to deny the appeal.
Ms. Maer: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
370 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion and a second. You want to speak on the appeal, on the motion to
deny the appeal?
Don Deresz: I want to commend Mr. Warren for -- the advertising company applicant who is respecting
the lawful provisions of the City, much unlike other billboard companies such as Carter and Affinity, who
have erected over 41 illegal -- 41 illegal billboards up the I-95 corridor during these past three years,
averaging one illegal billboard per month. This amounts to the occupants of an automobile, kids, tourists,
adults the like in an automobile seeing a billboard advertising underwear, booze or a political campaign
every six seconds while they're traveling up I-95. Ordinance 11000, developed with the input of residents
and responsible businesspeople living and working in the City of Miami. Under Section 926.15, which
nobody has mentioned here, which encompasses the entire City, assures that signs should not affect views
and vistas such as our City skyline and bay. The applicant's proposed structure would violate this section.
This section also prohibits signs east of I-95, which is where the applicant intends to install his structure.
The SD-6 provisions permit freestanding billboards and projected signs up to 120 square feet.
Furthermore, the billboard must only identify the on -site principal business with less than half of the sign
devoted to a product or service that is only sold there on site. Your ordinance is quite clear. Please
uphold the corrective decision of the Zoning Administrator. If the Commission is worried about the cost
of lawsuits --
Commissioner Winton: We just made a motion to do that.
Mr. Deresz: Yeah. Thank you, sir. If the Commission is worried about the cost of lawsuits by the
applicant, because of a possible City Zoning employee's oversight -- we're not sure -- I would suggest that
you demand that the Code Enforcement Board collect two million, one hundred and thirty-six thousand
dollars ($2,136,000) in just last year's fines for the 41 present illegal billboard structures.
Commissioner Teele: Are you saying there's 41 right now?
Mr. Deresz: There's 41 illegal billboards between U.S. 1, starting at South Dixie Highway up to 79th
Street.
Vice Chairman Gort: Are you saying you're for the motion or against the motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: He is -- he's supporting the administration.
Commissioner Teele: Did you put your name and address for the record, on the record?
Mr. Deresz: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Mr. Deresz: I'm sorry. Don Deresz, 1852 Southwest 241h Street.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK, call the question.
371 12/14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. Sorry, sir.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1139
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DENYING
THE APPEAL AND AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S
INTERPRETATION DATED SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, REGARDING
FREESTANDING BILLBOARDS IN THE SD-6 CENTRAL
COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI
FLORIDA.
(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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chairman, can we take PZ-1 up? The young lady who had to leave on
an emergency has just gotten back and --
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, did we really have 41 illegal billboards? Madam Manager?
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): I believe the NET is undertaking a survey at this time to
determine exactly how many illegal billboards there are in the City.
Mr. Deresz: You can't just count the poles. That's counting poles. You have to count the billboards on
the poles. And quite often, there's two or more billboards per pole. So each billboard, at a hundred and
fifty dollars ($150) a day fine amounts to over two million dollars ($2,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: Could I get a meeting with you?
372 12/14/00
0 •
Mr. Deresz: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Teele: Can I get a meeting with you, please?
Mr. Deresz: A meeting? Certainly.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
373 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-1 is a modification to the Waterfront Charter.
Ines Marrero-Priegues: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council. For the record --
Commissioner Sanchez: Once again, state your name for the record.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: I sure will. My name is Ines Marrero. I'm an attorney with the law firm of
Akerman, Senterfitt, with offices at 1 Southeast 3rd Avenue, Downtown Miami, 33131. I am the
applicant's attorney and the owner's representative on this application, PZ-1. Thank you again for the
courtesy extended to me earlier on where I was allowed to be heard last this evening. Quickly, with me
this evening are Mr. Dan Sirlin, who is a partner in Miami River Associates, the applicant, and developers
and contract purchasers for this property. Earlier today, Mr. Harvey Taylor who is one of the partners,
owners of the property were here, but he had to leave. Victor Yue, who is the principal with the
architectural firm of Dorsky Hodgson, he's the architect for the project, and my colleagues, Julie
Williamson and (unintelligible). We're here to request a variance of the provision of the Charter of the
City of Miami that establishes a 50-foot setback along the Miami River, which was discussed at length
earlier this evening. Let me first tell you where the property is. This is a project consisting of an office
building and a garage with ground floor pedestrian -oriented retail and restaurant along the Miami River.
The property is located at South Miami Avenue, and the river is right here, obviously. And this ,is 4th
Street. This property is right next to Bijan's right here, the Clarion Hotel and the James L. Knight Center.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry. Next to Bijan's?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Well, yes. Bijan's is around here.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: The current use of this property is a parking garage, and cars are currently being
parked as close as the 50 feet. This is not a MUSP (Major Use Special Permit). This is not a DRI
(Development Regional Impact). This project is before you only because it needs a waiver of this Charter
requirement. This project -- Manuel, you could put the renderings of the project. It's the subject of a class
two permit. It underwent review by the Urban Design Review Board. Actually, we went there before
them once, and they had a lot of comments. And they told us this is a very special piece of property, and
you have to put a building there that is not a building that could be built in Kendall. It's a building that
can only be built on the Miami River. So we went back to the drawing board, and with a lot of patience
and cooperation from the City's planning staff and the Urban Development Review Board staff, we redid
the project. And we went back before them, and we were approved unanimously. So the only thing that's
remaining for this project to be built is an approval from this Commission of the waiver of the 50-foot
setback. Clearly, I have a section of the Charter here -- and I'm not going to get into, obviously, the things
that were discussed before. The Charter reads what the Charter says. It establishes a 50-foot setback, and
it can be modified. And it can be modified by you only if you determine that the modifications requested
provide public benefit, such as direct public access, public walkways, plaza dedications, covered parking
374 12/14/00
up to the flood plain level or comparable benefits which promote a better urban environment and public
advantages which preserve natural features. A lot of people have been interpreting what all these Charter
requirements mean. But to me, what it means is that the rivet is a patrimony of the City, of the people of
the City. And the least that we can do is provide 50 feet. Otherwise, make it so nice that people want --
going to want to go there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there a walkway now?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Umm --
Commissioner Sanchez: Bijan's has a walkway, and it goes all the way behind the Hyatt.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: There is a walkway on the properties to the north. This property, itself, does not
include a walkway. It's a parking garage. It's just a paved lot.
Commissioner Sanchez: I know it's a parking lot.
Commissioner Winton: It's not a parking garage. It's a parking lot, yeah.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Let me enumerate the public benefits that this project will bring. First of all, there
is a 20-foot wide -- we'll put this one up. And one of the things that I enjoy about looking at the
prospectus of the building is that when we -- we did the building, and you look at it, you look at it looking
from the river. That's what made the design of the building the most important thing. This is not an aerial
shot. It's not a skyscraper. It's a building that was intended to be here and to be appreciated and enjoyed
from the river. This is the river perspective, and this is the street perspective. Manuel, you could put up
the site plans. All of these exhibits, by the way, should be in a booklet that was distributed as part of the
materials for tonight's hearing. But the project includes a 20-foot wide river walk area, brick paved and
landscaped, a ten -foot wide covered canopy. It's really not part of the river, because the building lies
within that. It's just -- the first floor is set back an additional ten feet, so that we can have covered seating
for the restaurant. Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Just for point of clarification, the awning that you have is it from there on the ten
feet?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: From there, 20 feet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty feet from the awning. But then you have more.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: From the -- it's actually the -- it's a recessed first floor. The first floor is recessed
in ten feet to provide for a seating area for the restaurant, and then the building is set back 20 feet.
Commissioner Sanchez: But here's my question: If you didn't have the canopy, it would have been, from
your building, how many feet would you have -- would have had?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Twenty.
375 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh. So it starts from the wall. So you're going to have the canopy, and then ten
feet?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Also, there is a 30-foot area of river -oriented activity, pedestrian -oriented activity.
We have an activity center for the area. This is not just a sidewalk.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thirty, 30 feet?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Thirty feet. But the building itself is set back 20.
Commissioner Sanchez: So it's -- 20 and 30 is 50.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: No, no, no.
Commissioner Sanchez: No?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: I'm not explaining myself correctly. I apologize.
Commissioner Winton: Start over at the water's edge.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: The water's edge. There's 20 feet walkway.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: And then you have the roof of the building.
Commissioner Sanchez: The canopy.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: The canopy. Well, it's --
Commissioner Sanchez: Whatever.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: -- not really a canopy.
Commissioner Winton: You have 20 feet of walkway, and then you have the building.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: And then you have the building. But within the building, you have ten feet of
open area, see. You have these arches and this canopy area that has table seating that's ten feet in there
that is exposed to the river, and you can walk. If you walking to the river, you'll be able to access that.
376 12/14/00
But the building itself is already over those ten feet. I don't know if Victor wants to explain this in
architectural terms that are clear. But I know it's late, and I don't want to --
Commissioner Sanchez: Victor, from the building, from the building to the canopy is ten feet. And then
from the canopy to the river is 20 feet.
Victor Yue: Yeah. My name is Victor Yue, of Dorsky Hodgson Partners. I'm a principal. The address is
1 Financial Plaza, Suite 2400. Yes, there is a 20-feet setback from building. There is basically a ten -feet
covered arcade, which that was actually in addressing one of the comments from the Urban Design
Review Board that we push it back to put restaurant. And this is actually underneath the building, yeah.
So it's basically 30 feet of public, useable area, including that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right. Well, let me just clear this. The canopy, that's not considered public,
because it's part of the restaurant?
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): Yeah. What they have is at the ground level;
they're set back 30 feet. And then beyond the ground level, they come back, and then they have 20 from
there on up.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Thank you, Lourdes. In addition to the outdoor seating and the river walk, we
have provided two plazas, one here and one here, an area for congregation. The project will also provide
access to the river. If you are coming down the South Miami Bridge, you can't enter this property and
access the river right now. Now, we're going to create a pathway, a nice landscaped pathway to the river
that will connect to the river walk and -- either north or south. And there's another plaza adjacent to the
drop-off area for the building leading north, and at the same width as the river walk north of us. There's
retail on the street level on the garage to make it pedestrian friendly, although this is not one of the
elements of the river, the amenities along the river, but because we had to put the garage separate from the
building to make it street friendly, we're adding first floor ground level retail with canopies to make it
pedestrian friendly, and to add to the urban aspect of the building. Other private structures along the river
do not meet the 50-foot setback. Recent buildings developed along the river, including the City's own
Riverside Center, which was originally the private office building for Florida Power and Light is not
within the 50 feet. Similarly, the Santa Maria, the Bristol Tower, the American Airlines Arena and the
Sheraton Brickell Hotel, all these buildings are on the bay. They're not on the river. But when you go
there, you can't even access the bay. And here, this is a building that will be developed and will enhance
the public access to the river, will enhance the pedestrian experience of the river, and will make people
want to go there. It's not just a sidewalk; it's an activity center for it. I want to briefly address the
Manager's recommendation, because they deal with our ability to meet the 50-foot setback. It is our
position, very respectfully, that if it's not a legal hardship, and the hardship is not required for this
modification, but one of the requirements of the -- one of the major tenants of our building, which is going
to be the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) is that there be a separate garage. I believe that
part of the materials that were submitted to you include a letter from the GSA, the General Services
Administration that was sent in response to comments made about this very same element of the project
by the UDRB (Urban Development Review Board), where they specifically say that the Department of
Justice and the General Services Administration have both reviewed the site plan, this site plan, and have
determined that the proposed building meets the security and other requirements of the federal agency to
be housed in this building, in this case, the judges' offices for the INS. The tenant specifically requested
377 12/ 14/00
that the new building be designed with a parking garage separate from the office -building component.
The lessor's compliance with this requirement was a material inducement to the tenant's decision to
relocate to this building. After the Oklahoma City bombings, because of security concerns, it is a
requirement that there be no underground parking. So we cannot put this parking garage under the
building. So under all of the different criteria, this is the only way that we could build this building. And
we have done it in a way that maximizes the location of the property that enhances the location at the
river, and maximizes pedestrian and public uses of the site. To summarize --
Commissioner Sanchez: So because of the surrounding circumstances, that's the only way you could
build that?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Yes. We cannot -- this is the only economically feasible building in terms of what
we need to make the project feasible. And we need to accommodate all of the parking that's required.
This building requires no variances. It meets Code. The only thing that it required was urban --
Commissioner Sanchez: Does it meet parking? Does it meet the parking?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. Yes, it does. It complies with all the codes. They are under a class two special permit,
because it's new construction on the river. And it went to the Design Review Board for design review for
being on the water.
Ms. Bianchino: We would ask them whether or not -- the reason that they can't meet the 50-foot setback
is because of their tenant. And that's the reason.
Commissioner Regalado: It's because of what?
Ms. Slazyk: Their tenant.
Ms. Bianchino: Their tenant will not allow the parking to be underneath the building. And I'm
wondering whether your tenant will allow that walkway to be open to the public 24 hours a day.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Yes, they will. They have reviewed the site plan and they have approved it.
Ms. Bianchino: The only problem we have with this is that it's 20 feet of building straight up in the air. It
doesn't give you a feeling of openness. It doesn't really meet what we want to see happening on the river.
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, they got a good argument on the circumstances.
Ms. Bianchino: That's why they're here.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: That's why we're here. Let me move on to a couple of other points that I think are
very important for the Commissioners to consider. This afternoon -- this afternoon -- this evening you've
had some very exciting projects come before you. They are grandiose in many ways. This project is not a
skyscraper, but this project will be, if you approve it, the first office building to be built in downtown
Miami in 18 years, to quote Commissioner Winton. The developers have their financing in place. The
building is significantly pre -leased. They are ready to move ahead and put building permits. This is not
378 12/14/00
"pie in the sky." This is a done deal unless it doesn't get approved, in which case, it will not get built, and
it would remain a vacant parking lot. It's just a reality. You know, a lot of people who talked about
granting the modification of the setback said, you know, "If we give it to you, we have to give it to
everybody." And I submit to you in the Charter that if other projects on the river come before you and
they offer these pedestrian amenities, and they make our river look this beautiful, then you should grant it
to them, because they will have brought before you what the provision of the Charter is intended to do.
And I know that Mr. Bregman, who had spoken here on the One Miami Project, reviewed the site plan,
and he was so enthusiastic about it that he was kind enough to wait here another hour and a half to speak
on behalf of our project. And if I could allow him to speak briefly, I'd appreciate it.
Michael Bregman: Michael Bregman, 915 Northwest lst Avenue, Apartment H-1214. APA has not
reviewed this project, so I'm giving my comments on my own. I am very enthusiastic about this project.
This is exactly what Miami should be doing, because it has public uses right on the river. The walkway
leads directly to the shops and the cafes. This is the kind -- this is going to bring the kind of public life
that you want to have on the Miami River. The only -- And also, I'd like to note that there are some
elements there that are sensitive to history. It's not a historical building, but it's sensitive to the history.
You notice some of the stucco fagades. The only comment I'd like to make is -- and this is not something
on the part of the developer -- is that if it could possibly -- we could possibly have a flared sidewalk at the
intersection of Southwest 4th Street -- I'm sorry -- Southeast 4tb Street and Miami Avenue, where it comes
over the bridge, because the reason for that is because when cars come over that bridge, they really fly.
And if you're standing around that area, want to cross the street there, it can be very dangerous. That is a
public right-of-way, so that's really not the responsibility of the developer. But if we could have a flared
sidewalk at that point, it could actually create a third plaza, which would be, you know, great. And I think
you have one of the nicest projects on the river you probably have ever seen.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. At this time --
Commissioner Regalado: Question. This is going to house INS?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: This is going to relocate judges' offices and judges' courtrooms that are currently
down the street right here in downtown Miami. I always -- I'll give you the address but --
Commissioner Regalado: So this, this is sort of an option to what they want to do in Doral that they
couldn't do it?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: No, I don't think so. This is -- these are offices and INS facilities that are
currently downtown. They are in this building.
Commissioner Winton: It's not the 79th Street operation.
Commissioner Regalado: No, I know. But they were trying to build that in Doral so they --
Commissioner Winton: But that was 79th Street they were going to move, right.
Commissioner Regalado: -- they can bring the 79th plus the downtown together, because over there, you
have the trials. You have the INS judges.
379 12/14/00
Ms. Marrero -Priegues: Correct.
Commissioner Regalado: And in 79`h, you have the employees and the (inaudible).
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: I cannot answer the question, but Mr. Krinsky, I believe, who is very familiar with
exactly what is going -- who the tenants are going to be and what their operations are going to be.
Jeff Krinsky: Jeff Krinsky, 4717 North Bay Road. Hi. I'm the developer of the project. The only tenants
from the INS that are moving into this project are already a block and a half away, which is the judges for
the immigration and the U.S. Attorneys that deal with those immigration courts. There are no other
facilities that are coming in from the INS into this facility at all, and have never been contemplated.
Commissioner Regalado: What is the street that surrounds the building itself? You have the river in one
side and?
Unidentified Speaker: Miami Avenue.
Commissioner Regalado: Miami Avenue?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: No.
Mr. Krinsky: And Southeast 4th.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Southeast 4th
Commissioner Regalado: Southeast 4th
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Johnny, it's your district.
Commissioner Winton: Well, let's hear from staff.
Ms. Slazyk: The staff is recommending denial as presented. Although they are providing, you know,
public access to the river and the river walk, the -- you know, the 50 feet here could be achieved. It's a
tenant -driven solution to the design that is pushing the building up to the river. Now --
Commissioner Sanchez: But even with the conditions as she has explained it that will be --I mean --
Commissioner Winton: No, that's the point she's making.
Ms. Slazyk: We have to look at the -- this building, once it's here -- OK? They have this tenant now, but
once the building is here, it's going to be here for a very long time. And this is what I was talking about
when we were on the One Miami Project. The intent of the Waterfront Charter requirements are that open
to the air feeling by the river. And here, they've got -- while they have 30 feet at the ground floor, right
up above that building cuts back out toward the river, and then you only have 20 feet between the building
and the river for about ten stories or however many levels it is, I guess. It's approximately the equivalent
380 12/14/00
of ten. So that starts to crowd the building up against the river. And although they provided the
amenities, and the river walk and the public access --
Commissioner Sanchez: See, but this is where it comes in. We --
Ms. Slazyk: It's the character.
Commissioner Sanchez: We just -- we just approved with conditions Miami Project, Miami 1. OK?
Which is the same. Twenty feet is what they want. Less.
Ms. Slazyk: No, no.
Commissioner Winton: No.
Ms. Slazyk: The setback is from the water to the building, not how much -- how wide the river walk is.
It's where the building first is. On One Miami, the majority of the length of the project, the building did
meet the setback. They only had the 20 feet of river walk, but the building was set back 50 feet. So the
feeling you get from the building to the water was a whole lot more space of open to the sky type thing.
Here, it's closer. But the reason for is a tenant -driven reason, you know, that while it's valid for them,
what we're going to end up with is a building very close to the river.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Well --
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: May I respond?
Commissioner Sanchez: Well I think that -- go ahead.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: If I may. It's not tenant driven. It's economic viable -- economic viability driven.
Otherwise, the building just doesn't get built. I disagree with the -- the way in which we can justify
approving this modification for the One Miami Project and not approving it for here. I don't think that
when you walk -- And I was at the river, the Miami River Commission presentation that was made for
that project, and I saw the renderings of the river walk. It's a sidewalk. And they're here, and they got
approved, and I'm happy for them. They're my former colleagues. But it was a sidewalk. And the
feeling that you get relative to the river is nowhere near the feeling that you get for this building. This is
not an aerial shot saying, oh, look at this beautiful skyscraper. This is a building that was designed to take
advantage and maximize the river, and make people want to come here, and want to eat there, and want to
shop there, and want to walk down the bridge and traverse the side of the property, and walk along the
river. The other way, with the other project, you don't get that feeling. I know it's objective, but that's
what the architect design had intended.
Commissioner Winton: What other project are you talking about?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: One Miami.
Commissioner Winton: How did you walk that project? It's not built.
381 12/ 14/00
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: No, I didn't walk it. I was there. I saw the architectural renderings that were
prepared for that project for the Miami River Commission presentation. And in fact, they have a street.
You have the river walk, and then there's a -- there's emergency access vehicle road.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. But -- and that is the issue. The requirement is a 50-foot setback. That's
the requirement. And whether you like the aesthetics or not, the requirement is still a 50-foot setback.
And what we're chopping off of that setback is 20 feet. No, we're chopping off 30 feet of the 50-foot
setback.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah, 20 at the ground, 30 up above. Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: Now -- now -- and -- and one of the conditions that we placed on the other group
was this whole treatment of pedestrian flow of traffic, including the point I made about the differential
between -- the differential point there between the river walk and the road that's beside it, and said that
that process, as far as I'm concerned, they need to look at very closely, because it doesn't create the same
kind of ambience that we're looking for. But in terms of meeting the rule of the law, which is a 50-foot
setback, there are only two points along that piece, until you got to the very point, the very mouth of the
river. There are only two points where they were out of compliance, and that out of compliance was by
two or three feet, not by 30 feet.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: I understand. But my interpretation of the requirement in the Charter is that it
establishes that setback, and you may modify it if you feel that it satisfies these conditions. And our
position is that it does. I mean, I'll read it again just for clarification. The above setback maybe modified
by the City Commission after design and site plan review -- which we've undergone -- and public hearing
only if the Commission determines that the modification requested -- namely, the setback -- provides
public benefit, such as direct public access or providing public access to the river -- people can't even get
into this property right now -- public walkways, plaza dedications, covered parking up to the flood plain
and other comparable benefits, or comparable benefits which promote a better urban environment and
public advantages, or which preserve natural features. It's in the disjunctive, "or, or."
Commissioner Sanchez: The City's recommendation is for denial?
Ms. Slazyk: Yes. The recommendation is for denial.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right. Any Commissioner wants to address the applicant? Do you want to
ask her any questions? Johnny, it's in your district.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner --
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Well, it's a huge struggle here, because you're always caught in the battle of
trying to get development done downtown, which we want, and creating the kind of ambience in the
community that we're looking for as we develop this stuff. And while this project, I think, has done really
a good job of trying to create that appropriate street level ambience -- and I think they really have worked
hard at it all the way around the building. I mean, it really looks right. The problem is that what we're
382 12/ 14/00
going to be agreeing to here is a huge, huge exception to the rule that's been created. And I'm very, very
concerned about the precedent that that sets if we allow such a huge, huge variance go through here. And
I -- and that's what I was sitting over here talking to staff about. I'm struggling with that. I don't
understand -- I'm really struggling with this whole idea that we will grant that kind of variance, even if
they have done a really good job of the -- of the pedestrian area that they've carved out for the community.
The variance is gigantic. And I am struggling with that, and I'm struggling with what it's going to mean
to our community long-term, because if we're doing -- in our next few years, as we continue to work at
this and we try to bring new infrastructure dollars to the table, we create more demand for product out
there, and we're going to see more and more of this stuff. And I would hate to get started here on the
wrong side of the fence and defending for the next at least three years that I'm going to be here the fact
that, "Well, you gave them a 30-foot variance from the 50-foot setback, so why can't I have it? I'm going
to do the same kind of thing you've done." And I don't -- it's hard for me.
Commissioner Regalado: I know your struggle. But I just wanted to tell you that every time that we deal
with an issue that comes from the past to haunt us, we have to remember that there were people on this
dais that did things that were not really nice for the City. So with that in mind, you have to decide what
you want to do.
Commissioner Winton: Well, what we're trying to do is set a better standard for the future, so that our
successors don't have to deal with this, with --
Commissioner Regalado: Johnny Winton just --
Commissioner Winton: that our successors get to deal with the good stuff and not the bad stuff.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, exactly.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, we either approve or disapprove it. The recommendation of the City is for
denial. So.
Commissioner Winton: Well --
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: If I may. I don't know if this makes any -- any difference. I hope it does,
obviously. But one of the requirements or the suggestions of the Urban Development Review Board was
that we maximize the setback in the front. There's five feet there that we could shift the building five feet
to the front and add five feet to the back. So we would set it back -- it would be 25 instead of 20, being
half.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well I --
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: But that's shifting the building.
Commissioner Winton: Isn't there some other way you could design that garage to make the footprint of
the garage smaller?
383 12/14/00
Mr. Yue: No, actually, because at the deepest spot, actually, as was said, talking about the deepest spot
where this -- can I have the site plan? It's actually 270 feet. And again, for the building to function, the
INS gave us a footprint, specifically 120, because they have to have double circulation. Excuse me.
Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me. Just for the record, is the parking -- the restrictions that you have for
the parking are because of safety issues.
Mr. Yue: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: That are strict guidelines to assure that --
Mr. Yue: There's no bomb underneath the building.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- there isn't any threat to the judges and the members of the INS that are going
to be in that building.
Mr. Yue: And that's why. And as far as the parking garage, the standard parking garage has to be 120
feet, because a typical aisle is 60 feet or 24 feet drive aisle and so forth. So that basically takes up 240
feet. So we have five feet landscape setback requirement on one side, so we have 20 feet. And actually,
as a way to address one of the comments from the Urban Design Review Board is that they want to
maximize a little bit more, because we had -- we do have some judges -- secure parking on grade. So we
want to screen that. So we want to maximize the screening of the landscape on this front side. And that's
what Ines was talking about. If you allow us, we can, because during the River Commission, when we
were in that meeting, they were asking to see whether we can get 16 feet instead of the 20 feet. There is
an eight feet clear pathway between the bumper zone, safety zones and all those things. And we could
shift it five feet back there to give us 13 feet.
Commissioner Winton: I'm there now. I -- as much as I would like to support this I -- you know, I know
the guys that are developing this. I think they're good guys. I can't make the motion to overrule staff. So
-- so I guess I'll make the motion in support of the staff recommendation that denies the variance, because
the variance is just too significant.
Commissioner Sanchez: There is a motion to deny by Winton. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second by Regalado. Open for discussion. Hearing none, all in favor, say
aye.
Commissioner Regalado: Aye.
Commissioner Winton: Aye.
Commissioner Sanchez: Anyone opposing has the same rights.
Commissioner Teele: No.
384 12/ 14/00
0
11
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Winton: I didn't hear it. What was the vote?
Commissioner Regalado: Two to two.
Commissioner Sanchez: Two/two. It fails.
Commissioner Winton: All right. Then what's next?
Commissioner Sanchez: Does it fail or does it come back to the next meeting?
Commissioner Regalado: No, it fails. It fails.
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah. Basically, it means no action. So.
Commissioner Sanchez: No action? Well how about let's say -- let's -- you're able to move it -- you said
you were able to give five more feet, correct? '
Mr. Yue: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: So instead of 20, it'll be 25 feet.
Mr. Yue: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: Was that under the conditions, Mr. Winton?
Commissioner Winton: It's too much of a variance.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's too much of a variance? Well, you know, it's your district. I'm --
Commissioner Teele: You know what? Make the motion again.
Commissioner Winton: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Sanchez: Make the motion again.
Commissioner Winton: Who?
Commissioner Sanchez: You.
Commissioner Regalado: You make the motion.
Commissioner Winton: My motion is to support the staff s denial of this variance for this project.
385 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: Motion to deny.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconded by Commissioner Regalado. Open for discussion.
Commissioner Teele: Let me just say this: It really is a little bit much. And, you know, if this were -- the
use of this building is not going to really be residential or something that is -- I mean, you all kept making
reference to the One Miami. I think -- didn't you make reference to the previous discussion on the One
Miami?
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Just relative to the river walk that they're providing.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, I understand. But I -- you know, I listened to that, and I was trying to
support that concept. But the big distinction there is the use that we're really desperately trying to get in
the downtown area is residential uses. And I mean, I think there is a much more valid public policy
reason why we would be willing to entertain, and to work and to provide some different standards. And
so I'm going to support the recommendation of the Commissioner who lives in -- who represents the
district and the staff, and because I really do think that this is not the way to go about doing this at this
time. And so I -- I did vote initially, but I'm going to change my vote and support the staff
recommendation.
Mr. Krinsky: Before you vote, may I add --
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, we're through with it. You vote no. I'm turning it over to you. I'm
taking into consideration, first of all, that it's going to -- it's -- they have conditions which really require
them, for the safety of the people that are going to be utilizing that area, I'm taking that into consideration.
Of course, it's going to be a three/one, but, you know, I'll go ahead and change my vote and also vote
"no" on it -- yes, "yes" on it. So --
Commissioner Teele: Call the question.
Commissioner Sanchez: Call the question. We already did.
Commissioner Teele: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: We haven't voted on it?
Commissioner Teele: Not on the revote.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Call the question.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call.
386 12/14/00
•
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1140
A MOTION TO DENY VARIANCE TO PERMIT A 20-FOOT
SETBACK (50-FOOT REQUIRED) FOR PROPERTY BOUNDED ON
THE EAST BY THE METRO MOVER GUIDEWAY, ON THE WEST
BY SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE, ON THE NORTH BY S.E. 4TH STREET
AND ON THE SOUTH BY MIAMI RIVER.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Ms. Maer: And that was "yes," to support the staff recommendation of denial.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a denial, yes. Yes.
Ms. Marrero-Priegues: Thank you all. Good evening.
387 12/14/00
Ll
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving on to -- what is it? Seven, PZ-7.
Lourdes Slazyk (Assistant Director, Planning and Zoning): PZ-7 is a second reading, a companion item
to PZ-8 for a change of land use and zoning.
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-7 was approved by Planning and Zoning.
Ms. Slazyk: It was approved by you on first reading.
Commissioner Sanchez: Planning by zero to six, and it was approved by us by first reading. Is there a
motion for approval?
Commissioner Teele: So move, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved by Commissioner Teele. Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second by Regalado. Open for discussion. Hearing none, all in favor, say
aye.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): It's an ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Ordinance.
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, it's an ordinance? Read the ordinance.
Ms. Maer: Are you ready for me to read it?
Commissioner Winton: Where did Commissioner Gort go?
Ms. Maer: Read the ordinance?
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
388 12/14/00
® 0
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENTS, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
THE COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN BY CHANGING
THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY' 5932 NORTHEAST 2No AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM "MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIFAMILY
RESIDENTIAL TO "RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL"; MAKING
FINDINGS; DIRECTING TRANSMITTALS TO AFFECTED
AGENCIES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERA 31LITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second
and final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Teele, seconded by
Commissioner Regalado, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and
was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12007.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Sanchez: It passed unanimously.
389 12/14/00
El
�7,
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving on to number 8. Number 8 is second reading to amend Ordinance
11000, medium density residential to C-1 restricted commercial, to change the zoning atlas. It was
approved by Planning and Zoning. Zoning Board recommended approval to the City. The vote was
seven/zero. Is there a motion to approve? Oh, it's an ordinance. Read the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Is there a motion to approve?
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Approved by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Mr. Teele. I'm sorry. Read
the ordinance.
Commissioner Winton: She's halfway through, the middle.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're getting delirious here.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk, call the roll
390 12/14/00
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT (S), AMENDING PAGE NO. 13 OF THE ZONING
ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, ARTICLE 4,
SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-3
MULTIFAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO C-1
RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT
APPROXIMATELY 5932 NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, LEGALLY DESCRIBED ON ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A";
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner
Teele, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12008.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Sanchez: It passes unanimously.
391 12/14/00
i
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ number 9 is a second reading ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moved by Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconded by Winton.
Miriam Maer (Assistant City Attorney): Ready?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: Read the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call.
392 12/14/00
i
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING
ARTICLE 4, SECTION 401, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 9, SECTION 934, COMMUNITY BASED
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES, AND ARTICLE 25, SECTION 2502,
SPECIFIC DEFINITIONS, TO MODIFY PROVISIONS RELATED TO
COMMUNITY BASED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Regalado, 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: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12009.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Sanchez: It passes unanimously.
393 12/14/00
® 0
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-10, second reading.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moved by Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconded by Mr. Teele. Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Read the
ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE
9, SECTION 916, INTERIM PARKING, TO MODIFY PROVISIONS
RELATED TO INTERIM PARKING; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner
Teele, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
394 12/14/00
•
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12010.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
Commissioner Sanchez: It passes unanimously.
395 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-11, second reading.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moved by Mr. Winton.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconded by Mr. Teele.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: No discussion on the item. Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11000, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY AMENDING ARTICLE
9, SECTION 910, UNITY OF TITLE, TO ALLOW ACCEPTANCE OF
A COVENANT IN LIEU OF A UNITY OF TITLE FOR PROPERTIES
ZONED R-4 MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner
Teele, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and adopted
by the .following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
396 12/14/00
•
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12011.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
397 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-12, second reading.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there a motion? Motion by Mr. Winton.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seconded by Mr. Teele. Open for discussion. Hearing none, read the ordinance.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: You don't want to amend anything, right? OK. Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 62/ARTICLE V OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ZONING AND
PLANNING/APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS AND ALTERNATE
MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND ZONING
BOARD," TO AMEND PROVISIONS RELATED TO COURTESY
NOTICE FOR CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATIONS; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTION 62-129(4) OF SAID
CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
398 12/14/00
0
11
passed on its first reading, by title, at the meeting of November 16, 2000, was taken up for its second and
final reading, by title, and adoption. On motion of Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner
Teele, the ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title, and was passed and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 12012.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to
the members of the City Commission and to the public.
399 12/14/00
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-13, first reading.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moved by Mr. Winton. Seconded by Mr. Teele. Open for discussion. Hearing
none -- it's an ordinance.
Commissioner Teele: That is the best presentation the Planning staff has given on --
Commissioner Sanchez: Read the ordinance, Mr. City Attorney.
Note for the Record: The City Attorney read the pending ordinance into the public record by title only.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk, call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
CHAPTER 62/ARTICLE VI OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "ZONING AND
PLANNING/ZONING AND PLANNING FEES" TP PROVIDE FOR A
TRAFFIC STUDY REVIEW FEE FOR MAJOR USE SPECIAL
PERMIT APPLICATIONS; MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING
SECTION 62-156 OF SAID CODE CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
was introduced by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Teele, 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
400 12/ 14/00
•
•
Commissioner Sanchez: PZ-14, it's a resolution. Is there --
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): It was continued.
Commissioner Sanchez: It was continued? OK.
401 12/ 14/00
•
Commissioner Sanchez: Is there a motion where we --
Vice Chairman Gort: I have several items I want to bring up.
Commissioner Teele: You have what?
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a couple of pocket items. There is a pocket item. Go ahead, read it,
Manager.
Frank Rollason (Assistant City Manager -Operations): I've got a pocket item for the Manager dealing with
the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and being -- authorizing the City Manager to enter
into a contract with the State of Florida to be able to recoup monies through FEMA for the recent
flooding.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Mr. Rollason: It's a resolution.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's moved. Is there a second? Is there a second? Any further discussion? OK, I
need a motion to close the PZ (Planning and Zoning) meeting.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's been moved and seconded. All in favor state it by saying "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
402 12/ 14/00
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1141
A MOTION TO CLOSE CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING AND
ZONING ITEMS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Vice Chairman Gort: Reopen the regular meeting.
Commissioner Winton: So move.
Commissioner Teele: Second.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
MOTION NO. 00-1142
A MOTION TO RECONVENE THE REGULAR PORTION OF
TODAY'S COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA.
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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
403 12/ 14/00
Vice Chairman Gort: There's a motion to approve the request by the Manager to -- that's been moved and
seconded. Any further discussion? Being none, all in favor, state it by saying aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Winton, who moved for its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 00-1142.1
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DISASTER
RELIEF FUNDING AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO
THE CITY ATTORNEY, WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACCEPTING FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
("FEMA") GRANT FUNDS, FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF
EMERGENCY RELIEF EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY OF
MIAMI DURING AND IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE OCTOBER
SOUTH FLORIDA FLOODS; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO SUBMIT RELATED CLAIMS TO FEMA AND TO
ACCEPT PAYMENTS FOR SAME.
(Here follows body of the 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 Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Johnny L. Winton
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Commissioner Sanchez: Move to adjourn.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
404 12/ 14/00
•
r
There being no further business to come before the City Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:40
p.m.
ATTEST:
WALTER J. FOEMAN
City Clerk
SYLVIA LOWMAN
Assistant City Clerk
WIFREDO GORT,
Vice Chairman
(SEAL)
405 12/14/00