HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1999-09-15 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI
' f
* ; INCORF''ORATEG � *
COMMISSION
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL
Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk
•
INDEX
MINUTES OF SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING
September 15,1999
ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION
1.
REQUEST ASSISTANCE ON BEHALF OF THE BAHAMIAN FOUNDATION
9/15/99
FOR RECOVERY EFFORTS IN CONNECTION WITH HURRICANE FLOYD.
DISCUSSION
2
2.
RESCHEDULE SEPTEMBER 14 COMMISSION MEETING TO TAKE PLACE
9/15/99
ON SEPTEMBER 21, 1999. (See section 11).
R-99-617
2-3
3.
(A) PUBLIC HEARING ON BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000;
9/15/99
(B) MODIFY PUBLIC INFORMATION PERSONNEL; COMMENTS RE
M-99-611
AIRPORT NOISE;
ORDINANCE
ORDIANCE
(C) REQUEST ALTERNATIVES RE DISPOSITION OF KNIGHT CENTER;
M-99-620
(D) DISCUSS MODERNIZATION OF ORANGE BOWL;
ORDINANCE
(E) REQUEST FULL ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTIES FOR AD VALOREM
3-210
TAXATION PURPOSES;
(F) REVIEW OF EACH DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET;
(G) REQUEST EXTENDED HOURS OF OPERATION FOR CITY SWIMMING
POOLS;
(H) ENCOURAGE PRIVATE SPONSORSHIP FOR CITY PARKS;
(I) CONSIDER CONTRACTING OUTSIDE FOR INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY;
(J) REQUEST INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT TO CHECK APPROPRIATE
FEE TO CHARGE DADE COUNTY FOR USE OF CITY PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF
WAY RE WATER AND SEWER;
(K) DISCUSS SISTERS CITIES PROGRAM AND FUNDING;
(L) APPROVE BUDGET FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(CRA);
(M) AMEND BUDGET BY REDUCING THREE PERCENT (3%);
(N) FIRST READING: DEFINE, DESIGNATE TERRITORIAL LIMITS FOR
CITY FOR TAXATION — FIX MILLAGE AT 9.5 MILLS;
(o) FIRST READING: MAKE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FY 1999-2000.
4.
APPROVE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2004.
9/15/99
R 99-621
210-211
*1 0
5.
DEFER CONSIDERATION OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT, INCLUDING
9/15/99
BUDGEOUTLOOK AND UPDATE.
DISCUSSION
211
6.
(A) FIRST READING: TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF DOWNTOWN
9/15/99
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT — FIX MILLAGE AND LEVY DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE
DISTRICT — FIX MILLAGE AND LEVY TAXES;
211-217
(B) FIRST READING: APPROPRIATIONS FOR DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DDA) FOR FY 1999-2000;
(C) COMMENTS RELATED TO PARKING REVENUES TO BE EARMARKED
FOR DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENTS.
7.
APPROVE BUDGET OF BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST
9/15/99
($2,923,500) FY 1999-2000.
R-99-622
217-218
8.
APPROVE BUDGET OF MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION AUTHORITY
9/15/99
($735,000) FOR FY 1999-2000
R 99-623
218-219
9.
APPROVE BUDGET OF DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING
9/15/99
($7,610,036) FOR FY 1999-2000
R 99-624
219-220
10.
APPROVE BUDGET FOR OPERATION OF GUSMAN CENTER FOR THE
9/15/99
PERFORMING ARTS AND THE OLYMPIA BUILDING (DEPARTMENT OF
R 99-625
OFF-STREET PARKING).
220-222
11.
NEXT MEETING: SEPTEMBER 21, 1999 AT 9:30 A.M. — FIRE ASSESSMENT
9/15/99
AND SOLID WASTE FEE MATTERS TO BE HEARD AFTER 5:05 P.M. (See
DISCUSSION
section 2).
222-223
• . •
MINUTES OF SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
*****************
On the 151h day of September 1999, the City Commission of Miami, Florida met at its regular
meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida in special session in connection
with the FY 1999 —2000 Budget.
The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m. by Commissioner J.L. Plummer, Jr., (hereinafter
referred to as Chairman Plummer), with the following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Wilfredo Gort (District 1)
Commissioner J.L. Plummer, Jr (District 2)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4)
ALSO PRESENT:
Donald Warshaw, Acting City Manager
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk
Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk
ABSENT:
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5)
Chairman Plummer: First of all, the meeting which was cancelled yesterday because of the storm will be
next Tuesday, all day, from 9:30 on. That for the purposes of the fire fee is in next Tuesday's meeting.
It could -- as the City Attorney has said, anyone who wants to raise the issue today for the approval or
whatever of the fire fee would be next Tuesday. Trying to get, if we may, an orderly process, I would ask
anyone who wishes to speak today to the regular budget, and if you would go to the Clerk, please, and
register your name so, at the time where the public has a right to make their comments, we will call, in an
orderly fashion, those people as you have registered. This. meeting will start in four minutes. The time is
5:05 p.m. According to State Statutes, we are in compliance. I will call upon Commissioner Sanchez to
offer the invocation, and remembering in his prayer how lucky we were of.yesterday and pray for those
who are going to suffer the consequence some time tonight that wasn't here in our area. Commissioner
Sanchez to give the prayer and Commissioner Gort to give the pledge.
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Joe Sanchez, who then led those present in a pledge
of allegiance to the flag.
September 15, 1999
1. REQUEST ASSISTANCE ON BEHALF OF THE BAHAMIAN FOUNDATION FOR
RECOVERY EFFORTS IN CONNECTION WITH HURRICANE FLOYD.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I have received a call from the Bahamian Foundation here in Miami.
I am going to turn them over to you to ask what can be done by this City to aid their brothers and sisters
that have been absolutely devastated. I think that what they are interested in is a collection of clothing and
food, and I would ask you; sir, on behalf of this Commission, to do what you can to assist the Bahamian
Foundation locally, to assist their brothers and sisters in the island.
2.; RESCHEDULE SEPTEMBER 14 COMMISSION MEETING ` TO TAKE PLACE ON
SEPTEM 3ER 21, 1999. (See section 11):
Chairman Plummer: I have a -- what did you do with that resolution? I have a resolution, which we need
to pass to make it official. A resolution of the Miami City Commission rescheduling the regular City
Commission Meeting, originally set for September 14, 1999, to take place on Tuesday, September
21,1999; further rescheduling all public hearings advertised and originally set for the September 14, 1999
to be heard on Tuesday, September 21, 1999, at the same time set forth in the original notices, as
applicable. Motion made by...
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Move it.
Chairman Plummer: ...Gort, seconded by Sanchez. All in favor say "aye." Show it unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-617
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
RESCHEDULING THE REGULAR CITY COMMSSION MEETING
ORIGINALLY SET FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 1999, TO TAKE PLACE
ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1999; FURTHER RESCHEDULING
ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS ADVERTISED AND ORIGINALLY SET
FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 1999, TO BE HEARD ON TUESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 21, 1999, AT THE SAME TIME SET FORTH IN THE
ORIGINAL NOTICES, AS APPLICABLE.
2 September 15, 1999
(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 Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commission Tomas Regalado
Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
3. (A) PUBLI&AEARING-ON BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000;
(B) MODIFY, -PUBLIC, INFORMATION PERSONNEL; COMMENTS re&AIRPORT NOISE .I
(C) REQUEST:ALTERNATIV.ES re DISPOSITION OF KNIGHT CENTER;
(D) DISCUSS MODERNIZATION'O"'ORANGE BOWL; .
(E) REQUEST:= FULL ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTIES FOR ADAD VALOREM TAXATION
PURPOSES a
(F) REVIEW OFEACH DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET;
(G) REQUEST EXTENDED HOURS 'OF OPERATION FOR CITY SWI[VIMINGPOOLS; N,y
(H)-ENCOURAGE PRIVATE. SPONSORSHIP FOR CITY PARKS;
Xk
(I), CONSIDER CONTRACTING OUTSIDE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY;
(J) REQUEST INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT TOz CHECK APPROPRIATE FEE TO ,CHARGE;
DADE COUNTY FOR USE OF CITY PUBLIC RIGHTS=OF WAY re WATER AND SEWER;"
DISCUSS SISTERS CITIES PROGRAM:AND,FUNDING
-(L) APPROV E BUDGET FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)
(M)"AMEND BUDGET BYREDUCING THREE PERCENT (3%);
(Nj „FIRST READING: DEFINE; DESIGNATE TERRITORIAL . LIMITS FOR , CITY` FOR;
TAXATION = FIX MILEAGE AT 93MILLS;. .
,(0) FIRST READING: MAKE, PROPRIATION'S FOR FY 19992006.
Chairman Plummer: Once again...
Unidentified Speaker: But I just come for the purpose — we live at Biscayne Park...
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Ma'am, would you please talk to the Manager?
Unidentified Speaker: Oh. Because the lady over there told me to speak to you.
Chairman Plummer: But not while the meeting is going on. I am sorry. Ladies and gentlemen,
hopefully, for an orderly process, once again, I would ask any of the people of the public who wish to
speak to an issue today to please.register with the Clerk, for the purposes of an orderly process. Mr.
Manager, we will follow, as closely as possible, the agenda and it says Item No. 1. Discussion of the
proposed millage and tentative budget for the City of Miami. "A:" Percentage increase in millage over
rollback rate. Response on the record.
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manger): The Budget Director will address the millage issue.
September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. It's not on. Go ahead.
Luie Brennan (Interim Director, Office of Management and Budget): OK Louis Brenan, Interim Director.
"A:" Percentage increase in millage over rollback rate. Response: thirty-three hundreds of one percent.
Chairman Plummer: "B: Specific purpose for which ad valorem tax revenues are being increased.
Response.
Mr. Brennan: To eliminate the annual structural deficit; matching recurring annual expenses with
recurring annual revenue.
Chairman Plummer: And the purpose?
Mr. Brennan: To fund annual municipal services including, but not limited to Police, Fire and Solid
Waste.
Chairman Plummer: And the cost factor?
Mr. Brennan: Three hundred and ninety-seven thousand dollars seven hundred and forty-five;
percentage, one hundred percent.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you sir. Mr. Clerk, do we have any idea how long before Commissioner
Teele might be present? I hate to start without him.
Walter Foeman (City Clerk): Commissioner, I can call his office. We had previously called and he had
indicated -- his staff had indicated that he was in route.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: For the sake of the people that are here today and the people that are watching on
television, can we ask for the Budget Director to explain what we just went through?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort's request is in order. And, Mr. Budget Director, if you would, please,
explain the process up to Item C. Do you understand the request?
Mr. Brennan: Yes. In July we -- on July 1" we received from Dade County the estimated assessed
property value. That assessed property value was thirteen billion three seventy-six three three one one
nine five ($13,376,331,195). Based upon that assessed property value...
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Billion or million?
Mr. Brenan: Billion. That's for property value.
Chairman Plummer: I thought you said million.
Mr. Brennan: Billion. I am sorry. Based upon that, we calculated at 9.5 mills, which gave us a total all
non ad valorem taxes proposed to be a hundred and thirty —three million seven six three three one two
($133,763,312).
4 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Of the thirteen billion dollars ($13,000,000,000) of assessed value, how much of
that is tax exempt?
Mr. Brennan: I am afraid I do not have that answer right now. I will probably have to do some research to
give you that answer.
Chairman Plummer. I think it is very important for the public to know. Mr. Manager.
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): You want to know much of the assessed value of the properties in
the City is tax exempt?
Chairman Plummer: That's what I think is very, very important.
Commissioner Sanchez: What percent? I thought it was like twenty-five percent.
Chairman Plummer: It was my opinion about thirty, but that's why I am asking the question.
Mr. Warshaw: He wants a dollar value.
Chairman Plummer: You know, I think it's important to know that.
Vice Chairman Gort: What's the difference between the gross taxable value and effective taxable value?
Mr. Brennan: What was the question?
Vice Chairman Gort: What's the difference between the gross taxable value compared to the effective
taxable value? For example -- I will give you a good.example.
Mr. Brennan: The gross taxable value is what has been reported to us by Dade County's report. Then,
eventually, after this budget hearing, they report back to us what the effective taxable value is.
Vice Chairman Gort: Which means is what people would pay. So, the difference could be part of what
the tax exempt is.
Mr. Warshaw: As well as what we don't collect.
Vice Chairman Gort: As well as what we don't collect.
Mr. Warshaw: Correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: Because we have the same problem with DDA (Downtown Development
Authority). We have to go in the millage according to the figures that you give us, but three years ago we
realized those are not the actual figures. We have to set up a lower budget. OK. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: My question would have to be, the thirteen billion dollars ($13,000,000,000), is that
the taxable amount; does not include the exempt, or is that a total assessment, less the tax exempt?
Because a gross is gross. That's easy to figure.
Mr. Brennan: It is a total, less the tax exempt.
5 September 15, 1999
0 1 0
Chairman Plummer: So, you are saying that, if it's a third, that roughly four billion dollars
($4,000,000,000) is not taxable; is that correct, or it's more?
Mr. Warshaw: We are not saying what the amount is, Commissioner. We will get that answer for you.
Chairman Plummer: OK. As you know, Mr. Manager, for two years now, at the State Legislature, the
one priority item -- and I am saying this for Mr. Sanchez -- has been the tax exempt. We have profit -
making companies within the City of Miami who are tax exempt. In my opinion, it is absolutely wrong
that they should be exempt. But as long as they can qualify under the State Statutes under a terminology
called "Public Purpose," they can qualify to be tax exempt, and it's wrong and it shouldn't be.
Mr. Warshaw: It has a big impact on our budget, an enormous impact.
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Tremendous. Did we find out on Commissioner Teele? Mr. Gort,
proceed.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let me go back to this because I think it is important. We have grossed eighteen
billion dollars ($18,000,000,000) gross; that we have effected taxable thirteen billion ($13,000,000,000).
There is a difference of five billion dollars ($5,000,000,000). This should be my understanding, the tax
exempt should be included in that five billion dollars ($5,000,000,000) because, if not, then we are doing
something that we need to look at. Because if we are not collecting five billion ($5,000,000,000) dollars
because people are not paying taxes, then we've got a problem.
Chairman Plummer: It is usually five percent (5%) as a set aside.
Vice Chairman Gort: So...
Mr. Warshaw: We will get you that number.
Vice Chairman Gort. OK
Chairman Plummer: I don't want my will to be prevailing. Does the Commission wish to proceed
without Commissioner Teele or do we know anything yet, Mr. Clerk?
Mr. Foeman: No, we do not, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Plummer: Does Mr.Teele have somebody from his office here in the Chambers? Well, Mr.
Manager, I think we should proceed. I think we really should and we shouldn't inconvenience the public.
I will now go to Item C. Mr. Clerk, if you will bring me the list, please, of the people who have requested
to be heard on Item 1. I would ask, and I am going to try to impose, if I may -- does everybody feel that
they can handle what they need to in three minutes? Let's try, OK, because I have twelve speakers. The
first one is the notorious Boom -Boom. We ask all of the speakers, please, to come forward, give us your
name and your mailing address.
Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: Good afternoon.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Boom -Boom, I have word that Commissioner Teele has called. He
is stuck in traffic and is expected momentarily. Proceed, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: My name is Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga, 2469 S.W. 141h Street. I don't know if I
should have come here today.
September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: I said three minutes to the Clerk, please.
Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: This is another exercise in futility. Because a budget that has been --
that has taken I do not know how many employees in the Budget Department to prepare to ask questions,
when I have just seen three papers, it shows that something is wrong, and I have not been provided, yet.
By running or skimming through the issues, I can say that budgeting, in my definition, is the art practiced
by bureaucratic magicians, and we have plenty of them here working in the City of Miami. Another issue
is -- regarding budgeting is that even a fool like me can draw up a balanced budget on paper. Another
one, which is -- I think it was said by David Stuckman (phonetic). I think it was the Budget Director
under Ronald Regan. When he says, "Do you really understand what is going on with all of these
numbers? I don't think they do." And I don't think that the people responsible know. If they allow me to
ask a few questions. And then, finally, for the -- for all the people in Miami who work on this
bureaucracy, the most delicious of all privileges is spending other people's money, and this applies to all
of them. That means that when we spend our money, it is a totally different ball game. For them it is very
easy to spend other people's money. Like in this budget on page three, I see Non Departmental Accounts
and Special Accounts, twenty-eight million -- twenty-nine millions. That means almost ten percent of the
budget that is unassigned, and that's after the pensions of seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000); the
Police of eighty-seven million dollars ($87,000,000); the Risk Management, forty-eight million dollars
($48,000,000); Fire Rescue, forty-eight million dollars ($48,000,000). On top of that, they have twenty-
nine million dollars ($29,000,000) unassigned. So, this is like a blank check that we are giving to this
administration, especially if you read page nineteen. And, .then, just to take one replacement of Citywide
fleet. They were originally assigned for five million dollars ($5,000,000). IIt's not enough because the
streets are in very bad shape. They increase it to ten million dollars ($10,000,000). They doubled the
figures. Come on, babies.
Chairman Plummer:, Thank you, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: This is incredible, and good luck.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Thank God, I never voted for any one of you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Keep up the good work. The next speaker is Mary Davis.
Ms. Mary Davis: Thank you for the opportunity and good afternoon to everyone.
Chairman Plummer: Pull the microphone down, please. Thank you.
Ms. Davis: Thank you for this opportunity. It's my first time. My concern is...
Chairman Plummer: Ms. Davis, please, if you would, your address, mailing address.
Ms. Davis: Oh, I am sorry. Thirty -Two Zero Four S.W. 2°d Street. Actually, we don't mind and we do
understand that we do need to raise the budget up a little bit. It's not that I am against or for it, but we
have confidence. This is -- I am talking -- when I say we, my family. The only thing is, in the area where
we live -- I hope, when I mention DAC, all these air flights coming over the house twenty-four hours a
day, two, three and four o'clock in the morning, our privacy is invaded. And if you do understand, we do
need our rest. We can't hear T.V. or have family over and talk. If you want to raise the taxes for good
quality and for the City to grow, fine. We are not against it. Just as long as the money is used right and
September 15, 1999
it's been — well, we have the auditors -- I hope we have fine auditors to look after our money. And
whatever you men do, I know you are doing it in good will for us. And thank you very much.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, Ma'am. I am going to ask -- Mr. Regalado and a couple of others,
including myself, have been working very diligently on the noise of the airport. They are on a pilot
program right now and I will ask -- because I was chairing the meeting -- Mr. Regalado, if you would,
give a very brief -- because it's not a budget item, but a very brief answer.
Commissioner Tomas Regalado: Right. We just had one of the noise monitors installed at Bryant Park.
Unfortunately, some gangs vandalized this monitor and it's being replaced. Plus, it would be on a fence
sort of environment. We feel that, if we can put pressure on the Federal Government, through the City
and the County, that we have the right plan to change the flight pattern. We would hope that this plan
would be in place by January to coincide with the new FAA (Federal Aviation Administration)
regulations, in terms of noise and new engines. But I would tell you, Ms. Davis, that the City has been
taking the lead since about two or three years ago on this issue, and that we have, by pilots who live in the
City, a good plan, a solid plan, to cut fifty percent of the noise in the area where you live. As a matter of
fact, you live right close to Captain Eduardo Ferrer. He lives one block from you, who was the person
appointed by the City Commission two years ago and who designed that plan. We hope, with the
cooperation of the County and the Federal Government, that we will reduce the noise by fifty percent very
soon.
Ms. Davis: Could you give me about ten seconds?
Chairman Plummer: Ten seconds you have.
Ms. Davis: OK. I just hope we don't have to end up like what happened in L.A. (Los Angeles), that it
went to the Supreme Court. They had to take the airport to the Supreme Court...
Commissioner Regalado: No. The airlines agree.
Ms. Davis: The airline?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: They were one of the first.
Ms. Davis: No. They put in...
Commissioner Regalado: American Airlines and eighty-five percent of all the airlines agree. They have
supported that plan drafted by the City of Miami and the County.
Ms. Davis: Yes, but I understand that the airport installed sound -proof windows to the certain areas of
homes that were very close.
Commisioner Regalado: No. That's another plan.
Ms. Davis: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: That's another plan that was done in Chicago and Atlanta. We don't -- we are
not doing this. We are just using a flight pattern...
September 15, 1999
•
•
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: ...that would have the planes fly over some areas, but...
Ms. Davis: Yeah, I understand that we have no control over pilots flying. It's free for them to come high
or low.
Chairman Plummer:- Ma'am, you do. There is a special number that you can get from Commissioner
Regalado's office to call and register your complaints, at what time of the day, and they said once those
complaints pile up in high numbers, they will do something about it.
Ms. Davis: I went to the...
Vice Chairman Gort: Also, Ms. Davis, my suggestion is, give me your phone number and address. We
have a lot of meetings that are taking place and you should be going to those meetings because it is
important that the people participate in those public hearings. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: OK. The next speaker is Mary Hill. Will you give us your mailing address, please.
You have three minutes.
Ms. Mary Hill: Thank you. My mailing address is 146 N.W. 67th Street, Miami, Florida. My name is
Mary Hill. You just called my name. You know me. I have three minutes, right? I trust that I can finish
this before three minutes, but if I take three minutes, take it for good, not for bad. I am Mary Hill, the
founder of the Economic Opportunity Acts and Amendments in the White House, on White House
Records; creator of the first anti -poverty program, Title 20 Revenue Sharing, and the funds before that
was from my efforts. Now, I trust, under this budget, that we are not considering floating functions of
this department underneath the budget. I am asking you today, strip it out. We supposed to, at this time,
have effective community action. New day care, human services, and many, many more economic
opportunity service come under these acts and these laws. And what I have been noticing, so far, that this
Commission -- not only this Commission, there are may more, City, County, State and what have you --
have not been following statutory laws and guidelines and I am asking, under this budget, to be -- to
recognize these statutory laws and guidelines from my effort of bringing it in here and the plan that is
supposed to work with the City, the County, the State and back to the Federal level, to help the poor,
regardless of race, creed and color, under this anti -poverty program, and stop misuse and abuse and
corruption and diverting these funds that is not really benefiting the purpose of these funds and these
programs, according to statutory laws and guidelines. And I will be addressing this, and I trust to cut out
this political propaganda and misuse and abuse of our funds -- for people funds, which I am to establish
an office in the State of Florida here at — in Dade County Line, which has been approved. Dade County,
Florida. And I trust that we continue with this, continue to move forward, and proceed with the procedure
to work and cut out a lot of this red tape and rubberstamping red ink spending that is around, not only in
Dade County. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, ma'am. The next speaker is Luis Beltran. Mr. Beltran.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: He yields to me.
Commissioner Sanchez: He yields to him.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Yeah. He lives in Wynwood.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
9 September 15, 1999
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well, to continue in more detail, without actually going into details, is just to
throw one question because we are supposed to get answers. What percentage of the budget goes to
salaries?
Chairman Plummer: To where?
Commissioner Regalado: To where?
Commissioner Sanchez: Salaries.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: To salaries.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, salaries.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: And fringe benefits including pensions and cars and "la dolce vita."
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Manager.
Mr. Warshaw: Approximately, seventy-five (75%) goes for salaries, fringe benefits and pensions.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: OK. What percentage of the actual employees of the City of Miami live within
the City? That means that they would spend that money with us.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, do you know the answer?
Mr. Warshaw: I would say it's probably ten (10%) percent, but I do not know for sure what the
numbers...
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Only ten percent (10%) live within the City?
Chairman Plummer: That was his answer, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well, let me tell you. Again, I say that there is something terribly wrong with
this City. That's why we are the fourth poorest city in the nation, and we are not talking about Cuba. We
are talking about the United States of America. And the one that best pays and pays even better, if you
retire. Come on. I wish and I strongly urge all employees of the City of Miami, that do not live in the
City of Miami, to voluntarily resign and allow people who live in the City of Miami, that we will work
for half of the salaries, and I will work for free. Thank you very much.
Chairman Plummer: What kind of work do you do?
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well let me tell you. I should have been allowed ...
Chairman Plummer: I am sorry I asked the question.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ...and be given many proclamations here for coming and satisfying myself into
coming into this hurricane City of Miami. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you.
10 September 15, 1999
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: You want some more -- something else?
Chairman Plummer: Come work with me. I will give you a free burial. Linda Watson.
Ms. Linda Watson: My name is Linda Watson. My address is 1670 N.W. 41h Avenue, Apt. 12A. My
concern is that I receive a letter from the County and I went to the County last week stating that we --
instead of paying sixty-one dollars ($61.00) for the tax, we have to pay eighty-fiv, and they said it was a
mistake they did; that I was supposed to come here today and speak about that, and my concern is this.
The same thing I told them, the same way they did a lot of houses for the homeless -- which some of the
homeless even belongs to Miami. They come from another part of the country -- why they didn't make a
low-income houses for the total village, South Village, North Village and Plaza Village in Overtown?
You are trying to take we out from there so you all can make that expressway, but since you all want to
take we out, take we out in a good way. Make low income houses for us so we can live, but don't put we
out that way. Because right now there is some people don't able to pay the sixty-one dollars ($61.00). So
think about eighty-five ($85.00), and they said they would put a lien on the house. I am not talking for
myself because I pay the twenty-four ($24.00), I pay the sixty-one ($61.00), but there is some people that
hadn't paid yet, and they say they will put a lien on the house. I live in the Co -Op and those that I
mention is Co -Op. If the Federal made Co -Op for the people of low income, why treat us that way?
Because we are from Overtown? Treat us in the proper way, like how you all treat the rest of people.
Give us a chance. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, Ma'am. The next speaker is Angel Urquiola. Am I close? All right.
Your address for the record and proceed.
Mr. Angel Urquiola: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. My name is Angel Urquiola. I live at 25 S.W.
38th Avenue, Miami City. I have to start like Mr. Boom Boom said about the City employees. I want to
ask you, Commissioner Plummer, do you live in the City of Miami? Yeah, I know.
Chairman Plummer: Sir, I have since the day I was born.
Mr. Angel Urquiola: OK
Chairman Plummer: Sixty-two years.
Mr. Angel Urquiola: We have a regulation that our politicians have to live in the City of Miami to be
elected.
Chairman Plummer: That's correct, sir. Now you have to live in the district.
Mr. Angel Urquiola: OK. Why we let the big salary of the City, very big, 75, 85, 90, 100, to live out of
the City? If Miami is not good enough to live, don't make -- come over here to make our money. I live
in Miami and raise my kid, I raise my grand -kid, and now my great grand -son. I raised in Miami. I love
Miami. Miami is very good City for the people. It is big salary in the City of Miami. If they don't like
Miami, like Boom -Boom said, resign. Let the people who love Miami to make the money here. Every
year you raise the budget, raise the budget, raise the budget, and we become more poor, and poor and
poor. What do you want on for us? To be in the street like a homeless? No, I do not going to be. Friend,
I fight. I fight for my rights, for my money because I working for forty-five (45) years and no one of you
giving me a penny to live. I raise my family over here. It is hard to be respect. No more tax, no more
tax, no more tax. Put the salaries down. Ten percent (10%). Ten percent (10%) down tax. Thank you
very much.
11 September 15, 1999
0 . 0
[OUTBURSTS FROM AUDIENCE]
Chairman Plummer: Sir? Sir, I want to remind you that boisterous outpouring will get you removed from
the Chambers. That is the policy. Please don't make me enforce it. Thank you. The next speaker is Greg
Bush. Mr. Bush, if you will, give us your mailing address, sir, and proceed.
Note for the Record: Commissioner Teele entered the meeting at 5:36 p.m.
Mr. Greg Bush: Good evening. My name is Greg Bush. I live at 6261 Coral Lake Drive in Miami. I am
not a citizen or resident of Miami itself. I try to preempt that these days,. but I'm President of the Urban
Environment League and I am very concerned in particular about the parks and funding for parks and
public spaces. I think, from what I have been able to glean in recent weeks, there is something of a new
day coming for parks in Miami.. There is before you next Tuesday the final reading, my understanding, of
the Parks Advisory Board, which I think is a very positive symbol and that everybody was in favor of
before. There is a great deal of attention to greenways in the City and I think that's all extremely positive.
I think we are looking forward to a day for greater partnerships with private segments for parks and
ultimately building a constituency behind parks that's far more clearly formulated than has been before. I
think, however, and what I would like to try to impress upon you all is the need for increased funding, not
necessarily for capital improvements at this time, but for maintenance and programming that can affect
people in all different parts of the City. I don't think there is enough funding from what I have seen in the
budget, and I was just able to get it about ten minutes ago, for the elderly, for example. I think the
elderly, in many instances, are, if not shut out of parks, there are simply not enough amenities to appeal to
the elderly. I think, as antiquated as this may sound, a number of public parks need to be beautified.
People need to be attracted to them again in ways that they haven't for a long time and that takes money.
That takes more money, I think, that is in the budget. Enhancing public parks, I fully believe, is an
important strategic form of investment in the future. Attracting businesses to the area and increasing the
value of nearly all homeowners in that area, and you can see that in Charleston, in Austin. You can see
that in Portland and many other cities, and I am assuming that the City of Miami is on the edge of doing
things like that. Final comment is that I have, over a number of months, been working with people in the
Parks Department off and on and I have been extremely impressed, and I just think it is important for you
to all understand, from my perspective as something of an outsider, of the concern and caring of people in
the Parks Department and their sensitivity to different neighborhoods, and its an honor to be able to work
with them. I guess, I also want to add one final comment, too. I think there is a real movement in this
country to make parks a part of the kind of re -centering of neighborhoods. So that I think Miami has
potential to be at the cutting edge to be able to have neighborhoods enhanced in ways through the reuse of
parks in a number of ways. The Urban Environment League and our Public Parks Coalition are having
several conferences coming up in late October and November. One in East Little Havana and another one
at the Historical Museum, in which we are trying to get more and more people involved. So, I thank you
very much and urge you to put more funding into public parks.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Bush, you might be interested to know that Commissioner Gort and I attended
an opening of a park solely put together by the public sector in honor of Arnold Greenfield this week.
Mr. Bush: I heard about that.
Chairman Plummer: Got a very small donation from the City of Miami for some shrubbery that mostly
the Spring Garden people put it together themselves. It was very, very nice and I think that that is the
kind of thing that we need to encourage.
Mr. Bush: I would agree. I think it's a good sign. Thank you.
12 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. The next speaker is Manuel Gomez. Mr. Gomez. No. No, no, no,
no, no. Boom Boom's been up twice. Mr. Gomez, if you would, give us your mailing address, sir, and
proceed.
Mr. Manuel Gomez: (comments in Spanish).
Chairman Plummer: We need a translator, Mr. Manager. I'm sorry? No, no, no, not Boom -Boom. No,
no, no, no, no, no. Josephina? Sit down, please.. Josefina, if you would, translate please.
Mr. Manuel Gomez: (comments in Spanish).
Chairman Plummer: All right. We have a mechanical problem.
Ms. Maria J. Argudin (Assistant City Clerk): I just have no light. OK. Proceed.
Mr. Manuel Gomez: (comments in Spanish).
(Translated by Ms. Argudin): My name is Manuel Gomez and I live at 3440 S.W.33rd Terrace. I will
speak briefly. I am seventy-six years of age. My significant other has seventy-six years of age. We're
retired. Our budget is fixed. Our taxes have gone up at least twenty percent (20%). Four hundred dollars
($400) appears on the bill. It is almost forty dollars ($40) a month. It goes against our economy. I don't
think it is right. Perhaps, if the City has high salaries and my taxes are increased by twenty percent
(20%), the salaries should decrease by the same amount. That is the reason of my visit here and I don't
wish to say anymore.
Mr. Gomez: Gracias, muchas gracias.
(Translated by Ms. Argudin): Thank you very much.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Manager, I think, at this time -- because some people are
confused -- that you might take a few minutes and understand that residential property, by State Statute,
could only be increased three (3%) percent. Where the problem is occurring is that people feel that now,
for the first time, about the fire fee and garbage on the tax bill, that that is part of the increase and it's no
longer three (3%) percent. I think that you should take a couple of minutes and try to explain the
difference so that it may be -- a lady told me this morning that her garbage fee was four hundred and
some dollars. What she didn't realize was she owned a duplex. Those are the kind of ...
Commissioner Regalado: Before...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, a question. According to the Charter, you, the Manager, and the
Executive Mayor work on the budget. Does the Mayor support this budget?
Chairman Plummer: Ask the Mayor.
Mr. Warshaw: Ask me that question again.
Commissioner Regalado: Does the Mayor of the City of Miami support this budget that you have brought
to us?
Mr. Warshaw: I am sorry, Commissioner. I can't speak for what the Mayor supports or does not support
13 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Did he work with you on this budget or was it your administration?
Mr. Warshaw: The Administration worked on the budget. The Mayor has seen the same information that
you see, but I can't speak for what the Mayor supports or does not support.
Commissioner Regalado: OK
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: I think. that the residents that are here today all have the same sentiment and that
is that, you know, it's to a point where they can't pay anymore higher taxes. And what's happening I --
and I have Mr. Manuel Gomez and Lillian, his companion, as he stated, where --when he got the notice of
proposed property tax, you know, his taxes went up by twenty some percent, that's correct. The increases
or the significant increases were from the City of Miami. And what you do have is that these older people,
who are on a fixed income, who are basically struggling, get to a point where they can't afford their taxes
anymore. And, then, to throw gas in the fire, you know, they find out, through a complicated budget, you
know, that seventy-five percent (75%) of the budget goes to salary and pensions, and they see the
increases. And what they see is that they don't know exactly where that money is going.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Well, Mr. Sanchez...
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait, wait. J.L., please don't interrupt me.
Chairman Plummer: Go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: This is something that has to be said because, you know, I had plenty of calls
and I had plenty of faxes to my office from the notice of ad valorem taxes and, you know, it gets to a
point where people aren't going to take it anymore. You know, they see the taxes going up and they
continue to go up. But we will get into more details. I just wanted to -- the same sentiment that they are
here -- most of these people are from my district, and they are here to express their concerns, you know.
And one of the gentleman -- you know, for the first time, Boom -Boom has made a lot of sense, you know.
He's put up a good argument.
Chairman Plummer: It scares me.
Commissioner Sanchez: It doesn't scare me. But, you know, it's -- that is what they are here to express
today, you know...
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Sanchez: ...that they can't pay higher taxes...
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Sanchez: ...when no one is making sacrifices.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
14 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Manager, at the same time, when you explain the process you are about to
explain, most of all, I would like for you to explain the individuals that there is an option that they can
obtain where they can pay the taxes in installments. They don't have to pay all at once. They will have to
work that out with the County...
Mr. Warshaw: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: ...and they can pay as installments rather than one-time payment.
Mr. Warshaw: That's correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: So, I think it's important for that to be explained to them.
Chairman Plummer: And, also, include in your comments, if you would -- because many people are not
aware that, in this tax bill, they will not be receiving a separate bill, as they have for garbage, and they
will not be receiving a separate bill for fire fee anymore. It's all included in this.
Mr. Warshaw: That's what we're going to explain.
Chairman Plummer: But take just a couple of minutes. I think it is important that — and that it's clear.
Commissioner Regalado: J.L., when the City Manager finishes, I would like to...
Chairman Plummer: Sir, you will have that privilege. Mr. Manager or designated.
Mr. Warshaw: Thank you.
Ms. Bertha Henry: Bertha Henry, Assistant County Administrator...
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Ms. Henry: Assistant City Manager.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me, Bertha. Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's why I think it is important that they could be -- because the waste fee, they
were paying two times...
Mr. Warshaw: Two installments.
Vice Chairman Gort: ...a year in two installments. So, it's important, when they get all these payments
once a year, it is very difficult for some of these people to do this. So, that's why it is important we
explain the installment plan.
Mr. Warshaw: OK
Chairman Plummer: I am sorry. Proceed.
15 September 15, 1999
Ms. Henry: Yes. As Commissioner Plummer indicated, the tax bill of this year does represent a couple
of changes. The first change obviously reflects the trim notice for property taxes of ten mills. That does
not represent an increase. It is the same millage as was the previous year. As we get further into the
budget discussion, we will talk more about administration's proposal to reduce that from ten mill to one-
half mill, but we will get into that later. The other issue...
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Would you restate what you said, the administration?
Ms. Henry: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Teele: You meant nine point five?
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Mr. Warshaw: By one-half mill.
Chairman Plummer: A half a mill...
Ms. Henry: By one-half mill to nine point five mills. Also, as indicated, the fire fee does represent an
increase on the bill, but it too is an assessment that — now, I guess, we are into our second year or third
year -- that it's on the property tax bill itself. So, it's two years into that process, so if one did not
recognize that in the prior year, this would be new. For the coming year, the solid waste bill is new. As
you may recall, in the past you received two bills from the City, one in January and one in July. The tax
bill this year represents the effective solid waste bill for nine months. So, as you recall you received a bill
in July and it was for six months. So, we have included, as part of the trim notice, nine months for the
solid waste bill, taking into consideration what was, billed previously. And we did that for several
reasons. First, it is more cost effective for everyone if we do not have separate mailings, two mailings a
year. It's on the property tax bill. It had to — you know, that's a bill that comes out anyway, so it's there
and we are not incurring additional expenses. Also, for those residents who pay their mortgage -- who
pay a monthly mortgage through their mortgage company, they are now, in effect, paying this bill over a
twelve month period, month by month, versus two large bills a year. Now, if you pay your taxes directly,
that's not a benefit that comes to you. But as the Commissioner indicated, you do have the ability to enter
into a payment plan so that you can pay quarterly versus twice a year for that bill. So that may cut with
some confusion.
Mr. Warshaw: And just to add. That's something that would be done in negotiation with the County.
Chairman Plummer: Air right. Thank you very much. The next speaker is Jose Allongo. I am sorry.
Commissioner Regalado, please.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, just very briefly. I heard what the Administration said and, you
know, you can pay now or you can pay later. But the fact is that you are paying more. Regardless of
what we do here today, I just wanted to tell the Administration that, on Tuesday, when we discuss the fire
fee, I am going to try to get the Commission to approve a motion to defer all acquisitions of new
equipment for the fire department until the yea -- the budget for the year 2000/2001. And the reason is
that, if we do this, we are going to save four million two hundred thousand dollars ($4,200,000) and that
would reduce the fire fee by twenty-four dollars ($24). The people of Miami were paying this year, as of
today, sixty-one. Now, in the bill that we get, we will be paying eighty-five dollars ($85) for fire fee.
Even if we can pay it in two installments or three installments, it still is a raise. I think that this is the
time that we invest money in the people of Miami, instead of new Chevy Tahoes for the fire department.
And I really believe that we should -- we owe to the people of Miami to reduce the fire fee for next year.
16 September 15, 1999
Since this is related to the budget, I just wanted to say to the administration that this is my purpose on
next Tuesday when we discuss the fire fee.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Bertha, if you would, I am going to ask the question, which I expect an answer
back in two weeks. Is the total bill that people are receiving in the mail deductible from their income tax?
Because I'm going to tell you, as confusing as it is, people feel that that's their bill and they are going to
deducting it. Now, we better be prepared to answer the question for the public as to whether or not —
because, normally, fees are not deductible. Taxes are. So, be prepared in two weeks to answer the
question.
Ms. Henry: Thank you. I will.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Allongo. I am sorry, sir, that we delayed you. And the next speaker
will be Carmen Alvarez. If you will, give us, sir, your mailing address and proceed.
Mr. Jose Allongo: My name is Jose Allongo. I live in 219 S.W. 26th Road. I am one of the members of
the Neighborhood Association from the Roads. I see that every year -we have an increase in the taxes.
You do not have stop -- your machine don't have something to stop? What happened? Every body of
you promised and you are going to do this thing now. Our interest here and nobody do nothing. Why? I
do not want to speak anymore.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Carmen Alvarez. The next speaker will be Lila Bustamante de
Gomez after Ms. Alvarez. Ms. Alvarez, if you will, you give us your mailing address and proceed.
Carmen Alvarez: Well, my name is Carmen Alvarez. I live at 453 19th Road and that's my first time I
will be here. I know that this people are very glad to have this opportunity to open our mouth to do
something about, and I think — you know, I like -- this gentlemen, he said something about we are
retirees; .we don't have a lot of money to pay all this taxation, everything every year, every year. We are
not rich people. We -- our house is very old house. We pay four thousand two hundred dollars ($4,200) a
year, and I think it is a lot. My husband is a surgeon. You do not have anything to do. We will work our
life like a cows. We are love to be in Miami. We enjoy to do it. We are very pleased to help in whatever
we need our help to the Commissioners, so whatever we have to vote for. Why think you better sit
around the table and say we have to do something for these people because we are not children. We are --
I am sixty-six — sixty-eight years old and I think we need something to come in our place. They say we
are going to do something for both of you, whatever you can, and I think you should do something about.
Because to have this meeting over here, I think it don't help it too much. Help it too much and when you
get all together, do something for us. We are very happy to help you -- whenever they need our help, the
police and all. Will you please -- I hope you just do something about. OK. That's all I have to do it.
Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, ma'am. The next speaker is Lilia Bustamante de Gomez and after that is
Mariano Cruz. Ms. Gomez, if you would, give us your address and proceed, please.
Vice Chairman Gort: Or you could use this mic here, too.
Chairman Plummer: Either one.
Ms. Lilia Bustamante de Gomez: (comments in Spanish).
Chairman Plummer: Josephina.
17 September 15, 1999
(Translation by Ms. Argudin): Good afternoon. My name is Lilia Bustamante de Gomez.
Ms. Bustamante de Gomez: Let me talk in English. My name is Lilia Bustamante Gomez.
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Ms. Bustamante de Gomez: I live in 3444 S.W.23rd Terrace. I am here to support the opinion of my
husband, Manuel Gomez, against increase to the tax of my property bill -- my property tax bill. I am
briefly. I have only a question to the Commissioner. What we supposed to do to reduce our tax bill on
the property? To the Commissioner, this is my question. What we supposed to do? Two retired people
with seventy-four -- seventy-six years each.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, do you wish to answer the question?
Mr. Warshaw: I think, when we make our presentation, we are going to talk about what it was we are
trying to do from last year to this year to keep the budget level, at best, without significant increases.
Because I understand, the administration understands that Miami is not a wealthy city and that there is
only so much that people can accept in terms of increases. So, I think, when we make our presentation,
you'll see we have tried to keep the increases in the budget to the barest of bare minimums, and I hope
you will be listening when we make that presentation shortly.
Ms. Bustamante de Gomez: What? Because I have been hearing increase, increase, increase, but our
salary don't increase. It's same as the last year.
Mr. Warshaw: I understand.
Ms. Bustamante de Gomez: Only three percent. That's only the question that I have.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, ma'am. And just for the information of everyone concerned, the
Manager has requested that, at the completion of the public speaking, that he be allowed ten minutes to
make a presentation, which will definitely be granted. Mr. Mariano Cruz, and after Mr. Cruz will be Mr.
Charlie Cox.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: Mariano Cruz, 1227 N.W. 26"' Street, Miami, City of Miami. Going by here, why
this point thirty-three percent increase on the millage or the roll back rate? This is a bad public relations
for management there because so little money. They can find that money with the fire fee and the solid
waste fee and the twenty percent (20%) of the parking increase too there. It's very bad because people
will see in principle. I am against this increase. Even it will cost me maybe pennies a year, if I go to a
general tax bill. But, in principle, it's an increase. It shouldn't be when you have got all these other fees
going on now. Now, I am going to say a few things that people will say. I am going to talk. Any way
apply but give me a soap box and a way to come here every year. But they talk about the employees bad.
You know what I do? I told my people, "don't fight government, join them. Become one of them". I
work for the government, federal. My daughter, Theresa Camile, works in Tallahassee for the
Department of Education. My daughter Cynthia works for the County, Finance Department. My
daughter, Lillie Castilla works for the City, Miami Police Department. My son, David works for the
County, too. You know why we did it? Because I used to go by the State building on holidays and
Sundays and saw those parking lots empty. I was going to work. I said, hell, I am going to become a
government employee, too. That way I get all the holidays free. I give up my pest control license and
everthing and became one of them. That's the way to do. Join, join. Apply to the City. That's the way to
do. And get all those benefits too. Don't ask them to resign or live in the City. Affordable housing. The
employees can't live in the City. The City had a good program years ago, affordable housing. They gave
18 September 15, 1999
it up. You come next to me, 1221 N.W. 261h Street, it's a house there, affordable housing. Beautiful
homes, but it used to be an empty lot . You go by 1121, 32"d Street, affordable houses built by the City.
It's still there. Another one on I Ith Avenue. Another one on 341h Street in Allapattah. Those houses,
why the City stop those houses? Maybe because there is no money. You know why? What they want is
Section 8 programs. They want rental housing and all that, and the neighborhoods don't become stable
with rental housing. You got to have people, home owners. In that way -- and now the City is going to
allow a lot of rental housing at the Allapattah Metrorail Station. And what I am against too is that we are
subsidizing Jackson Hospital, right? Jackson, all these people. And you know how many hundreds of
millions they get with a half a penny tax that we pay? I go to so many counties out there in all of them...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Cruz, the City is not subsidizing Jackson Hospital. The County is.
Mariano Cruz: No.
Chairman Plummer: We are not.
Mr. Cruz: What about when you send the rescue there and I count 13 aparatus there?
Chairman Plummer: Sir, all I can tell you is, we are not subsidizing the Public Health Trust.
Mr. Cruz: No. I know. But I mean -- with money or with services, right? Do they pay anything?
Chairman Plummer: No City of Miami tax dollars subsidize Jackson Hospital.
Mr. Cruz: OK. Well — now, one thing that you should do with the County. We pay County wide tax,
right? And many times, when we require a service from the County, they say, "Oh, you are in the City?"
And many times I have to call for them to fix -- like on 17`h Avenue, 20th Street, those are major arterials.
What are doing your inspectors about those potholes on 17`h Avenue or the problem on 171h Avenue?
Because I do not have to call the County. Somebody have to do to check that because that is a major
arterial that serves the whole County, even if it is within City limits. Now, going by remember, my pet
thing here is parks. Money for the parks, service for the parks, program for the parks, and all that,
because those are prevention programs there. I always come here every year for the parks, our parks.
Thanks to Willy there, it's going up. I put a nice fence now — it's really, really — now, we need more
programs in the park beside the physical plan. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Charlie Cox, and the next speaker is Enrique Mendoza. Mr.
Cox.
Mr. Charlie Cox: I want to speak on the budget, not on the millage.
Chairman Plummer: You don't want to speak?
Mr. Cox: On the millage, no.
Chairman Plummer: You want to speak later on?
Mr. Cox: Yes, I wrote next to it, budget.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, OK. I'm sorry. Enrique Mendoza. And the next speaker is Emilio Lopez. Mr.
Mendoza. Mr. Enrique Mendoza.
19 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: He is also here to complain about the high taxes.
Chairman Plummer: In Spanish, Josefina.
milio Lopez: (Comments in Spanish)
(translated by Ms. Argudin): I am going to say a few words. My address is 1861 S.W. 51h Avenue. The
Commission gets together to increase tax. Why don't we adjust the retirement pensions and retirees
obtain in order for the people to live better. Many elderly have to sell their properties in order to make
ends meet on a fixed income. Those that work and earn high salaries can eat well while the retirees have
to eat hamburgers because they don't have enough money to make ends meet. Try to cooperate with the
people, adjust your salaries. In order to live better. We are humans, we are religious according to our own
......try to be just, humane. What would have happened if the hurricane would have come by here, what
would have happened? Be humane, think about your family. Try to work with the people and make sure
that all live humanely and equitably. To be humane is the biggest thing in the world. I don't mean to
offend. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Emilio, please, please, please. Emilio Lopez. He spoke for you. OK very fine, sir.
Sandra Ahmad. The next speaker will be Jose Gutierrez. If you would give us your mailing address and
proceed.
Ms. Sandra Ahmad: My name is Sandra Stringer-Ahmad. I live at 6814 N.W. 61h Court, Miami. I
represent the Post Organization as their Second Vice President and Post is for those who do not know, a
synagogue organization made up of fifty-seven churches all over the City and the County of Miami -Dade.
We are community empowerment and civil rights advocacy organization. We urge the Commission to
see the need and to implement the expansion of the budget with regards to parks and recreations. We
believe that the expansion of this, in this area would indeed allow for much needed programs in the area
of recreational and educational in nature. An expansion of this budget area would certainly provide a
means to diminish the drownings of our children in quote un quote, after hours, in our City's pools. The
children are our future and we have to do whatever is best to make sure that their future is insured. Thank
you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you Ma'am: You really need to be talking to the expenditures rather than the
millage, but your comments are well taken. Let me see here. Jose Gutierrez and after Mr. Gutierrez is
Oscar Rodriguez. Is Mr. Gutierrez here? Mr. Jose L. Gutierrez of 2360 S.W. 19`h Street. He is not here.
We will then go to Oscar Rodriguez. Is he present? Alright. After him is Ignacio Gonzalez. Give us
your mailing address and proceed, sir.
Mr. Oscar Rodriguez: Yes, sir. Thank you for allowing me to talk in front of my fellow citizens here. I
am here representing approximately sixty to seventy people in my neighborhood because of their schedule
they were unable to be here, if not, all of them would be here.
Chairman Plummer: Even though I know your address, would you put you name and address on record,
please.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, sir. My address is 3130 S.W. 27`h Terrace, Miami. My main issue here is that as we
see the government of the City of Miami grow and grow and grow, we do not see a stop to the size and
the projection of all of the departments. That is what we see that every day and every hour as the clock
ticks we are spending more of our money from our pocket to subsidize all of these expenditures. I do not
know anybody that lives in the City of Miami that has any idea per capita how many police per capita are
sitting in the City of Miami, how many firemen are sitting the City of Miami per capita versus any of the
other cities. And then again do we want the services because every time we bring up these things well we
20 September 15, 1999
need to have this great type of government. Well, there is no reason for us to be expending the amount of
money if we do not have that money to spend in a wheel that's three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000) or as
we spoke eighteen billion dollars ($18,000,000,000) wheel, but the moneys to maintain this eighteen
billion dollars ($18,000,000,000) are not in the pockets of ourselves, because the moneys that we are
spending go ninety percent (90%) outside the City of Miami to reinforce their pockets and then
everybody is all bent out of shape because they have to pay twenty percent (20%) more on parking. To
be able to substantiate some of the expenditures. We also see, would you allow me another minute?
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir, go ahead.
Mr. Rodriguez: Thank you. Ali, the other thing that I cannot see is all these companies coming into the
City of Miami, all the buildings that have been increased in the City of Miami, but none of these monies
are coming in to substantiate these expenditures that we need for the fire department to be able to expand
to take care of these people that come from Broward and Palm Beach Counties because they also require
all of these emergency stuff. But there is no way of us recovering it. And the County does not help the
City in taking care of any of these issues. These are the things that we need the City and you
Commissioners to address at a level where we need to bring down the machinery within the City of
Miami that is spending the amount of money out of my pocket. Thank you very much and have a nice
afternoon.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Excuse me, Mr. Gort. I promised I would do this. His next door neighbor
asked me to read this into the record which I will do at this time. Cid asked you to say that we would like
to manifest a firm protest towards the arbitrary way that we have been abused year after year by an
increase.in our property taxes. This has gotten to a point beyond our economic resources, we come to ask
that this abuse of property owners cease once and for all. Therefore, they are requesting that the Property
Appraiser be publicly elected instead of appointed. Since the designator of this position does not seem to
care about the well being of the citizens of this County and City. The constant abuse be harmful to those
who enjoy the political positions that we as voting citizens elected and she asked me, Mr. Clerk this is a
Petition signed by a number of people and I will surrender that to you for the record. And Mr.
Rodriguez, if you will come forth I have a letter for you, sir. Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Rodriguez. There is something that I would like to clarify when you talked
about the buildings. I hope you are addressing the tax exempt buildings, government buildings, because
in the private sector, the private sector buildings pay forty percent (40%) of the ad valorem taxes.
Chairman Plummer: Alright, the final speaker that I have here is Mr. Ignacio Gonzalez.
Mr. Manuel I. Gongalez-Goenaga: Yes. No. No. My middle name, my closing argument... Mr. Teele
didn't have the opportunity to be.privileged to hear me before.
Chairman Plummer. Sir, your name is not Ignagcio Gonzalez, and that is who the speaker is. You have
had your turn at the podium. Your soap box is removed. This, does anyone else of the... is that your jail
card? What are you? Do you want to speak again? I don't know why, but go ahead. We didn't
understand you, the first time. I will definitely limit you to three minutes.
Mr. Gonzalez: Since I have attacked...
Chairman Plummer: Now tell me where Ignacio lives.
Mr. Gonzalez: Ignacio, that's my second home, thanks to the Miami Police Department, the Dade County
jail.
21 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Who have not obviously done their job.
Mr. Gonzalez: Dade County jail. Well I have been the privilege of being a visitor there ten times. But
not since Mr.Carollo became Mayor. And let me tell you, I understand that you have thrown out, out of
the City of Miami the Vans Vans. I hope that you don't throw out Boom Boom. Because of what I am
saying, of what I have said today. And I hope that you take me seriously. I don't care how many figures
we are going to see here, we are in a disbalanced budget because I heard that we lost a twelve million
dollar ($12,000,000) lawsuit. And if that is the case.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah.
Mr. Gonzalez: And plus interest we have, where are we going to get out in the short term twelve million
dollars ($12,000,000) to pay back the sports..., whatever Decoma or Huizenga or whoever is the money
belongs to. I want honest answers, a full disclosure before we go on and on. And let me tell you.
Chairman Plummer: If you sit down, we will get you an answer. I hope. Mr. City Attorney, Mr. City
Attorney.
Mr. A. Vilarello (City Attorney): I believe he is discussing the Decoma lawsuit versus the City and
MSEA (Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority), yes.
Chairman Plummer: When was the memo sent?
Mr. Vilarello: The memo was sent September 10`h. Before you jump to any conclusions, the result was
not as this gentlemen suggested.
Chairman Plummer: That's why I asked you to please comment and answer his question.
Mr. Vilarello: The City and MSEA had been sued by Decoma which is the manager of the Miami Arena.
The Court entered a preliminary ruling which has not been reduced to writing at this point against MSEA.
No relief was granted against the City, in fact the Final Judgment in favor of the City will be granted with
no damages awarded as against the City.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Would you furnish him a copy of that? OK Now, so that I am not
accused of cutting anybody off, has everybody had their time to make their statements? I will now close
the... I'm sorry. Mariano, you had your turn and don't come up with an alias. Ma'am, do you need to be
heard. Excuse me, if you wish to be heard come to the microphone and give us your name and mailing
address, I will give you three minutes, ma'am.
Ms. Miriam Pena: My name is Miriam Pena. I live in Hialeah in 491 East 541h Street.
Chairman Plummer: OK
Ms. Pena: I am a worker of Jackson Hospital, I am a Unit Secretary, Medical Unit Secretary, emergency.
And this is my first time I come to a in in the City. So my reason is that we don't make enough
money, OK My salary is very low. To pay a increase, twenty -percent increase in the parking lot I don't
think none of us. We picked up with signatures and we have more than three thousand (3,000) against
this increase. And I don't think we are going to stay like doing nothing. We are going to continue to
complain, hear our complaints because we are not allowed to this increase to employees at Jackson.
22 September 15, 1999
Jackson is the only hospital in Miami that pays for parking lot. Not an employee work in Miami have to
pay in the hospital for parking lot. Thank you sir for letting me speak.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you Ma'm. I think though that that the answer to your question is that if a fee
is charged in any other hospital they do pay a fee. Sir you wish to be heard? OK I don't wish this to run
on now because we asked all of you please to sign up. OK This will be the last speaker and I will then
close the public hearing. Your name and mailing address please.
Mr. Luis de la Guardia: My name is Luis de la Guardia. Mailing address is 1757 S.W. 3`d Avenue,
Miami, Florida. I just have a very simple question.
Chairman Plummer: Alright. Mr. Manager.
Mr. De la Guardia: I will ask you how do you propose to add this new taxes to the real estate taxes we
pay at the end of the year? What about those properties that are being handled by mortgages? They pay
the taxes themselves directly, so how do you propose to get these two charges together?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager. It is the same way, but he wants an answer, let him give the Manager
give him an answer.
Mr. Warshaw: I believe you are asking why are proposing...
Mr. De la Guardia: How do you propose to handle these charges by adding them to the regular real estate
taxes that you pay every year through a mortgagee? You know mortgagee this, you pay every month an
amount and at the end of the year the mortgagee get the bills and they pay the taxes.
Mr. Warshaw: And as we stated earlier, now you are going to have two new components added on to that
bill that you will be billed for throughout the year, if you don't have a mortgage, you can set up an
arrangement with the County to pay it out in equal installments.
Mr. De la Guardia: But if you do have a mortgage.
Chairman Plummer: Then it's paid.
Mr. De la Guardia: And you have this mortgage, in an escrow you pay the'real estate taxes and insurance
through an escrow account.
Mr. Warshaw: And it will be escrowed and you work that out with your mortgage so that it will all come
out in the escrow.
Mr. De la Guardia: With the mortgage?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, ....
Mr. De la Guardia: Work out with the mortgage for them to take care of paying this additional tax? You
dreaming.
Mr. Warshaw: That's correct.
Mr. De la Guardia: That's dreaming because we have plenty enough problem with the mortgagees
without adding this burden. I think it is crazy. It is not feasible, it is not intelligent, it is not going to
23 September 15, 1999
work. I mean people are going to have more trouble than they ever had before by having this
combination or this proposed tax added piggyback to the real estate taxes and insurance. The insurance, I
mean, the mortgages do not work for you people. I mean they get out money because we decide for them
to charge every month an amount and at the end of the year they care of paying the taxes and insurance.
Now you want to get this new charge added to it in a piggyback, I mean do you expect the mortgages to
do the work and send the payment to you people from my escrow account? It won't work.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you sir.
Mr. De la Guardia: Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: This, at this time I will close the public hearing and I wish to inform everyone that
we will have public hearing and public input at the second and final reading of the budget on September
28t" at 5:05 p.m. Once again also to be known that the fire fee will be discussed in its entirety on the
Commission Meeting of September 21't which is the new date because of the meeting which was canceled
yesterday. Mr. Manager you have asked for approximately ten minutes. Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman. May I ask if I could reserve, respectfully reserve that after the
presentation I would, reserve the right for about half an hour, statement that I am going to make in
probably, discussing budget items with the head of the departments.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez, you will be granted any time that you need, sir to proceed to get the
answers that you seek. As it will either any of the other Commissioners, the public hearing is now closed.
It is now between the Administration and the Commission. Mr. Manager, you're on.
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioners before I ask Ms. Henry to make this brief presentation, I would just like to
make some opening comments. This has been, you know, unquestionably what one of the most difficult
challenges for me in my almost twenty-nine years with the City, and I have listened to the public input, I
have listened to the words, honesty, full disclosure, balance and we started this process back in March
many, many months ago. Almost completing a year now as Manager and having worked for you and
listened to the requests, demands and expectations you have of the Administration and understanding that
the staff and the employees of the City are sensitive people and are very sensitive to the needs and
concerns of poor residents and it is because of that that the some twenty or twenty-five million dollars
that they ask for to run their departments in excess of what's in this budget were basically denied by me
because I know we just don't have those moneys. But at the same time knowing the history of the City
and knowing where we were and knowing that what we are trying to do is rebuild those parks and pick up
the garbage better, have better fire service, have more police officers, and improve the quality of life of all
of our residents, this budget although it is a 2.8 percent (2.8%) increase most of which is in pension and
fringe benefit costs of some one time costs for, employees will retire into pay out this part of the drop
plan and the pension plans and vacation time, the reality is that the budget is as tight, you know, as we
try to make it to ensure that we didn't increase the budget and yet still we're able to satisfy the needs of
the City by being able to deliver services. I want to tell you also for the record that this is the first time
in many years, as many as I can remember that we were under a mandate and met it that this is one
hundred percent (100%) recurring revenue recurring expenditure budget. There are no land sales, there
are no one time plugs in here, this is a budget where we under the Oversight Board is under your direction
has to have recurring revenues and expenditures. It also has built in reserves. We now have approximately
thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) in reserves and the City of Miami size has got into a lot of difficulty
and a lot of trouble because we never had the cash from the bank for emergencies is now beginning to
finally to build up reserves and this budget contemplates seven to nine million dollars ($7,000,000-
$9,000,000) in reserves additional reserves for Risk Management and workers comp which we know
we're sitting with a big liability out in the future years and this is very difficult for people today in 1999
24 September 15, 1999
to listen to because we are doing so much catch up with things we didn't do years ago. I want to say
something also to you, I said many times and I know elected officials in the City have not always been
given all the information that they should be, and I know we are going to get hammered a little bit, and I
accept that and understand it, but I want you to know we are going to give you an honest accounting of
what we can and cannot do with the money that's proposed in this budget. And we are not going to back
away and say to you we are going be able to do something when we know we might not be able to. I
want you to hear, you know, from not only myself, from the Directors and they fully understand that they
have to defend and explain that the money in their budget are going to increase and enhance the quality of
life for Miami citizens. I'll say again, it is not a perfect system. I wanted to put it in some kind of
perspective. It hasn't been easy at all and I know its got a ways to go and believe me when I tell you
we're are going work with, you know, all of you to ensure that we can come up with a budget that will be
acceptable to everyone that will be able to give you the things that you basically asked us to do. And I am
not going to give you that list of things now, but there are things that we have done through this past year
that you have expectations where we have we built up NET offices so that we can be able to deliver to
people the things that they expect so that they can go into their neighborhoods and get service delivery,
these things are some of the few areas where we have put increases in the budget where I think they truly
make a difference, but I would like you, you know, to evaluate that so I will ask Ms. Henry to make this
brief presentation because you have got so many copies of so many budget books because the
Oversight Board has sent back so many times I think it's important that we put in perspective exactly
where we're at today.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I think that it cannot go without being said that the increase given to
the employees this year is primarily predicated on the fact that what they gave up two years ago to make
the balance of this City to go from into bankruptcy. And there is no question that they gave up, I think it
was twelve million ($12,000,000) one year and I think thirteen ($13,000,000) the next and they were
entitled to a raise this year and that is included in this budget. OK Budget revisions, are these available
to the public, sir? Anyone that has the, an interest in it they will be passed out. Alright ladies and
gentlemen, we are going to have an approximate ten minute presentation by the Administration and while
everybody is trying to regain their seats there is more to this budget this evening than just Item No. 1, we
have other hearings in reference to the DDA downtown, Bayfront Park, the Sports Authority and Off
Street Parking, all will be taken up this evening. Mr. Manager, you're on, sir, you and the Administration
for your presentation, please.
Ms. Henry: Thank you very much. This is Bertha Henry, Assistant City Manager for the Finance
Administration. We have over the last five months or so, we have spent an enormous amount of time and
energy in developing a budget and a five year forecast that number one meets, all of the requirements that
are either required by State law, by our inter -governmental agreement with the Financial Oversight Board
in attempts to meet our basic needs. You have received over the... since June a number of documents and
I think it is important that we walk you through the iterations and what they mean because I think for
many of the public who has spoken today. Their issue really relates to the trim notice and the proposed
increase that is reflected therein, and quite frankly we are proposing something different. But I'll very
quickly try to run through that. In June via Resolution, the Commission passed a budget for the general
fund of three hundred and five point eight million ($305,800,000) and with all of the other funds debt
service, special revenue funds, it was four hundred and sixty eight point four million ($468,400,00).
Throughout this presentation I will focus on the general fund because most of the other funds are
supported by grants and when the grants go away the expenditures conceivably go away. In that plan, in
the Resolution that was passed on June 22nd it proposed a fire fee pursuant to the current five year plan
that we, that we are operating in. It also proposed the Solid Waste fee per the plan and then the millage
rate of ten mills pursuant to the plan. On July, before I leave that what was missing from that first
submission was the impact of the parking surcharge program. And then I'll go from there. On July 161h,
Commissioners, you received a five year forecast with FY 2000 budget as the base. And it did several
25 September 15, 1999
things and once again I am going to focus on the general fund. In order to balance out the budget we
provided for salary increases pursuant to the current contracts that we have, and in salary, years FY 2003
and 2004, we are currently, we don't have a labor agreement. It held those expenses flat.
Commissioner Teele: Ms. Henry.
Ms. Henry: It reduced capital, yes?
Commissioner Teele: You said in 2002 and 2003, we don't have a labor agreement?
Ms. Henry: In 2003 and four for three of the four unions, we do not have a contract.
Commissioner Teele: But in reference to what the Chairman has discussed, which I think there is clearly
an agreement, but this year we have calculated that in.
Ms. Henry: Yes, absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: So the question is what are the labor costs in terms of percentages over this year in
2001 and 2002?
Ms. Henry: OK We will get those percentages for you.... I will come back to that. OK We also as part of
this plan. We reduced our capital equipment and improvements by two million dollars ($2,000,000)
instead of applying inflation every year, we applied inflation every other year. We also propose a Solid
Waste increase that was also pursuant to the plan, except that in that last year which we are obviously
operating on one year additional each time we adopt a new plan, we propose the thirty-four dollar
($34.00) increase for Solid Waste. This plan was rejected by the Financial Oversight Board. The
Oversight Board had given us basic instructions. From that we went back and we prepared another plan
and I will go into details quickly, but very quickly.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me, let me ask you a question.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is that the Oversight Board has a group of professionals that
makes recommendations on the financial presentation you all make.
Ms. Henry: Yes they do.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is at the Committee Meeting the Financial Consultant for the
Oversight Board was in agreement with you all.
Ms. Henry: We will as part of the last mission, and I will get to that.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Answer his question, is that a true statement?
Ms. Henry: Well, if we are, if we are referring to the budget submission, that I just spoke of, the answer
was no. We were not in... They did not agree. Ultimately, we came to a point where we agreed, but the
Oversight Board did not agree, and so I will go through that.
Vice Chairman Gort: But the Financial Advisers did agree?
26 September 15, 1999
0
•
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: The Adviser, the Financial Adviser to the Oversight Board was to agree to accept
it? It was sccepted by them and they recommended it. The Board took a decision on their own.
Ms. Henry: Yes, they did.
Vice Chairman Gort: To go against the Financial Adviser.
Ms. Henry: To...
Vice Chairman Gort: OK Thank you.
Ms. Henry: OK
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, but is it the policy of the Oversight Board that when you need to
balance a budget, you either have to have new taxes or fees, or reduce the budget? Reduce expenses.
Ms. Henry: Generally speaking, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: So, any reduction in the expenses, do you think that if you bring that to the
Oversight Board, would they agree with it?
Mr. Warshaw: Let me respond to that. In most cases I would say, yes, the problem is that part of the
Oversight process has included rebuilding the infrastructure and there are certain strategic and blue ribbon
initiatives that include expenses that they might not favorable agree with, but in general principle the
answer to your questions is, yes.
Ms. Henry: In...
Commissioner Regalado: So, and what I see here is that in the September 7th meeting, they proposed that
the fire fee increase would be consistent with plan, that is to raise the fire fee. Is that what they basically
said?
Ms. Henry: Let me go back.
Commissioner Regalado: OK But now, if what I said I would try to do. If we freeze all acquisitions, four
point two million dollars ($4,200,000) for the Fire Department, that would reduce the fire fee. That
would be consistent with the policy of the Oversight Board. Would that be not....
Mr. Warshaw: I will answer that, Commissioner, that the Oversight Board has taken specific interest in
the capital piece of the fire fee for the Fire Department, and we have already run that by them, although
they have not voted on it, the feeling we get is they would not accept that. So that's why I am telling you
that there are certain kinds of initiatives that, you know, part of the rebuilding of a strategic initiatives and
infrastructures that they have taken strong position on, although in general terms if you reduce
expenditures and there are expenditures that they accept as a reduction that would be a way to balance the
budget without no question.
Commissioner Regalado: But, I just want to make sure. The philosophy or the policy of the Oversight
Board is that either you raise taxes or reduce expenses.
27 September 15, 1999
0
•
Ms. Henry: I wanted to answer your question a little bit different. No, I can't think...
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Ms. Henry: I can't say that it's a universal yes or no. Generally speaking if you go back to the scenario
that I just presented to you, I proposed in that five year forecast, we proposed expenditure reductions. The
Oversight Board did not feel that those were acceptable. They felt that number one is was unrealistic to
think that we would be able to bring salaries down and level them out and hold them for a couple of years.
They felt uncomfortable with that. Second they felt that it takes a certain amount of people and overall
expenses to run a city. And especially when you have a city like the City of Miami where you are really,
you really staffing and working at peak. As you all know, the resident population here is about four
hundred thousand, but during the day, during the weekday, there are eight hundred thousand people. We
have to provide police protection, fire support, we have to provide protection to these people.
Commissioner Regalado: Of course. None of the members of the Oversight Board live here in Miami.
They are part of that.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Regalado has the floor. We can only have one at a time. Mr.
Regalado, when you are finished, Mr. Gort has the floor. Please continue.
Commissioner Regalado: I just want to make a brief comment, because I am confused. It seems, that
generally speaking the Oversight Board feels that it's their policy to set budget work, either you have your
recurring revenues, or, reduction in expenses. And yet, they are selective. They fail to, they seem to think
that they can impose new taxes and different fees or demand that the fire fee imposed. So I would ask
you to advise the Oversight Board that this one Commissioner is going to try to freeze the new acquisition
of fire equipment. Now, of course, that might not be the Commission's, but I would really like to know
the response of the Oversight Board in terms of the difference between a huge increase for property
owner and a reduction of taxes, and if I may to ask the Oversight Board if they don't think that it is about
time that we invest in people instead of equipment. And when I mean invest in people, I mean in the
people of Miami that they are going to lose their properties, you know.
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, I would like to if I can, respond to that. I would want to speak for the
Oversight Board because I don't know what they think about everything and in general terms, you are
right, but I do want to tell you on the record that in the particular example of the reduction of the capital
piece of the fire fee, they have gone on the record and made certain comments about it. I am not going to
say how they would vote or not vote, but they have spoken about fire fee, they have spoken about the
five year, long term commitment to fire capital, to the purchase of infrastructure, to the rebuilding of fire
stations. But honestly, I don't know how they would vote on anything, and I think we need to leave, you
know that to them, except those examples where, you know it is come up in the public meeting, I want
you to know from me that I have heard and it is on the record.
Vice Chairman Gort: I think it is important to state that the when the fire fee was established, it was
destined to be used in any wrong way. It was this Commission that made the policy to be used for capital
improvement for the Fire Department. It wasn't the Oversight Board that decided that. We did as
Commissioners. I think it's very important that...
Ms. Henry: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: My question to you is, we have a population of four hundred thousand (400,000)
people. But the Oversight Board, because we have over eight hundred thousand people in the City of
Miami wants our residents to pick up the tab for maintaining eight hundred thousand (800,000) people.
28 September 15, 1999
So somehow, it is important for people to understand we have to find ways to pay for those services, but
is not fair for the citizens of the City of Miami to pay for those services. So that's why we pay county
taxes and if we pay the city taxes for Dade County, school and state.
Chairman Plummer: Alright.
Vice Chairman Gort: And I think this has to be considered:
Chairman Plummer: If I may, if I may, I would like... Mr. Gort. You will have all the time you need, sir.
I would ask my colleagues to let them complete their presentation. You will have all the time in the
world to ask all the questions you want.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele
Commissioner Teele: Before they do. Because I really do think that hearing the presentations are
important, but I think it is just as important for the Commission to have discussion among ourselves and
we don't have that opportunity...
Chairman Plummer: But you will, sir.
Commissioner Teele: ...Because of the Sunshine Law, and I want to respond to my colleague,
Commissioner Regalado.' I really believe that it would be real mistake for us to focus in on the fire fee
on Tuesday. Of course, that's your right and you've said you, you intend to do that. But the Oversight
Board would be obliged and I think any reasonable interpretation of a roll of an Oversight Board would
support that if we are going to start balancing the budget by deferring maintenance and deferring capital
items, that's exactly why we have an Oversight Board. Deferral of essential maintenance and deferral of
capital items, I believe, is a gold plated invitation for involvement in the budget process by the Oversight
Board. And unless, and until we are willing to begin to cut some of the reoccurring costs, because those
are one time expenditures. Until and unless we are prepared to cut the reoccurring costs of this City...
Chairman Plummer: Thank you.
Commissioner Plummer: You know, we are going to invite the Oversight Board doing something. And I
have got to tell you, I served in a different capacity in Washington, and I can tell you the reason that New
York City got in so much problems with their transit, was, it was this type of process year after year.
They would cut the capital and just deal with the maintenance until the whole system almost collapsed.
So I'm not at all suggesting that the Fire Department is about to collapse. In fact, I share your concern,
and I have heard from a number of people about these new Blazers or whatever they are, apparently they
are expensive vehicles. I didn't know that they were that expensive, but I had people to stop me on the
corner and talk about is it Blazers, what is it?
Chairman Plummer: Tahoes.
Commissioner Teele: Tahoes, or whatever they are. They are apparently very, very expensive. I mean it
is literally Land Rover of the Mercedez Benz of the American SUV's (Sports Utility Vehicle). And
people are outraged about it. Because Joe Lunchbucket or Jose Lunchbucket can understand what a
Tahoe cost apparently. Real well. I mean that they may not understand all of the technology issues and
why the hell we are spending so much money for a computer system that doesn't work at all and still not
working and we can't even dial out on America On Line or any other Internet service today as we speak.
29 September 15, 1999
And we have it ninety percent (90%) of the time this year. I mean, but those kinds of seven million dollars
($7,000,000) budget adjustment go over our head and they go over the public's head. But I would tell you
this, John Q. citizen understands that the City of Miami had no business buying the Rolls Royce or the
Mercedes Benz or the Cadillac or the SUV's American made. And that's the kind of thing that
Commissioner Regalado is querying and I want to be on record as supporting that. I just think, to say we
are going to take a hatch, Tomas, and cut all of the capital costs out of the Fire Department for a year is
going to invite some serious Oversight Board kinds of issues that we really don't need and it's going to be
fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) worth of problem over two million dollars ($2,000,000) as far as I am
concerned. So I don't want to give, you know, I respect your opinion and I am not at all trying to have a
chilling effect on what you want to do and I will certainly support having that discussion, but I really
think that we need to be careful if we are not going to cut reoccurring costs in this process.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand, I understand.
Chairman Plummer: Alright. Guys, if you want to be hear all night, I have got nothing else to do and
Maria's Restaurant doesn't close until 10:00. Alright, let's get finished with the presentation. I promise
you, you (inaudible comment from audience). Well, if I mean if we are going to get Greek grub, we can
have it here as well I promise you guys that you will have all the opportunity to speak as much as I can
limit you, but let's finish the presentation.
Ms. Henry: OK the first submission which is the August 18`h submission is where you finally begin to
see what Administration's recommendation is with respect to parking surcharge revenue and its use. This
is one of the issues for those that are here from the public, where the Commission did understand the
issue of high taxes. And they were sensitive to the fact that our residents are baring a disproportionate
share of the cost to run this City. That's why the parking surcharge came into effect. Our statistics show
that because most of this surcharge will be paid by people who do not live in the City, that it would fair
that, that revenue source come in and that, a hundred percent (100%) or eighty percent (80%) of what is
allowed under State law be used for, tax reduction, tax and fee reduction. So, that August 3`d, August 181h
submission began to address the parking surcharge revenue and how it's allocated for tax release. It put
the balance of what we couldn't use for tax release by State law into reserves to help build those reserves.
It used fund balance in FY 2000 because when we are starting to take in reserves in 2000, we needed to
use those reserves out in the outer years of 2003 and 2004. We also brought in some one time revenue
out in the outer years for the final payment of the FEC land sale, this is around two million ($2,000,000).
And finally we propose increases in FY 2003 and 2004 for solid waste. To get.. 1 beg your pardon? For
solid waste. Now we get to where we are today and I think this is where we want to focus most of the
discussion because this is what we are proposing for the budget as we speak when we presented that
August 18th proposal to, or actually it was August 25`' Oversight Board Meeting, they were again
uncomfortable with what was proposed. They sent us back, with some additional instructions to basically
take a look at those reserves they felt uncomfortable using reserves that we build up in 2000 to use in
those outer years. They also expressed some concern and reticence with respect to the parking surcharge.
At the conclusion of that meeting and I think one of the Commissioners pointed out that the 9.1 million
dollars of parking surcharge revenue, that was presented to the Oversight Board, did meet the scrutiny of
the revenue estimating conference. They felt comfortable. In fact they worked with us to support that
estimate to the Oversight Board. The Oversight Board did not accept that that estimate, the Oversight
Board expressed discomfort with number one this is a new surcharge for the City, it's an new revenue
source. There are, in their mind undoubtedly there will be a start up issues, in the first year that would
suggest that somehow we would not make it. They also, in line with that, they allowed us to continue to
use the 9.1 million in the outer years. So their real discomfort was in the first year and it was largely start
up, and they expressed some concerns. As you all know the Mayor from the County requested from our
Mayor that they be exempt from the County facilities be exempt from paying this surcharge. So these
were things that made them uncomfortable. So they asked the Administration, and we complied, to go
30 September 15, 1999
back and revise the parking surcharge estimate to 7.6 million. So what we are here today to propose
would be with respect to the overall budget, we will propose that a half mill reduction to the ad valorem
millage goes from ten mills currently to a half mill be to 9.5 be implemented, that the fire fee increase
consistent with the plan, that we at this point, we are not using reserves in the early years to balance the
budget, but the Commission would also like to point out that the Oversight Board did indicate that we
would able to...
Chairman Plummer: Did anybody read that? I mean I realize I am getting old, and you have to... Go
ahead.
Ms. Henry: Just to close this out, that in the end the Oversight Board said it would be OK for us to in
those latter years to come back at a later date to determine exactly how we would balance in those outer
years. So, just so that you have some sense of what was ultimately presented if I can take you to the
bottom line because quite frankly it all get,down to the general fund. When we prepare just a presentation
for the Oversight Board they wanted us to forecast what our expenses would be and what our current
revenue with the increases that would naturally occur, what that would look like before we implemented
certain activities to balance the budged. And as you can see we go from a year end surplus in 1999 of 5.6
and you know that's a rough estimate at this point through 2004 where there is a negative just shy of
seventeen million dollars .($17,000,000) to balance that out and we worked with the Oversight Board,
there were a couple of things we, that was done. The only revenue increase as part of balancing that out
was the solid waste fee increase. The Oversight Board and the Estimating Conference over the years have
suggested to the City that we begin to bring the revenues in line with our overall expenditures and at some
point then that can once again become an enterprise operation which it isn't now. It's in the general fund
because it's not self supporting. We also made some expenditure adjustments. The first was that we now
have budgeted for attrition. We have not in the past budgeted for attrition. So we have done that. We are
in essence pulling 4.2 million out of the budget in FY 2000. So in effect there's not a rate increase in
effect that would need to cover that. You can see the impact through 2004. We also discontinued the one
percent (1%) City reserves. That's the $3.1 million you see on the next line. That was discontinued. Once
that was done we still had a gap in 19.. in FY 2003, just shy of $2.4 million, and about six and a half. We
are now charged with for those outer years to come up with the appropriate expenditure reductions or fee
increases to close that gap.
Mr. Warshaw: Let me just add that putting aside the issues of today for the fiscal year 2000 budget the
charge for the Oversight Board is for us immediately to begin working on the 2003, 2004 issue and, of
course, we worked hard with them understanding that there are a lot of potential revenues sources,
expenditure cuts, what have you, that three, four, five years from now we have even addressed and there
are certain project in the City that in fact committed to that solely. We had some time to do that, but not a
lot of time if we are going to live up to this five year recurring revenue, recurring expenditure on a long
term forecast which is something the City really hasn't done ever before until we went into this process.
Ms. Henry: And finally, this reserve charge is just to give you a picture so that you can see what's
occurring here. It is, it's certainly from the Oversight Board's perspective, and Administration as well,
we have had a few, on our balance sheet and, and you don't have that in front of you, but that's part of the
comprehensive annual financial report that was presented to you by KPMG. We have a number of
outstanding liabilities that we have to cover. We have liabilities associated with workers compensation
and our liability property casualty risk. So right now those liabilities aren't specifically covered. We also
have a ongoing liability associated with the accrued vacation and other leave that employees have as part
of as part of our agreement. We ultimately are responsible for those increases. So the Oversight Board
and the Administration's perspective at this point, is that we have to begin to develop these reserves to
help offset these liabilities because they're in 2002 possibly 2003, GASP which is the Governmental
Standards, Accounting Standards Board is coming out with new regulations that guide our local
31 September 15, 1999
governments prepare their financial statements. They will no longer allow us to put those outstanding
liabilities out there and not be incorporated into the overall balance sheet. If you bring that in it says the
City is not healthy. And we are doing everything that we can to mitigate bring down those outstanding
liabilities and we're gradually building these reserves once for emergency purpose, but also to help that
balance sheet. And just with respect to the budget for FY 2000, we have received request, periodically
asking that the Administration, take a look at possible reduction scenarios. It was important that we, that
we present some statistics to you that when you look at the City's budget and we have talked about how
the budget is configured, but our salaries and fringe benefits are in the neighborhood of seventy-four
percent (74%). Our contribution to reserves, five percent (5%) and you can go around the chart and see.
If we are to make any substantial or significant impact on reducing this budget, it has to come in the areas
of salaries and fringe benefits. And as we look at where we are today, we are really quite frankly not able
to do that. Eight -nine percent (89%) of your employees are represented by labor contracts. The other
eleven percent (11%) are not. We have language in all of our contracts at this point that deal with layoffs,
so when you are talking about significant reductions to the budget at least in the next couple of years
while we are under labor contracts, it is virtually impossible to do that without incurring unfair labor
practices, by our labor. That is sort of the presentation, in a nut shell. 1 know that there was the
Commissioner has asked that the Departments be prepared to address their budget specifically, so I didn't
go into some of tangible benefits that the residents will get from their budget in essence of time.
Chairman Plummer: This Commission is going to take a five minute recess. Immediately upon return
Commissioner Gort has asked to be first, Commissioner Sanchez second, Teele third or fourth?
Commissioner Teele: Fourth.
Chairman Plummer: Fourth. Regalado, you just became third and the Chairman will reserve the right to
the end. We will be in a five minute recess. A definite five minutes.
Commissioner Teele: Could I get a copy of that hand out you just gave out?
Ms. Henry: Sure.
[At this point, the Commission recessed at 7:04 p.m. and reconvened at 7:04 p.m. All members of the
Commission were present, except Commissioner Teele who returned to the meeting at 7:15 p.m.]
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is the Financial Advisors to the Oversight Board is the Public
Financial Management. My understanding is this is the National Corporation that deals with public
finance throughout the nation.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: They are financial advisers to the major cities throughout the United States.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: So they are very knowledgeable individuals...
Ms. Henry: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort:... in the business of public finance. Now, my understanding is when you sit down
with them and you talked about the surtax for the parking, they agreed on the numbers that were given to
you.
32 September 15, 1999
•
•
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Given by the Administration.
Mr. Warshaw: Yes.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: They agreed because they are experienced in working with other cities
recommended and they have had it in other cities that this was a possible a doable tax, and a doable
number.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK That's just... I just want to go over this. So when they presented this to the
Board itself, the Board disagreed with the Financial Advisor.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK The second question that I have is, my understanding is, what we wanted to do
if we do not want to increase the fire fee. That represents how many millions?
Mr. Warshaw: I am sorry Commissioner, I turned around for a second.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK Not increasing maintaining the fire fee in the present status, how much would
that mean?
Ms. Henry: I'm sorry. If we do not?
Vice Chairman Gort: Right. If we maintain the way it is today.
Ms. Henry: It would be eleven, a little over eleven million dollars ($11,000,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: That's the additional?
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, no, no.
Ms. Henry: No.
Mr. Warshaw: They way you... Oh, OK A piece of the fire fee that is on the Commission Meeting now
for next Tuesday...
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Mr. Warshaw: ... will generate approximately another four million dollars ($4,000,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: Four million dollars ($4,000,000).
33 September 15, 1999
0
Mr. Warshaw: Correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. The lowering of the mill, how much is that?
Mr. Warshaw: Six point two million
Vice Chairman Gort: Lower that half mill.
Mr. Warshaw: Six point two million.
Vice Chairman Gort: Six point two.
Mr. Warshaw: Correct.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK There is an increase of the sanitation?
Ms. Henry: Two dollars ($2.00) per residential.
Mr. Warshaw: Very small.
Vice Chairman Gort: So we talking about ten million two hundred thousand, what we are looking at, if
we combine.
Mr. Warshaw: If we combine the fire fee and the half mill.
Vice Chairman Gort. And the half a mill?
Mr. Warshaw. Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: We talked about that the Oversight Board would allow us to, to use reoccurring
revenues of five million...
Mr. Warshaw: Five point seven of the parking surcharge.
Ms. Henry: Five point seven million.
Vice Chairman Gort: Five point seven. So we are talking a difference of four point five million dollars.
Mr. Warshaw: Well, in fairness, OK
Vice Chairman Gort: I want to make it easy, Don. If not, we are going to be here all night and we're
going to be all kinds of things. If we want to maintain the status quo as it is right now and satisfy our
expenditures with our revenue, what we have tolook for is the reduction of four point five million dollars.
Mr. Warshaw: Well, we just have to add a little piece. Because we are looking at the half mill and we
have five point seven of the parking surcharge, we are coming up with the additional half million dollars.
So in realty what we have agreed with the Oversight Board is we will have six point two million to offset
the decrease of the half mill. So it's really the difference between six point two and the four.
Chairman Plummer: And the four...
34 September 15, 1999
Ms. Henry: And part of what may be a little bit confusing is we can only, of what the parking surcharge
revenue will bring in, we can only use eighty percent (80%) of it. So, I mean that's why we are...
Chairman Plummer: How much would eighty -percent (80%) be?
Ms. Henry: The eighty -percent (80%) is the five point seven million.
Mr. Warshaw: It's eighty percent is about seven point one million.
Ms. Henry: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK Those are the numbers in my suggestion to our colleagues those are the
numbers that I think we need to look into it because as you can see it is not only here, not everybody
comes and takes part in the public. But I received a lot phone calls, especially after everybody received
the tax projections, especially when the County made the mistake and twelve thousand homes where the
bill was a lot higher than what it was supposed to been. People look at the bottom line and they don't
look at the different compensations that goes into the tax bill. So it's very important that we try to
maintain it within the limits. The only thing I wanted to caution you because I think we still paying, I
don't know if you all recall, Dena probably does, because she was the head of it at that time. And I don't
put any blame on you, the CETA (Comprehensive Employment and Training Act) Program, you recall
CETA?
Mr. Warshaw: Cedar?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Who is playing with these light switches?
Vice Chairman Gort: She is.
Chairman Plummer: She is, who is she? Stop it. Go.
Vice Chairman Gort: We have to be very careful in our grants and one of the things that I have learnt also
in our capital projects, the one problem that we have had, we found the funds to do capital projects, but
we didn't find the funds to maintain them. So, before we accept a grant we have to make sure that that
grant, although it looks very good at first, it is not going to affect us in the long term. That's all I have to
say.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Let me make, let me make one point, and then I will turn it over to
Sanchez. I back you one hundred percent and let me tell you why. Non fire fee is non deductible in my
opinion is not going to be deductible from your income tax. To reduce the mileage, is to say that taking
off what you could reduce in your income tax, where if we take the money and apply it towards a status
quo the fire fee, that money will be tax deductible. So I pro... I go with that entirely. Mr. Sanchez, you
have the floor, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, thank you so much. First of all before I start I would like to
commend the City employees for their fine effort during the preparation of Hurricane Floyd, so I
commend you and the Police Department, Fire Department and all those department heads who at the
CEO, so on behalf of... and some of the Commissioners were there, but I am not going to say who wasn't
there.
35 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: I didn't go down to the EOC (Emergency Operations center) for publicity. I stayed
down in the street with the people.
Commissioner Sanchez: WellI brought the Cuban coffee and donuts. So we are OK Bertha, might as well
stay up there because you're doing such a good job. Stay up there. Mr. Chairman, like many citizens
here today we are all concerned with the City's financial situation. Let's just get to the facts, which I am
going to explain and Bertha, feel free to stop me if I am, you know, not saying the correct numbers after
the meetings that you and I had and also the City Manager pertaining to a lot of the facts that are of great
concern to me because of the situation where we are at and where we are getting on the situation of the
City of Miami. Now, we continue to be under financial crisis and ...Financial Oversight Board. What
alarming thing that was brought to my attention was that the City of Miami's revenue to make it simple is
that we are bringing in a dollar and thirty-six cents and we are spending two dollars and forty-four cents.
OK Just about, but, OK and that to me is very alarming. One of the things in the four, five year forecast
is that it's also alarming is that we are going to have a deficit of seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000)
from the year 2000 to 2004. Now, in that time frame, we are all hoping that a lot of the major projects
coming up which are going to bring revenue to the City, such as, you know the Bayshore Palms, the
Biscayne Bay Yacht Center, etc, etc, and some that are under construction right now. But it's going to
take a while before we start bringing in recurring revenue, and that's a concern that I have: Now, one of
the biggest concerns, yes.
Ms. Henry: You asked me to stop you. The projected deficits in those outer years were basically covered
through attrition cutting back on the amount that we dedicate to reserves, but in the latter two years we are
still facing a shortfall.
Mr. Warshaw: Particularly in 2004.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, but also we cannot touch that reserve dictated by the oversight Board. We
cannot touch that, correct?
Ms. Henry. So, in essence you're right. What they are asking us to do is....
Commissioner Sanchez: Let's, you know this has reached ... that I am not even going to get me off of my
course here. One of the alarming thing that has been brought by myself and many other citizens here
today is, seventy-five percent (75%) of the budget goes to salary, pensions and fringe benefits. Now, that
to me is a great concern. However, some of us up here have inherited that problem and we need to find
ways to get out of it. Now, one of the things that I look at is somewhere down the line through past
administrators whoever may be, we, I believe, that the City has been too generous in some ways and we
need to look at the State for guidelines to find out which avenues we are being too generous in and try to
reduce us when the contracts come back up again. Now, the other alarming thing is that, I want to bring
out is seventy-four million long term liability, you know, I, have been a champion in the workers comp
issue, I believe that nine point three million dollars is being thrown out the window which I consider
because of the claims that have been filed, I do think that Risk Management has done a very good job at
reducing some of the claims and I believe we are down to two hundred two thousand one hundred claims.
But to close those cases we have to pay out money. Which still it's sending out a good message to our
constituents in that we are doing what we can to reduce it. Now, one of the things that I, and I am not an
MBA and the budget to me is very complicated. Very, very complicated. It is also complicated to any
citizen that wants to pick up the budget and find out how their taxpayers money is being spent. It's very
complicated, and I ask you that somewhere down the line try to simplify because, you know you can't
have one department having a budget reaching out to transfer the funds and have seven or eight funds, it
is very, very complicated. Yes, sir, Mr. Manager. .
36 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: I would like to add a comment, and I agree with you in one of the things we have done
this year particularly in the Finance Department is to close out and eliminate some of the complicated
accounts that make no sense to anyone that have been around for the last twenty or thirty years. You are
one hundred percent right. Not only do we want to make it simple, we want to make it so simple that they
can put in a book that any citizen who comes in here can open it up and understand where their top tax
dollars are going. That's part, you know, of the charge that the budget finance people, is to over simplify
this, because it is too complicated and there are and happens too many places where moneys have been
hidden, where we didn't even know that they existed, and we are finding them even now as we speak in
reconciling all accounts. So, I am one hundred percent with you on it.
Commissioner Sanchez: The budget needs to be taxpayer friendly. It needs to be priority driven. It needs
to be a budget that's simple to the taxpayers. You know, one thing that I send out a memo to the City
Manager, September loth and I'm going to read this memo on the record: "Per my recent memo
regarding cutting the budget ten percent (10%), I want to reiterate the urgency of working together
towards the goal of offering our citizens a tax payer family budget. I have forwarded a copy of my memo
requesting the budget cuts to all the Commissioners and the Mayor. I respectfully request that three
proposals of the budget be prepared which include cuts of three percent (3%), five percent (5%), seven
percent (7%). To accomplish the taxpayer friendly budget, the City must make the budget and policy
based priority driven, information rich and openly accountable. Each department must present, personally
embrace their budget and justify their expenses. At this time I respectfully request to form a committee
made up of Administration, department directors and representatives of .the City Commission. The
committee should be referred to as the "Tax Payer Family Budget Committee". The committee shall work
together to come up with recommendations to amend the budget, to reflect how taxpayers earn, hard
earned tax dollars for being utilized by our government. Our ultimate goal is to reduce our expenditures
and provide a more efficient government." When I sent out that memo... and let's get back to fourteen
(14) months ago, when I came here, I did not have the experience that I have earned today. But I will tell
you this once, if I would have had the experience that I had then today, back then, I think I would have
taken a flame thrower to this place. To be honest with you. Because when I was here the last time, I
made the same argument I am going to make today. You know, our taxpayers ... and we must keep
government going on at all cost, I understand that, and I have my differences and I also agree with some
of items pertaining to the Oversight Board. But I will tell you this much. If the citizens of Miami are
going to make sacrifices, they are making it now because they are paying the highest millage. They are
paying the fire fee and you have heard just a few of the people that are out ,there, because I go out and I
talk to people. And they can't continue to pay higher taxes. And yet alone the City has never made
sacrifices. J.L. Plummer brought out the unions made sacrifices years ago when they had to. When they
decided to give up whatever their pension was because of the situation we were in. Yes, they were
generous. But guess what? The Oversight Board, because of the situation, of sixty-eight million dollars
could also have told the unions, "You know what? This financial crisis, the contracts are through, do we
start from scratch." And that's the golden opportunity this City missed years ago to do that. And today,
we wouldn't be where we are at. I believe that this government in the past had been very generous with
the labor contracts. I commend the presence of the labor unions, they have done an excellent job. I've
worn that hat. I wore it for four years in Tallahassee, but comparing Tallahassee to this City, and
comparing any type of contract, let me tell you, it's day and night. Just alone on the disabilities, seven
percent... seventy percent (70%) only in the City, it's unbelievable. One hundred percent (100%) plus
when you fall down and break yourselves. And these are the things, Mr. Manager, you need to help me
help you to help this City get back on track. And we had made significant improvements. But let's talk
about the improvements this City has made. The improvements are very simple. We have taken the easy
road. We have sold in major ocean of waterfront property and we have taxed the heck out of our
taxpayers. It doesn't mean that we are heading in the right direction and it's hard to made sacrifices and
it's hard to make tough decisions when you sit up here and you are constantly pressured with the
taxpayers, the Administration, the employees and now an Oversight Board. These are the things that I am
37 September 15, 1999
very concerned with. And I have plenty of questions on this budget. And we will get to that if you, allow
me to the opportunity. Now..
Commissioner Teele: You are going to do it now?
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, and just to talk, the reason that I want this is because I want it said on the
records that we are doing everything we can, not only myself and the Commissioners here, but the
department heads that, see their department. I think that the City wants to see somewhere along the line
someone say, you know what I am willing to give a little bit. I'm willing to make a little sacrifice. And I
am very concerned about just jumping in with a steak knife and cutting the budget. I want to have the
input of the City Manager, I want to have the input of the Finance Director and I want to have the input of
everybody.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes sir.
Commissioner Teele: Would you yield on the point? On the point of the questions that you want to
propose which I think...
Commissioner Sanchez: Numerous questions.
Commissioner Teele: No, well the numerous questions which I fully not only support, but I think it's
about time this Commission as a legislative body took its role seriously. And I certainly am prepared to
stay here as long as necessary to afford you the full opportunity and any of my colleagues that opportunity
to be able to vote an intelligent vote on the budget which may very well be a radical departure of what we
have done in the past. But in fairness, I think to Ms. Henry and the general comments that may be asked,
I would ask you to just yield to Commissioner Regalado and then to me and then the Chairman, and I will
be happy to yield back to you, or ask the Chairman to yield back to you so that you can go directly into
your specific questions. But I do have some general questions that I would like to establish that will take
three or four minutes before you do that and I fully support what you are going to do.
Chairman Plummer: There are no objections.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, no I have no objections, but I...
Chairman Plummer: So be it. Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Since early last year we have been talking to the Administration about
Amendment Three. And, it seems the City Attorney already has the resolution to be introduced, this
afternoon, or either in the next meeting. However, it seems that the Administration has not paid attention
to Amendment Three, even though you know that the Commission has been on record on a vote of 5-0,
that we are determined to implement Amendment Three and I am, I cannot understand Bertha and Mr.
Manager, why is it that you always say that's next year. And we don't have to worry about it. And you
still don't know where we are we going to get a least, it a million or a million some. I mean this is a
reality. Don't you realize that the Commission is going to implement Amendment Three and then we are
going to have a problem and since we cannot use the parking surcharge we just have to start making plans
and I don't know your ideas on this issue.
Mr. Warshaw: Mr. Commissioner, respectfully, we are very aware committed to and engaged in
discussion with the Oversight Board and Amendment Three.
38 September 15, 1999
•
0
Commissioner Regalado: But, Mr. Manager. Always, that's next year.
Mr. Warshaw: Let's go into that for a minute. It is next year and initially there was a movement by the
Oversight Board that would have had a much bigger impact on this year's budget in anticipation, of
Amendment Three coming next year. For example, if we had come with a budget for this year that
included a let's say hypothetically, half a mill drop in the millage rate, and in Amendment Three comes
next year, we want to be in a position where we have to start looking at raising what we just lowered
twelve months later. So, we have been working with the Oversight Board knowing full well the
Commissions' intention to implement Amendment Three for next year and I will let Bertha explain not
only are we involved in it, but we have got a financial plan in anticipation of the Commission approving
it.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but now the Oversight Board is not only, an Advisory Board on
economics, they also interpret the law because now they say that we cannot use the parking surcharge for
Amendment Three because this is a special group of persons. So I would tell you that knowing that we
should have already started to prepare for this issue because it is going to happen. The Commission has
been on record three times already.
Mr. Warshaw: Before I ask Bertha to going into some of the number details, based upon our initial hope
that the Oversight Board would accept our middle ground revenue projection and the surcharge which
was nine point one million dollars ($9,100.000) they accepted the lowering of approximately seven
million ($7,000.000). We have a good collection history which we feel confident we will. We are already
building into the 2001 budget with the Oversight Board's approval and concurrence that the revenue
stream for the surcharge will jump to the eighty percent (80%),of nine point one million for the year 2001
and beyond. Based upon that we now have some numbers as to what it is going to cost us to implement
Amendment Three starting at fiscal year 2001. I will let Bertha give you those numbers.
Ms. Henry: The first thing I wanted to point out was that the Oversight Board raised the question that
there were a couple of members, actually a couple of revenue estimating members who when they read
the language they questioned whether or not the "Save our Senior Legislation" would count or the impact
would count as a tax or fee reduction. I think that our City Attorney has opined that it can't. If I am not
mistaken. OK so I think that issue is put to bed. The Oversight Board raised it as a question, they didn't
make it as a statement of fact. The second point was the Commission, the budget that we are presenting
to you today, as I indicated earlier, assumes that the fire fee would increase pursuant to the plan. If that is
the case, for FY 2001, we now have a million a little over a million dollars ($1,000,000) of the 'two point
two that it would take to address "Save Our Seniors." And so...
Commissioner Regalado: But that's not the case.
Ms. Henry: I beg your pardon? Well, I mean that's our recommendations, so obviously if that's not
accepted then we have greater issues to deal with.
Commissioner Sanchez: Tomas, would you yield to me, and I will turn it over to you... Teele? Mr. City
Manager...
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Next year, would we have the two point two million dollars ($2,200,000) to
implement on the "Save our Citizens".
39 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Right now, again, let -me go back to what Ms. Henry stated. The current budget
recommendations by the Administration includes a one-half mill reduction worth approximately six point
two million ($6,200,000) and the approval next Tuesday, now of the additional piece of the fire fee
assuming all those things were to happen with the one million plus we have set aside already to save our
seniors, we will be able to implement "Save our Seniors" starting in 2001.
Commissioner Sanchez: But...
Mr. Warshaw: You asked me if we can find the other million dollars ($1,000,000) between now or next
year.
Commissioner Regalado: Wait, hold on just before you go on any further. The Oversight Board said that
we could use, we have to combine, if we wanted it implemented, combine the "Save our Seniors" and
along with the parking surcharge reduction.
Ms. Henry: Once again, during that discussion though we had reduced the fire fee increase so the
increase in the fire fee was reduced by a million dollars ($1,000,000) which we are not proposing in this
scenario.
Mr. Warshaw: The answer to your question also, put in a different way, is if you decided on the fire fee
issue, if you were not going to do this latest increase you would now be short, in addition to the one
million, another force would be have a five million dollar ($5,000,000) problem, basically, for the year
2001.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Turn over to Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you very much. Mr. Manager let me again tell you what I ...publicly what I
have said privately. I believe that the budget process is the most important function that a legislative body
engages in. In fact, many people think that Tallahassee would work a lot better if the legislature just came
to town, did the budget and went home. But the fact of the matter is, we are involved in a number.of
legislative actions throughout the year. I would hope that this year, having a year behind you, that many
of the issues that led, quite frankly, last year to misunderstanding, I think legitimate and sincere
misunderstanding were issues where there was just not enough communication over the specific issue and
I fully recognize that you have applied yourselves very diligently and your staff very diligently. And I
think we're much better off this year and I commend you and your staff in that regard. But I want to
return before we really get into this budget to a central and court theme. And that is under our charter, the
way it is right now, the Mayor and the Manager are supposed to confer on the budget. The charter is very
clear that the Mayor is supposed to submit a budget, in fact, in addition to a state of the county, state of
the City, the Mayor is expected to deliver a budget message. I think unfortunately the charter has the
timeline totally screwed up, but that's another issue. Have you personally conferred with the Mayor on
this budget and are there any matters that the Mayor is concerned about that we should know about? I
mean in the spirit of collegiality, are there concerns that the Mayor has and are there things that the Mayor
would like for us to pay particular attention to. We hear all the time from the Oversight Board we know
what the Oversight Board wants and doesn't want. Do we know what the Mayor wants and doesn't want
on this budget?
Mr. Warshaw: And I think I answered that before. I certainly can't speak for the Mayor's feelings on the
budget other than to tell you that similar to briefings we have had going back to last March with many,
with all of you and your staffs, those same meetings have taken place with the Mayor and members of the
Mayor's staff. But in terms of the Mayor's specific feelings about issues of the budget, I think it would
be best for the Mayor to address those.
40 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: I understand that, but 1 am just asking you, as the person who the Mayor hires, are
you aware and have you discussed this budget with the Mayor?
Mr. Warshaw: Again, to the same level I have discussed it, you know with all of you. I am certainly
aware that the Mayor's aware of what's happening, that the Oversight Board. I am certainly aware that
the Mayor has some of the same concerns we all have without getting, you know, balanced budgets
through the process. But in terms of specifics about the budget, I would defer those comments to the
Mayor.
Commissioner Teele: I find that extremely curious. And quite frankly, of concern, but of course the
problem here is that this Commission, in my judgment, certainly since 'I have been here, we have not
appropriately acted or acted appropriately as a legislative body and, and we have basically taken all the
heat, everything that goes wrong has been blamed on the Commission, the Oversight Board has continued
to blame us, the press has blamed us, but, but no one reads the charter. Now, Mr. Attorney since you are
an attorney, highly educated, could you read section four subparagraph nine, under the powers and duties
of the Mayor, 4G that is, of the Charter.
Mr. Vilarello: The Mayor shall prepare and deliver a budgetary address annually to the people of the City
of Miami between July I" and September 30th. Such report shall be prepared after the consultation with
the Manager.
Commissioner Teele: So, we are hearing very clearly now, I think we are down to the eleventh hour,
eleventh and a half hour with the September 30th guideline, that the Mayor is supposed to prepare a
budget for the citizens of the... and make a budget report to the citizens and such a report shall be
prepared after consultation with the Manager. Now we are hearing from the Manager that there have
been no such consultations, at least to this point, other than the basic briefings that we have had. Now, I
want it to be on record, I am not going to be available at a whim, at a moments notice or a whim, so that
the Mayor can carry out his constitutional duties which is to prepare a report to the Commission. But, but
I certainly think, Mr. Attorney, as you all look at the Charter Reform issue, this is the kind of matter, I
think the president of the United States is required to prepare the President's Trillion Dollar budget by
January 30th. And I really do believe that somewhere between January 301h or February I" and June 30th is
the right timeline to do that if we are looking at any Charter Reform issues. Because this thing is totally
out of whack. Now, since I have been here the Budget Director has prepared his budget and submitted
this budget. Now, Ms. Henry, I am happy that you are here and I am particularly pleased that you are so,
you are so well prepared. And I commend you. Do you supervise the Budget Office?
Ms. Henry: No, I do not.
Commissioner Teele: Did you prepare this budget?
Ms. Henry: I worked with the Budget Office.
Commissioner Teele: Alright, did your office prepare this budget or did the Budget Office prepare this
Budget?
Mr. Warshaw: I would like to answer that because its ...
Commissioner Teele: As long we get an answer to the question.
41 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: You will, you will. Let me say that when I hired Ms. Henry who had extensive
background in budget preparation as an Assistant County Manager to two major counties, Montgomery
County, Ohio and Broward County simultaneously with that the former Budget Director was no longer
here. We hired many, many new people in the Department of Budget and this has been an exhaustive
seven day a week around the clock venture that has been going on for now months and Ms. Henry, Mr.
Brennan and many, many members of the staff have had an involvement in the budget unlike any that the
records of the City have ever had before. So the answer is there is a joint bifurcated responsibility that is
shared by numerous people to turn out the best product for all of you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, in essence, I mean if this is a Commission legislative budget hearing
for the first reading and in fairness to us to, I think we need to at least focus on the answer to our
questions and let's try to get through this on this side of midnight to the other side who is responsible for
the numerical calculations of this budget? That's what I would really want to know.
Mr. Warshaw: When you say the numerical calculations are they the projections?
Commissioner Teele: No. The numbers of the actual budget. Who calculated the taxable revenue?
Ms. Henry: The Budget Office.
Mr. Warshaw: The Budget Office.
Commissioner Teele: OK Mr. Director, let me ask you this. Would you explain at a later time, after
Commissioner Sanchez has had a chance because I am, I got in to this because I am looking obviously at
the Omni issues that relate to the county and city involvement as it relates to the tax increment district in
Southeast Overtown. But the numbers just don't add up. I talked to the County Budget Office today,
there are calculation errors that need to be explained. And particularly as it relates to the calculation of
taxable revenues, we need to try to figure out, are we actually deducting... what are we deducting for
uncollectibles?
Mr. Brennan: Let me defer your questions so members of my staff who I had to do some inquiry
concerning that subject matter.
Aristides Fernandez (Resource Allocation Manager, Management and Budget Department):
Commissioner, my name is Ari Fernandez. I'm Resource Allocation Manger.
Commissioner Teele: I am pleased to see you here.
Mr. Fernandez: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Teele: What are the uncollectibles? What is the deduction for the uncollectibles? Is it five
percent, or is it some number greater or some number less.
Mr. Fernandez: OK You are talking in terms of the ad valorem, there are two elements.
Commissioner Teele: On both the ad valorem and the real and centrally assessed.
Mr. Fernandez: OK Essentially, it all depends on the DR twenty-two later on that we receive from the
appraiser...
42 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: No, no. no. What is the number, what the percentage that this budget is built on?
It is ninety-five percent, ninety-six percent, ninety-seven percent, ninety-two percent, what is the
calculation?
Mr. Fernandez: OK Essentially we have used ninety-five percent as required ...
Commissioner Teele: Ninety-five percent. And are we using a nine point five mileage rate?
Mr. Fernandez: Yes, sir. But out of that you have to deduct the incremental tax ... excuse me, tax district
amount. That is what goes to the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency).
Commissioner Teele: And that calculation yields two hundred and seventy-three thousand in Omni which
is how we get into this. However, the county's calculation is somewhat in variance, and I would like later
on today to try to sought out why the county is getting one set of numbers, I mean the only thing they
could come up with is maybe we were using a different deductible for collections and it is particularly
true as it relates to centrally accessed and personal where the calculation is even greater in percentage -
wise is different.
Mr. Fernandez: I would like to take a look at that. .
Commissioner Teele: I would very much also like to understand the debt service fund tax roll, because
again the calculation there has it at ninety-six point seven as opposed to ninety-five and, of course, by
state law I think we are required to calculate that at ninety-five percent.
Mr. Fernandez: That is the base pay on that; ninety-five percent is base pay.
Commissioner Teele: By state law?
Mr. Fernandez: Yes sir.
Commissioner Teele: But our calculations work out to ninety-six point seven four. These are the numbers
coming to us from the county, I mean these aren't your numbers or my numbers. These are the county's
numbers, I mean there are thirteen billion three hundred and seventy-six million three hundred and thirty-
one and hundred and ninety-five dollars ($13,370,331,195).
I
Mr. Fernandez: That's quite true.
Commissioner Teele: You divide that by one thousand you get thirteen million three seventy-six, and if
you multiply that times one point four which is the proposed millage you are getting eighteen point seven
and if you deduct for uncollectibles, you know, at ninety-five percent you get one number and if you use
what we have got, you get a different number, which is in violation of state law, which is ninety-six point
seven. So we have got a difference right there of about four hundred thousand dollars.
Mr. Fernandez: Right
Commissioner Teele: I would like to just reserve the time to go over those things with you a little bit later,
but, but this is just the mathematics. This has nothing to do with policy or any of those issues which I
really would like to get... to focus on with you.
Mr. Fernandez: Absolutely.
43 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Say that again.
Mr. Fernandez: We are aware of that.
Commissioner Teele: And then the only other area that, that I think fits within to this is we really need to
see the actuals in terms of the half cent tax numbers that we are looking at. The State of Florida has sent
out a booklet that gives their projections of what we are going to get for the half cent sales tax and those
numbers that the State has given us don't coincide with the numbers that you are giving us and I just
would like to know how we are in a position to restate the States' number. I realize that this are
estimates.
Mr. Fernandez: We have got to make a note of that,and check it out, sir.
Commissioner Teele: And it may be that we don't need to get to that tonight, it could be that we could
look at it and try to figure out how to get to it later on by calculating and trust me, I got straight low
grades in math, so I am not at all for arguing with you about your calculator versus my calculator. I will
concede to your calculator as long as we are agreeing on the same methodology.
Chairman Plummer: What is the discrepancy, Mr. Teele, in the sales tax?
Commissioner Teele: In what?
Chairman Plummer: What is the discrepancy in the sales tax between the state and what we are using? Is
it a hundred thousand dollars? Two hundred...
Commissioner Teele: I thought it was about three hundred and eighty thousand, and the same thing is
true of Key Biscayne City contract because ... but in any event, those are the areas that I would like to talk
to you that relate strictly to the budget issue. Then, as it relates to departmental issues, I am going to
really want to understand what we are doing in solid waste, and particularly the storm utility drainage. As
to storm water drainage issues or the storm water, surcharge or whatever that thing is and how that's
getting in here, because it just seems to me that we told you last year that we would look the other way
last year, but we wanted that number to be reconciled and pulled out of that solid waste budget and it
seems that it still back in here. And the other biggest, the other big area that I think we have not dealt with
if I can is just the issue of permits. Particularly, permits for, water, sewer and City permits. I mean, we
need to look at the number again very closely. So I appreciate very much...
Mr. Warshaw: On the revenue side?
Commissioner Teele: On the revenue side, appreciate very much, Commissioner Sanchez if you allow
me to just lay out those general issues and, and Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I had also sent a memo to the City Manager asking the
Department Directors to attend this meeting because I wanted to ask them certain questions pertaining to
the budget. As I looked at the numbers compared ...Bertha since you are up there, I have a question for
you. The comparison by funds and spending, there is a difference of one point five mill from August, the
estimated ninety-nine two thousand year from August to September there was some increases there was
an increase in the City Manager's office, twenty-seven thousand ($27,000.00) there was an increase in
the City Clerk by thirty-one thousand nine hundred and sixty-seven ($31,967.00). What, why was, why
was there a difference in August to September of one point five mill?
44 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: I am not sure where you are looking, Commissioner.
Commissioner Sanchez: Here... Because this was presented, I received ...we presented the budget in
August and then in September there was a difference in numbers of one point five seven nine six hundred
and forty, and I wondered was it because of the Oversight, because you had to make some changes in the
budget or was it...
Ms. Henry: O.K, specifically, Commissioner, which office? You just... on the bottom line.
Commissioner Sanchez: Why is there a change? I can tell the amounts. The City Manager's Office which
was the first one there was a difference of twenty-seven thousand dollars ($27,000.00). Of course, the
City Manager didn't tell me why those twenty-seven thousand dollars were allocated to his office in
addition. You presented us with a budget and then you changed... in September the budget changed all
these numbers. There was a difference. Money was added to the budget. In most of the...I believe in
most of these cases there was money added to the budget. Do you know what I am talking about?
Mr. Brennan: Yes Commissioner I think I know what you are talking about. In that is we presented an
amended budget to you in 1999 which increases the City Manager's budget by that amount. During that
year, we had a change of department administration. And because we had change of administration,
individuals differ in salary, we had to increase the budget by that amount to take care of the other salaries
and operating expenses.
Commissioner Sanchez: And where did that money come from, from the transferable funds?
Mr. Brennan: No, we were operating at surplus and we got the money from there.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK And that was a difference of one point five million dollars ($1,500,000)
One point five, seven nine six hundred and forty thousand ($1,579,640).
Mr. Brennan: In total.
Commissioner Sanchez: In total, those were just salaries. You said salaries, were they just salaries?
Mr. Brennan: For the City Manager's Office. What I am saying is that for the total departmental budget
there were not only salaries. We had operating expenses also.
Mr. Warshaw: I am still not sure where you are reading from. I would like to see .....
Chairman Plummer: I guess he is reading from this .....
Commissioner Sanchez: In other words, let me just..... and the number in pencil are there was a
difference.
Chairman Plummer: Now I am going through the .......
Commissioner Sanchez: The amended budget, that's exactly what it is. The amended budget from FY....
Mr. Warshaw: The only time we amend the budget we came with a budget amended that the Commission
approved. We can't amend the budget on our own. So you're talking about the adopted budget versus the
45 September 15, 1999
amendment budget. We came before the Commission with a budget amended that put additional revenues
in to departments throughout the City. If that is what you are looking at.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's the budget that was given to us in office.
Mr. Brennan: You are talking about... you are comparing the two thousand budget with the ninety-nine
budget, Commissioner?
Commissioner Sanchez: No. August 4', you presented us with a budget, and then at a later date, you her
gave us the same budget with different numbers.
Mr. Warshaw: And that's because the budget was amended as a result of an Appropriations Ordinance
that came before the Commission with a full line item understanding, and that was in accordance as you
recall with the anti -deficiency Ordinance prior to the beginning of the fourth quarter. So, there was a lot
of money in there for technology, if I recall in that budget amendment. It was a rather substantial amount
of money, but that's the only way you can have an amended budget that changes in any way the budget
that was presented to you at the beginning of the year. As a result of the budget appropriations, and we
will probably have another to clean up this year's budget before it is over, because again the budget is a
projection, you know, dollars being spent so you don't spend exactly to the penny in every line item. We
will probably come again once again with another as they refer to a "Clean -Up Ordinance" or an
amended Appropriations Ordinance to finalize the fiscal year 1999 budget and that will have to come
before you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Bertha, can I have that back please? I need that back because I am going to
compare that with the different departments. Now the reason why I asked the Department Directors to
come in front of this Commission is because I want to ask them a couple of questions. Now I know that I
am probably going to get Washington Monument syndrome, when Regan asked the parks department to
cut back its budget and the Parks Director said "fine, we will close down the Washington Monument".
But I am hoping that we won't get that. So, however you want to do it, Bertha, you want me to call the
departments up?
Mr. Warshaw: Whoever you ... You have specific departments if you would like all the directors are here.
Chairman Plummer: First of all, it has to be under concurrence with the Manager if he will allow that to
happen.
Mr. Warshaw: That's fine, the Directors will answer whatever questions you have.
Chairman Plummer: Then, Mr. Sanchez. How do you wish to proceed?
Commissioner Sanchez: Well I wish to proceed with the Mayor's Office. The difference of sixteen
thousand dollars ($16,000.00) in increases.
Chairman Plummer: There is no one in that capacity.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well the City Manager can answer that.
Chairman Plummer: I am sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: The City Manager can answer that.
46 September 15, 1999
0
r 1
Chairman Plummer: Alright, Mr. Manager, the question is asked then of you.
Mr. Warshaw: Sixteen thousand dollars ($16,000.00). What is the question? Why is there an increase in
the Mayor's Office of sixteen thousand dollars ($16,000.00)?
Commissioner Sanchez: Sixteen thousand dollars twenty-five three point four (3.4) and the explanation I
have is that... sustain the existing level of service. Which I can understand that.
Mr. Warshaw: And again off the top of my head I don't have the back up for every department, I would
say that's a rather you know modest increase from one fiscal year to another considering that there are
salary increases that the staffs of elected officials, you know received as well, so that's, that's not large...
Commissioner Sanchez: As I recall, last year when I was here, I think 'that the Mayor had a reduction in
his ... he gave up some money. So did all the Commissioners trying to send out a message which was, you
know, be more cooperative and try to help out, you know make some sacrifices towards the budget. Now
I'll just go down to the Office of Asset Management, is the director here?
Ms. Lori Billberry: Hi, how are you?
Commissioner Sanchez: Did your department use all its funding last year?
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. For the record, put your name on the record and if you are the
Department Head so indicate.
Ms. Billberry (Director of Asset Management): Lori Billberry, Director of Asset Management
Commissioner Sanchez: Did your department use all its fundings last year?
Ms. Billberry: There were some salary savings primarily because of vacancies that were subsequently
filled.
Commissioner Sanchez: And, and what, that surplus, what happened to that surplus?
Ms. Billberry: Still there.
Commissioner Sanchez: It was still there?
Mr. Warshaw: And it goes into as the rest of the. surplus money go into either reserve or some other
commitment that's been, you know agrees with part of the budget process.
Commissioner Sanchez: And this year you received an increase of one hundred and fifty point seven
percent (150.7%).
Ms. Billberry: Part of this is because the MRC (Miami Riverside Center) building management is going
to be put under the Office of Asset Management, where previously it was.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Have you ever identified your highest and most important priorities in your
department?
Ms. Billberry: Yes, they are to generate and maximize the utilization of City real property and generate
new revenue to the City.
47 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Do you feel that your budget could be reduced?
Ms. Billberry: Not without affecting the effectiveness of the department.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: How many exempt people do you have in your department? And Mr.
Commissioner, when you prompt your questions, would you allow me just to ask the number of exempt
people in the department and the percentage that the exempt represents for everybody.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Could you tell me how many exempt people there are in what....?
Mr. Warshaw: Are you talking of unclassified.
Commissioner Teele: Unclassified, exempt, whatever you want to call it.
Ms. Billberry: I have seven. I have...
Commissioner Teele: How many?
Ms. Billberry: Out of eleven employees.
Commissioner Teele: You have seven out of eleven? What page are you on in the book in the budget
book?
Ms. Billberry: It's not in the Budget book, it's part of what I prepared.
Commissioner Teele: No, where is your budget? What page is your budget on?
Ms. Billberry: Page thirty-four.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Does anybody have any other questions for the Office of Asset Management?
Hearing them.
Commissioner Regalado: I do, I do...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Your office has to deal with properties and projects. We have been told for
about almost two years that we are working on Virginia Key, Watson Island. What is the problem that we
cannot get one single project moving? Is it too complicated, why, what is happening to the RV
(recreational vehicle) and the Coconut Grove Convention Center? I mean, the problem is that we sit
here...
Mr. Warshaw: That's a good question. We should address that.
48 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: They don't have that, I thought Development has that.
Mr. Warshaw: Yeah, that's not an Asset Management. Dena can respond to that.
Commissioner Regalado: Dena can respond, but in terms of the office of Ms. Billberry, what is
happening with the Virginia Key, why it's not nothing being done, I mean we went through the process.
You told us you to do this, you have to do that, you gave us a timetable. No timetable has ever, ever been
complied with the City and then what you have is that the only way out to balance a budget is to tax the
people of Miami. We do not have a major project to say at least to the people well you know we've done
this, so you are not going to have to pay more taxes next year when they have their ... What is the
problem, Dena?
Ms. Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner, you are absolutely correct in saying...
Chairman Plummer: Name for the record.
Ms. Bianchino: My name is Dena Bianchino, Assistant City Manager. You're absolutely correct in
saying that these projects stand a good chance of bringing substantial revenues to the City. If I could just
go through the major development projects...
Commissioner Regalado: Could you tell me just why no timetable...
Ms. Bianchino: OK well wait...
Commissioner Regalado: ...has been complied with?
Ms. Bianchino: Well first of all, you have instructed us not to proceed with Virginia Key. We are under
instructions by the Commission not to do anything...
Commissioner Regalado: No, that's the beach. That's the beach.
Commissioner Teele: Just one part...
Commissioner Regalado: I am sorry...
Ms. Bianchino: I am sorry...
Commissioner Regalado: No,no, no. We did not instruct you to do that.
Ms. Bianchino: OK You, you...
Commissioner Regalado: That's the beach.
Ms. Bianchino: You have never authorized us to go out on an RFP (request for proposals).
Commissioner Regalado: We have done, we have done what you asked us to do and I am just saying this
as an example. Watson Island, other projects, I mean what is wrong, what I am asking is what is wrong?
Why do we have to tax the people in order to get more revenues? And we keep meeting and meeting and
meeting and we do not come up.
Ms. Bianchino: OK
49 September 15, 1999
• . •
Commissioner Regalado: At least we do not come up, at least with a, with a clear timetable.
Ms. Bianchino: OK on Dinner Key which you have authorized us to proceed with an RFP, we are
proceeding very rapidly, we have been meeting with the community on a regular basis, we will have an
RFP to you within the next two months. The outstanding issues on Dinner Key are related to FEMA
(Federal Emergencies Management Agency) guidelines, we are working right now with FEMA so that we
can put out in our RFP that it valid. We don't want to have a flawed RFP. That is, that project is, is
working ahead full speed. And you authorized us to do that and that's what we are doing. On Watson
Island, you authorized us to develop an RFP for a portion of the island. We have not done that yet. We are
working on two other projects on the island. We felt it was in the best interest of the City to determine the
outcome of that before we went out for an RFP because they all affect each other. On Bicentennial Park,
we are absolutely directed not to do anything. On Virginia Key if you would like us to come forth with a
declaration of UDP (unified development project) for the marine stadium site, we can do it at the next
Commission meeting. Grove Harbor...
Commissioner Regalado: Watson Island, frankly, I mean, I know that you are the professional. That you
feel that the, in my case, I don't know anything real estate. However, I have to find out things by reading
the paper. If you are going to bring one vote, if you are going to do this and then you ask me and other
members to approve something I am really disappointed because, first of all, I keep saying, "Why
timetables have not been complied." What is the problem? Is it because the administration don't want to
do it, is it because of political pressure, is it because the Mayor has plans and we don't know about it?
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, I will tell...
Commissioner Regalado: Can you tell us?
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, I will tell you that we are complying with timetables.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I am sorry. If you want me to, I can bring you the memos.
Ms. Bianchino: Well...
Mr. Warshaw: OK Commissioner on the Watson Island and on the Coconut Grove piece of property, we
are seeing the time lines. We have gone out with the Commission's approval and concurrence. We have
hired top line architects, developers and planners to work with us. We have been meeting with the
community, working with the community so that we come forward with a proposal for Dinner Key. It's
something that we know is going to be a success.
Commissioner Regalado: The time line for Grove Harbor is it...
Mr. Warshaw: One of the problems with Grove Harbor is that because there were so many problems with
it going back now for years, here we are just about at the deadline date and we haven't yet even seen a
plan on the part of the developer. We have one unresolved issue as a result, as it involves the Bay bottom
but outside that, it's very probable that the project might not go and have to start all over again. And that's
the proposal that's been out there for now, what two or three years.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, let me just...
Chairman Plummer: May I just stop you for one minute?
50 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Sure.
Chairman Plummer: I think we need to speak to specifics and not to individual projects.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman....
Chairman Plummer: Now the point is very well taken that a number of projects that we, the Commission,
had felt were on a go item that are not...
Commissioner Regalado: Your are right, my only point is that the City of Miami has resources that we
can use and we can produce. And yet...
Chairman Plummer: And we are not.
Commissioner Regalado: Every year what we need to do to balance the budget or bring new revenues is
to tax the people of Miami. Well, you know, count me out, because I have been here three years and I
mean the lower theater is not done, my God, I mean,
Chairman Plummer: No that's not a revenue.
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Chairman Plummer: That's not a revenue.
Commissioner Regalado: Chairman, it's not about revenue, it's about projects. I am telling you and what
I am saying is why cannot, can we have instead of this fire fee for next year that we need to increase the
fire fee because if not, we cannot implement Amendment No. 3. Why don't we have already a plan set we
are going to do this, we, you approve this, we are going to have revenues like this. I just do not agree with
this philosophy that the easiest thing to do is to tax the people.
Chairman Plummer: OK Mr. Sanchez.
Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman if we could just continue or get exact, does your question require an
answer from someone here?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: It does not?
Chairman Plummer: Well I think he made a very good point. I mean we all are very knowledgeable with
the obvious that the Marine Stadium has sat there and just celebrated its seventh anniversary of an
absolute and total disaster. And nothing has happened. Seven years. I mean that is the name of the game.
I am sorry, Mr. Sanchez, go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: .Mr. Chairman, what I want to accomplish is I don't want to put anybody on a
hot seat.
Commissioner Plummer: We are.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, you know it's business, not personal. You are the department head. You
run that department. You should know where all the money is. As a Commissioner here what I want to
51 September 15, 1999
hold you is accountable what that department does, how its operating, how much money is in there and
you know what? You probably got everybody, I have a feeling that somehow you were briefed to come
up here to go, "No." Can you cut the budget? "No." You know, but let me tell you, somebody is going
to get up there and say yes. Because I am telling you, if everybody tells me no, I am going to vote no on
the budget and I am going to turn around and I am going to direct the City Manager, if it is legal, through
the advice of the ...to cut the budget by three percent (3%) across the board. And then let him decide
how he is going to do it. But as a Commissioner representing a poor district and last year I told you that if
I have the experience I have today I would have taken a flame through this City. But today, if you are
going to get up and you are going to say, "No, we cannot cut our budget," and you are not going to make
any sacrifices, I am not going to make any sacrifices because the only peoples that make sacrifices here
last year were the Commissioners and the Mayor. And I know that we can reduce our budget. There is
fat in our budget.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. There is a rule that there are to be no cellular phones or beepers audible
in the Chambers.
Commissioner Sanchez: And that's all that I want.
Chairman Plummer: I just bought another bad story.
Commissioner Sanchez: I want the City Manager, I want the City Manager to help me and I want you to
help me.
Chairman Plummer: I didn't know who it was.
Commissioner Sanchez: And I know we can cut the budget. One percent (1%), two percent (2%), just
need to show we can make some type of sacrifice. And I encourage you, and I challenge you to try to
make those sacrifices. And that is the only way to continue. Office, thank you so much. And I respect
your professionalism. Thank you so much.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, I, Mr. Manager want to concur with Mr. Sanchez. I am willing to cut my
budget. I mean it's, it's if everybody does do the same and I am willing to cut.
Commissioner Regalado: We have done that every year, J.L.
Chairman Plummer: With three or five percent. If that's what it takes, and we have got to set the
example, then we are going to set the example.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if I could continue, as quickly as possible.
Chairman Plummer: Sure, go ahead.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes sir, I yield.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Sanchez, you began with the Mayor. The next budget is the Commissioners. I
cut mine. I am returning some money from the previous year and this year and I am willing to cut 10%.
Commissioner Sanchez: Every year we can't always be the ones making. Last year I gave up twenty-five
thousand ($25,000.00), you gave up twenty-five.
52 September 15, 1999
0 * 9
Commissioner Teele: The problem is, look, let me all tell you something. It's fine and it's reads well
but the press is not going to record it, number one, so it's no need in saying it. Number two, if all of us
take a fifty percent (50%) cut in the budget, it still won't change the millage rate one iota. So let's stop,
let's be serious about this. We have got to figure out how to get some real savings out of this budget and
we need to approve the Manager's budget and I am willing to do either one, but I think the real issue here
is .that we are gong keep planning these cosmetic games of taking twenty -thousand dollars ($20,000.00)
out of his budget and eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00) out of your budget and my budget and at the end
of the day that does not add to one percent of one percent. So what are you talking about? What are we
talking about here? We either are going to cut this budget and, and what we are talking about is the
seventy percent (70%). And that seventy-five percent, seventy-six percent is salaries and wages and fringe
benefits.
Commissioner Sanchez: If I could continue down the line, Office of the City Clerk.
Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: How are you, my neighbor?
Mr. Foeman: I am just fine sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you use all your funding this FY (fiscal year)?
Mr. Foeman: I think we realized some salary savings, I think the projections are roughly about seventeen
thousand ($17,000.00)...
Commissioner Sanchez: Seventeen thousand. What did you do with that money? Did you roll it over in
your budget?
Mr. Foeman: Same scenario as Asset Management...
Commissioner Sanchez: Same scenario as Asset Management.
Mr. Foeman: It was rolled over into some fund.
Commissioner Sanchez: Have your ever identified your highest most important priority in your budget?
Your budget's high priority?
Mr. Foeman: Yes, we are ... the City Clerk's Office is a repository of the public records, so our mission
basically is to try to capture and make accessible to as broad a segment of our community the public
record...
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Clerk. Can you reduce your budget?
Mr. Foeman: Well I think we have taken certain initiatives to try to do that, one is the initiation of the
Passport Office, that's going to be a contribution back to the general fund in the amount of roughly about,
close to ninety thousand dollars ($90,000.00) we are looking at hopefully...
Commissioner Sanchez: Ninety thousand ($90;000.000).
Mr. Foeman: We are looking at roughly about ninety thousand ($90,000.00). Right now through
53 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: They degenerate. Can that money will go back. So that is a reduction of
your.......
Mr. Foeman: Yeah, we ......
Commissioner Teele: In other words what you are saying is that if you could keep the money your
budget would be reduced by ninety thousand dollars ($90,000.00).
Mr. Foeman: Well I think we are going to making a contribution to the general fund....
Commissioner Teele: I understand that, but, but to answer the Commissioner's question. If you were
able to keep the money that you are generating, which you can't, it means that you basically are
contributing ninety thousand dollars ($90,000.00) to the budget.
Mr. Foeman: Yes. That money is in a special revenue fund.
Commissioner Sanchez: So it's a yes?
Commissioner Regalado: And, and if I may Commissioner, you used to pay rent, but you don't now?
Mr. Foeman: Right, we moved that office. Most of our revenues are realized through the naturalization
ceremony and the daily customers flow we can accommodate over the counter here, so we have in fact
moved the office over.
Commissioner Regalado: So, and just to make a note, I can guarantee working in the media that this
revenue will not be a one year revenue. This is an ongoing process once and as a matter of fact, once that
this office is established he will have more revenues than ninety thousand dollars ($90,000.00). I am sure
of that.
Chairman Plummer: He has the floor. Mr. Reg... Mr. Sanchez, Mr. Cox is "biting at the bit" to make a
statement. Would you allow him to have the floor?
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Cox, you have the floor.
Charlie Cox (President — AFSCME): You know, you need, while you are asking these questions to look
at your budget book, because...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Cox for the record sir, your name and who do you represent.
Mr. Cox: Miami General Employees. Their budget in '98, '99 was five hundred and eighty six thousand
($586,000.00), OK their budget and projected '99, 2000 is a million eighty...
Chairman Plummer: Five hundred thousand or more.
Mr. Cox: OK and you are saying that there is ninety thousand dollars there and get accounted as a
savings. Let me tell you, there is a whole lot of smoke and mirrors going on here and I feel real betrayed
by a whole bunch of people here today. So, and I am going to give you some points if you want them to
look for.
54 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, absolutely.
Mr. Cox: Well, you look at that last slide they put up there and they showed you and I am tired of
everybody is telling the public that all the employees are rich. Because the employees I represent make
less than thirty five thousand dollars ($35,000.00) on average. And I dare any of them to dispute those
figures. You look at that last figure that says eighty-nine percent (89%) of the employees are represented
by a union.
Commissioner Sanchez: By labor.
Mr. Cox: OK That's real great with percentages. Put the numbers up there. Don't play smoke and
mirrors anymore. Put the numbers of the salaries up there. I can do it. Don't sit there and point the finger
at the unions. The Manager sat up there and said that the increases in this book are because of pension
costs by the employees and because of raises. Well I can tell you what my employees got this year. Two
percent (2%). And I think that's the same for every other employee organization out there. Now if we are
stealing from the public I want to know it. That is what we got in our contract. Two percent (2%) this
year and two percent (2%) last, next year. OK, so don't let them tell you how much the costs are going up
other that the two percent (2%) on my contract.
Mr. Tony Rodriguez: Excuse me.
Mr. Cox: They are also sitting here telling you pension costs have gone up.
Commissioner Regalado: Commissioner....
Mr. Cox: Well did they bother to tell you the Gates settlement this year alone they have to put sixteen
million dollars ($16,000,000) in between the two pensions. They would have had to put in our sanitation
pension. Alone over sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000) if we didn't settle Gates. So, don't sit here and
tell the public that everything is going to the employees, because that's not true. We have given and
given and given and then you turn around stabbing us in the back and that's wrong.
Commissioner Teele: Who is stabbing you in the back?
Mr. Cox: Let me, let me, well these numbers that they are saying and what the reasons are for the
increase in the budget is not correct.
Commissioner Teele: I just want to understand Mr. Cox. I mean, I, you normally make a lot of sense on
these issues but 1, are you saying that eighty-nine percent (89%) of the work force is not represented by...
Mr. Cox: It absolutely is, but do it by dollar wise. Don't do it, don't do it by percentages. If you do it by
dollar wise, you'll see that that seventy-four percent (74%) of employees of the employees that are
represented by the union is not going to be seventy-four percent (74%). OK I can go down every single
department. Here is a fine example of,some of the things. We are paying right now the police department,
they have decreased civilian employees by thirty-two. Look at your page seventeen. This is their
numbers, not mine. Their decrease in the civilian employees by thirty-two. Ask them how many
employees are working on communications every single day on overtime. Now is that smart
management? My Communication's Operator started out at about nine, ten dollars an hour. What is a cop
on overtime make? Is that real bright or what?
Commissioner Teele: Well what does it matter. I don't know. What is ... what's the story of that?
55 September 15, 1999
Mr. Cox: Well ask them, I know what they make.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, what does a police officer on overtime make?
Mr. Warshaw: At time and a half they are supposed to be making twenty something dollars an hour.
Chairman Plummer: How much?
Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty something dollars...
Mr. Cox: But we are cutting civilian positions.
Mr.Warshaw: Twenty something dollars an hour.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, yeah, OK
Commissioner Teele: Then what kind of surveillance position?
Chairman Plummer: And that's, that's for a regular police officer and not a sergeant or lieutenant? Now
ask the question, ask the question.
Mr. Cox: Oh, I can go a lot further.
Chairman Plummer: Why then I been asking and I am still going to get an answer, Channel 9 under the
most important facts of the police department for getting information has been closed about a third of
every day and we are paying how much in overtime for the dispatcher's on Channel 9? 1 was told about
eighty-five thousand dollars ($85,000.00) a year in overtime. And Mr. Manager, I want to get an answer
to that before we do the close of this budget hearing. But, it upsets me that a policeman calls in and
cannot get information because Channel 9 is closed for the remainder of the shift. It's ridiculous. So we
are going to get those answers and take it from there. Go ahead, Mr. Cox. Sorry to interrupt.
Mr. Cox: Here's another smart move. Instead of promoting and moving civilians into the Fleet
Manager's position to take care of those police cars, they decide no, we will put more cops in because we
don't like whose on the list. So what they are paying a cop to be a Fleet Manager instead of a civilian?
Chairman Plummer: He is hitting it right on the head.
Mr. Cox: Now, how many, if you are going drop for salary savings thirty-two positions they have
dropped in the police department over three hundred positions in the last five years who is picking up the
workload? Police officers instead of civilians in every area. It isn't so bad there because the fire
department is doing it now. Fire fighters now are working in communications on overtime. What does a
firefighter make compared to a Com Operator? And you know what, they are still working there because
we don't hire any Communications. Look at your list, how many are they decreasing, how many have
they decreased in civilian employees in the fire department. Did they ask for any more civilian
employees? You know what, they got two people doing the payroll for all the fire department. And then
we wonder why the people can't get paid right in there. Two civilians, OK we also have firefighters
working on overtime on the fire trucks in the fire garage because we do not have enough fire men, fire
mechanics. Now let's compare salaries with mechanics and firefighters. Now, I am sorry I am not a
rocket scientist, but don't come up here and say that you're going to reduce, keep taking on the people
that I represent and reduce them. Let me go down the list for some more. Community Development.
56 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Alright, Charlie, let me stop you, let me stop all of you. To..
Mr. Cox: You are not going to keep pointing the finger.
Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait. To my colleagues, it is becoming more obvious to me we are not going
to finish tonight. Let me finish. I am willing to sit here for as long as you want, but I can assume we ate
going to have another day of continuance and where we are tonight and give me an idea to my colleagues
how late you would like to stay here tonight, is it ten o'clock?
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. as long as it takes.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't care.
Commissioner Sanchez: As long as it takes, it's the most important thing, it's as long as it takes.
Chairman Plummer: So be it.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK
Commissioner Teele: Now, Mr. Chairman as a matter of law, I am not sure you can continue a budget
hearing. The Lawyer can rule on that...
Chairman Plummer: I want to ask the question and unless the City Attorney is wrong, then he is wrong.
But the answer is that you can.
Mr..Vilarello: You cannot adjourn tonight's meeting, however, you can continue tonight's meeting.
Commissioner Teele: But I thought under our rules we had, OK, fine.
Chairman Plummer: You two attorneys argue and I will sit back.
Mr. Vilarello: You have to adapt a tentative, budget and a millage rate before you adjourn.
Chairman Plummer: It's going to be closed. Go ahead. Alright. Mr. City Manager, would you have all
this high price help please have a seat. Mr. Sanchez has the floor and he will call on them as he is
requesting of them.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez, you have the floor, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: I want to commend Charlie for coming up and fighting for what he believes.
And it takes a lot of courage for you Charlie to do that, you come up there and do what you got to do. I
respect your professionalism and what you...
Mr. Cox: You want to some more tips, or not?
Commissioner Sanchez: I would love to know because see I met with you and I had my Chief of Staff call
Tony Rodriguez and Tom Gabriel to sit down and what I wanted to do is really sit down and have them
help me find a way where the least couple of years do whatever to make a small reduction of the budget
and then later on work together and that's one of the reasons that I am, we are going to try to get this
57 September 15, 1999
tax..... friendly budget committee established so they could, you know, help us out when it comes to the
budget again. But I want to continue because we are going to he here for a long time, and please provide
me with those numbers as one of the things that I ask people if they have some recommendations they
want to give it forward, and that's what we need to do, we need to make some sacrifices. I challenge
people to step up and say, you know what I am willing to cut my budget by fifty thousand ($50,000.00),
one hundred thousand ($100,000,00) if possible. Because numbers add up, and if we can reduce the
budget by a million ($1,000,000), two million ($2,000,000), three million ($3,000,000), it sends a positive
message to our tax payers that our government, the ninety some percent that don't live in the city, were
willing to make a sacrifice. Arid that's enough is a victory for everybody. All the City employees, the
City government, everybody.
Commissioner Regalado: Commissioner. Just briefly. He is not talking about sacrifices, he is telling us
the things that are wrong, and the things that are costing millions of dollars, so you know, I would ...
Commissioner Sanchez: He is identifying some things that we will get to when I sit, when I ask the Chief
of Police and the Chief of the Fire Department.
Mr. Warshaw: They would both like to respond.
Commissioner Sanchez: They sure have the right to, Chief O'Brien, Chief Gimenez.
Mr. Cox: So in other words you are going to cut me off.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no, you are going to have a chance to rebuttal.
Commissioner Regalado: Let him finish, but let him finish.
Commissioner Sanchez: Charlie, you want to finish?
Commissioner Regalado: He is saying, let him finish, let him finish. He is saying, I mean, he may
embarrass somebody. No, no, let him finish.
Commissioner Sanchez: Charlie, you were not finished, go ahead and finish.
Mr. Cox: OK
Chairman Plummer: Let's us understand. Mr. Sanchez has the floor. In effect he is running the meeting
now, who he wants is who is going to come up here. When he wants somebody to from one department,
he will ask for it. But until then, I would ask all you to please have a seat, there is no extra charge. Mr.
Sanchez, proceed.
Commissioner Sanchez: What I want to clarify, I just got a call from my Chief of Staff that said that she
did not contact the other presidents of the Unions, so I apologize for that. But I will sit with you when we
get a chance. Charlie, go ahead.
Mr. Cox: OK next area is Community Development. I came here and screamed and hollered before about
Community Development. You know what, I have got seventeen employees in Community
Development, but yet they are asking for forty. You check their salaries. Their salaries are astronomical,
they have taken the people I represent, put them out on the street say, hay, we do not need you anymore.
Now, you know what, if there was problems there from other Directors, usually when there is garbage it
runs uphill. When in that department, it ain't run uphill, it's run downhill to the employees that I
58 September 15, 1999
0. 0
represent. And now all of a sudden we don't have anymore employees in that department that are
AFSCME (American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees). Out of hundred and thirty-
one, ask them how many are exempt. There you'll find some answers I can guarantee you, they'll find it.
And how many more are we asking for?
Commissioner Teele: Charlie, on that point. Let me just understand this. I thought we had an agreement
with the.Unions, at least, we have an agreement that we would limit the number of exempt people per
department. We got into this during the issue of the anti -deficiency and those issues that we were
discussing and there was a limit by department on the... I have just heard that one department had eleven
people and seven of the eleven are exempt. Now, you are telling me that in Community Development
there are how many people there?
Mr. Cox: One hundred and thirty-one.
Commissioner Teele: And how...
Mr. Cox: And how many are asking for, plus what they have.
Commissioner Teele: They are asking for a hundred and thirty-one new positions.
Mr. Cox: No. They have right now on the salary book, they have Community Development has one
hundred and thirty-one total positions.
Commissioner Teele: And how many of them are exempt?
Mr. Cox: How many of those are exempt? All but seventeen. Now they are going to say that they are
grant -funded positions, but let me tell you all something...
Chairman Plummer: He did not call you. Please have a seat.
Mr. Cox: There is a block in grant funds that have been here for a long as I am old and are going to be
here for as long as I am before I die. But they were good enough for the old ones to do for all these years
that someone started twenty years ago and those grants are still here and now they are coming along and
saying, well we are going hire unclassified and pay them a lot more money than the 01's we got because
it's grant -funded positions. Now ask them how many more grants have they brought in. No they are
using the existing grants that have always been there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Twenty percent (20%).
Commissioner Teele: But at some point Commissioner Sanchez, I want to yield back but Mr, Attorney, I
would like an answer from you and Labor Relations and the Manager of what are our obligations in this
area, because, I mean, we always hear and read about the professionalism of the professional
management. But a lot of this has to do with the professional employees. If we are running departments
whether it be Asset Management or Community Development, whether the issue be grant or not grant, we
need to, I think reign in the operations to ensure that those persons that are properly associated as being
professional and career are there in that position, because otherwise they have no job stability.
Mr. Cox: They have done away with it, and they are pushing them out the door. OK Here is another
example for you.
59 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, and Mr. Manager, I really would like to understand what out labor
agreement is on that. I understood and I am fully prepared to make a lot of exceptions on the NET
Offices, because I think that's a different kind of situation. But in offices such as Asset Management
where you really need professionals and you need people who have the security and the training to be able
to say, yes and no, and especially, no, and the same thing is true in Community Development. And
believe me, career person has the security of being able to say no. I don't agree with you Mr. Manager.
No, I don't agree with you, Commissioner. An exempt person does that at the peril of losing their exempt
status. So, I am going to be on record to say, I have been having professional employees who are
protected by Civil Service assuming they performed is a good thing to enhance the professionalism of this
department. Particularly, in light of the criticism about the Commission having hearings on confirmation
and those kind of things. I think the counter balance to that is to have more professionals and less exempt
people in all of these departments.
Mr. Cox: Your Building Department brings into this City more than twice of what their budget is, and yet
how many inspectors are we down? Did they add any more people to the building department in their
budget? And yet there is a revenue producing spot, and did they add anybody? Lucky you paid
seventeen, they didn't. Even though right now they bring in twice as much to this City as what it costs
them to run that department.
Chairman Plummer: And yet I was told we were going to have eleven new inspectors.
Mr. Cox: Well, where are they?
Chairman Plummer: Well, I will ask that question.
Mr. Cox: It doesn't show in any of their budget books.
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh.
Mr. Cox: Where? Here is another fine example. You know what, in your Blue Ribbon Panel, you said
the Blue Ribbon Panel, the only thing they said in favor of the Unions, everything else was management,
fix this and fix that. We need to get rid of the two tier system. Now they can't hire people because they
can't pay them enough. But yet the message they are sending out is telling you that we are overpaid. OK,
and the same message you are sending out, Commissioner, that we are overpaid and yet nobody's going
to come to this City at the pay we are offering. Now you can't have it both ways and you can't tell that
public that you are overpaying us when we can't get anybody to come. And you know what, we give
preference to City residents. So they are out there and they want to come, let them come. I welcome
them, but you better have some positions for them to come, OK. Don't say that we are overpaid and
keep saying it. And let me go to a couple of your issues. You complain about our pensions; you know
what the state pays for your pension?
Commissioner Sanchez: What's our pension?
Mr. Cox: Your pension?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah.
Mr. Cox: The Trooper's Pension. They pay twenty-nine percent (29%). What do you put out of your
pocket to that then? Zero. Do you know what they take out of everyone of our employees every single
pay day? Ten percent (10%) of our pay. So if I make fifty thousand ($50,000.00) that means that my
family...
60 September 15, 1999
0
Commissioner Sanchez: But .... wait a minute. Are you going to compare your benefits to the benefits
of a State Trooper?
Mr. Cox: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: Please.
Mr. Cox: But I will compare...
Commissioner Sanchez: Don't even get there.
Mr. Cox: No, but I will compare the costs. You don't pay anything, we pay and the City doesn't pay
anything. When you look at what they are paying for our pension as a relief for what they didn't pay
when they were stealing the money from us. OK That's what happened. Your..
Vice Chairman Gort: Charlie, one question. Commissioner Sanchez.
Mr. Rodriguez: You want to talk about Police pension? If that's what we're talking about, we saved the
City $15 million. If you're going to talk police pension, let's talk numbers.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me, Mr. Sanchez is running... Tony we will, OK, but we can't do it with
everybody running into a microphone and everybody grabbing the microphone. Now Mr. Sanchez,
proceed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, when did the Gates begin?
Mr. Cox: Way before your time.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I inherited most of this stuff.
Mr. Cox: I understand...
Commissioner Sanchez: Well when it's time to make sacrifices, we are all going to have to make
sacrifices. When it's.good, its good, when it's bad, it's bad.
Mr. Cox: We've made them; the employees have made them. Don't say that we are getting rich off of
this City. We are not.
Commissioner Sanchez: Huh?
Mr. Cox: The City is getting rich off of us every time that that pension performs.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's not what I get from the administration.
Mr. Cox: Well, you better get the right answers from them.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
61 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is, that according to J. L., Gates case before he was here.
Chairman Plummer: That's true. That is true. Gates case came about very simply when the City Manager
at that time took the pension money to pay social security...
Commissioner Sanchez: Tony, you've got more?
Chairman Plummer: ...withholding taxes and many others and that's how a deficit occurred in the
pension and a lawsuit was filed by the name Gates. They did go before the Judges and there was a
consent decree by the City for the purposes of the supplemental two. Now, in favor of the Unions, they
did come back and renegotiate with the City to reduce the Gates obligation. Because let me tell you
something, the Gates was on a sliding scale...
Mr. Cox: One hundred and forty-four million dollars ($144,000,000)
Chairman Plummer: That took us up, that one the...
Commissioner Sanchez: How much? Really?
Chairman Plummer: About the top year, about thirty-three million dollars ($33,000,000) per year. The
Unions came back and negotiated with the City to reduce the Gates obligation and that is where we are
today. But that started before me and I have been here twenty-nine years.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, we are paying for a lot of old mistakes, today.
Mr. Cox: Yes, and the employees are paying for them too, OK The Parks Department that you all say
you want to gear up, in the budget, how many positions are they adding? One. How you are going to get
off a Parks Department with one more body? I mean, let's don't keep fooling the public. The games got
to be over. And that's what I understand. And you know what, you want true numbers, go by the salary
schedule, not by this nonsense. Go by the salary schedule, that will give you true numbers. Don't let
them put bodies up there, put numbers up there. And that tells you. But to come out and say, we want a
ten percent (10%) reduction, or this or that reduction, you know what, yes, there are salaries in the City.
Unless you want to start cutting bodies, you are not going to get it. Don't tell the public that you are going
to get it unless you are want to cut bodies.
Commissioner Regalado: Let me ask you something... just wait a minute. When several members of this
Commission, Commissioner Sanchez today and I also sent a memo to the Manager saying that I would
like to explore the ten percent (10%) cut in the budget. One of the Manager's Aide, I think was Bertha,
told my office that this will mean six hundred jobs that would have to be cut. Is that... you know the
general, this is not only about Miami, but the general philosophy of every government is that when they
have to cut budget, they cut from the bottom, and not from the top. And when I heard that six hundred
jobs ..... I mean thirty million dollars, I was, I thought that we were talking about park tenders and
mechanics and employees who makes, who don't by the way don't even have forty hours, because it's a
lot of people who have been working in this City for many, many years who are not full time yet, and so I
agree with you. I am just ...
Mr. Cox: There are charts in your book that will show you how many employees we have ten years ago.
How many employees we had eight years ago, and, you will see the decrease of how many employees we
have left in the City. Look at the charts. Those are actual employees that are bodies that are no longer
here. How do they keep doing that? Every time somebody retires, every time somebody resigns, every
time somebody quits, every time somebody get fired, they don't fill the spots. Every department can get
62 September 15, 1999
up here and tell you, I can give the exact numbers. What the numbers of how many employees we have
in the department. Not the budgeted numbers, but how many actual numbers we have, and I am sure
that's where they are getting some of their reserves from. It's every time somebody quits there's reserves
in the salary and they are dumping it in the reserves, and you know what I haven't once came here and
screamed. Not once, because I want to see the City healthy just like you all do. Believe it or not. I have
been with this City twenty-five years and it's been good to me. I may be a Union President, but let me
tell you what this City has been good to me.
Commissioner Sanchez: Nothing wrong with that.
Mr. Cox: I have also earned every penny I have ever made from this City, and most of the employees I
represent have done the same thing. But don't come here with smoke and mirrors, and it's wrong. Don't
keep spreading the rumor that we are out there getting rich.
Commissioner Sanchez: Who. is spreading the rumors that every body is...
Mr. Cox: But that's what you are saying. The employees need to cut back.
Commissioner Sanchez: I am saying...
Chairman Plummer: We have cut, we have cut.
Commissioner Sanchez: I am saying that if we continue the path that we are heading, we will not be able
to afford our services in the next three years, and that's the advise that the administration has given me.
Mr. Cox: Well, you know what Commissioner, did you read the numbers in your budget.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. Cox: How much is your budget going up, Commissioner?
Commissioner Sanchez: My budget went up ten percent (10%
Mr. Cox: Alright, well let's put that on the record then.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I am sorry, Mr. Sanchez, would you yield? Because I want to raise
the point and I don't know the answer. I don't know the answer. But one of the issues that Commissioner
Dawkins raised any number of times and I fully agree with him, and that is the residency of employees.
Now, I realize that we are in a global village, I realize that with the Internet, but the biggest problem that
this City has is the declining tax base, and more and more and this is what I am hearing from a number of
people, more and more people are having a very difficult time finding an appropriate place to live in
Miami. We are looking at it across the board. We made a commitment to build one thousand new homes
because more and more this is becoming a rental City and we don't want this City to be like some other
cities. Now you said this City has been good to you.
Mr. Cox: Absolutely has.
Commissioner Teele: Do you live in the City of Miami?
Mr. Cox: No, I do not, and let me tell you something...
63 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: I am not trying to put you on the spot.
Mr. Cox: You don't have to..
Commissioner Teele: But I am only, I really want to understand because I think one of the things that this
Commission. ought to try to do, at this point, as we move toward hiring some of the people is we really
need to look for positive incentives. The Beacon Council, Empowerment Florida, every body is looking
for incentives to move companies to Florida or to specific areas, and I really believe that one of the things
that we should do is look for incentives for people to live in the City of Miami. I really would appreciate
if you would give us the benefit of any recommendations you have. I would like to take, you know what I
would like to do, because see, I know what you are saying you are telling the truth. In fact, I was
surprised that the Oversight Board that the management staff was actually recommending to take the
savings from this year's operation which is what, about six million dollars ($6,000,000)? Five, six
million dollars, and they were actually proposing, believe it or not, to roll the savings from this year...
Mr. Cox: Into next year.
Commissioner Teele: ... into next year, which every body knows you can't do in terms of a reoccurring
budget and reoccurring expenses. OK but you know what I will be willing to do? I would be willing to
put a positive incentive out there to the department heads to take forty percent (40%), fifty percent (50%)
of all the money they can save and give it out as bonuses to every body whose a resident of the City of
Miami in their departments. I would be willing to do that. That's the kind of creative thinking that I am
really hoping that you all will come up with, because I will tell you something, Commissioner Sanchez is
right and your are right. All kinds of games get played with the personnel issue, and I believe, I honestly
believe that we have done such a good job in getting federal grant money in the area of the police
departments, specifically, I believe that that is going to "eat our lunch" or "eat our tail" if we are not
careful, and it's not unbelievable to me that we have our police officers out there doing maintenance on
cars, police officers answering communication systems, and phasing out civilians because, the truth of the
matter is, we have done an outstanding job of getting federal grants. The problem with those federal
grants is like taanscient grants.
Mr. Cox: They go away...
Commissioner Teele: They will pay you for the first three or four years, but then you have got to absorb
all those costs in the out years, and what do you do? You start squeezing out the civilians. The difference
is a police officer, sworn police officer with badge and with retirement and everything is going to cost
you twenty dollars, twenty-five dollars, thirty dollars an hour, pick a number and a general employee as
you represent doing the same job is going to cost nine dollars, ten dollars, fifteen dollars, pick a number,
and it's going to be double anyway you look at it, and so I think the issue that Commissioner Sanchez is
getting at, it's a two prong issue. It's not just how much money can you save, but it's also how much cost
that we avoid. That's what we need to be seeking your cooperation and that of the other Unions in telling
us how we can make the City more efficient and save money in doing so in out years. So I commend you
for coming forward, but I do think, you know, one of the things that we also have to look at is how do we
increase the tax base of this City because that's the key thing that we have got to do. Is we got to
continue to grow the tax base in the residential areas especially.
Mr. Rodriguez: Will you yield on that one point, for one second?
Mr. Cox: Alright, let me just make one statement on the residency and I did all kinds of studies on that.
I can tell you, use me for an example. I make less than fifty thousand a year as a City employee. OK I
64 September 15, 1999
bought a house in Pembroke Pines, Hollywood. I paid sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) for it, and now
that was twelve years ago. It's eighteen hundred square feet with a pool. I am selling that house now. .
Commissioner Teele: I don't want to make it personal,'Charlie.
Mr. Cox: I don't care you can it personal, because I made it personal before. I am selling my house right
now for a hundred and one thousand ($101,000.00). You find me a house that's anywhere comparable in
the City of Miami for a hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000.00). You can't do it. That is the
problem.
Commissioner Teele: We have got to work on that together. But this is the bottom line. The bottom line
is all those wonderful citizens that we have heard here today came in here with their tax bill.
Mr. Cox: I understand that.
Commissioner Teele: And when they look at statistics that shows, you know, seventy-five percent (75%)
of the cost of their tax bill are employees and when we all recognize that too many of our employees
don't live in the City of Miami, we are literally hitting the people who live here with the cost of this and
we need to try to figure out how to share the burden which is why it is important for the parking fee.
Mr. Cox: I understand.
Commissioner Teele: It is the equitable way.
Mr. Rodriguez: Commissioner, if my colleague would yield on that one point of residency. I want to
make something real clear. Because we have heard a lot of talk about our employees.
Chairman Plummer: Identify yourself.
Mr. Rodriguez, President of Miami FOP (Fraternal Order of Police): About our officers and other
employees not living in the City. And Commissioner Teele, you mentioned some suggestions in being
innovative. We have done that. Two contracts ago, we negotiated away, we gave something up for the
City to be able to have a requirement to only hire police officers and made that requirement that you only
live in the City of Miami. You know what happened? They asked us to negotiate it back because they
said they couldn't hire enough cops. Ask them? Couldn't find enough qualified applicants that met the
standards.
Commissioner Teele: That may be a good provision to come back with.
Mr. Rodriguez: We did give that away and we gave something up for that, two contracts ago the City
came back to us and asked us, alright...
Commissioner Regalado: Tony, one year and a half ago, two years I presented a motion that was
approved for a program to give five thousand dollars ($5,000.00)...
Mr. Rodriguez: That we worked on together...
Commissioner Regalado: Any police officer who would like to buy a house in the City of Miami could
get a five thousand dollar grant and there was the money...
Mr. Rodriguez: And I joined with him on that project.
65 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: But, you know it was so complicated that none of the police officers that
wanted it could apply for it...
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: And the problem was never implemented.
Mr. Rodriguez: We want to be in the City.
Commissioner Regalado: Never, never.
Mr. Rodriguez: You can't, and that's just on that one issue. Later on I would like to expand on some
other issues.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez. Proceed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. The next department is City of ...Civil Service. They increased the
budget.
Chairman Plummer: Did you decide... excuse me. Did you decide on the Civil, on the Clerk's Office?
Where the additional ...
Commissioner Sanchez: He wants to explain.
Mr. Foeman: Can I respond to something? I just want to respond to the increase of four hundred and
ninety-four thousand dollars ($494,000.00). Sixty-two percent (62%) of that is election related costs,
that's like, that's...
Commissioner Sanchez: Election related?
Mr. Foeman: Three hundred and six thousand dollars ($306,000.00) of that four ninety-four, is election
related and it was based on certain operating assumptions. The first one being that there would be a non-
partisan primary run-off, and if the Charter Amendment issue passes a March scenario. The other three
main object codes dealt with those items that were paid out of special programs and accounts, namely
advertising which is a city wide expense, we have put in seventy-seven thousand ($77,000.00) in the
budget for that as well as the printing and binding outside which is our codification contract with the
Municipal Code Corporation, that was eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000.00). We recently took over
responsibility of the zoning code and I think because of the subscriber base of the zoning code, we may be
able to defray the costs of both the charter and the zoning code because of the large subscriber base that
that contains. So, that contract in our budget for the additional eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000.00), we
may be able to avoid through cost avoidance. The last expense was the rent of equipment which is the
large copier on the ground floor at City Hall.
Commissioner Sanchez: Can you reduce your budget?
Mr. Foeman: Well, as ...
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't care how much, can you reduce your budget?
Mr. Foeman: As it relates to the...
66 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes or no?
Mr. Foeman: Two thousand Dollars, we, I think we will be able to reduce that contract.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Now, let me elaborate a little bit on the City Clerk, now, I know you are
spending a good chunk of money on advertisement. Is there any way that we could cut back on
advertisement?
Mr. Foeman: Well, my costs in relationship to the total City costs is just one part, but we are in the
process of trying to look at standardizing procedures in terms of the manner in which we advertise, and
pending is a legal opinion, I am waiting from the Law Department with respect to land use issues and how
that could impact on advertising. Other than that, I think there are certain legislative initiatives that
through our lobbying efforts in Tallahassee because the whole issue of advertising kind of evolved before
the advent of technology, so maybe we should look at the language in the State Statutes as it relates to
public notice.
Chairman Plummer: It the Sun -Sentinel cheaper..
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: ...than the one we are using presently?
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely. OK moving on to Office of Civil Service. There was as increase of
nine point six percent (9.6%), twenty-four thousand one hundred and eighty-seven dollars ($24,187.00)
salaries in replacement of obsolete equipment. How are you? Thank you for coming.
Priscilla A. Thompson (Executive Secretary, Civil Service Board): Good evening Commissioners. Along
with the contract use issues we also as it said were going to be replacing the lap top computer that we
have and getting some CD Roms...
Commissioner Sanchez: We don't need to get ... Did your department use all its funding last year?
Ms. Thompson: No, we did not.
Commissioner Sanchez: You had a surplus?
Ms. Thompson: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: How much was the surplus?
Ms. Thompson: Approximately eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00).
Commissioner Sanchez: Eight thousand dollars ($8,000.00). OK Did you receive additional funding this
year more than the eight thousand, you received?
Chairman Plummer: Does it carry over?
Commissioner Sanchez: Two thousand seven hundred and fifty-five thousand dollars four eighty-four.
67 September 15, 1999
Ms. Thompson: The difference between the 1999 budget and 2000 budget was approximately twenty-four
thousand dollars ($24,000.00).
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Does that carry over a part of it?
Ms. Thompson: No, it's not, it goes right back to the general fund.
Commissioner Sanchez: Office of Media Relation. An increase of twenty-four point one percent (24.1
($70,652.00) Channel 9, formerly a part of NET.
Commissioner Regalado: Media Relation?
Chairman Plummer: What do we call it?
Commissioner Sanchez: Luis, nice to see you.
Mr. Jorge Hernandez: Good evening, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Good evening Commissioner. Did you have any money left over in your budget
last year?
Mr. Hernandez: No, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: You did not? OK Could you cut your budget? Can you reduce your budget?
Mr. Hernandez: No, sir, I can't.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Can I ask that when you ask that question, and I don't mean to pick on
Jorge...
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. when I am talking about reducing the budget..
Chairman Plummer: No, no...
Commissioner Sanchez: If he tells me that I will reduce my budget by fifty bucks...
Chairman Plummer: What I'm asking, I think you should ask the question at the time that you ask the
question, "can you reduce the budget?" I think the second question needs to be asked, "what would you
give up if you have to give up three percent?"
Commissioner Sanchez: But when they tell you, "what are you talking about?"
Chairman Plummer: Well, I think that that's what's the issue...
Commissioner Sanchez: Are you going to make a motion for three percent (3%)?
68 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir. I think we need to know what would they have to give up, to give up three
percent (3%), and that's important, OK Very important, right on down the line of every department head
so that I don't have to come back after you're finished and go through every department head again, I
would ask that question be asked, so that I can have the answer and I don't have to go through it again.
But, that's up to you, sir. You have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: What page is this on your budget book?
Chairman Plummer: Page eleven.
Commissioner Sanchez: I mean, J.L.
Chairman Plummer: And we have gone through about a third of the departments so far.
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. if they say no, what's the sense of asking for a reduction...
Chairman Plummer: Because they better be faced with reality, that is probably going to happen.
Commissioner Regalado: OK next question. Jorge, how many employees you have now assigned to the
Office of Media Relation? According to a memo from the Manager, you have two, a public information
coordinator, an assistant and yourself at that office, and does your office pay the salaries of NET 9
personnel?
Mr. Hernandez: Yes, Commissioner, Channel 9 is being, as you probably know, transferred from the
budget NET to the budget of the Office of Media Relations.
Commissioner Regalado: When was that?
Mr. Hernandez: That was a short while ago. We have, we are running Channel 9 at this moment with
two budget employees. As I said in previous Commission meetings, I think that we are breaking a world
record, we are the only T.V. channel in America being run by two persons.
Commissioner Regalado: Just for the record, that's a computerized channel. Because I know of T.V.
stations who do not have any employees; that are run by computers. My understanding is that ....
Mr. Hernandez: I don't know anything about a T.V. station being run without employees.
Commissioner Regalado: But, what I am saying is, what is the office itself does? Forget NET 9.
Mr. Hernandez: Alright, first, let me say, Commissioner, that I have under my supervision what I would
say four offices in one. I run the Office of Media Relations, I run the Office of the City photography, I
run Channel 9 T.V. station and I run the Office of Community Information. Media Relations is being run
with one employee, in other words, I am one person assigned to the duties of media relations, so, to write
press releases, to organize press conferences and so forth. One person.
Commissioner Regalado: Does your office...
Mr. Hernandez: The public information coordinator just started this. The person that does everything.
Commissioner Regalado: But, you have one photographer?
69 September 15, 1999
Mr. Hernandez: One photographer for the whole City of Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: OK The...
Mr. Hernandez: Which makes it very difficult sometimes.
Commissioner Regalado: Do you have, you say that the Media Relations Office is run by one person?
Mr. Hernandez: The work of the Media Relations Office which is to write press releases, to organize
press conferences, to coordinate media requests...
Commissioner Regalado: What press conferences?
Mr. Hernandez: We have press conferences conducted by the City Manager or the elected officials.
Commissioner Regalado: Have you ever organized ...
Mr. Hernandez: Or any department that requests our assistance.
Commissioner Regalado: Do you work for the Mayor's Office?
Mr. Hernandez: I work for the Manager, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Do you organize a conference for the Mayor?
Mr. Hernandez: When requested by the City Manager, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: So the Mayor requests through the City Manager and that's the process. Mr.
Manager...
Mr. Hernandez: Every press conference that is requested by the Office of the Mayor or the
Commissioners or the Director of any department; is my responsibility, yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: OK You are requesting, or the budget is requesting an increase of, I don't
know, almost seventy thousand dollars ($70,000.00) more than that, right?
Chairman Plummer: Seventy -One,
Commissioner Sanchez: Seventy thousand six hundred and fifty-two dollars ($70,652.00).
Commissioner Teele: Twenty-five percent (25%) increase.
Commissioner Regalado: A twenty-five percent increase? Why is that?
Mr. Hernandez: No, sir. With all due respect, I have less money in the budget that is presented to you
than the money I have in the last fiscal year. I am not receiving any increase at all.
Commissioner Regalado: So...
Mr. Hernandez: As a matter of fact, I am losing money.
70 September 15, 1999
Mr. Hernandez: So that a little budget of twelve thousand dollars ($12,000.00) that I have for a past time
was cancelled and eliminated.
Commissioner Regalado: So I don't.
Mr. Brennan: Excuse me Commissioner. NET 9 has been transferred for the year 2000 into their budget.
Commissioner Regalado: He told me it was for this year, that's what I am asking.
Mr. Warshaw: The responsibilities have been transferred, but the budget only transferred till next year.
Chairman Plummer: Who approved the transfer?
Mr. Warshaw: The transfer of the responsibilities? I did. NET 9 for..
Commissioner Regalado: So NET 9 used to paid by the NET, and before by the Fire Department, is that
correct?
Mr. Warshaw: At one time I believe it was the Fire Department, yes.
Mr. Hernandez: NET 9, Commissioner, in other words has been the Cinderella of the City for a many
long, long time.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, you know, I am sorry to say that, I have always been disappointed with
NET 9 and still am. I just don't believe that there is the will of the administration to have NET 9
function, because I still think that with the personnel that you have, as a matter of fact, you have one
yourself, you know about television. You have Christina Fernandez and Xiomara Concepcion to work on
coordinate probably. How many press releases you send a day? Let's start by doing this.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Commissioner, I think we need to be really careful that we don't
involve individual names. Posistions...
Commissioner Regalado: Oh yeah, I am sorry; but just because I can't understand that the functions of
this office. I still don't. But, I don't want to prolong this meeting. I really think that this office has to be
looked at and I don't know what the Manager's plan is in terms of ...
Mr. Hernandez: I can tell you Commissioner that I don't understand it either. I don't understand why we
don't have a commitment to have a first class T.V. channel and media operations. Miami is one of the ten
best known cities in America, and I don't understand why we are running our T.V. channel with only two
persons.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort.
Mr. Hernandez: I can give you the budget of T.V. stations of random cities, a lot smaller than Miami and
the comparison is really ridiculous.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I will ask you, sir at the time...
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort has the floor.
71 September 15, 1999
0
Vice Chairman Gort: There is something that I will like to state and I think I made a statement the last
time that Media Relations in front of us and I think it was misunderstood by some of the people who work
there. I believe that the job that they are doing with what they have, and the resources that they have they
are doing an excellent job and going beyond the call of duty to perform what they are doing. My
statement was, my understanding is that there is not enough funding to get an Al rating studio, but I am
pretty sure that we have people in this community, like the different channels and the governmental
channels that would be willing to be maybe use some of the resources to go ahead and make better
programs. I mean, we are asking a lot with what they have, and I think that can be improved, and my
statement I want to be assured once again the people that work in there right now are going beyond the
call of duty to do what they are doing with what they have, with the resources they have.
Mr. Hernandez: I really appreciate that comment, Commissioner.
Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me, excuse me. Wait, Commissioner Teele, you have have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you very much, Commissioner Sanchez. Look, I don't think we ought to
belabor this, I do have one big concern, Mr. Attorney and Mr. Manager. What good does it do for us to
approve a budget, if by whatever means, budgets are reorganized and funds are and positions are
transferred in the course of the year without getting the Commission's approval. Now, that to me is, I
mean, budget one hundred. If we are approving, when we approve a budget, we are not approving the
final budget, we are approving every departmental budget, and Mr. Attorney, I want for first reading or
second reading in the next budget meeting, a clear ordinance that prohibits the transfer, the reassignment,
even the detailing of any individuals since we are going to lock this thing down and know what we are
doing. Even the detailing of anyone without getting permission from the Commission by resolution. I
think it's very important if we are going to go through this, if we are going to be held responsible for this
budget, then we need to basically ensure that when the budget is being implemented as our budget, and I
am going to be very candid with you. I think NET 9 by any standard does an outstanding job. I question
quite frankly, why we have to see the drab review of all of the NET offices day after day after day, year
after year after year. But, it's better that than being off the air, and I think what we ought to look at is
some creative slots that we can put things in. I will tell you one thing, the Commission discussion when
the Commission heard from the public, the good, the bad and ugly relating to the charter issues and the
Commission override including the public discussions, should be put together as an information package
and just run back over and over and over. I mean, that didn't take any real creativity. You have got the
tape, it's the biggest issue in the City of Miami, it's not editorializing, it's not biased, it's just a straight
run, and let all of the people who came up and spoke and gave their intelligent reasons why the
Commission shouldn't do this and should do this. But, it seems to me like there is something else at foot
here and I would only ask you to come back, Mr. Manager, to the next full commissioner meeting on the
28`h, not on Tuesday, and tell us why that can't be done for the period and all of these gap periods leading
up to... I certainly think it would be more entertaining to hear Mr. Goenaga quite frankly, I have heard
more people say that Goenaga is making more sense, more and more, and I don't mean that
disrespectfully. I mean your comments and the charter reform issues of the issued that we discussed were
extremely well taken by a lot people in the public, and to be very candid with you, most of the people
who have come to me and said they don't agree with my position, use your arguments, and so I mean, I
think there is a legitimate issue here that needs to be dealt with. But let me just say this on the budget,
Mr. Director, please prepare an amendment for me at the second budget hearing that will eliminate the
Office of Public Information and that will provide a dotted relationship to the Director of Media
Relations for all of these people that are public information specialists all over the City, and I specifically
would like included in the budget book, who these dotted relationships are. How many people does the
Fire Department have doing media, doing public information? How many people does the Police
Department have, and my point of view is we can't afford it, and we have got all of these media people in
these various departments and we can save two positions and by the way, these numbers do not make
72 ' September 15, 1999
sense. If this is six positions, and the personnel service costs is three hundred and thirty thousand dollars
($330,000.00) six into thirty, goes what? Five times, that includes fringe benefits, now. But, what we are
saying is that the average salary here is fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) fully loaded, and that seems
mean to be pretty good. How many of these people are union and how many are non -union?
Mr. Hernandez: Two persons are union, sir.
Commissioner Teele: But, and so the point here that I want to be very clear on is -,as far as I am concerned
up and down vote, I would like to eliminate the office and all position's :associated with Public
Information and give you the same dotted line authority to work with the various departments that have
media information people. I know the police's got a gob of them, the Fire Department has got a couple of
gobs, there may be some other departments, Building and Zoning may have some, Community
Development probably has got twenty. I mean, you know, there is plenty of public information
specialists in the City and we just got to figure how to work through some of that and figure out how to
do it, because I got to tell you something, every time you hold a news conference in my district, you
clearly don't... are utilizing the two people that are there, because if I get notice that the day of and the
day before, or not at all, we don't need the positions as far as I am concerned. So, I just want to be on
record using this issue that I would like an amendment to eliminate that office and to eliminate the dollars
associated with it.
Mr. Hernandez: May I make a comment?
Commissioner Teele: No, I was talking to the Budget Director on that.
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. You....
Chairman Plummer: My question Mr. Manager, by the time it gets around to me at two or three in the
morning, I would like to know how much is PIO (Public Information Office) Police Department, how
much is PIO in the Fire Department, but I have to disagree with Teele. Jorge is a very good man in
relations. But, a policeman needs to speak to the media about police work. A fireman needs to speak to
the public about that. Now, I am not saying that you have to have all backed up to the policeman, or all
backed up to the fireman, and I think that the person that does the speaking to the general public has to be
an officer in uniform to make the credibility.
Commissioner Teele: Well, what are you disagree that with me. I am saying the same thing. I said the
same thing you just said, I didn't take as much time to say it. I said eliminate these two staff positions that
are here and work with the police department resources and the fire department resources in carrying out
the City public information activities. That's all that I said.
Commissioner Sanchez: City Attorney.
Chairman Plummer: You should be a little bit more explanatory.
Commissioner Sanchez: City Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: As I understand it, Commissioner, you have asked that an ordinance be prepared creating
the Department of Public Information or the Office of Public Information...
Commissioner Teele: No, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: And those functions..
73 September 15, 1999
0
Commissioner Teele: No, sir.
Mr. Vilarello: OK
Commissioner Teele: I asked for simply one thing, that a general ordinance be prepared relating to the
budget that it clearly establishes our resolution that once the budget has been approved that there can be
no changes or shifts in organization, or in positions or including detailing of individuals without coming
to the Commission and getting that approval. In other words, what sense does it make if we are going to
approve the NET Office working under NET 9 and next week its going to be transferred to the Chairman
of the Commission, or to the Director of Sanitation. I mean, I am using that as an example, J.L.
Mr. Vilarello: Mr. Commissioner, try to understand your request. The Manager has certain powers to
control the operations of departments...
Commissioner Teele: Absolutely, he does.
Mr. Vilarello: ...which are inherently...
Commissioner Teele: And the Commission has certain powers relating to the budget.
Mr. Vilarello: ...to create departments exactly... and to control by the budgetary process,.
Commissioner Teele: That's exactly right, and we are appropriating whatever this amount of money is,
three hundred and sixty-three thousand ($363,000.00) less whatever those two positions represent for that
department. And what I am saying is, and those, for these six positions, and what I am saying is you can
not transfer those people, not by name, but those slots, nor can you detail them, nor can you do anything
with them but leave them there unless you come back to this Commission and get budget approval.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, you have the floor.
Mr. Warshaw: A couple of issues. On the issue of the detailing of the two positions from what was NET
into media relations, those are two departments that are already in creation, so all we did is move
organizationally the responsibilities from NET, because it was more efficient to have NET 9 working
directly under the office of Media Relations. I understand where you are going and I fully understand it,
but we didn't create a new department. This was not for example, like Real Estate and Economic
Development which we went through earlier in the year. These are two departments that existed and still
exist simply moving in detailing people because it's more efficient for them to be reporting directly to
Media Relations rather than working at a NET. NET has no direct responsibility for NET 9.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK any other Commissioner wanted to make a statement? Jorge Hernandez?
Would you like to finish it off?
Mr. Hernandez: That's all right with me, Commissioner.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Thank you very much.
Mr. Hernandez: Thank you.
74 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Office of Equal Opportunity and Division. Thank you. Twenty-eight percent
(28%). Not very much to talk about. Thank you. Office of Hearing Boards. The Office of Hearing
Boards. Ms. Fernandez. How are you?
Ms. Teresita Fernandez (Executive Secretary — Office of Hearing Boards): Fine, and you?
Commissioner Sanchez: Five point four two (5.42%) increase goes in anniversary and longevity steps,
twenty-seven thousand ($27,000.00).
Ms. Fernandez: OK I already talk to the Budget Director, there was as a typo on their part and our
increase is really on advertisement.
Commissioner Sanchez: On advertisement?
Ms. Fernandez: Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you go over it for me? During the FY... you did go over it? How much
was something like that when you went over it?
Ms. Fernandez: I am sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you go over your...
Ms. Fernandez: No, no, I didn't, I didn't.
Commissioner Sanchez: You didn't.
Ms. Fernandez: I didn't.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK
Ms. Fernandez: I didn't. Well, I went over on advertising, but I went under in salaries. So, it evened out.
Commissioner Sanchez: Can you reduce your budget in any way?
Ms. Fernandez: No, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. Any of you...
Chairman Plummer: You better start looking.
Commissioner Sanchez: If you had to give up three percent (3%) of that, what would you take it out of.
Ms. Fernandez: At this point, I actually don't know, but I would like to talk to the City Clerk because he
is trying to devise new ways of advertising, and maybe we could save from that. At the present time, we
can't.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Who do we want to hear?
75 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Office of Labor Relations, an increase of five point one percent (5.1%) twenty
three thousand ($23,000.00).
Chairman Plummer: They only work once every three years.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the explanation was caused in anniversary longevity.
Ms. R. Sue Weller (Labor Relations Officer): Sue Weller, Labor Relations Officer.
Commissioner Sanchez: Sue Weller, did you use up all your funds in this FY year?
Ms. Weller: There is approximately five thousand ($5,000.00) left over.
Commissioner Sanchez: Left over. OK Can you reduce your budget?
Ms. Weller: No, sir, not without causing a severe impact.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. OK, if you had to reduce the budget three percent (3%) what would it be?
Ms. Weller: It would be about fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00).
Chairman Plummer: Yes, but what would you have to give up of that fifteen thousand, I mean, you
know.
Ms. Weller: I am sorry, I thought he asked me how much money that would be.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I am going to bring everybody up, so, thank you so much. Office of
Professional Compliance. Just a point six percent (.6%) on COLA (Cost of Living Allowance)
anniversary and longevity. No transfer, of position of planning and zoning. No, no. No, it's a point six
percent increase, one thousand two hundred and eighty-one dollars ($1,281.00) COLA and anniversary
longevity.
Ms. Shirley Richardson (Office of Professional Compliance): That's correct...
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you use up all your money this year?
Ms. Richardson: We had a salary savings of about two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00), not
salary savings but a savings of about two thousand dollars ($2,000.00), yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Is there any way that you can reduce your budget in any way?
Ms. Richardson: Not without cutting positions, sir.
Chairman Plummer: This is getting ridiculous.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, but we are going to ask everybody, OK
Chairman Plummer: Every body has got the same answer.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fine, if you had to give up three percent (3%), what would that three percent
be...
76 1 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: No they can't give up anything, you know, they are all going to tell you the same.
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. You are the one who had brought out that question.
Chairman Plummer: I understand that, but I don't like these answers.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's all right. Ma'am, what would it -be on?
Ms. Richardson: Well, if we had to cut three percent (3%), it would be approximately sixty-five hundred
and eighty-one dollars ($6,581.00) and we could cut probably cut some operating expenses..
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely.
Ms. Richardson:...... cutting in the Civil Service division. We could probably do that because it is my
understanding that training is going to pick up some of the training expenses for each of the departments,
so we could probably have a savings there, but nothing substantial.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am.
Chairman Plummer: That's what we want to hear.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you ma'am, thank you so much. Does anybody have any questions, any
of the Commissioners? Hearing none, we move on to Building.
Chairman Plummer: Building.
Commissioner Sanchez: Building was a reduction of their budget.
Commissioner Regalado: No, there is building and there is zoning.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. it's building, and it's a reduction of five point four percent (5.4%) transfer
position to Planning and Zoning.
Ms. Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Commissioners, if I could explain the proposal here. We
are transferring or proposing to you that we transfer the zoning function out of the building department,
put it into the planning department, create a department of building alone and then a department of
planning and zoning.
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you use up all your budget?
Ms. Bianchino: Frank can answer specific questions.
Commissioner Teele: Hold it, Frank, where is this building department in the budget book, Frank?
Mr. Frank Rollason (Director, Buildings and Zoning Department): It's page fifty-four, fifty-five.
Chairman Plummer: History repeats itself. When we split it and we gave building to the fire department,
we now have a fireman in charge of the building department and oh my God! Everything went absolutely
bonkers because we split it... and here we go again.
77 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank.
Mr. Rollason: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Did you use up all your fundings this entire year?
Mr. Rollason: From last year's budget?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. Rollason: We were, we fell short in last year's budget, and money had to be put in a part of the
appropriations that came back for the amended budget in some of the codes that required additional
funding. This year, as we come to the end, I have some positions that are vacant, but that money which
will fall back into the general fund, I fully intend to fund, you know, fill those positions as soon as I can.
Chairman Plummer: How many unfilled?
Mr. Rollason: Right now, in the inspectors areas, I have three which are the..., I have an electrical
inspector, an elevator inspector and a building inspector that are currently budgeted that I cannot fill.
Chairman Plummer: What would approximately seven additional cost?
Mr. Rollason: Well, you are talking forty-three thousand dollars ($43,000.00) per forty-five thousand
($45,000.00) per depending on the expertise of...
Chairman Plummer: Roughly three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00).
Mr. Rollason: Right.
Chairman Plummer: OK
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank, could you cut your budget? Could you reduce your budget?
Mr. Rollason: My budget is three point two million dollars ($3,200,000). When we look at a three (3%)
percent cut in my budget, you are talking about roughly a hundred and twenty thousand dollars
($120,000.00). When you look at my operating budget, it's two hundred and forty thousand dollars
($240,000.00), so when we take a hundred and twenty thousand and you cut my operating budget in half.
So we are looking at people, and when we look at people in building you are looking at service. So, I
mean when you say, can I do it, if I get the direction from the Manager to go back and cut three percent or
five percent, we are going to do it. But you are going to have an impact on the service and you know
from spending a day there...
Commissioner Sanchez: We are trying to touch non -service, if possible.
Mr. Warshaw: And I would just like to add that as an example in the building department, and I hadn't
commented on any of the others up until now. Frank asked for additional positions as did everyone else,
and of course, he didn't get those additional positions because we are trying to keep the budget as flat as
we can, so this is an example of, yes, you can make a cut and you are going to go with the people, but it's
important to understand what an elevator inspector, what a building inspector does, and how many
elevator inspectors we have, city wide, and how many we have in the whole city.
78 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: One.
Mr. Warshaw: One.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner, wait.... Excuse me, Commissioner Gort, you have the floor.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is, and correct me if I am wrong, but in the building department
the staff that you had to bill the department could probably triple his salary.
Mr. Rollason: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: I mean... how much we charge for inspection for the elevators?
Mr. Rollason: Our revenues that we bring in now is a little over seven million dollars ($7,000,000). My
costs or my budget is a little over three million ($3,000,000). Now...
Vice Chairman Gort: Fine, my question is, what we charge for inspection of elevators?
Mr. Rollason: I don't know the answer to that.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK
Mr. Rollason: I mean.....
Vice Chairman Gort: Whatever we charge, we only have one...
Mr. Rollason: But what I can tell you is there are many that are not getting the renewal that they should
get...
Commissioner Sanchez: OK
Mr. Rollason: Because we are not getting out there as the same with.....
Commissioner Sanchez: So, Frank, it's no, and if you had to cut three percent it would have to be service
positions.
Mr. Rollason: Any of the impacts that we have, in fact, you know, I am going to be coming back and
when you say no amended budgets or nothing without coming to you, I have got shortfalls right now that
are going to have to be addressed in different areas, and I am going to have to come back and they are
going address this so that we can get the funding to provide those services. The microfilming, you know,
the situation that we have got in, that we have run into with straightening out records that could be
tampered with. I have got to have that money to finish out that microfilm program. So when you say, cut
three percent (3%), and I say, OK I am not going to use fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) towards the
rest of the microfilming, that's fifty thousand right now that if I haven't even gotten from.
Chairman Plummer: But knowing all of that, Frank, why isn't it in the budget now?
Mr. Rollason: We requested....
Chairman Plummer: Where is that money going to come from when you asked for it later?
79 September 15, 1999
C]
0
Mr. Rollason: I ask for it at budget time. There were things that we got, and things that we didn't get.
Chairman Plummer: But, you are saying...
Mr. Rollason: There are adjustments that I can make with line items. The Manager may very well say to
me, suck it up within your two hundred and forty thousand ($240,000.00) and take care of it that way,
and that maybe his answer. Of course, I am going to hammer him for something else, but ...
Chairman Plummer: That's robbing Peter to pay Paul, and you know, pay me now, or pay me later.
Mr. Rollason: Let me make another point to you before I go bye, bye. When you look at what's
happening in the City, when we talk about what we are trying to do with development. When we talk
about bringing the people in that want to build these single family homes that Commissioner Teele is
talking about, they eventually have to come to us, and they don't come to us because they think when
they get up in the morning, let's go by the building department and spend a fun day or two pulling a
permit. They come to us because they have no choice, and the reality is that throughout this community,
not just the City of Miami, but all of South Florida that deals with the South Florida Building Code,
nobody is happy in coming to the building department. You see what's going with the County, with the
seminars they are having and trying to improve service. We are trying to do the same thing. We are
trying to make it to where people can come in and do what they have to do by the law, and not have to
spend end on days and hours to get things done. And that has an impact on people wanting to come in
this community and build, and to develop. Is how long it takes them to get through the system and not
spend thirty and forty-five days to get a set of plans through which has an impact on the float on their
money and getting started, etc., etc., and that equates to having to have more people to perform those
services. Either in-house, or you are going to have to go outside and do it. But, you are going to have to
spend the money if you are going to be pro -active and re -active to these people and be able to provide this
service that they want and they demand.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you have the floor.
Commissioner Regalado: Frank, are there any NET Inspectors doing any building or zoning inspections?
Mr. Rollason: They, I think they do some zoning enforcement, but they do not do building inspections.
Commissioner Regalado: They do not?
Mr. Rollason: Not, in other words, to be a building inspector, there are certain qualifications that you
have to have.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that, but, they do go around.
Mr. Rollason: They go around and they find what they feel are violations. If they are of a building
nature, they refer them to us and we send out a building inspector. If they see construction going on
without a permit, they will refer that to us and we will pursue that, and if there are things that are already
built that are in violation of the zoning ordinance, they will pursue that and to legalize those things so that
people will have to come through us at the building department and get the permits to do that.
Commissioner Regalado: Right, that's what I am saying. So, are we seeing here some of a double effort
in those two departments?
80 September 15, 1999
Mr. Rollason: No, what they will typically do is they may find, and again, I am sure Manuel Diaz is here
and can speak to what NET does, but in my experience, they will refer to us a house that has an addition
that has an encroachment and that part of that zoning is handled through the NET office, but now, the
actual building of that comes to us, and will go and inspect that and we will see if a building permit has
been pulled, and if it hasn't and it can be legalized, a lot of these cannot be legalized because of the
zoning. So, not only do they have a problem...
Commissioner Regalado: Then why is it that you're separating building from zoning? That's the point
that I wanted to get to, and, you know, you have to go from one place to another, from one place to
another, and the problem is that you need to call somebody who is a friend of somebody so they would, I
mean not to do a favor, just to get an appointment.
Mr. Bianchino: No, I think there is a ...
Commissioner Regalado: Because the people don't want to complain, but that's the problem, and this is
why I do not understand this separation of a building and zoning department.
Mr. Bianchino: Because the zoning function is more closely aligned to planning. When a person comes
into the City, and they want to build a house, or they want to build a townhouse, or a building or anything,
the first place they have to go is to zoning to find out if the property that they have can support, or what
the property can support. At the same time, they go to Planning and Planning tells them what permits
they have to get, what class II permits... zoning and planning are much more closely aligned than
building and zoning. The zoning that you are talking about is zoning inspection on the part of NETwhich
is a completely different topic than putting our zoning professionals who interpret the zoning laws...
Commissioner Regalado: I understand what you are saying, but my point is that we always wanted to
have a one stop permit office, and now you have to go to this, and go there, come back...
Mr. Bianchino: But you always had to do that. This is making the process actually friendlier,
Commissioner. It is, the developers can come into Planning and Zoning, they can get all the information
they need about physical requirements, then they go to Building which is building. Zoning has nothing to
do with land.
Mr. Warshaw: We have me with key people in development communities and this process....
Commissioner Regalado: I had a complaint, Mr. Manager, I had complaint of a very well known
developer who had to wait for three weeks for a demolition permit, and, you know, it's something that,
and the problem is that he had to stop the work, and if, I don't want to prolong this, but I am just saying
that this developer got a letter from the City of Erie in Pennsylvania saying, you know, we will give you
free permits, we will give you free inspection if you come and build here. And, you know, that's
eventually what we need to do, and Frank was right when he was saying that, you know, we need to be
proactive in this, but, you know.
Mr. Rollason: My reaction to that is who wants to live in Erie. I mean they are giving you land in
Alaska. We are in Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, that's why, but you know, that who wants to live in Erie, whoever wants
to make a buck, and build something and sell it, and that is the problem that we have here, but, you know.
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank, like always, thank you for your professionalism.
81 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: May I, Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir, Mr. Teele, you have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: Frank, let me again compliment you for your candor and, you know, I think, you
are making the point to the public. That you can be honest and you can be open, and give your views
without being disruptive and being discourteous and I mean it's a good point. Who does want to live in
Erie. You know, we all are with you on that, so let me encourage you to continue to be candid and open,
and give us the benefit of your years of experience, of course, when you do not care if you get fired, it
does not matter, I mean you have been there and done that before, so I mean.
Mr. Rollason: I have been to the wall.
Commissioner Teele: For the public, Frank was the Manager for a couple of weeks too, so.
Commissioner Sanchez: For a couple of weeks.
Chairman Plummer: If I could ask a question please, Frank.
Commissioner Teele: But I would like to before you do, I think one of the things Commissioner Sanchez,
is that we really ought to try to adjust in this whole budget processes we develop this in future, again I
commend you, because this is what this Commission should have been doing for the last ten or fifteen
years really, is going through these budgets one by one. What's missing about Frank's budget? And why
a three percent (3%) across the board doesn't work, and let me tell you, I mean I want to support a three
percent budget cut, but you just can't do it across the board. When you do it, you got to go by -every page
and you got to turn that book, OK, and it's going to sound difficult, but believe me, it doesn't work.
Frank's department cost how much money to generate? How much does it cost us to run your
department, Frank?
Mr. Rollason: Three point seven million ($3.7,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: How much do you generate, how much in fees, in licenses, in fines, etc., do you
generate?
Mr. Rollason: Just in the Building proper, a little over seven million ($7,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: OK And I think it is important for Commissioner Sanchez to understand and hear
this. This is a department that generates seven million dollars ($7,000,000), and I want to tell you, and
it's not Frank because you are a nice guy, but I am prepared next budget hearing to increase your budget
because let me tell you, the point that I agree with, Mayor Carollo, is that this City has got to engage in
development. When you look at the development projects that are underway, we got two or three major
hotels that are underway, we have a Performing Arts Center, the Performing Arts Center alone will
generate over a million dollars ($1,000,000) or so in fees. Cutting you three percent (3%) is like shooting
yourself in the foot. I mean, in the point year and the Manager needs to hear this point, is the question
going to be in the next meeting, you would. give us a wish list of everything you want to make this
department collect even more money and be just that more efficient, and I think you will have one or two
votes up here to figure out how to move some money around and do that. That's what this process is all
about. This is really not about humiliating department heads, or making them, and I have got to tell you
something. I am absolutely offended at what I have heard today from most of these department heads. I
mean, for the them to come up here and with a straight face say, they can't live with a three (3%) percent
or one (1%) percent, or a one dollar cut, you know, is the kind of thing that makes Legislators make bad
82 September 15, 1999
decisions because you are not being very helpful. And I think the point that I want to deal with on a
positive way, is that this Director has come up here and said, "Yes, I would make the cut if the Manager
instructed me to", number one and number two, but I am upset because I didn't get enough money to do
some of the things like whatever it is that he needs to do on microfiche or whatever that's all about. And
I am here to say to you, Mr. Manager, that if a department is generating money, we ought to try to figure
out how to make them more efficient. The one question that I want to ask you is this, Frank, in all of your
activities, how many contract employees or contractors do you have carrying out any of these duties?
Mr. Rollason: For on the outside?
Commissioner Teele: No, non -employees, how many contractors do you have doing any of this work?
Mr. Rollason: I have contracts with three...
Commissioner Teele: I am not talking about demolition.
Mr. Rollason: No, I am talking about people that are doing the services that our employees are doing too,
but we cannot get it done with and stay on a time frame with keeping...
Commissioner Teele: But, I don't see that in your budget?
Mr. Rollason: Well, that's one of the areas...
Commissioner Teele: Operating expenses two hundred and twenty thousand, you are actually decreasing
that?
Mr. Rollason: That's because some of it went over to, with zoning, portions of that went with zoning.
But when you look at, I believe its code 3, look at...
Commissioner Teele: Let me make this point, Frank, and we will discuss this later because I think
Commissioner Sanchez has been very good and kind in allowing us to all work off of his issue. I think
for those big ticket items like the Performing Arts Center, you know, let's don't make the mistake that the
highway department makes. They go out and hire all these people to build a section of road, then you got
them for the rest of your life. The School Board made the same mistake. You know, if we are going to
do a big project like the Performing Arts Center, and some of the other things, don't just look at trying to
hire people. Look at also ways you can contract some of those services.
Mr. Rollason: And we are doing that now. I have, we have contracts for doing that. The problem with it
that we have found, is that they are not when entering into with a contract, they are not beholding to us,
and the people that we are dealing with that are running their plans through go to these contractors and cut
a deal with them on their own to try to accelerate the process and pay additionally. And what starts to
happen is, in our view point, is where the loyalties lie with how this relationship is between the contractor
of the City of Miami and the person building the building and the City of Miami and it get a little muddy.
If we had our preferences, we are going to have the people in house doing it for obvious reasons. Some of
the problems we have had in the past in the City.
Commissioner Sanchez: Frank, thank you so much. Once again, thank you for your professionalism
Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait, I want to ask a question. Frank, at' one time, I don't know whether the
City of the County that was contemplating using certified contractors to do inspections as a fee. Now, I
think probably all my colleagues up here have the same problem of people calling in, "I can't get an
83 September 15, 1999
inspector, he is not available, he told me he would be here at 8:00 a.m. and its' 5:00 in the afternoon".
Have we pursued the possibility of independent contractors who are certified to be assigned inspections at
a fee where we get an override on the fee with control. Has that been considered?
Mr. Rollason: Alright, here is where that whole situation sets would not only inspections but also with
plans. A great deal of that was allowed immediately after Hurricane Andrew, and people were allowed to
sign off on these that would seal them and so forth, and allow the inspections to go through. Subsequent
to that, when audits were performed on some of the inspections and some of the plans that were
approved, the South Florida Building Code or the Board of Rules and Appeals stopped that process. It's
being considered again with the drafts of the new Florida Building Code and it's a two edge sword. You
can, when you turn these people loose, the problem that evolves is that the City assumes a certain amount
of liability when these people go out and sign off on these. And these people come and go and disappear,
and the City remains, and when an Andrew or a Floyd comes through, and you know, the disaster occurs,
we are going to be certainly on that list of the deep pockets, that they are going to come after us.
Chairman Plummer: Well, you know, that hurts me to say that we are. going to continue to have these
complaints and people are going to continue to complain and I think rightfully so, I mean, I don't know. I
am not asking for an inspector, but what I am saying to you is, you got.three vacancies which you, I am
assuming going to fill. We talked about ten that's seven less than what you felt or somebody in that
department felt were necessary. So, you know, let the contractors beware. The City don't have the
money. We are not going to hire them, so don't call these Commissioners up here and complain.
Because we try to get more, we try to do more, and it ain't going to work, well, I mean that's where we
are. Now, let me address the second point. At no time did this Commissioner, this is not for you. At no
time did this Commissioner say, there was going to be a three, a five or any percent across the board.
What I said was, "Mr. Manager, you got high price help to decide if we want to cut the budget three
percent". "You come back and tell me where you are going to have to make these cuts of three, of five or
seven percent." Not across the board, never said that. What I said was, "send it to him, let him decide
with all of that high price help he has, and come back and recommend and we can agree, or disagree, and
if we agree, that's fine, if we disagree, we will send it back to him again." Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Conference, Conventions and Public Facilities, Christina.
Chairman Plummer: While she is coming up, Mr. Manager, does that include the debt service on the
Knight Center?
Ms. Christina Abrams (Director, Conference, Convections and Public Facilities Dept.): No, it doesn't.
Chairman Plummer: That's an additional four million dollars ($4,000,000), right?
Ms. Abrams: The debt payment is six million ($6,000,000). The annual debt payment.
Chairman Plummer: The debt service is now up to six million ($6,000,000)?
Ms. Abrams: It's been six million ($6,000,000) for the past eighteen years.
Chairman Plummer: Well they told me last year it was four.
Ms. Abrams: No, what we have been able to reduce that deficit to four million ($4,000,000), this year we
are contributing...
Chairman Plummer: Is there any way we can finance it?
84 September 15, 1999
Ms. Abrams: Have we refinanced the debt? No.
Commissioner Sanchez: Christina, did you use up all our funds in FY this FY year?
Ms. Abrams: No, we haven't. We have a short fall on the Artime Center because we haven't had that
many events and because we are planning on selling the facility. And also, in the Marine Stadium Marina
where we are purchasing fuel to sell it, and we open the purchase order for the entire fuel we hope to sell,
but we haven't reached that objective.
Commissioner Sanchez: Could you make a reduction on your budget?
Ms. Abrams: If I made a... half of my budget is...
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, or no, very simple. Can you make a reduction in your budget? Yes, or no.
Ms. Abrams: I can reduce the budget if the Manager asks me to. The problem is but you would be
impacting is half of our budget goes towards building maintenance and services. Right now, we don't
even have a marketing budget. We run eight facilities, we have thirty-four employees and we don't have
a marketing budget to promote the facilities. So, yes, I could make cuts, but there are areas I was hoping
that I would get more funding so that we could generate more revenues. Our department is generating
over fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: Don't we have all that information. If you just had to give up three percent
(3%), where would it be coming from?
Ms. Abrams: It would probably be in building maintenance services.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you very much.
Ms. Abrams: Your welcome.
Commissioner Regalado: One question, Christina.
Commissioner Teele: What page are you on in the regular budget?
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you have the floor.
Ms. Abrams: Commissioner... yes, Commissioner.
Commissioner Regalado: No, what page?
Commissioner Teele: I just was trying to find the page here.
Ms. Christina Abrams: Our department is made up of two...
Commissioner Teele: Page fifty what?
Commissioner Regalado: Page number.
Commissioner Teele: That's alright.
85 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: OK
Commissioner Sanchez: Any questions for...
Commissioner Regalado: I have a question.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you have the floor.
Commissioner Regalado: Why, Christina, why the delay on the Artime? People want to rent, and they are
told that the Commission has to decide if we are going to raise the rents on the different offices. But this
has been going on for almost three months.
Ms. Abrams: The rental of office space is coordinated by the Office of Asset Management, and we have
been working with them to establish a rate for both the theater and for office space.
Commissioner Regalado: OK
Ms. Abrams. And we are with a position that before entering into a long term agreement for office space
that we should review our rates which have not been updated in over ten years to see if we can somehow
reduce the deficit of the center. The center provides great service, but our deficit there is hundred and
fifty thousand ($150,000.00) a year just in the operating.
Commissioner Regalado: OK
Chairman Plummer: Five hundred ($500.00) a day.
Commissioner Regalado: By reducing the ten percent (10%) surcharge, hasn't the Center not received
any more shows? I believe it has.
Ms. Abrams: We have a lot of interests in the theatre now, but you have to understand that the Theatre
was for sale until recently when the City decided to keep it. So now, what we are doing is we are putting
together a package of what we are sending to interested parties on the rental. Once the Commission, of
course, approves a new rate. We are also painting the facility and fixing it up, because for the past year
we have been operating on the premise that it going to be sold.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, didn't the Cultural Board of the County awarded some money and then
we decided we are going to sell it, and then we didn't sell it, and how much money is that? I mean, that
was budgeted last year.
Ms. Abrams: Three years ago we applied for a grant from the Cultural Affairs Council, and we recently
got awarded a hundred and forty thousand dollars ($140,000.00) grant that's going to help us fix the
building. We never stopped going after that grant, even though the building was up for sale. Once the
City Commission decided to keep it, we are going to be receiving the money, we haven't already received
it, and it's going to go toward fixing up the building.
Chairman Plummer: Did you see the appraised... the cost of construction on the new Performing Arts?
They have paid... estimated a hundred and seventy-four million ($174,000,000), I think, and the best that
they got was two hundred and twenty-three million ($223,000,000), so you can kiss those monies good
bye.
86 September 15, 1999
•
•
Ms. Abrams: We are not.
Commissioner Regalado: The money was awarded, and Christina, is your salary still being paid by
MSEA (Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority) and the Conventions Bureau?
Ms. Abrams: No, my salary is paid strictly by the... my salary has always been paid the Conference and
Conventions and Public Facilities Department.
Commissioner Regalado: And how...
Ms. Abrams: ......reimbursed the City forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000.00) for my time.
Commissioner Regalado: OK Then you are still paid by MSEA?
Ms. Abrams: Then that's no longer. I resigned from MSEA, so MSEA is no longer reimbursing the City
for my salary.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, I.didn't know that. I am sorry, I...
Commissioner Teele: May I ask a question? Would you yield?
Commissioner Regalado: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: What do you mean, you resigned from MSEA? I thought you were appointed?
Ms. Abrams: Well, I was appointed, but I have the right to resign, and I resigned from MSEA.
Commissioner Teele: Who did you report to at MSEA?
Ms. Abrams: I report to the Board of the Manager of the Sports and Exhibition Authority.
Commissioner Teele: And the Chairman of the Board is a Mayor?
Ms. Abrams: Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: And the Vice -Chairman is Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: And that's not a violation of the Charter?
Mr. Vilarello: She had in addition to her responsibilities as Director of the Conventions Bureau, she also
provided that service to MSEA for a period of time.
Commissioner Teele: May I remind you of the memorandum that Ms. Warren wrote and the Manager,
regarding, but I don't want to get into that, I mean, I think that's very interesting. Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: Just one final question. Recently, Christina, we had a very political issue,
because of the Knight Center booking, and it was really embarrassing, at least for me, to be asked by
media and then had to run and read the morning paper, because I didn't know what was going on. Did the
87 September 15, 1999
administration know about this? Don't you feel that we should have been informed in this, whenever
there is a sort of a cultural event that could be political?
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, if I could interject. We, with regard to that matter, we have been advised at
least through the media...
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, I am not talking about, if it's bad, or if it's good. I am talking about the
members of the Commission and the Mayor, according to him, he was never informed that we are not
informed of the potential political situation arising form a cultural... so called cultural event. I am not
saying that we should have it, or we shouldn't. I am saying should the administration hadn't notified the
elected officials, or didn't you know anything about it until you read it in the Herald?
Ms. Abrams: The James L. Knight Center is managed by a private company, Globe. They are the ones
who deal with the promoter. They did tell me that they had been approached by a promoter who was
interested in bringing this band sometime ago.
Commissioner Regalado: And?
Ms. Abrams: And, I notified Raul Martinez, I would say about a week or two.
Chairman Plummer: And?
Commissioner Regalado: And?
Mr. Raul Martinez (Assistant City Manager — Operations): There was no contract signed by anybody by
Globe or anybody for this group to perform if they had not met the requirements that were told to them
from the beginning to do that, so , since that didn't happen, there was no need to go before the
Commission until we had something signed, or until Globe had something signed.
Commissioner Regalado: OK SO, if the Klu Klux Klan would approach Globe just to do some kind of
rally in the Knight center, there is no need to notify the elected officials not until they fill all the
paperwork and requirements right?
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, once and if they would have met all the requirements and before we would
have allowed, and before their contract would have been signed, we would have let you and we would
have let you be aware there is a person that has come to apply for, to play at the Knight Center. They
have met all of the requirements that were...
Commissioner Regalado: But, I mean, for me, Raul, it was very easy. I blame you. I blame the
Manager. I blame Christina. But what I am saying is that it was really embarrassing...
Commissioner Teele: What about the attorney?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): You can blame me, too.
Commissioner Regalado: I didn't blame the attorney. The Mayor did. The Mayor is — you know, he let
that communist group play, but what I am saying is, if we are going to take the brunt of any public
opinion campaign, don't you think that, at least, we should have been notified? I mean — because I read
the paper every morning because, you know, I use it in my radio program. I am paying for it. So, I — you
know — but.the problem is that I learned through the media -- and that really is embarrassing. At least, it
was for me.
88 September 15, 1999
Mr. Vilarello: But, Commissioner, if I can, I think the appropriate question is, notification to the elected
officials of an event, which may cause some concern within the community, as opposed to the specifics of
the event. I think the answer to the question is, my office, nor the Manager's staff, notified the elected
officials. I think that, if that's the comment and the inquiry, I think that it should be accepted as that and,
in the future, we should be — we should advise you when we become aware of such a situation that might
have an impact on you, individually; however, to get into the specifics of this particular event, I think,
would not be in the City's best interest.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't want to know the specifics. I just want to know why I wasn't notified.
I mean, is it a policy of not notifying whenever there is a controversial issue or you just forgot?
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): No, commissioner, there absolutely is no policy. I- mean that.
And I don't have the entire chronology but, as Christina pointed out, the City has had a contract...
Commissioner Regalado: For me it wasn't any chronology. I mean, I read it on the press. It wasn't...
Mr.Warshaw: The City has had a contract for many years with Globe. Many people come in and make
inquiries about dates. Red flags generally don't go up until they come in a second or third time, and they .
start talking about funding and costs and police and what...
Commissioner Regalado: Talk about red flags.
Mr. Warshaw: So, you're right, that there could be a better notification system. But, again, the entire
chronology of this group, no contract was signed, and a whole lot of things took place prior to the time,
you know, it made it into the newspapers. But I understand what you are saying.
Commissioner Sanchez: Let's try to stay with the budget issues. That way we can move along and get
the ball rolling. Christina, thank you so much.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, sir? Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Teele, you have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: If I may, on this point, there are two things — three things that I am concerned
about. First of all, the Knight Center is not in this budget.
Ms. Abams: Yes, it is, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Well, what page is the Knight Center on in the budget? Sixty -- your budget is on
page 64? It starts at 62 — 63 is...
Ms. Abrams: The Knight Center is in a special revenue...
Commissioner Teele: I understand that. I am talking now about in the context of the budget presentation
that we have. So, I can only assume that you're treating this as a special revenue.
Ms. Abrams: It's on page 175 of the book.
Commissioner Teele: OK, 175. Now, the question that I have of the Finance Director, not directly, but
tonight — not tonight, Madam Director — is in light of the issues that we were associated with Solid Waste.
Why is this not treated as a general fund activity as a matter of accounting procedures? I just would Pike
89 September 15, 1999
to understand. If an account is running in the red, as this facility is, it was my understanding that one of
the serious omissions of the previous external auditor, in the way this was being presented, was that when
an account — when an enterprise or something is in the red consistently, it needs to be be brought over the
general fund. I really would like to just get a written explanation of that, particularly when we understand
that we are putting in additional — what is it? Three million dollars ($3,000,000) a year, which is not
reflected in the departmental budget to operate the Knight Center, which gets me to the issue that I want
to put on the table tonight. Mr. Manager — Mr. Attorney, I would like a companion resolution instructing
and requesting that the Manager move with all deliberate speed to prepare options for the immediate
disposition of the Knight Center within a hundred and eighty days, or with a time period that the Manager
explains to us why it can't be done in a hundred and eighty days. We need — you know, I am very
sympathetic to the discussion about the facility, but the discussion underscores why the City should not be
in this business. If the Klu Klux Klan play in Birmingham, Alabama, and if the — whatever group was to
play in New York City, you know, this thing is going to always run into a political policy issue that's
going to wind up costing the taxpayers. The point that I want to make is, this thing can be avoided by us
acknowledging the fact that we are subsidizing the Knight Center to the tune of — give me the correct
number. Two million or three million a year?
Chairman Plummer: She said six.
Commissioner Sanchez: Six million.
Commissioner Teele: The net -- after you reduce the amount of money, what's the net subsidy to the
Knight Center a year?
Ms. Abrams: The Miami Convention Center will produce gross revenues...
Commissioner Teele: No, no.
Ms. Abrams: Well, let me give you...
Commissioner Teele: No, just answer my question, then explain. Don't confuse me because I am not
good with numbers.
Ms. Abrams: OK. We contribute four — we will be contributing in 99-2000, four point seven (4.7) to the
debt, which is approximately six point one (6.1). So, a little bit more than two point five million deficit to
the Knight Center.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So, that was my point. We are subsidizing the Knight Center to the tune of
two and a half million dollars ($2,500,000) a year. So, when all these homeowners and taxpayers come
up here and want to know where is their money going, every year for the last fifteen years, we have
flushed two point five million dollars ($2,500,000) or more down the drain for the Knight Center.
Ms. Abrams: And it's been reduced significantly over the last three years because three years ago was a
five million deficit.
Commissioner Teele: And we need to own up to this. This is why these budget hearings — and,
Commissioner Sanchez, again, I appreciate what you are doing. We need to own up to the fact that we
are going to lose money when we sell the Knight Center.
Commissioner Sanchez: For sure.
90 September 15,1999
Mr. Warshaw: A lot of money.
Commissioner Teele: OK. We are going to lose money. Somewhere in the order of seven to seven
million dollars ($7,000,000) just say as a floor, OK? But it's a lot cheaper to get rid of this thing now,
than to continue at infinitum to underwrite a debt that we know is going to be two and a half million
dollars ($2,500,000) in the foreseeable future. And, so, I would like, Mr. Manager, you know, as a
request to you, to come back to us, within 180 days and give us a plan or have a sale or do whatever is
necessary. I don't want to rush this through. I know that you got a Finance committee, an Audit
Committee. We are going out for a Financial Advisor. I don't think we can proceed down this track
without a Financial Advisor's advice. But we need to make this a top priority and we need to work
through the Oversight Board to get a release of our strategic reserves to underscore or to underwrite this,
and we need to get this thing done. And on that point, I want to commend Commissioner Sanchez and all
those little people that work everyday at the Orange Bowl. The Orange Bowl, I believe, is one of the
better resources that this City has and because there are powerful forces that don't really want us to have a
good stadium right now. We have not treated it right. Mr. Manager, I would also like to ask for a
resolution requesting for you to look at various options. Why don't we lease out a section of the Orange
Bowl, and allow some private developer to come in and build skyboxes or something? Alternatively,
why don't we provide an option and ask the Oversight Committee to release strategic reserves. I talked to
Dr. Tad Foote, the University of Miami, wants more boxes. They are willing to pay for it, and with the
Financial Advisor, we should do that. I think we should go ahead and say we are going to make a
commitment, a strategic reserve. How much money is in the strategic reserve? Thirty million?
Mr. Warshaw: Not thirty million anymore.
Mr. Luie Brennan (Acting Director, Budget Department): Approximately fifteen million dollars
($15,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: We need to look at how we can use the strategic reserves in a way that can bring in
money for this City. I think the Orange Bowl — and we owe it to the University of Miami to look
creatively at ways that we can do that. I believe, if we were to — I don't know where the development
office is on this. But if we were to look at — let's just rent out or lease out on'a thirty-year contract, a
section of the Orange Bowl and let a private developer come in and do a "turn key deal" and lease it back
to us, we could possibly even do that at no money. But there is no reason for the University of Miami to
have signed — what did they just sign? A four-year, five-year agreement?
Ms. Abrams: They sent us a notice that they want to extend their contract by ten years.
Commissioner Teele: There is no reason why we don't go ahead and make that facility a wonderful first-
class facility, where the Bowl people want to use it, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Mr. Manager, I am
respectfully asking you to look at that. I am respectfully asking you to work with Commissioner Sanchez
or whoever's Commission district the Orange Bowl is in, because I think that is the person who should
take the lead, but I want to be on record as saying, we need to be proactive in this department. Thank
you, Commissioner Sanchez.
Chairman Plummer: What's the remaining debt on the Knight Center?'
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir. Thank you. Commissioner, excuse me. Excuse me. Vice Chair,
Commissioner Gort, you have the floor.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you. If you look at the agenda for the next week that was supposed to be on
Tuesday, one of the items might was in my district, I know it's not in my district, but they checked with
91 September 15, 1999
Sanchez and I am requesting the approval o a committee for the purpose of doing just what you are saying
for the Orange Bowl. This committee will be people that have used the Orange Bowl, they have played
there like that, that more and the University of Miami so that they can come up with ideas to create more
revenues. So, you will get a chance to vote on that next week.
Chairman Plummer: It doesn't work. We have tried twice. What is the remaining debt service on the
Knight Center? Ballpark.
Ms. Abrams: Fifty-seven million.
Chairman Plummer: Fifty-seven million. Forty some.
Commissioner Teele: No, it's thirty-eight.
Chairman Plummer: Pretty soon we are going to be talking big money. Go ahead.
Mr. Pete Chircut (Treasurer, Finance Department): Approximately fifty-seven million dollars
($57,000,000).
Chairman Plummer: OK. Fifty-seven million dollars ($57,000,000). Now, maybe I am worse than Teele
on mathematics.
Commissioner Teele: That's impossible.
Chairman Plummer: If somebody was to come in and we want them to buy it, they've got to pay off the
debt service, correct?
Mr. Chircut: That's correct, they have to assume...
Chairman Plummer: OK. Now that building, that portion of the building cannot be separated from the
other part of the building.
Mr. Chircut: That's also correct. It's part of the bond documents.
Chairman Plummer: what the hell — what do you mean, give it away. No, no. It's gonna cost you money
to get rid of the facility. OK. Why seven million dollars ($7,000,000) a year?
Commissioner Teele: Seven million dollars ($7,000,000) or somewhere around seven plus million dollars
is going to cost us to get rid of it. But let me tell you...
Chairman Plummer: No way. Wait, wait. You are bad at mathematics.
Commissioner Teele: J.L.?
Chairman Plummer: You are bad at mathematics. Maybe I am worse.
Commissioner Teele: J.L.?
Chairman Plummer: But if you owe fifty-seven million dollars ($57,000,000)...
Commissioner Teele: J.L., trust me on this.
92 September 15, 1999
0
Chairman Plummer: Yeah. OK. Why I might.
Commissioner Teele: Low ball the number because whoever is interested in buying it is going to take
whatever number is thrown out here and they are going to use that as a starting number to negotiate up.
So, if you were hypothetically to say it is going to cost you hypothetically eight million dollars
($8,000,000), you can be assured that all of the bidders would come in and so the Commission has
already said they are going to spend eight million dollars ($8,000,000). I believe that it may be a little
more than seven million dollars ($7,000,000) honestly. Or maybe a little bit more. But the fact of the
matter is, J.L., we are spending that money every year and for the last ten years, if they will come back in
here with the numbers, I would be willing to bet you that we have put in thirty million dollars
($30,000,000) in subsidies in the last ten years.
Chairman Plummer: and you know why?
Commissioner Teele: Because the Commission never really decided that the thing was a loser, and we
ought to cut our losses and get out.
Chairman Plummer: No, no. The money that was supposed to be brought in by the University of Miami
never ever was used.
Commissioner Teele: Well — but that's fine. But, J.L., the taxpayers are paying for it and that's what we
are here about tonight, is how can. we reduce the burden on the taxpayers and homeowners of this City,
and I am suggesting...
Chairman Plummer: We are going to do it.
Commissioner Sanchez: All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Put it on the market. Let me tell you, the market is hot for Miami right now. They
are hot for the entertainment centers, so this is the time to do it. I am telling you right now. We are
getting a lot of requests from New York, from California. This is the time to do it.
Commissioner Sanchez: Moving right along. Finance. Added increase of four thousand seven hundred
and — four hundred and twenty-two dollars and that was an increase of...
Chairman Plummer: Where are we, on Finance?
Commissioner Sanchez: Finance. Of eleven point six percent (%11.6), which went to unclassified
salaries and parking surcharge administration. Finance, how are you?
Ms. Julie Weatherholtz (Director, Finance Department): And that is correct. My budget has gone up by
four hundred and seventy-eight thousand. The portion that that represents is the cost associated with
implementing and monitoring and enforcing the parking surcharge administration and which was not in
my budget last year, since it is a new revenue source, and in addition, to that there is also an additional
sixty-one thousand dollars ($61,000) for maintenance on our software, out accounting software...
Commissioner Sanchez: Julie...
Ms. Weatherholtz: Out accounting software, our payroll software that was not in my division.
93 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Whatever happened to the request of this Commission to give us a comparison of
going to the outside for a private company to do the collections as we do in the rescue and other areas
that...
Ms. Weatherholtz: We are doing that.
Chairman Plummer: We could have done it cheaper on the outside than we are on the inside. Now...
Ms. Weatherholtz: We are doing that.
Chairman Plummer: Now, this is a half a million dollars ($500,000), OK. That's ten percent (10%),
roughly, or twelve percent (12%).
Ms. Weatherholtz: But five — that five percent (5%), which is authorized in the current ordinance to use
for the parking surcharge. If you were to take those expenditures out of my department, and compare
them the remaining amount to last year's, you will see that my departmental expenses have reduced from
last year by point four three percent (.43%).
Chairman Plummer: That's not the point I am trying to make, OK. Where you have other obligations, a
company who is a private concern, to go out and do the collections and maintain the books. We have
found over a period of years, as more efficient that that's the only thing they have to do than a department
head in the City of Miami who has multiple places to cover. I thought this Commission had asked that we
be given a comparison to the private sector on collecting the surcharges and to this day, obviously,
nothing has been done because we are just saying, kick in another half million dollars ($500,000) to this
department. Why?
Ms:, Weatherholtz: Well, actually, for the parking surcharge we have put out letters of interest for
consulting companies to come in and do the things that you are talking about. We have had a response
from them. We are developing the scope of services and that's being submitted out this week with replies
coming back by the end of the month. And, therefore, we will be bringing a recommendation to the
Commission in October for the selection of a firm.
Chairman Plummer: So, that's a half a year? A half a year before you even get a reply back.
Ms. Weatherholtz: A half a year...
Chairman Plummer: March is six months.
Ms. Weatherholtz: No. We are bringing it back to you in three weeks.
Mr. Chairman: You said March.
Ms. Weatherholtz: October. I meant October if I said March.
Commissioner Sanchez: Julie, how much money is out there possibly that we have not collected through
debt to the City in whatever form it may be? Have we ever analyzed that or looked at maybe debt that
had never been paid to the City?
Ms. Weatherholtz: As it relates to outstanding receivables to the City?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
94 September 15, 1999
i
Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes, that has been analyzed and there is an RFP (Request for Proposal) on the street
currently to bring in a debt collection agency.
Commissioner Sanchez: Approximately, how much is out there? Ballpark figure.
Mr. Chircut: About two point three million, that are sixty days and older.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Did you ever look into the idea of hiring a company to go to the assessment
rolls of Dade County to collect on what is not reflecting in fair, fair appraisals? You know, we did it for
one year and we got in almost two million dollars ($2,000,000) with one guy in-house. Now, I brought
this up last year. There are companies out there or individuals out there under contracts who will go
down and make appraisals, and I keep giving you the same one. We have a building downtown, which I
will not name, that we all are very familiar with, that is assessed, I think, for a hundred and three million
dollars ($103,000,000), which recently sold for a hundred and eight million. All you got to do is
everyday, like I do, read the Business Review. Look at what the property is appraised r for in the City of
Miami, and how much it's sold for yesterday. And I want to tell you something. It's forty to sixty
percent off. It is a source of revenue that is incredible and yet over this past year, nobody has done
anything.
Ms. Bianchino: Commissioner, just to bring you up-to-date, this past year we did hire an area associate,
Mike Cannon. He worked closely with the...
Chairman Plummer: I have no idea who they are.
Ms. Bianchino: Well, they are very well respected in the field and they work very closely with the
Property Assessor's Office providing him with information that enabled him to raise the assessments on
buildings, because he didn't have enough staff to do it himself. The current year budget includes exactly
what you are talking about. People that go to value adjustment hearings on .behalf of the City and argue
the case that people should not be able to lower their assessments, and so we are doing exactly what you
are talking about.
Chairman Plummer: And I hear exactly what you are saying. But you are only half of the story and half
of the answer. You don't have to be a genius to read the Business Review.
Ms. Bianchino: We do that everyday.
Chairman Plummer: the Business Review everyday has the cost of real estate, how much it's sold for,
how much it was bought for, how much it is assessed for. And when you see that it is assessed for a
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) and yesterday they sold it for two hundred thousand dollars
($200,000), somebody ought to be there saying, hey, you owe the City.additional monies. But we are not
doing it.
Ms. Bianchino: No, we are, Commissioner. We read the...
Chairman Plummer: How much did the company that you are telling me about that's well respected and
how much do they bring in additional revenues last year?
Ms. Bianchino: It can't be measured because what we ask them to do.
Chairman Plummer: Sure, you can.
95 September 15, 1999
Ms. Bianchino: No, we can't. It can't be because what we ask them to do is very general in nature and it
was to supply the Property Assessor with additional data that would enable him to raise the assessments
on all categories, it wasn't this building or that building. This year we are going to have someone that's
going to do exactly what you are talking about, and go to Value adjustment hearings and argue on behalf
of the City. In addition to that, the staff reads the Daily Business Review every single day and does
exactly what you are talking about.
Chairman Plummer: It was estimated to me by a professional in the business, the City is losing between
twenty and twenty-two million dollars a year. That is absolutely not in compliance with State Statutes,
that it would call for a hundred percent (100%), and fully understand the Tax Assessors will accept eight -
five. They even don't comply with the law themselves, all right, and they, told me that they would not,
and this man was a former appraiser, you know who I am talking about.
Ms. Bianchino: I know who it is, yes.
Chairman Plummer: And that man estimated for me that if you got the proper people, I told you this last
year, Dena, not you, I told somebody in the administration...
Ms. Bianchino: Probably me.
Chairman Plummer: That it would value to the City of Miami, twenty to twenty-two million a year if
people were appraised at property value of what they are, and yet here we sit again this year, nobody has
been hired, it's like we don't want twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).
Ms. Bianchino: That's not true.
Chairman Plummer: It's like we don't want it. Yeah, well why isn't somebody, you know, Don, the
easiest thing in the world is to do nothing. Where is it, show me the results.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Thank you. Julie, there is a — could you reduce your budget?
Ms. Weatherholtz: We have reduced our budget from last year by point...
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no.
Ms. Weatherholtz: By point four three.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, listen, listen. It's simple. Can you reduce your budget, yes or no?
Ms. Weatherholtz: In addition to the reduction already reduced? Is that what you are asking?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Weatherholtz: It would be difficult. Out of my budget, seventy-five percent is salaries and twenty
percent relates to contractual agreements for audits, other charge calculations and the remaining five
percent of my budget, the majority of that has to do with telephone costs, copy machine costs, fax
machine costs.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, it's no.
96 September 15, 1999
0
Ms. Weatherholtz: The majority of it would be very difficult. If we had to, we could, but we would have
to eight break contracts or reduce office supplies.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, you can't? All right. Yes or no, it is simple, yes or not.
Ms. Weatherholtz: No.
Commissioner Sanchez: No. OK. Thank you. Commissioner...
Commissioner Regalado: Why are you saying that you are looking into the possibility of hiring outside
help for the parking surcharge, but yet we are budgeting almost half a million dollars. So...
Ms. Weatherholtz We were given the dollar amount that was put into my budget for the parking
surcharge was the dollar amount that corresponded with what was authorized in the Ordinance. We may
not utilize that full amount, and if we don't, then that would be a savings.
Commissioner Regalado: But, then we would never know if an outside firm would be able to do it for
less.
Ms. Weatherholtz: We are, we have, we are looking for an outside firm right now, and we are going to
bringing that recommendation back to the Commission within the next three...
Commissioner Regalado: And you are going to use that money to pay that firm?
Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: And if it's less than...
Ms. Weatherholtz: than it's less.
Commissioner Regalado: If it's more?
Ms. Weatherholtz: We are not authorized to expend any more.
Commissioner Regalado: It cannot be, it's not authorized.
Ms. Weatherholtz: That's true. It just could not be more.
Commissioner Sanchez: Julie, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, would you just allow me one...
Commissioner Sanchez: commissioner Teele, you have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: On the revenue side of the equation, how much money, and direct me in the book,
how much are you all looking to collect in bad debt, or debts that have not been...
Ms. Weatherholtz: Our outstanding debt on accounts receivable right now is two point three million.
Some of those receivables are extremely old, but there, we have the RFP on the street and we have had
pre -conference meetings, and are getting ready to make a recommendation as to a selection of a debt
collection firm to look at those.
97 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Ms. Weatherholtz: But that is with your general receivables. That does not include any kind of
outstanding debt that may be associated with loans or with community development.
Commissioner Teele: Well, the question though is, direct me in the budget book please to where the
anticipated, what are the anticipated revenues from the bad debt collection effort?
Ms. Weatherholtz: Those from, we have not provided a projection for that collection because it's such an
unknown number that if we do make collections on them, that would be excess surplus to be added to the
general fund.
Commissioner Teele: In other words, there are no revenues associated with this effort?
Ms. Weatherholtz: That's correct. Several of them at this point are very, very old. They have all been
reserved for and there is a chance that some of them may be collected.
Commissioner Teele: Why has it taken us so long? We, a year ago, we were talking about a firm to
collect debt. It seems tome...
Ms. Weatherholtz: Actually, this is the third time that a debt collection RFP was put out on the street.
When I got here a year ago, the recommendations from prior staff were being made. It was...
Commissioner Teele: Is there something going wrong? Are you all under pressure from somebody not to
collect the debt, or are there instructions from the Commission?
Ms. Weatherholtz: No, from my understanding, I just know that about a year ago, the Commission had
thrown out the RFP. That was the second time that it was thrown out and we were instructed to go back
out for the third time and do the RFP again, and we have done that, and we are preparing that.
Commissioner Teele: Did you all ever prepare a list of the aging debt, I mean, before it was like a very
general document that went out that had very little specificity. Has the RFP gone out on the street now?
Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes. The RFP has gone out in the street, there is an attachment "A," which lists the
various types of debt that we are looking to collect...
Commissioner Teele: Has it closed?
Ms. Weatherholtz: ...with an estimated dollar amount...
Commissioner Teele: Has the RFP closed?
Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes, it has closed, and last Friday was the pre -conference meeting on it, and ...
Commissioner Teele: How many bidders approximately?
Mr. Chircut: Approximately fifteen.
98 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: OK. How long is it going to take you all to get that back to the Commission with a
recommendation for action? I mean, I think this is something anything that we can do to enhance the
revenues, reduces the need and the burden on the citizens and that's what Commissioner Sanchez is...
Ms. Weatherholtz: Absolutely, plus in addition, bringing on this firm can get us current and get rid of
some of these old ones and then they can work on when they are thirty days late, because the
collectability rate is so much more.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, but the point I want Commissioner Sanchez to focus on is that he asked you a
very direct question, you basically told him, "there were no savings," but yet we have a major effort to
collect debt of about two million of which is general fund debt.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Right, I had responded to him about reducing my expenditure side of the budget, but
by collecting this debt, I could increase the revenue side of the budget. That is correct.
Commissioner Teele: Well, but I also think that it would be prudent if we chose to, and if the Oversight
Board would allow it, then we could assume a five percent net collection, I mean, you know, five percent
of two million dollars ($2,000,000) is a few bucks.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Possibly, in future years.
Mr. Warshaw: They might accept some of that.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, if we don't think we can collect anything, I mean, if we really don't think
we can collect anything, then why are we going through all of this? And so the answer is, we obviously
think we can collect something over and above what it's going to.cost to do it, so there is revenue issue...
Mr. Warshaw: And there would be a reasonable expectation of some monies. I agree.
Commissioner Teele: But there is revenue here that has not been put into the budget, and what I am
suggesting to Commissioner Sanchez, if he wants to basically reduce your budget, or the Finance
Department's budget, based upon some reasonable estimate of that revenue without putting the revenue
in. I am not proposing to put the revenue in, but if you want to reduce the expenditure, I will support that
as it relates to this because it's just, it's not, it's nonsensical that we would go through a process of having
a bid if don't expect to collect anything.. I mean, now whether it's two percent — twenty percent is an
issue, but certainly if you are asking for three percent, I am prepared to assume that we can collect three
percent
Ms. Weatherholtz: And certainly the benefit of bringing that Debt Collector on would be able to deal
with current billings, because when a current bill goes out, its collection rate, if it can be reported to them
within thirty days is extremely high. Unfortunately, the majority of our collections right now are older
and we may be slow for that recovery, but certainly there should be some recovery.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez, again, I appreciate it and, Mrs. Weatherholtz, I again want
to commend you and your department for the tremendous improvements that have been made over the
year and I hope that we will continue to see that, and I hope that our budget will give you the flexibility to
continue to make those enhancements.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Thank you, and then also I will follow up with that memo for you on the special
revenue funds for the Knight, Center and a lot of it revolves around the bond covenants.
99 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Thank you so much. Fire Department. Any, well, you have taken a
cut in your budget.
Mr. Carlos A. Gimenez (Chief of Fire): From the operating expenses, yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: Where is the cut?
Commissioner Sanchez: They did, almost a million dollars.
Fire Chief Gimenez: Actually, we had an increase in the budget.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, I am sorry, we did not. I am sorry.
Fire Chief Gimenez: An increase in the budget of about two point six million dollars ($2,600,000).
Chairman Plummer: No, it's near five.
Fire Chief Gimenez: no, sir.
Chairman Plummer: What we gave you last year was forty-three seven, and now you are forty-eight two.
Fire Chief Gimenez: There was an amended budget.
Chairman Plummer: I am not talking about amended. You've got a five million dollar ($5,000,000)
increase over the last year, right? Yeah, well.
Fire Chief Gimenez: The amended budget is a real budget. From the amended budget to this year's
budget, the increase is two point six million dollars ($2,600,000).
Chairman Plummer: With five million over what we told you you could have last year. What is it, Rolls
Royce's?
Commissioner Sanchez: Chief, did you department use all .its funding for last year?
Fire Chief Gimenez: Yes, sir, the estimate from the budget department is that we will have a thirty-three
thousand dollar ($33,000) surplus at the end of the year.
Commissioner Sanchez: You are going to have a what?
Fire Chief Gimenez: A thirty-three thousand dollar ($33,000) surplus at the end of the year.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: That was my surplus.
Commissioner Sanchez: What?
Commissioner Regalado: I had a surplus of thirty-three thousand dollars ($33;000), but not the same
budget though.
Chairman Plummer: Did you get a Rolls Royce?
100 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Can you, can you?
Commissioner Regalado: No. I was gonna ask -- I want to ask you about that.
Commissioner Sanchez: Chief, can you reduce your budget?
Fire Chief Gimenez: Can I reduce my budget?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Fire Chief Gimenez: We have reduced, in essence, I will answer it this way. The only control we really
have as a staff of our budget is the operating expenses, and we have reduced the operating expenses by
ten percent (10%) two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: Well...
Fire Chief Gimenez: There are other increases that are due to salaries and benefits et cetera, which we
really have no control over, so we have, you know, have done a reduction of ten percent (10%) on the
operating side.
Chairman Plummer: Well, let's ask you it in reverse. What have you done, if anything or explored to get
in more revenue?
Fire Chief Gimenez: More revenue?
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Fire Chief Gimenez:
We have since 1990, we are going to go back in history again.
Chairman Plummer:
I am talking about a year.
Fire Chief Gimenez:
In one year?
Chairman Plummer:
One year.
Fire Chief Gimenez:
Sir, we...
Chairman Plummer:
What did you do last year differently, now one of the things you are doing, and I
think ought to be on
the record whether it passes or not, you're thinking about dropping certain amount of
rescue runs.
Fire Chief Gimenez: That's correct, sir.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Now that's a savings.
Fire Chief Gimenez: That's a savings because we will not have to add additional units as rapidly as we
would have to if we didn't drop some of these rescue calls.
Chairman Plummer: Well, you are talking about how many runs a year?
101 September 15, 1999
0 1 9
Fire Chief Gimenez: We run approximately seventy thousand calls per year.
Chairman Plummer: No, you're dropping.
Fire Chief Gimenez: Three thousand calls per year.
Chairman Plummer: You're dropping three thousand, which is a drop in the bucket, is really what you
are talking about.
Fire Chief Gimenez: But when...
Chairman Plummer: But what it is is savings in the City.
Fire Chief Gimenez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Now, you know, what have you done, my question is in the last year have you
done anything in your department to try to increase revenue?
Fire Chief Gimenez: We have, we transport all the EMS (emergency medical service) calls in the City,
and we have been doing that since 1995. We are the only department in this county that does that. We
have a fire permit fee that we instituted. We have the fire fee, the fire assessment fee that we instituted in
order to generate revenue for the City, so in terms of all the revenue that we generate, it's possibly
nineteen million dollars ($19,000,000) that comes into the City because of the Fire Department.
Commissioner Sanchez: Can you reduce your budget? Yes or no?
Fire Chief Gimenez: At this point, no, I can't.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. And if you were to reduce your budget, and you had to give up three
percent, what would it be?
Fire Chief Gimenez: The only way I can reduce three percent is by reducing personnel.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Any other questions?
Fire Chief Gimenez: That's the only way. You look at the operating expenses.
Commissioner Regalado: How many members of the department are doing inspections if, I mean you
don't have to give me the exact figure, but...
Fire Chief Gimenez: I would figure about thirty-five to forty members.
Commissioner Regalado: They only do that.
Fire Chief Gimenez: They do inspections, yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: But, that's the only thing they do.
Fire Chief Gimenez: That is their job, sir, yes.
102 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: What is the number of inspections that one person, do you assume he or she
can do in one day for instance? Is it one or two or three or four?
Fire Chief Gimenez: We figure they will do about a thousand inspections, a little bit over a thousand
inspections a year.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Do you need more people to do inspections?
Fire Chief Gimenez: We feel that with the number of people that we have, we can get to the buildings
that we have to inspect on a yearly basis.
Commissioner Regalado: Why is it that people complain because the fire department never gets there in
terms of inspections. I personally called you on one case that I know, but then I heard of others, and I
told them to call directly.
Fire Chief Gimenez: Usually, people complain because we do too many inspections and we find the
violations.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I am saying when you need a fire department inspection to complete
your licensing process, why does it take that long?
Fire Chief Gimenez: you are talking about the Plans Examiners. That's what you are talking.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't know.
Fire Chief Gimenez: You are talking about plans examinations, you are really not talking about
inspections. That's...
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. Inspection on the site, Carlos, on site. I told you about on one case of
the guy who was waiting for three weeks and called and called, and the only thing that he was told by the
NET, that he needed the signature of the Fire Department. _
Fire Chief Gimenez: The inspectors,that we have are in a district and they inspect those buildings in that
district. Whenever we run into a problem like that, it's usually because the inspector has been on
vacation. We try to solve any problems like that by giving it like we did to the Fire Marshall who will
then reassign it to another inspector and the thing done and quickly as we can. For the most part, you
know, I think we do a pretty good job of getting on site and getting those inspections done in a rapid
manner.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. One, just one final question.. How many pieces of new equipment have
you bought with the fire fee?
Fire Chief Gimenez: We purchased seventy-five new vehicles. Fifty0one were cars for the inspectors, et
cetera, and the department and another twenty-four were fire trucks.
Commissioner Regalado: The ones that I saw in Neighbors, did you see the Neighbors Magazine?
Fire Chief Gimenez: Yeah, you are talking about the Escorts, 30 Escorts.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, right, and those Tahoes that were bought.
103 September 15, 1999
Fire Chief Gimenez: That's good. I am glad you asked me about the Tahoes, because I have been
wanting to get to that. The Tahoes that we bought are used by the district Chiefs in order to respond to
emergencies. They are the commanders of the districts and they set up the command posts. The normal
response vehicle in this County is a Suburban. I consider the Suburban to be a Cadillac. We bought the
Chevys, which are the Tahoes. They run about ten thousand dollars ($10,000) cheaper than the
Suburbans.
Commissioner Regalado: How many did you buy?
Fire Chief Gimenez: Five.
Commissioner Regalado: Five. OK. Do you feel that, do you need all the money that is supposedly
being allocated from the fire fee to buy new equipment, or can you do without some of that money this
coming budget year?
Fire Chief Gimenez: Well, I would say that we need the money, and I will explain why we need the
money. In 1976 there was a ten million dollar ($10,000,000) bond program approved by the voters for
the fire department. In 1981 there was a twenty-one million dollar ($21,000,000) bond program. That
was thirty-one million dollars ($31,000,000) tha was expended for the next fifteen years. So, in essence,
the Fire Department needed two million dollars ($2,000,000) per year for their capital program. In 1991
except for the building of Station 12, that money ran out. So, basically, from 1991 to 1998 the Fire
Department had no funds, no capital funds to do the things that we needed to do. There is a two million
dollar ($2,000,000) expense every year, so we are basically fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) in the
hole. We now have two years of the fire funds, which have given us eight point four million dollars
($8,400,000). At the end of the five-year period, we have twenty million dollars ($20,000,000), but we
will still during the five-year period would have needed ten million dollars ($10,000,000), so we really
need thirty-four million dollars ($34,000,000), fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) to make up what we
didn't have for those years, ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the five-year period, we are only going
to get twenty. So, no, I don't think we can do without the fire fee.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, remember, Carlos, it was '91 when you and I, we did a lot of radio
programs. I wasn't even thinking of being here, but, and on the issue on those radio programs, to push for
the bond election, was that if we don't do this, if we don't approve this bond issue, the fire rescue service
of Miami will just dies down. That's the threat that we told the listeners so we can, I mean, so we can
help push the bond issue through the election. It seems that you never got anything, and now, we have to
punish the residents and the property owners of Miami with another fire fee increase because of neglect of
so many years. I mean, you think that's fair?
Fire Chief Gimenez: The fire fee, the initial fire fee was four point two million. All the oth3er increases
go to offset the costs of the fire department, but doesn't really go for capital. That fire bond program that
we talked abut, twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000), was back in 1994, and we stayed at that and we
didn't get that kind of — we didn't get the money, and yes we would suffer the consequences of that, and
we started to suffer the consequence of that a couple of years ago. We still have a County fire truck
loaned to us because...
Commissioner Regalado: But why did at that time, we didn't see the outcry of the unions or we didn't
see nothing in the press, you know like, a sort of a scandal type headline, you know...
Fire Chief Gimenez: Because we were being proactive in telling people that we needed the money for the
future in order to make sure that we didn't get the position that we got a couple of years later.
104 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: No, no.
Fire Chief Gimenez: And the union did support that.
Commissioner Regalado: You went to my program, Carlos, and this is important because it has to do
with today, and we say if we don't approve this bond issue, then we are going to have a real crisis in the
rescue, the fire rescue in the City of Miami. OK.
Fire Chief Gimenez: Yes. And we did.
Commissioner Regalado: And we did.
Fire Chief Gimenez: And we did.
Commissioner Regalado: Fine. OK. But nobody complained since '91. I can hear your complaint. You
didn't come to me on the radio or the T.V. to complain, nor did the union complain that that money that
was approved by us was not being used for capital improvements.
Fire Chief Gimenez: What money was approved by you .all for capital improvements? That bond
program did not go through.
Commissioner Regalado: What I am saying, it did go through once.
Fire Chief Gimenez: No, it did not. It went — the bond programs I am talking about were voted on in
1976 and 1981, that bond money ran out in 1991, a couple years later we said, "Hey, we need our capital
improvement funds because we have no money." We went to the voters again, we asked for a twenty-five
million dollar ($25,000,000) bond program, and some people got on the radio and said, don't vote for it,
and we kept telling the people that, "Hey, look, if we don't get this money, you have fire consequences in
the future." Sure enough, a couple of years later, we ran out of fire trucks, the stations are falling apart, et
cetera. So, what we said came true. We never got that money.
Commissioner Regalado: But that's when '91, but my point now is that why do we need to raise once
more the fire fee just to remedy the problems that began in 1991?
Fire Chief.Gimenez: The...
Mr. Warshaw: The increase piece of the fire fee has nothing to do with fire capital. The fire capital piece
is already in place, so you are asking me why. Why, because it's part of the five-year plan, part of the
commitment to the Oversight Board, it's built into the budget as a revenue stream.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, we were always told by you, and by all the Managers that the
budget and the five-year plans can always be modified.
Mr. Warshaw: I am not saying they can't, but I am just saying...
Commissioner Regalado: So, I am just telling to you that this is not, you know, this is not the law, so I
am trying to find...
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: You're welcome.
105 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez, may I ask a question?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: If we are gonna go, we are about half -way through...
Commissioner Sanchez: We are going to go through all of them. Nobody wants to be left out.
Chairman Plummer: Sir, I said I would give you that privilege. But if we are going to go all the way
through this and then turn around at the end, and say to the Manager, we want you to cut the budget by
three percent, now come back and tell us how you are going to do it, what have we accomplished by
going through each one of these and then at the end saying to him, cut it by three percent. I don't
understand what we are going to accomplish.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr.Chairman, I want every department head to come up here and say, no,
because that is exactly what they are going to say.
Chairman Plummer: I haven't heard one yet that deviated from the same answer, no, I can't cut.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, I want to hear them all say no. General Service Administration.
Chairman Plummer: I tell you what, let's out of the ones raise your hand that says that they can cut their
budget.
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Chairman Plummer: How many, I don't see one hand raised over there.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, you know, we have done it, this City has done
things one way, I think we should give Commissioner Sanchez and those of us an opportunity to just go
through this and try to get something on the record here.
Commissioner Sanchez: Sir, your budget was reduced by almost a million dollars. There is a reduction
of seven point eight percent transfer of Miami Riverside Center to assessment Manager. Sir, do you, did
you use all your funds in the last budget year?
Mr. Dean De Jong (Acting Director, General Services Administration): First of all, sir, I covered, my
name is Dean De Jong and I am the Acting Director...
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Mr. De Jong: ...General Service Administration for the City of Miami.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Mr. De Jong: No, sir, we are projecting at this point a surplus of approximately five hundred thousand
dollars ($500,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Are you willing, not are you willing, can you reduce your budget?
106 September 15, 1999
0 . 0
Mr. De Jong: I could reduce my budget, but...
Commissioner Sanchez: So, it's a yes.
Mr. De Jong: The impact would be a reduction in service to the other agencies, which I serve, that's the
principal point. GSA (General Services Administration) is unique, in the sense that we service the other
departments, Solid Waste, Police, et cetera.
Commissioner Sanchez: We understand.
Mr. De Jong: It would impact on my ability to deliver that service.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, yes, you could reduce your budget?
Mr. De Jong: With a consummate decrease in my ability to serve other departments.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. If you were able to reduce your budget, giving up three percent, what
would you do?
Mr. De Jong: If I was made to reduce the budget, I would probably look in the area, first of all operating
expenses.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Mr. De Jong: and secondly, I would have to look at existing vacancies and not filling those existing
vacancies.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK.
Mr. De Jong: But, once again, that still is not going to get you to that amount, the three percent. Three
percent, just so you understand represents over three hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($350,000) in my
budget, and understand, because I think it is important, that this five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000),
the vast majority of that was a result of salary savings through a phased in process. We are finally at a
point where I am only down five vacancies, and I am serving the City in a better manner. And the second
question, or issue quite honestly, is an issue what do I save the City? As if for instance, every time we fix
a radio in the City of Miami with the people that you have given me, because I have had an increase, I
save the City two hundred dollars ($200), OK. The point is, could I reduce it? I could, it will negatively
impact on our ability to allow all these other departments to provide service .and to function, so if the
question is, do I want to, the answer is no, I don't.
Commissioner Regalado: Question, do you have — oh, I am sorry.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, Commissioner Regalado. You have the floor.
Commissioner Regalado: Do you have now any vacancies in terms of mechanics and...
Mr. De Jong: Yes, sir, I have at this point, five vacancies.
Commissioner Regalado: Are you reversing the trend, because I remember that in the past what they did
is they vacate positions and they hired outside firms to do the labor.
107 September 15, 1999
Mr. De Jong: We still contract out a lot of labor. A good example is, once again, auto body work, where
we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to repair cars because we don't have auto body mechanics.
Understand that the fleet has increased, the numbers of people have decreased and at one point was very
low. We are now moving back to the point where we can perform, begin to perform the maintenance that
we need to perform. Understand also, gentlemen, that preventive maintenance is not something that we
can do if we reduce. We are just now getting to the point where we can start to do those things. As an
example, particularly, our heavy equipment, OK, is very, very old. � The older it is, the more it costs to fix,
the more time the mechanics have to spend on it, and that's part of the issue. As we know, the City's
equipment is older and older and older, and the result is increased cost for fixing that equipment.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do you think that the City should save money in looking at products that are
cheaper, but yet, some safe by several standards, is that your philosophy, or do you feel that you got to go
for the gold in buying products?
Mr. De Jong: My feeling is that the City has to assure that the parts is gets to fix its equipment, to fix its
buildings is of the quality that will assure that first.of all, it will hold up, because w3e can buy two of this,
and one of that, and if it breaks within two weeks, then we are spending more money even though its
cheaper. So my —is yes, we should look at a standard, we should set standards that have been set by
industry and government, and we should adhere to those standards.
Commissioner Regalado: But, my question was because I know it has to do with the budget, although we
will deal with that on Tuesday, is that there are certain local firms that have not been contracted by the
City and the City is paying more for those products that used to be in the past. But, that's an issue that we
will deal with on Tuesday, it's in the agenda. By the way, I don't know if you have been told but it has to
do with local firms, but I just wanted to find out your philosophy in terms of either, if we have to pay
more we will spend more to get a better product. Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions from the Commissioners?
Commissioner Teele: Mr....
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, I really, and maybe the Budget Office can help me. Your budget, as I read it
is eleven point seven million dollars ($11,700,000).
Mr. De Jong: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: How much of that is inter -agency or transfers?
Mr. De Jong: Money coming to me?
Commissioner Teele: From other departments.
Mr. De Jong: From other departments. At this point, we pay for everything. In other words, they don't
send money tome. It's now, as part of the budget.
Commissioner Teele: When we talked about GSA in the context of Solid Waste, a lot of the Solid Waste
maintenance costs were in their budget. The cost of parts and all of that and we went through this two or
three or four times. Do you provide general service fleet management for Solid Waste?
108 September 15, 1999
0 . 0
Mr. De Jong: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: OK. At some point, over the next ten days, I would like to get thorough briefing,
but now what you have said has really disturbed me. We need a breakout of what departments are
spending this eleven million dollars ($11,000,000). In other words, if you were charging these
departments, because I will tell you this, when I did all of the budget calculations last year, and all of
those charts that showed the relationship to fire and particularly, police, if you are telling me that the
police numbers are not interfund, that this eleven million dollars ($11,000,000) does not reflect interfund
transfers from the Police Department, this Commission has been totally misled over the last two years, at
least since I have been sitting here. Because what you are telling me is that the police budget and all, of
the analysis that we have done on these budgets does not include the cost of the police fleet activities, and
I have got to tell you something, I have a car, my car is charged to my budget, OK. I hope Tomas has got
a car. But those things are hitting my budget. That is my commission budget. Now, if you are telling me
again we got two different rules here, that when it comes to Commission, it's not an interagency charge,
but when it comes to the various departments, I really want to have a meeting with you and the Budget
Office and the Internal Auditors and I really want to understand this, because this is going to take too
long, but I can tell you one thing, all of the calculations about what is the percentage of the budget that
Police represents and Fire represents and Solid Waste represents and all those numbers are totally off the
chart. If these are not interfund agencies, so the question is, of this eleven million dollars ($11,000,000)
approximately what percent of this is for Police activities, and I would like very much to get the details of
an approximate, you know, back to the. envelope, nothing scientific. But then the next question to the
Finance Department is how can we go to, I mean, you know, let's break this thing out. Let's take all of
the money, let's collapse all of the money out of the eleven million dollars ($11,000,000) except what it
costs to operate the agency, you know, in terms of the raw administration and let's let everybody pay for
what they are using. Because, there is no incentive if the departments have no way of knowing if a tune
up costs them thirty-two dollars ($32) with you, or if they could go down to Mr. Good Wrench and get it
for fifteen dollars ($15).
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, if I may?
Commissioner Teele: Now, hold on now. This is a discussion that I am having with the GSA Director,
and what I would like to know is how can we, because you see, by losing the costs center approach, no
one knows what it costs them for you to do the service, as opposed to Mr. Good Wrench, or as opposed'to
the dealer, to an OAM, and I think a lot of efficiencies that I thought we had built into this are being lost.
Would you answer one question for me, before everybody jumps into this, because once you say Police,
everybody I figure out around here starts, you know, wanting to get in and cut you off. What percentage
of this eleven million dollars ($11,000,000) or what percentage of your department in terms of the top
three or four agencies that you all are supporting, what are the percentages of the agencies that you all
support, Police, Fire, Sanitation or Solid Waste? Let's just take those three.
Mr. De Jong: The truth is, I can't answer that right now.
Commissioner Teele: you have no, as a department head, you have no idea, you don't know whether the
Police represents two percent or forty percent?
Mr. De Jong: I can tell you that I can tell you if you give me some time, but right now, no, I can't.
Commissioner Teele: But, I just really to put this on the record. You don't have a clue, right now, as you
stand here as to how much the Police and the Fire and Solid Waste represent?
Mr. De Jong: I can give you an approximate idea.
109 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: That's all that I am asking for. I am not going to hold you to it.
Mr. De Jong: Once again, Police fleet is approximately twelve hundred vehicles. Much of that work is
work that is done because the car is still under warranty. Other than that, that work is because the car is
so old that it's no longer in warranty.
Commissioner Teele: So, if it's under warranty, it's not on your budget. Because it was done at no
charge to you, or relatively no charge. So that washes out.
Mr. De Jong: Right, no, another point just so you understand is...
Commissioner Teele: All I would like to know is roughly, on the eleven million dollars ($11,000,000),
based upon we have one City of Miami, how many departments do we have here? Does anybody know
how many departments there are? It seems like that one grows every week, every year.
Mr. Warshaw: It is about twenty-two, twenty-six.
Commissioner Teele: Does anybody know how many Dade County with their four billion dollar
($4,000,000,000) has?
Mr.Warshaw: A lot more.
Commissioner Teele: Maybe, maybe not. Approximately how much money. does Sanitation, Solid
Waste, Police and Fire represent of this budget? Because they have got, those three agencies have got to
be seventy percent.
Mr. De Jong: First of all, Fire has their own garage, Commissioner. They do their own heavy equipment
work.
Commissioner Teele: So, you don't service them?. So, the Fire budget is inclusive of all of their costs,
relatively?
Mr. De Jong: Yes.
Mr.Warshaw: They have their own people.
Commissioner Teele: So, when we look at the Fire budget, we are looking at their fleet budget as well.
Mr. De Jong: And, Commissioner, up until two years ago, when you looked at the Police budget, you
were looking at that as well. What happened was, when Ed Marquez was the Manager, one of the first
things he did was collapse these funds. All the internal service charges that GSA were brought in.
Basically, GSA had no budget. There was a zero budget. So this is a policy call, and this was a decision
that was made a couple of years ago.
Commissioner Teele: I don't want to change the policy. All that I want to do is make sure that when we
say the Police budget represents eighteen percent of the City's budget, that it represents eighteen percent,
and when we say that Fire represents fourteen percent, it represents fourteen. I think we ought to be
intellectually honest about what these budgets represent, because I can tell you this, we brought out the
charts, I will bring them out this year. The ones we did last year, and not one person said, their charts are
all wrong. Because the charts were done by the external auditor. And nobody said that these charts are
110 September 15, 1999
wrong. Because when we looked at the costs of Police, the costs of Fire and the costs of Solid Waste, in
terms of the total percentage of the budget, what we now know is we saw a very distorted picture, and if
Fire is out, it makes it even worse. It means that a whole lot of this money is the Police budget, and there
is nothing wrong with that. There is no sinister plot here. All we are saying is, put the numbers on the
table. So, the question that I would proffer to the Manager, is directly in writing would you please
provide me with the costs, the approximate costs of the running the Police Department inclusive of this
and all other costs, if there are printing costs that are being hidden, if there is gymnasium costs, tee shirt
costs, you know, bullets, beans costs, you know, let's try to get all those numbers and let's please, let's
look at this as a relation — the same chart that got Mr. Cox all upset, let's look at the various departments
in relationship to the budget, because the real issue here, Mr. Commissioner Sanchez, is that there's a
bunch of people in here that have waited all night, they haven't said much, but most of these people want
to know one thing, what are we doing for the Parks Department. What we are going to wind up seeing is
that the Parks Department budget is being totally eaten alive by everything else. And what we have got to
figure out, I thin more so now than trying to reduce taxes, is we need to establish a budget policy that says
what it is going to cost to run the Parks Department. And we need to establish that as the beginning line.
Commissioner Sanchez: the Park's bond money.
Commissioner Teele: The problem according to that guy, Mr. Bush, is that the problem is not the bond
money. The bond money is there. It's not the capital money. The reason there was a drowning is there is
no operating money. What we need to start out with and what I am prepared to do next week, if you all
will agree to it, is we ought o set first the Park's budget, and say this is the budget we want for operating,
and then let's the numbers fit in. Because right now those numbers are being set based upon grants that
are coming in for community development or grants for the Fire or grants for the Police or grants for
everything else, and that's what is eating up the budget.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, you have the floor.
Mr. Warshaw: Again, not to be repetitious, it's not only the Police Department, all departments that avail
themselves of the services of GSA, those funds were collapsed two years ago, just off the top of my head.
Two years ago the Police Department's budget was probably close to a hundred million ($100,000,000),
this year it's eighty-six or eighty-seven million. That's because GSA now has its own cost center whereas
it used to be basically, you know, zero. So, we will get you not only, not only will we get you the
information, Commissioner Teele, to get you the history of when those adjustments took place, so you
can...
Chairman Plummer: Yes, but it's worse...
Mr. Warshaw: ... see when we made those changes.
Chairman Plummer: The Police budget is way over a hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) when you
put all the grants in it.
Mr. Warshaw: You put GSA in it, put grants...
Chairman Plummer: No, you put the grants in there and you put law enforcement trust fund monies in
there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions, Commissioners?
Chairman Plummer: I have one question. Mr. Manager?
III September 15, 1999
0
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Plummer, you have the floor.
Chairman Plummer: We talked and I assume this is GSA. We talked in the lot clearing about the five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) that was going to be wasted and gone away. We were going to buy
some equipment from those proceeds so that we didn't lose the money. Now, to my knowledge, the three
hedgehogs that you talked about buying through GSA, has not been bought.
Mr. Warshaw: That's Public Works...
Mr. Raul Martinez (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner, those were bought by Public Works.
Chairman Plummer: They have been bought?
Mr. Martinez: Yes, they have, sir.
Chairman Plummer: They have been ordered?
Mr. Martinez: They are here.
Chairman Plummer: No, not the two that we had originally, the five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000), Mr. Manager. Mr. Diaz is here, I think he has informed me for round numbers that there isa
half a million dollars from Community Development that in fact was dedicated to lot clearing and they
had only used about two hundred thousand ($200,000), am I correct?
Mr. Manuel W. Diaz (NET Coordinator, NET Administration): What we did is, we utilized, we redid the
lot clearing program, and we implemented the monies in the new program, the new way that we are
distributing lots, and we are cleaning much more and more lots.
Chairman Plummer: But October I", it ends. How much money are we going to lose out of the program?
Mr. Diaz: I will have to defer to Community — we will get it for you, but I am not sure that we will lose
any of that money, sir.
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Mr. Tony Rodriguez.
Mr. Tony Rodriguez (President of Miami FOP, Fraternal Order of Police): Our police officers pay for our
oil changes, and we do that by contract. Incidentally, now while we are in the topic of cars, this last
collective bargaining agreement which all of you approved, we saved the City about ten million dollars
($10,000,000) in take home cars, so I just want to make sure that we give the public the correct numbers
and we pay for our oil changes, not the City. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: you pay for your oil changes?
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, we do, sir. We do all preventive maintenance. Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: For the record, I pay for my oil changes, too.
Chairman Plummer: I ain't about to touch that one.
112 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Sir, thank you so much. Going to the next department, we have Human
Resources. Difference in increase of five point two and if I may, we have some people that have been
here all day, do you mind if they, we bring, do any of the Commissioners object putting Parks up front, so
these ladies and gentlemen could go home? No, Parks. Where is Al Ruder? Come on up, Al. You are
the next contestant.
Mr. Alberto Ruder (Director, Parks and Recreation): Al Ruder, parks and Recreation Director.
Commissioner Sanchez: Parks and Recreation. One of our lowest funded resources. You received an
increase of five point eight percent, which was four hundred and eighty-eight thousand four hundred and
fifty-seven, Virginia Key Beach reopened in stages. Al, I hate to ask you this question, but did your
department use all its funds last year?
Mr. Ruder: I don't have the final numbers right here for last year, but this year we are going to use
everything...
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely...
Mr. Ruder: The projections, everything but about four thousand dollars ($4,000), but with two weeks to
go.
Commissioner Sanchez: is th4er any way that you can reduce your budget?
Mr. Ruder: If the Manager were to ask me, I would have to reduce se5rvices. I would be careful to
minimize the impact on the community, but in the end, all the things that we are doing, the opening of the
pools, the beach, the improved playgrounds would all be affected, because I would have to reduce
services.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Al. Do any of the Commissioners have any questions?
Chairman Plummer: Wow, wow! For example, Pace Park. Now, we are going to be spending a million
eight in improvements.
Mr. Ruder: Right.
Chairman Plummer: Now, obviously, where is the money going to come from for maintaining, we are
going to have tennis courts, we are going to have basketball, we are going to have any number of
activities. Where is the ONM money coming from to maintain that?
Mr. Ruder: Well...
Chairman Plummer: Is that in this budget?
Mr. Ruder: Number one, that project is not projected to be completed until next fiscal year, and we do
have some maintenance dollars assigned to that park right now in this year's budget. Obviously, with all
those improvements, when we do next year's budget, we are going to have to account for those...
Chairman Plummer: All right. What about Virrick Park?
113 September 15, 1999
0. 0
Mr. Ruder: The same thing, and in that case, we are going to have partnerships with groups like the Boys
and Girls Club and Coconut Grove CARES, which is going to reduce some of our operating costs.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you have the floor.
Commissioner Regalado: We have been shown, you have seen it too, probably, some projects that could
be implemented in City parks and could generate revenues to the City. Several members of this
Commission attended a presentation in Douglas Park for one, and we have shown, been shown also
projects that are working in County Parks. Do you feel that this could bring some revenue that you could
use, for instance, in employing people to do some kind of maintenance, or just be there on weekends in
different parks?
Mr. Ruder: Sure, it certainly can. Right now, our budget as you know is a hundred percent funded by the
General Fund because of how poor our community is. We maybe generated by a million and a half in
revenues, so anything such as what you are talking about,. usually goes into the General Fund. But if it
would go into our department, we could use that money to hire more people...
Commissioner Regalado: Precisely, that's what I am saying, that if, Mr. City Attorney, I would like if
this is possible to say that, especially in the Parks Department, if there are innovative programs or new
programs that will finance extra personnel in the Parks Department. Can we do that within the framework
of the budget?
Mr. Joel Maxwell (Assistant City Attorney): Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: Sorry.
Mr. Maxwell: The answer is yes.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Then, why are we delaying this, I know that this has been going on for
how long, Al?
Mr. Ruder: I don't know if you want to talk specifics, if you are talking...
Commissioner Regalado: No, just any program...
Mr. Ruder: About the Douglas Park, we are working with Asset Management to finalize the agreement to
bring back to the Commission for approval. There was a community meeting held, which I think three of
you attended, and I believe that the one, the other situation that you mentioned which was the Kennedy
Park, I believe also, Asset Management, we have worked with them and they are in the proves of
finalizing that agreement also. Those are two examples of two new initiatives that could bring more
revenues to the City.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, last Commission meeting, we had a chance for the second meeting to vote on
the Park Advisory Board, which I think is a great idea. I mean both J.L. and I went to the inauguration of
a park that was all created by the private sector. One of the things that we can look at into, and we will be
discussing this, we could probably get the private sector through the Marketing Department, not the
grants, to offer the names and to use their names in different activities when the parks so in this way we
can create revenues.
114 September 15, 1999
Mr. Ruder: And we have done some of those things directly ourselves, right now, but obviously, one of
the main missions of this Board, would be to try to bring us some more money for the Parks Department.
Not only to be more sensitive to parks, but to be very active in bringing money in.
Vice Chairman Gort: I tell you the renaming of Comstock to Juan Pablo Duarte, we got the private sector
there to pay for all improvements that was done at the park, and they bring in additional activities. They
bring in revenues into the parks.
Mr. Ruder: Right.
Chairman Plummer: Come on, Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Are there any other questions from the Commissioners? Commissioner Teele,
you have the floor.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Commissioner. Since I have been here, there has been a lot of
discussion, I think led largely by Commissioner Regalado about the importance of the Parks Department
and the funding of it. I think we have all expressed concerns, but we have not done anything about it.
Unfortunately, in the community that I represent, ther was again a tragic death brought about quite frankly
because we don't have enough money in some ways to just keep these parks open and keep them secured
and all of that. Now, I want it to be clear and on the record, the young man who died was clearly in
violation of the City regulations, he entered unlawfully, and inappropriately. But it happened around five
or six o'clock in the afternoon at a park, when it gets dark around eight or nine o'clock. I am familiar
with, and I see the attorneys eyes are bucking and I will be careful, Mr. Attorney, what I am saying. I
will respect you, and the City. But, yet and still, I think it is wrong when we have a park that has a
swimming pool in the summer in Miami, Florida and the park is closed before the sun goes down.
Personally, I would hope that some of the parks would be opened until eleven o'clock. I grew up in
Tallahassee, Florida, and the biggest event in Tallahassee on a Friday night, was evening at the park,
Robinson Truebook Blood Park. It was a segregated park, but it was open.
Chairman Plummer: That was the biggest event?
Commissioner Teele: That was the biggest event in Tallahassee when I was in...
Chairman Plummer: You don't think I am going to buy that, do you?
Commissioner Teele: When I was in the seventh grade, at least the ones that I got to know about. And I
mean it was a big thing, and you know, all the boys and all the girls went to the park and there was
playing and all of that, and it just seems to me that we need to develop a plan as a part of our budget of
instructions regarding a commitment to maintain these parks, and particular swimming pools being
opened citywide. This is not a minority issue, this is really goes to -the essence of Miami. We talk about
this being Miami. I mean, it's something wrong when children in Miami can't swim in a swimming pool
until dark. I know that PULSE (People United to Lead the Struggle for Equality) is here, they served
notice on me that they are going to pay close attention to how much I advocate, and I think that is healthy.
I think it's positive that people, government works best when people are watching and it's eleven o'clock
at night, let the record reflect they are all here watching, so I want to be on record not just because
PULSE is here, but because it is the right thing to do. We have got to develop an appropriate budget
instruction and policy directive associated with this budget on the Parks Department around swimming.
Every year, we have had children to die needlessly in swimming incidents. Now always, in the City of
Miami, there was a church recently, that had a year ago, that had what three kids to drown in a swimming
incident, and we have taken that for — Mr. Manager, I commend you for ordering the parks to be opened
115 September 15, 1999
longer. I know it did not get a lot of attention, and maybe it shouldn't because you are just doing the right
thing. But, the Manager did increase the hours of the parks, but the point that I would like to ask the
Manager to work with the City Attorney on is that we need to change our approach to how we fund the
Parks Department, and I think that is something that some of the Commissioners are getting at. I think if
we have got a development office, and I must tell you, Mr. Manager, I don't understand why we have got
a Marinas, what are the things, what's that department? Marinas?
Mr. Warshaw: Conference, Conventions.
Commissioner Teele: Conferences, Conventions, Marinas, we have a Development Office and we have
an Asset Management Office. I mean, you talk about layering it, you know, you know, you have got
three offices all dealing with assets in some ways of enhancing assets, and I am not at all suggesting they
are to be merged, but I tell you what, it's mighty wide to me. But somewhere between those three offices,
or all of them I call upon the Commission and the Manager to take a different approach to funding parks.
We need to open the door and break down the walls and barriers of government regulations that
encourage public/private partnerships in our parks.
Commissioner Sanchez: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: We need'to not only have an "adopt a park" kind of thing where you walk by and
get your name up, where they proactively are literally adopting the parks. We need to have management
agreements in our parks and I know there was some controversy about a management agreement, and
quite frankly, if I had been on the Commission, I would have voted against the management agreement at
the Melrese Golf Course at that time. But today, if the Melrese Golf Course ManagementAgreement
came up here, I would not only vote for it, I would make the motion. We don't have enough money to
run these Parks Department properly, and we need to stop thinking like bureaucrats, we need to stop
thinking like government officials and we need to think like entrepreneurs and operators. We ought to try
to get some people to agree to maintain a park, and give them a waiver on the use of the park. I mean,
there are enough, and I don't mean Virginia Key and I don't mean, I am talking about neighborhood
parks, parks that quite frankly are going to be under utilized. There are businesses, I really believe, that if
we went to organizations like Carnival Cruise Line, The Miami Heat, I am sorry, what is that thing, the
American Airline, the United Airline, we could come in with a proactive program where they could
literally agree to underwrite certain costs of these things, but I got to tell you this, you got first of all get
the City Attorney to wake up and not try to block everything. I have been waiting for four months now,
on the agreement in Hadley Park where you got, where you have a private operator agreeing to cooperate
or do something on that grant that went to the Safe Neighborhoods Bonds thing. We have gotten the
money, we have drawn the plans for the grant, but we still don't have an operating agreement. Those
operating agreements should be done before we even submit the grant. There is another one that I called
you all about also that there is a management agreement that is in the Hispanic community. We have got
to get the Finance Department, I mean the Development Department, the Asset Management, all these
people who got departments and titles, and certainly it seems to me like the expertise in the marina, the
marina and Development and whatever that thing is called, those are the people that have the expertise in
dealing with promoters and tourism kinds of things that might want to be a part of this, but you have got
at least three departments plus the City Attorney. Mr. Manager, I believe we could put together a
prototype, a pilot program in our Parks Department where we could quantify the kinds of things that they
would do in every park and go out here and solicit people to be real partners, not partners where they stick
their name up and walk away, but a five-year agreement, a ten-year agreement kind of thing, and let's
really figure out how to get these parks operating. So, to me it's not just a question of how much money
can we rob Peter and pay Paul. We have got to change our whole approach in the Parks Department, and
right now, it takes a court order almost to get a management agreement out of the City Attorney's Office.
And I raise the issue directly with the City Attorney on the grant that we submitted in Hadley Park a year
116 September 15, 1999
ago, and there is no management agreement done yet, and I believe that we should not even submit the
grant if we don't have the management agreement, or at least the management agreement in outline. But
I've got to tell you this. If we wait to get that grant, the management agreement in writing, you will never
submit any grants, because it will take a year to get the thing done. So, I just would like to have a report
in the next Commission meeting this coming Tuesday, on all of the pending management agreements on
what we can do to break through the bureaucratic and regulatory and legal, and there are legal
impediments, Joel, that limit this, and may even be in our Charter that says it has to be bid or something
like that as it relates to leases or certain things. But there are neighborhood parks all over Little Haiti and
all over Overtown and all over Liberty City, Model Cities that I believe that with the little of proactive
work we could find businesses that would agree to adopt the parks and a part of that adoption could be
cleaning them, maintaining them and I know somebody going to say who is responsible for the liability,
but we are responsible for the liability insurance, we are anyway. We ought to be able to get them to-do
the kinds of things that can generate and save money. It's not just a question of putting out money, Mr.
Manager, it's a question of avoiding money. Mr. Manager, I want to yield to you, because I think this is a
very important way that we can begin to save the taxpayers money. I mean, you know, my God, if
American Airlines is willing to put up, how much are they putting up for the name on the American
Airlines Arena? Is it two million ($2,000,000) a year?
Mr. Warshaw: I think it is more than that.
Commissioner Teele: You know, they ought to be willing to put up forty thousand ($40,000), fifty
thousand ($50,000) dollars on the Douglas Park in Overtown, right across the street, or something you
know.
Mr. Warshaw: And, Commissioner, I agree with you. I have said publicly before, the twenty or twenty-
one dollars in Safe Neighborhood Parks money is nice, but just putting equipment and sod and lights is
not enough. We have done a couple of things with the Law Enforcement Trust Fund and with the Police
Department we are doing this prototype. We are going to hire people who work through operational
programs in the parks, six or seven days a week, but we have a lot more to do and we will aggressively
reach out with contacts we have in the private sector and see if we can really do some imaginative things
to...
Commissioner Teele: I would like to see how much Law Enforcement Trust money has been spent in
parks and cultural activities over the last four years, and where the money has gone.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort, you are recognized.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, this is one, I have had a lot of requests of individuals coming to — would like
to see something done and so would management agreement with their parks and I think Commissioner
Teele is right on the ball. We need to expedite these agreements, we have to get them going. The Law
Enforcement Trust Fund, you are talking about crime prevention, you keep a kid in the parks doing sports
or cultural activities, that kid will not get involved in crime.
Mr. Ruder: I just want to say, I mean, we could do a lot more, but right now, we have agreements.
Tacolcy is running a park for us, Little Havana Development Authority is running Domino Park and has
been running it for us for many years. The Inner City Youth Corporation is running programs now
through an agreement with the City at Range Park. So, and then we have all these other youth
organizations, like the Optimist Clubs who get permits from us and are running a lot of programs that we
otherwise would...
117 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: What we are seeing is those people you mentioned, we are giving them money to
run the programs. We want the private sector to put some of the money.
Mr. Ruder: Two of those cases we do, but it costs a lot more than what we give them. They bring a lot of
other money in. It costs a lot of money..
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. So, as long as we can show savings.
Commissioner Sanchez: You could recognize a good community by their good parks. OK. Thank you,
Al, thanks. Going on down the list, if I could find it, I think it was Human Resources?
Ms. Angela R. Bellamy (Director, Human Resources Department): Yes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Human Resources. An increase of seventy-eight thousand two hundred and
seventy-nine five point two, reason or explanation was COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) anniversary
and longevity steps. Did you use up all your funds for that year on the budget?
Ms. Bellamy: No, sir. For the record, my name is Angela Bellamy, Director of the Department of
Human Resources:. We project that we will have approximately sixty-two thousand dollars ($62,000) left
from salary savings.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. If you were, first of all, would you be able to cut your budget?
Ms. Bellamy: The answer, Commissioner, is if I were instructed to cut my budget, I would have to do
that...
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Bellamy: I would have to tell you the impact. Nine percent of my budget, the proposed budget
represents operating expenses. Those operating expenses represent services that are provided to all City
departments. For example, a service award program that we had to cut out of our budget three years ago
to provide service pins for City employees based on their years of service. We included that back in the
budget and that's thirteen thousand dollars ($13,000). So, that includes service awards for all City
employees. Then all of the employment physicals, drug testing, the background investigations for FDLE
(Florida Department of Law Enforcement) that comes out of my budget. So, that's thirty-six thousand
dollars ($36,000). Recruitment supplies, postage that has to be mailed to various applicants, that's what
we would be able...
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. If you were to be forced to cut your budget by three percent, where
would the budget be...
Ms. Bellamy: I would have to propose some of those services, the service award program we would not
have to do that. The others, the employment physicals, drug testing would have to do, other than that, I
would have to cut employees.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Do any of my colleagues have any questions?
Commissioner Regalado: No questions.
118 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Hearing none, thank you so much. Information Technology. An increase of
fourteen point nine percent, eight hundred and ten thousand dollars ($810,000). Administration and
personnel changes was the explanation for the increase in the budget.
Mr. Aldo Stancato (Interim Director, Information Technology): Aldo Stancato, Interim Director of
Information Technology.
Commissioner Sanchez: Aldo, how are you?
Mr. Stancato: Oh, fine.
Commissioner Sanchez: A little tired.
Mr. Stancato: Oh, yeah. The costs over here are generally all, personnel costs. We have had significant
increase in staffing over the past year. What we found is that in general, what the City pays is for
beginning of IT (Information Technology) salaries, substantially below market rate, we have to bring in
people at not at Step 1, but at Step 4, 5, so all of these people that we brought in over the last year will
have to be getting anniversary increases, COLA increases and those kinds of issues.
Commissioner Sanchez: With the Y2K coming up, that's, we projected to put a lot of money into
technology and try to catch up with the old system that we had. Now, did you use up all your funding in
that year?
Mr. Stancato: No, we have had, we initially started out, pardon?
Commissioner Sanchez: What was your surplus? You did have a surplus, what was it?
Mr. Stancato: We had a surplus. It's all coming from salary savings. We had approximately fourteen
positions that we were, that we had gotten new positions and we had not filled those yet. We are still...
Commissioner Sanchez: What was the dollar amount?
Mr. Stancato: Ah, at this point, we still have a little, we have over a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000)
in savings. But, we still have six vacant positions that we have to sit down and fill.
Commissioner Sanchez: Would you be able to reduce your budget?
Mr. Stancato: Not and provide service at the level that we are providing.
Commissioner Sanchez: If you were to be told to reduce your budget by three percent, what would be
your cuts?
Mr. Stancato: We would try to turn around and take some out of operating capitals, but mostly it would
come out of salaries. I just want to state that over the past year, we have increased the network by about
twenty percent, over the next several months we will be increasing the network by approximately another
fifty percent and as we bring on all the NET Offices and all the other offices on line. To support all these
people it takes staff. Everybody is looking to IT for support and to help turn around and do productivity
initiatives.
Commissioner Sanchez: Do any of my colleagues have any, we Commissioner Gort, you are recognized.
119 September 15, 1999
0
Vice Chairman Gort: Let ask you a question, and I don't recall the exact amount, but the next
Commission meeting we have a request from your office to have someone or a company come in and do
an analysis of the needs for the next five years, something like that, and I do not know what the costs of
that was.
Mr. Stancato: We don't have a cost yet; we are going to be coming to the Commission with request for
an RFP for a strategic plan.
Vice Chairman Gort: My question to you and the Manager is, I think we have approved at least close to
twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in acquisitions for new computer and new system, should we not
have had that way before?
Mr. Stancato: Those, the things that we have purchased has been about ten million dollars ($10,000,000).
Ten point five million dollars. All the things that we have purchased were things that, for instance, the
main frame was a ten year old main frame. This was way beyond the level of replacing, we should have
replaced that about six, seven years, when it was about six, seven years old. So, it should have been done
about three years ago. A lot other things, the other three and a half million that we have approved, that
you all approved, were for finishing the network. This is basic service. These are the things that have not
been done over the years, and just need to be done so we can sit down and provide the basic networking
and basic service. Now, as we go forward and we are looking at other, at all the other projects that we
could look at for productivity initiatives, now we want to sit down and look at a strategic plan. The IT
Steering Committee has been reestablished, meets weekly, and we are pursuing the issue of going out on
an RFP and having a firm come in and help us with a strategic plan.
Vice Chairman Gort: We do not have the expertise within the department to do it ourselves? Because I
remember, I requested this when we started funding your office...
Mr. Stancato: We will work with them, but we have, we are looking for firms, because again, when we
are looking at capital money for IT, we are talking serious, very, very serious, millions and millions of
dollars for the City and the upcoming years and we want to make sure that we have a firm that will come
in and be able to do it, assist us properly.
Vice Chairman Gort: But if you recall, one of the things that I requested is when you bring this request to
us, also want to know what the savings are going to produce, by selling those equipment and how our
services are going to be improved and how we are going to be more efficient, because by being, providing
better services and being more efficient, we would be able to save and make more money also.
Mr. Stancato: Correct, right now, what we have done to this point though, is just play catch up over the
fact that we have not done anything in a lot of years. Again, if you go into some of these NET offices or
the police station, they are still using dumb terminals, we are still using equipment that has been, that's
very archaic.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you are recognized.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you, Commissioner Sanchez. Again, the Blue Ribbon
Committee recognized that we have serious issues related to ITD. I want to be on record as saying that I
really believe that all of the City agencies are not in the MRC building. We need to ensure that we have a
technology department that supports all of the City functions. One of the things that I think we really
need to look at, and this has been raised before, is can technology be contracted out, could technology be
an association with other governmental agencies.1 think you should be commended, the department
should be commended for working more closely with the State of Florida in some of the technology and I
120 September 15, 1999
think that that's a tremendous enhancement to the department. But, you know the question reoccurs, have
we looked honestly and objectively, and without the usual bravado between agencies at whether or not the
County could provide Dade County, could provide technology services to us on a contractual services to
us on a contractual basis more efficiently and cheaper at a reduced cost. I don't think given how dynamic '
technology is and how fast it's moving, that everybody can be invested in trying to stay abreast on it, and
I mean I think we need to recognize the fact that we have a budget of four hundred thousand ($400,000),
the County with its airport and seaport has a budget of approaching five billion dollars ($5,000,000,000),
they can clearly put more resources and clearly with their enterprise account such as the airport and the
seaport, and their technologies are far more advanced in some ways than ours, and this is particularly, I
think the case, and in, for example, in graphics where the University of Florida is contracting with them
to do studies on manipulation of census data. I mean, everybody in the State cannot be an expert in
everything and I think we in local government need to look at how we can provide the best service at the
most cost efficient way without getting into the brovado that we have got to have our own. I know the
issues of the red fire truck from the green fire truck and all of those kinds of, you know, boy, boy issues.
But the fact of the matter is,.I am not convinced that we should not study in the coming year whether or
not technology as an activity cannot be coordinated with Metropolitan Dade County Information
Technology. Your budget is how much money?
Mr. Stancato: It's six point two million dollars ($6,200,000).
Commissioner Teele: And how much is the County budget in technology?
Mr. Stancato: That's really hard to say, because a lot of it is also in the different departments, but
significantly higher.
Commissioner Teele: Particularly in the airport, I mean where, you know, they have got, they have
technology today that I mean, it's literally a cutting edge technology. And the point that I am making,
this is no disrespect on you or any of your staff, it's just a question that the technology moves so quickly
and the cost is so high. So, I really do believe that you all need to pay a lot more attention to how we can
better provide service as we show today. It was a simple cable apparently that was not connected that has
the internet in this office down, not that any of us up here know how to use the internet. I mean, I
certainly don't, but I got some people in my office that do, but certainly it's the kind of thing that we
ought to be trying to figure out how to maximize, and I would just ask your cooperation in looking at that.
I have been waiting for one telephone hand set for one year. I recognize somebody said there is warranty
issues and all sorts of issues, but a simple telephone hand set, you know is a pretty much of a hard thing
to request and can't get it from an office that has six million dollars ($6,000,000). Thank you very much,
Mr. Chairman, and I really think, you know, that this whole of technology, certainly you can reduce some
money, but at the same time you clearly are going to affect services and I just don't know if we can spend
enough money to stay current, given the magnitude. I know that for example, the Finance Department
has done wonders with the hardware and software that we have, but nobody had really been trained on it,
and that really gets to the issue that I wanted to raise with Human Resources Department, and with your
department. How much money are we spending for training?
Mr. Stancato: I don't know what we are doing City wide.
Commissioner Teele: How much money are you spending for training?
Mr. Stancato: At this point, I am not spending anything. I have a position open for a trainer, but when we
went out, we did not get any applicants.
121 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Why do you have to think in terms of a position? I mean, you know, you could go
to Gateway, you could go to Miami -Dade Community College, you could go to FIU. I mean if we have
got sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) left in training, I vote we spend... we appropriate out of your budget,
or was it Ms. Bellamy, you said you had sixty thousand ($60,000) left?
Ms. Bellamy: We, no, we have two hundred sixty thousand dollars ($260,000.00) in training.
Commissioner Teele: You know, I am telling you something...
Ms. Bellamy: And that does include computer training.
Commissioner Teele: It doesn't matter how much money we spend in technology, and I saw this a
thousand times in the military, it doesn't matter how great the tank is, or how great the helicopter is, if the
people aren't trained to use it, you may as well have an old World War 11 clunker. The fact of the matter
is, we have people who cannot transfer telephone calls. Mr. Manager, I want you to hear this. We have
people in this City working for this City, who cannot transfer telephone calls. We have people in this City
who cannot conference telephone calls, and I would defy anyone to say that every telephone operator that
is trained as a telephone operator in these offices, can use fifty percent (50%) of the functions on those
telephones, fifty percent. The fact is, it's not a reflection on the employees, it's a reflection on us and the
management in terms of our priorities. You know, my wife works for Bahamas Air, you know, that's a
very, very small airline. But I tell you this, Mr. Director, they have a training unit that goes to every
station and teaches those people on Saturdays and on Sundays how to use the, I guess they are using
World Pass now, which is a TWA system. If you don't train the people, it doesn't matter how much
hardware be buy, and you can never train the people enough. There is too much turnover, and if there is
any money left, in anybody's budget, I recommend we get with Miami -Dade Community College and
come over here and have some training session for the remaining of the year. That's the best way to spend
money in this town, and get the community and the citizens who call here to get a more professional, a
better response and a more professional response, so that's just my recommendation, Mr. Manager. I
seriously raised this issue last year with Ms. Bellamy, I don't think we spend enough money for training.
Mr. Warshaw: I would Angela just give you a brief overview on training commitment.
Ms. Bellamy: Yes, Commissioner, we have answered to the training, this is the second year that we have
done that. We have trained approximately three thousand employees and we have trained not only in
professionalism and ethics, but also in the computer training, we provide that and basic writing, technical
writing skills, we have not included, we did include customer service training, but you have mentioned an
important area and I would like to say that we will make sure that we work with IT (Information
Technology) and provide the training for employees in terms of the telephone training. We have
constantly requested departments, if they have any specialized training needs, we have devised programs
for them and we are working with FIU, there is an agreement with the Institute of Government.
Commissioner Teele: Great, Mr. Manager, I am very encouraged, but again, it blows my mind when you
ask about training and the first thing somebody talks about is a position. Look, this is not about position.
This is, I mean, one position costs this City forty thousand dollars ($40,000).
Ms. Bellamy: And I want...
Commissioner Teele: No, let's be clear about this. One position, if you bring somebody with a Master's
Degree or a Bachelor's Degree in technology or computers, you are going to pay them twenty-eight
($28,000) to thirty-five ($35,000) dollars, your fringe benefits package, what are you all computing, forty
percent (40%)? Is that a good number, forty percent ?
122 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Close enough.
Commissioner Teele: Forty percent (40%) of thirty thousand is how much money?
Mr. Warshaw: Twelve thousand ($12,000).
Commissioner Teele: So, now you are at forty-two thousand dollars ($42,000), OK, and do you know
how many people you could train just at Gateway, I mean, I sent my whole staff Christmas down to
Gateway for a forty dollar ($40.00) training, and they all learned everything on how to get on the Internet,
of course, they were trying to sell Gateway, we told them we were in but we didn't buy one, you
know for the record, but it's a good system, and I will give them that plug on the T.V. But the fact of the
matter is, for forty dollars ($40.00) you can train how many people at forty thousand dollars ($40,000) a
year? At four hundred dollars ($400.00) Does anybody know the answer? If it costs forty dollars
($40.00) for the training, and you have forty thousand dollars ($40,000), how many people can you train?
Ms. Bellamy: A thousand people.
Commissioner Teele: You can train one thousand people with that one personnel slot that you are talking
about. So please don't start talking about people. We can't hire enough people fast enough to keep up
with what's going in the technology areas, in the internet. I mean, look at what's happening on Wall
Street. Don't think in terms of people, think in terms of services and whose providing .this because the
guy who is the leader today, the one thing is for sure, it two years he is not going to be anywhere in the
race.
Ms. Bellamy: And Commissioner, that's exactly why we went out and we have a contract with FIU, so
we are not looking at employing a lot of employees to provide that training. We are trying do it as cost
effective as we can.
Commissioner Teele: Respectfully, let's treat the employees the same way we treat, say the police, let's
give everybody a voucher. I would challenge the management, take forty thousand dollars ($40,000),
voucher them into some forty dollars ($40.00), sixty dollar ($60.00) training, you pick them, you know
whether it be Gateway, whether it be America On Line, whether it be Fred Pryor, or whoever all these
people are that come to town and do. Let me tell you, there are some great training out there on the
Internet and on how to use soft wares and all that, and they will do it like in six hours.
Mr. Warshaw: And Commissioner, I couldn't agree with you...
Chairman Plummer: Al right, the best training in this City right now is Dade Junior College.
Commissioner Teele: I agree with you and they have special training. I was looking in the catalogue.
They have some Saturday training. We ought to give the people vouchers and say, "go there on a
Saturday."
Mr. Warshaw: And Commissioner, over and above Human Resources and the Computer Department,
Department Directors have blanket authority and exercise it in many cases for training for employees and
there is an awful lot of training going on. I agree with you, we can do more, especially, as the work force
and it has gotten smaller and we expect more from the people we have, they have to well trained. So, the
commitment is there, we are doing it, we will do more, and I here you loud and clear.
123 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, thank you for what you did last year and Ms. Bellamy, thank you in
this area, because I was not aware that you had done as much, but I really do think we can do a lot more,
and I think it's important that we keep on that end.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions, Information and Technology? Aldo, thank you so much.
Internal Audit, an increase of one point eight percent (1.8%) the explanation was COLA, anniversaries,
longevities staging.
Mr. Victor 1. Igwe (Director, Office of Internal Audit): My name is Victor Igwe. I am the Director of
Internal Audit. Can I get your question?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, did you use up all your funding last year?
Mr. Igwe: No, I did not. We have a budget surplus of about a hundred and twenty-nine thousand dollars.
Commissioner Sanchez: Eight hundred and twenty-nine thousand dollars ($829,000)?
Mr. Igwe: A hundred and twenty-nine thousand dollars ($129,000).
Chairman Plummer: One twenty-nine ($129,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: Oh, One twenty-nine ($129,000). Alright.
Commissioner Teele: Is it eight twenty-nine ($829,000) or one twenty-nine ($129,000)?
Commissioner Sanchez: No, one twenty-nine ($129,000).
Mr. Igwe: One hundred and twenty-nine thousand dollars ($129,000).
Commissioner Sanchez: OK Sir, is there any...
Chairman Plummer: Can I stop right there for a minute? Mr. Manager, there is not a Budget Director
that, I am sorry, not a Department Director that has come up here yet this evening, that did not have
surplus. Now, I didn't count it as we went along, but I am estimating that so far I have heard probably a
half a million dollars ($250,000). Where did the money go?
Mr. Warshaw: It is still there in the budget.
Chairman Plummer: What budget?
Mr. Warshaw: You are asking them how much money they are going to have at the end of ...
Chairman Plummer: But you can't carry over their savings. You won't allow them to carry it over to this
coming year. Now, where does that money go?
Mr. Warshaw: First, the money is, this budget year isn't over yet.
Chairman Plummer: I understand that, but I am assuming when the question is asked of this year when
you said a hundred and twenty-nine thousand dollars ($129,000), that meant for the next fifteen days.
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L. It will be spent. Trust me. It will be spent.
124 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Respectfully, Commissioner, and I would like to just,'if I may, refresh your memory,
earlier in the year you said to me that probably what's going to happen a the of the year, every
Department Director is going to come here and say, "every penny is gone."
Chairman Plummer: That's always been standard.
Mr. Warshaw: "And nothing is spent." Well, I think what you are hearing is the Department Directors
have exercised a lot of prudence in the way they spent money.
Chairman Plummer: Now; answer my question.
Mr. Warshaw: And for the first time in a long time, there is money that's left in the budget. Now...
Chairman Plummer: And where did it go?
Mr. Warshaw: We still have it. We are projecting a surplus in this year's budget of approximately five
million dollars ($5,000,000)...
Ms. Bertha Henry (Assistant City Manager): Five point three, in the five million dollar range
($5,000,000).
Chairman Plummer: And that comes from the individual departments, and not from other sources?
Mr. Warshaw: That's correct.
Ms. Henry: Primarily...
Chairman Plummer: I don't agree.
Ms. Henry: ... from the individual departments.
Chairman Plummer: I don't agree. Part of the surpluses is that you have in this year's budget, for
example, how much of it is from the parking surcharge?
Ms. Henry: At this...
Chairman Plummer: No, no, twenty percent (20%)
Ms. Bellamy: For FY 99 now?
Chairman Plummer: No, no, for the coming year.
Mr. Warshaw: You are talking about, the monies we are taking about now, are for the fiscal year '99,
that's about to end in fifteen days.
Chairman Plummer: How much surplus did we start this year with?
Ms. Bellamy: Basically, zero that was not allocated for...
Chairman Plummer: Are you saying none?
125 September 15, 1999
•
Ms. Bellamy: Yes. .
Mr. Warshaw: We started the year with a new budget, there was no surplus dollars .... and approved
budget by the Commission. What we start with will end the year with a five million dollars surplus
($5,000,000) which I think is a...
Chairman Plummer: Strictly from...
Mr. Warshaw: Strictly from the operating budgets of the departments, which I think is a credit to the
Directors.
Chairman Plummer: I don't disagree if is that's what I am going to find.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you are recognized.
Commissioner Teele: In fairness, I think, not only is it a credit to the Managers, the Department Heads,
it's a credit to you and the Assistant Managers and the management team as far as is goes. One of the
questions that I ask of the union, and I will continue to ask that question, if you don't provide department
heads and departments with incentives in the end of the third quarter, on things that they can do creatively
with those funds, then you are not going to see the kinds of surpluses that you have this year and next
year. I mean, if all of the money get swept and that's what the Oversight Board has clearly ruled that the
money basically get swept back into a pot and it gets put back over, but you can't use those dollars to
balance out next year, then that was my point as it related to the training and those other things. There are
a series of things that can be done that would prudently put us in a better position next year, if we can
intelligently spend some of those funds, but with all due respect, a lot of the money, a percentage of the
money has come from increased enforcement and increased activities, again a credit to the management,
and particularly, to Chief Martinez, but you take something like the solid waste delinquent. You have got
a lot of money...
Mr. Warshaw: Excess revenues.
Commissioner Teele: You have got a lot of money that were delinquent. Now, I am going to tell you the
problem with your budget. If you look at your budget, your Director is assuming the same amount next
year in collection of delinquent revenues and solid waste, and that just don't work. That's a "one trick
pony." That pony will only do that trick one time. I mean there ain't going to be no delinquent solid
waste being carried over into the next year and you have got more money stated in your revenue
projections than are there, because that just isn't going to happen. I mean, once the guy pays up, from
two years ago, and a years ago, into this year you are not going to be able to carry that forward next year.
So, I think you all are overstating the delinquent as one item pretty substantially on that line item,
although that's only a one million dollar ($1,000,000) line item.
Vice Chairman Gort: How many more we got to go?
Commissioner Teele: So, I would urge you to look at that, and again I would urge you to look at how you
can intelligently and prudently spend resources...
Mr. Warshaw: And you mentioned something earlier about the strategic dollars. We have been talking to
the Oversight Board. Once we get through this budget process, you are right, there are monies that can be
126 September 15, 1999
committed for strategic initiatives, like the Parks Department, like training, things that are going to have
long...
Commissioner Teele: Like the Orange Bowl.
Mr. Warshaw: Like the Orange Bowl. Long term infrastructure issues that are going to enhance the City
in the next five or ten years, and we are going come back to you probably in October with a list of some
of the things that we would like to take to the Oversight Board so we can start to use it, and believe it or
not, there are members of the Oversight Board who have asked us to come forward now that we are
starting to work on recurring balance budgets, ways to spend that money long term and do things for the
City that will benefit it in the future.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any more questions Internal Audit?
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, I have a question, I would like just a very simple document, alright. I would
like to see a document telling me where the five million dollars ($5,000,000) was established. How much
from police, how much from each unit of where that money came from to establish that surplus.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort, you are recognized.
Vice Chairman Gort: My question is and I don't know if 1, you can answer it, Mr. Attorney, you were
reading a while ago the document that we signed a little while ago with the Oversight Board, my
understanding is we are committed to have a balanced budget for how many years?
Mr. Vilarello: Well, we are committed to have a balanced budget pursuant to state law each and every
year. You mean...
Vice Chairman Gort: I understand that, but I mean, the Oversight Board will stay with us for how long?
Mr. Vilarello: Three years after we have two balanced budgets that are balanced based on recurring
revenues meeting recurring expenses. So, after we have achieved that twice, then they stay on three more
years.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, are there any other questions that would like to be asked? Sir, is there
anyway that you would be able to reduce your budget?
Mr. Igwe: Definitely not because this fiscal year '99, we identified one point one million dollars
($1,100,000) in additional revenue to the City and of that one point one million, we have actually
collected or recovered eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000). So, if we were to reduce our budget,
then that would mean reducing it now, either one position...
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, thank you so much. We will take a five minute recess.
(At this point, the Commission recessed at 11:38 p.m. and reconvened at 11:45 p.m.)
Chairman Plummer: What are you going to give up?
127 September 15, 1999
Mr. Vilarello: The increase was based on salary increases over the year. Only five of my positions are
union regulated positions. Another twenty of them are Management- Managerial confidential support
staff of secretarial which typically receive the same increases as the unions do, and the balance of that at
my office is twenty-five lawyers which I did provide pay increases in the last year which were the first
pay increases that many of them realized since 1994. On average, that was a little bit less than five
percent (5%), six percent (6%) of my total budget. The attorneys in my office have been working for that
period of time without pay increases, and have been doing a great job, and have been working under very
difficult circumstances, particularly, one you go through a change of a series of administrations. To that
extent I felt that it was appropriate to reward them, in fact the committee chaired by Commissioner Gort
and the Committee called by the Oversight Board had listed specifically those issues as the reasons why
we were having turnovers in the lawyers in our office. In fact, over the last year, I have recognized some
of those turnovers, and we have been replacing it. I do have a surplus in the budget this year, which may
be as high as a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), those are based on salary savings because I have had
some vacancies that have taken a period of time to fill. When I presented my budget to the Manager
during the budgetary process, I had in fact asked for additional lawyers and support staff for those
lawyers, and at the request of the Manager, went back and tried to see whether or not we could make it
another year without the increase in staffing. Last year, for the first time, our office was, received three
paralegals that we were able to probably, well in fact, that is the basis under which I was able to agree
with the Manager that I could hold out for another year without any increase in service, without any
increase in personnel. In doing that, what I am trying to accomplish, which isn't reflected in our budget,
our law department budget, is the reduction in outside counsel expenses. In fact, we have reduced by
about half the number of cases we have farmed out to outside counsel. That savings isn't reflected in my
office, it is reflected mostly in Risk Management. If you ask for three percent (3%) savings, or reduction
in my department, there is only two places it can come from, I have approximately a hundred and eight -
six thousand dollars ($186,000) in operating expenses. We are looking into some reductions in our library
expense which would be nominal for may ten to fifteen thousand dollars ($10,000 — $15,000), and any
other changes, any other reductions would necessarily come from a reduction in personnel.
Chairman Plummer: How much outside counsel did you use this year that we were not reimbursed for?
Mr. Vilarello: That exact number, I don't have that figure.
Chairman Plummer: Roughly.
Mr. Vilarello: Sixty...
Chairman Plummer: Send me a memo.
Mr. Vilarello: I would be happy to.
Commissioner Sanchez: Alex.
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: How many positions do you have in your office right now, occupied?
Mr. Vialarello: Authorized, fifty-one.
Commissioner Sanchez: How many attorneys?
Mr. Vilarello: Twenty-five.
128 September 15, 1999
0 . 0
Chairman Plummer: Sounds like Greenberg, Traurig.
Mr. Vilarello: No, Greenberg has over two hundred. I am sorry, four hundred and...
Commissioner Sanchez: And you said that you would not be able to reduce your budget?
Mr.Vilarello: Sir, if I reduce my budget, I reduce personnel, and at this point, the reduction of personnel
would have to be in a reduction of lawyers.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, it's no?
Mr. Vilarello: It's a yes, with a consequence. The consequence is...
Commissioner Sanchez: Spoken like a true attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: The consequences, I would have to reduce personnel.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK so it's no?
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, well the question is...
Commissioner Sanchez: It's a simple question. If I were to... Alex, excuse me. If you...
Mr. Vilarello: The question is, can I reduce my budget? The answer to that question is, yes, I can reduce
my budget. The consequence of it is loosing personnel, and I have heard at least three or four complaints
this evening about the...
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions from the Commissioners? OK, moving right along. It looks
like that we are going to make it to...
Chairman Plummer: I have not heard a savings yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, of course not. No one, everybody wants to go to heaven, and nobody
wants to die. Steve Clark's favorite line. Management and Budget. An increase of sixteen point seven
percent (16.7%), a difference of two thousand nine hundred and ninety-three, five thirty-two, addition of
operation research and student interns.
Mr. Brennan: Yes, Commissioner...
Commissioner Sanchez: Student interns?
Mr. Brennan: Yeah, we do have student interns. We take on student interns.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK alright.
Mr. Brennan: Before I answer your...
Commissioner Sanchez: Lou, we are going to do this very quickly. Can you cut your budget?
Mr. Brennan: There are consequences in cutting my budget. I would like...
129 September 15, 1999
0. 0
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you Lou...
Mr. Brennan: I would like you to know, Commissioner that we have taken on enormous amount of
responsibility based upon the interlocal agreement. We have to produce monthly statements to the State...
Commissioner Sanchez: Lou, don't worry about it. Thank you. We will go to the next. We did Parks and
Recreation, Pension we are not even going to touch. Planning.
Chairman Plummer: No, you can't touch pension.
Commissioner Sanchez: Pension, what are you going to touch pensions, this is...
Chairman Plummer: No, you can hear it, but you can't do anything about it.
Ms. Ana Gelabert-Sanchez (Director, Department of Planning and Zoning): Planning and Zoning.
Commissioner Sanchez: Planning and Zoning. OK An increase of sixty-two point six (62.6%), almost
seven hundred thousand dollars merger with Planning and Zoning. Did you have a surplus of your
budget?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I had a surplus on unfilled vacancies. I just want to clarify on the percentage that
it looks like the twenty-five percent (25%) is so many when it came to Planning.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: So, that's what you are seeing. The actual increase is really is only eight percent
(8%).
Commissioner Sanchez: I am sorry. You did have a surplus?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: Yes, I did, on unfilled vacancies.
Chairman Plummer: Can I ask a question? How long were those vacant positions vacant?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: It's difficult to say, because...
Chairman Plummer: The point I am trying to make is, if you got along without them this year, why do
you need them next year?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: No, let me tell you something, and I was just going through Commissioner
Sanchez on the questions, when you are asking, if the Planning Department, as you know, is right now,
we have been waiting for years to be able to plan for the City. This is a great opportunity that we have.
We need the quality of life in our neighborhoods. On the one division on the Planning Department, we
bring close to for next year and the year to 2000 close to one point six million dollars on ad valorem
taxes, just on permits and projects that are being reviewed. That's just on private development coming in.
In addition to that, as you all know, because we try to work with everyone on the City and the
neighborhoods and the citizens. We are being requested constantly on neighborhood plans, on
amendments, on zoning, on design same guidelines, we don't have the staff. The positions that I will fill
right now, and it has taken us perhaps a little longer. It has been to make sure that we taylor those
positions to our needs, and this is precisely what we are doing. Right now, we have that opportunity.
130 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: And If I could just add commissioner, I mean, Ana and I and Dena have talked about this
a great length. This is the City's future. We haven't had in the past years people who were so user and
customer friendly to people. We want to able to attract the best of the best to come here to make them
feel that not only are they welcome, but down the road that there are incentives and reasons similar to
what was said about Erie, Pennsylvania, and not to be you know, humorous about it. We want people to
come here because there is a reason for wanting to be here. That this is a place where they want to
develop, they want to enhance neighborhoods, they want to make a difference, and we want a first class
Planning Department. Ana has had a strong charge from myself and from Dena as to the direction we
want to go in.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, but somewhere, something has got to give.
Mr. Warshaw: I understand.
Chairman Plummer: Alright, when the little old lady sits here and says, "Sir, you raise my fees one more
time, I got to move, I got to leave this City." Mr. Manager, something has got to give, because there is
becoming more and more of those little old ladies every day.
Commissioner Regalado: And you know, we all want all the Fortune 500 companies to be in Downtown,
Miami, but what we are doing to downtown, with the parking surcharge and now with increase in the fire
fee, which I hope that this Commission will not allow. It's you know, you are a military person, and you
now friendly fire kills people exactly like enemy fire. And I this is what we are doing. We are killing the
people with friendly fire, and I think that J.L. is exactly on the money when he says " that something gotta
give." I mean, we want to have the best and we want to plan for the next ten years, but next year they are
going to people in Flagami and in Little Havana that would not be able, not even to pay their mortgage,
but not even, probably to sell the houses, because there won't be anybody buying, and let me tell you
what the perception becomes reality when the press start picking up stories about this couple that had to
leave their house, it becomes a nightmare for the City. So, you know, we are listening here to the
grandiose plans that we want to have, all of us, but if we this year don't do something for the people, and
invest in the people, the City is doomed.
Commissioner Sanchez: If you were to be asked to reduce your budget by three percent (3%), where
would you cut your budget?
Ms. Gelabert-Sanchez: I would have to cut in people.
Commissioner Sanchez: People, thank you. Police. Chief O'Brien. An increase of two point five percent
(2.5%), two million dollars ($2,000,000), almost primary due to COLA, anniversary, longevity in staging.
Chief, did you have a surplus in your budget this year?
Mr. William O'Brien, Chief of Police: Last year our budget was seventy three million ($73,000,000) and
change and we spent seventy-five million ($75,000,000) and change.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK If you...
Chairman Plummer: Poor management.
Commissioner Sanchez: If you were to be asked, to cut your budget by three percent, where would it
come from?
131 September 15, 1999
0- 0
Chief O'Brien: Basically, it would a hard call for us as some of the others have said, you know, could we
cut it? Yeah, we could cut it. Right now, in our operating expenses we are one million dollars
($1,000,000) less than last year. With the personnel expenses, the police situation with our grants, we
have got approximate two hundred and fifty-four grant positions that are paid for by federal dollars,
counting to just less than fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000). To cut police, we would have to cut those
two hundred and fifty-four so those aren't there.
Chairman Plummer: Did you just say that you got seventy-three and you spent seventy-five?
Chief O'Brien: That's what I said.
Chairman Plummer: Well, then, Mr. Manager, why are you saying he got eight -five?
Chief O'Brien: We are talking about last fiscal year, right.
Chairman Plummer: That's what I am taking about, yes. Here it says eighty-four, somebody has goofed
up.
Mr. Warshaw: I think he...
Chairman Plummer: Don't choke, please.
Mr. Warshaw: I think he was comparing...
Chief O'Brien: I wouldn't.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, alright.
Chief O'Brien": We are talking '97, '98.
Mr. Warshaw: Alright, we are talking now, and the question is, Chief, the current year budget, where are
you going to come in this current year, the budget that ends in fifteen days.
Chairman Plummer: No, I am just asking the question, when he said he had seventy-three and he spent
seventy-five, I didn't think it was two years ago, I thought it was this year, last fiscal year. So you are
saying then that between last fiscal year and this year, you need thirteen million dollars ($13,000,000)
more money.
Chief O'Brien: Basically, last fiscal year there were a number of concessions that were given, those
concessions are no longer in effect and those expenses are...
Chairman Plummer: But you have got almost two million dollars ($2,000,000) out of the VIP (Vehicle
Impoundment Program) program.
Chief O'Brien: The additional effort that we put in the VIP program...
Chairman Plummer: I understand, but I am saying that you got that money, and you are asking for
thirteen more, that is fifteen, and other grants... how much are you spending for PIO (Public Information
Office)?
Chief O'Brien: The cost of five sworn and three civilians, I don't have the exact...
132 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Why not civilians?
Chief O'Brien: I beg your pardon?
Chairman Plummer: Other than the two people that are up there in front of the line. Why not civilians?
Chief O'Brien: Well, I agree with, I am not sure which of the Commissioners earlier that spoke to it, that
police are best speaking the police issues.
Chairman Plummer: No, no, I said that, sir, and I say that of five positions, why do five have to be police
officers?
Chief O'Brien: That gives us ...
Chairman Plummer: Why do you need a police officer to be in charge of fleet management? Why do you
need a police officer to be in charge of burglar alarms administration? I don't understand the things of
why they have got to be sworn officers, when civilians can be at a less reduced rate. You know, it took
me five years to get rid of (unintelligible) processing where eleven police officers, OK Finally, somebody
said, well you know, maybe he is right, but maybe we ought to do it.
Chief O'Brien: And that was me.
Chairman Plummer: And that's fine, you know, why aren't we using policemen to deliver the mail? You
know, we you use policemen to deliver mail.
Chief O'Brien: We use the resources we have to get the job done. If we had the civilians, in a lot of these
cases, we wouldn't have to use police officers.
Chairman Plummer: And what do you anticipate doing this particular year in reference to the dispatchers?
Chief O'Brien: The problem we have with the dispatchers, and I think you know it, we have spoken
about this issue before, is hiring them and keeping them. Hiring qualified people and keeping them, and
it's a problem. I have to say it's a problem that not only Miami has, Dade County has it, Miami Beach
has it and the like.
Chairman Plummer: You know.
Chief O'Brien: I think the pay should be higher.
Chairman Plummer: Chief, if that's the case that you have got to do to keep the Channel 9... How much
are you paying overtime in the dispatchers? Because, let me tell you something, I am told one dispatcher
makes eight -six thousand dollars ($86,000.00) a year.
Chief O'Brien: I don't know that that's a fact. We have got...
Chairman Plummer: Joe is shaking his head, yes.
Chief O'Brien: It is very possible, and I tell you one of the problems we have...
133 September 15, 1999
0. 0
Chairman Plummer: And you are telling me at eighty-six thousand dollars ($86,000.00) a year, we can't
find people to be a dispatcher.
Chief O'Brien: They don't go, the advertised rate isn't eight -six thousand dollars ($86,000.00) a year.
They start at twenty-one thousand ($21,000.00).
Chairman Plummer: And they are making sixty, sixty-five in overtime.
Mr. Warshaw: I just want to add we are in the process of completing a salary study for dispatchers and
communication people...
Chairman Plummer: Don.
Mr. Warshaw: Basically...
Chairman Plummer: Don, you have promised me for five years that you would address the issue when
you were Chief. Dade Junior College offered to put on the training programs and whatever you needed in
a hundred million dollar ($100,000,000) a year corporation and we can't find people. You know what?
Al Sunshine is right. Shame on you.
Mr. Warshaw: J.L. I have to tell you, it's not just in Miami, it's all over America, these are very difficult
positions to fill, they are difficult to...
Chairman Plummer: I don't disagree.
Mr. Warshaw: Even when the pay is high.
Chairman Plummer: I don't disagree with that. But when you have got people out there unemployed,
who are trainable, you cannot tell me that you can't encourage people to come in and keep open a life line
to the police department. You just can't convince me of that.
Mr. Warshaw: What I am telling you is that...
Chairman Plummer: You just can't convince me of that.
Mr. Warshaw: I am telling you, it is a very technical job, it's filled with stress, there is a very high fall
out rate. Believe me, we are not opposed to getting people, we are aggressively pursuing the best of
what's out there. It's difficult to maintain these people. We are not against it. We have got the money,
we have got the jobs and we have all the incentives to fill the positions...
Chairman Plummer: And yet.
Mr. Warshaw: And yet, there is a problem.
Chairman Plummer: It's still not being done.
Mr. Warshaw: Well, we have a compliment of, it is not like we don't have civilian dispatchers, how
many do we have?
Chief O'Brien: And, we just hired four, and one of the problems we have is passing the background
check. The psychological, the arrest situation...
134 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: How many policemen, sworn officers do you have in background checks?
Eighteen. Excuse me, eight. You know how many the County has? None. It is done by civilians, and
civilians are just as capable from what I am.being told by an Assistant Chief, as sworn police officers.
Chief O'Brien: Of the eight, for the record, four are limited duty, that they can't function on the street.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you are recognized,
Commissioner Regalado: OK Chief, how many sworn officers you have doing jobs that civilians could
do?
Chairman Plummer: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. Let's start with those that are present and
accounted for. OK Each one of these people here, especially Joe, a civilian could do the job. Am I right,
or am I wrong, Chief?
Chief O'Brien: I don't agree with that.
Chairman Plummer: No, no. You don't agree with it, but they could do the job.
Chief O'Brien: Oh, a civilian...
Chairman Plummer: One is doing budget, one is doing analysis, can easily be done by civilian personnel
at a reduction in...
Commissioner Sanchez: And who is the new Assistant Chief back there?
Chief O'Brien: I would have to say yes, just as I would say yes, could we do the job...
Chairman Plummer: Chief, the problem is, look, it's not your fault. OK We will go to previous Chiefs.
We go to previous Chiefs, and what happened was, when we didn't have the money to put the civilians in,
they put policemen in to do the jobs. When you got more money, the policemen are still doing the jobs
and civilians weren't hired. OK That's the problem. I guarantee you, sir, that you can go through, and
you can find at least ten percent (10%) of what police officers, sworn officers, are doing in the police
department, that civilians can do for a lesser amount of money. No question in my mind. No question.
OK I mean, you got policemen sitting out there guarding the gate with seven hundred policemen inside
of the police station.
Chief O'Brien: That doesn't happen. I mean it happens on rare, rare occasions when someone doesn't
show up we need security at that outer gate.
Chairman Plummer: Chief, listen...
Chief O'Brien: I agree with you in concept though.
Chairman Plummer: Listen to your radio. Go ahead. Obviously, nothing is going to happen, so go
ahead.
Commissioner Regalado: Ah, how many Chief, more or less?
Commissioner Sanchez: How many Assistant Chiefs?
135 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, it is question that I asked for...
Chief O'Brien: I don't know the exact number, there are some, and they, generally when they are in those
functions, they are in those functions for a couple of reasons. One of the reasons, is they are on light and
limited duty, they can't perform on the street, and the other circumstance selling them in that function is
that they don't have a civilian available to do that function.
Chairman Plummer: How long has the police officer without mentioning names, handling the record
service been on light duty? About twelve years, fourteen years?
Chief O'Brien: There are a number of functions that could be done by civilians.
Chairman Plummer: You see what reason why the towing fees are down so much this year?
Chief O'Brien: The one thing, there are number of functions that could be done by civilians. The
particular function we are talking about with the towing, that does incorporate enforcement. If a civilian
was put there, the civilian wouldn't have the enforcement capability.
Chairman Plummer: Chief, why is towing fees down so much this year, the revenue to the City? I think
it is about, I think it was seventy ($70,000) or eighty thousand ($80,000) dollar drop in revenue.
Chief O'Brien: I haven't addressed that. I have not been aware that it is that quite frankly.
Chairman Plummer: I think that it is very important...
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I am back here...
Chairman Plummer: Go ahead. I will look it up, because it's in the revenue source. I am sorry, here, if I
may. You're towing charges, and I am assuming that's the City's fee, dropped from a hundred and sixty
thousand dollars ($160,000) last year to thirty-five thousand ($35,000) this year. Can you explain to me
the reason why? Page seven. It is almost down at the bottom, under "T." It dropped from a hundred and
sixty thousand three -sixty seven ($160,367.00) to thirty-five thousand ($35,000).
Chief O'Brien: We are not showing the same thing on our forms. We are showing two thirty-nine, two
hundred and thirty-nine thousand ($239,000) this year.
Chairman Plummer: It's marked.
Commissioner Regalado: Is it because those towings are done within the framework of the VIP program?
Chairman Plummer: We get a fee from every tow that is made.
Commissioner Regalado: I know, but J.L. maybe they are using the VIP program as...
Chairman Plummer: No, even that we still get the fee.
Commissioner Regalado: I know that, but they tow cars in the VIP program. Anyway..
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely, is what they are saying, is that there should be a hell of a lot more. I
mean they are dropping a hundred and thirty thousand dollars ($130,000).
136 September 15, 1999
Major Joe Longueira: Sir, we will get you the answer to that.
Mr. Warshaw: That doesn't seem right. The number is much higher.
Assistant Chief Ray Martinez: I don't know if that figure is correct. We have already collected over two
hundred...
Chairman Plummer: Sir, it's not my figure.
Mr. Warshaw: It's not mine either.
Assistant Chief Ray Martinez: It's not mine either. We have already collected over two hundred and
forty-five thousand dollars ($245,000) this year.
Chairman Plummer: Well then, you better tell somebody, because if that's the case, then we have got
another hundred and twenty thousand dollars ($120,000) to spend.
Chief O'Brien: We will address that and find out what numbers are right.
Commissioner Regalado: OK Chief, you...
Chairman Plummer: But how many errors like that are there in the budget?
Chief O'Brien: We are just, if I could go back to that budget saying that there is an error in the line item,
but we will clarify that by the...
Chairman Plummer: Well, tell the man that's in charge of it.
Commissioner Regalado: Chief, in the past we have seen, operations and different areas of the City,
especially in bars on Flagler Street or West Little Havana, East Little Havana, are these done by regular
police officers on the different shifts, or these are people getting overtime, getting paid as an extra job that
they are doing?
Chief O'Brien: It's both. There is overtime and there is regular on -duty officers. You are talking about
the bar checks?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Can you do it without the overtime scenario, or can a police officer or a
regular patrol can do this or it has to be done in groups?
Chief O'Brien: To do the bar checks to the extent we were doing them, trying to make the impact that we
were, we need to have overtime.
Commissioner Regalado: OK You know that the priority of the residents of Miami is number one, less
taxes and number two, less crime, in that order. So, what is it that you can do to put more officers on the
street? Is there, do we need to look for civilians that are trained, or knowledgeable about the job so you
can get more officers on the street? After all, I am sure that most of the officers, if not all, would like to
do work on the street, rather than sit on a desk, because that's why you want to be a policeman. But, what
can you promise with the resources that you have now, or less because I am sure that you by now, have
seen the will of the Commission to reduce some of your budget, but what can you do to put more people
on the street, and less inside?
137 September 15, 1999
Chief O'Brien: Basically, in response to that question, I can say we have more officers now, on the
department and more officers now on the street than we have ever had, and we hope to continue keeping
the pressure on, and I think both the effect on crime and crime dropping down year after year, went down
another nine...
Commissioner Regalado: That's national trend, you know, that...
Chief O'Brien: But we were exceeding the national trend, and that's important to know. Our numbers
are actually staggering, even in view of the national trend, and it's not only the numbers, because numbers
sometimes can be deceptive, it's the feed back, and I think a number of you have come to me as speaking
about the feed back from the communities with the police presence on the street. And I am really happy
with what we have been doing, we hope to continue to do more and continue that trend.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, no doubt about it, I mean, we what I want is more police officers on the
street. I mean, but no doubt about it, that crime is down and this is a national trend and the City and the
people are more, the people feel more comfortable when they see a police officer on the area. But, you
know, especially my question is, can you promise more officers on the street with the same resources, or
less than you have now?
Chief O'Brien: We will continue, I'll try to continue on that vein, as it was said earlier, I have already
done that during my time as Chief. I have closed prisoner processing putting those eleven officers on the
street, and I will continue to do that. There are a limitations; however, as I said earlier, with light limited
duty officers, and limitation when we don't have the civilian personnel, I need to have the job done by
somebody.
Commissioner Regalado: Your film office still works out of PIO, right? The film permitting office.
Chief O'Brien: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: And this is free. This is a free service that we give to the people, or do we
charge for those permits?
Chairman Plummer: And the next question is why does it have to be out of the police department, which
should be law enforcement, rather than issuing permits?
Mr. Warshaw: I can answer that. That was something that occurred when I was there. Basically, there,
were two people who were working, I forget where they were in Special Events Department that doesn't
exist anymore. Basically when someone comes in for a film permit, there is a big coordination process
that involves sometimes closing streets, getting permits, so it's kind of a one stop place to go in and I
have to tell you that I have met over the years with the film industry, it makes that whole process a lot
easier, when people can come in, they meet with Vivian Ponbo, Liz Baboon, they have been doing it for
years and then they are taken right over to the permit off -duty office where they are able to get street
closures and get the information. Sometime it even has to come to me or to the Commission for approval,
so it's worked well over the years.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, you know, it's...
Commissioner Regalado: I don't mind, I don't mind. .I am just asking because the County is charging a
huge amount for a film permit and we are not being proactive in offering this service. I understand it's
free. Isn't is not. It's free, right?
138 September 15, 1999
Chief O'Brien: That is correct, yes.
Commissioner Regalado: OK the County charges two hundred and fifty ($250.00) for each permit,
something like that. A photo opportunity, yes, two hundred and fifty ($250.00) film maybe more. But,
we have not been able to be more proactive in bringing to the municipal area, more of this kind of
business. I still think that we should keep it free, because it generates a lot of money. But, frankly I have
not seen an effort and maybe through the Conventions and Business Bureaus, we can do that, but they
work for the County so they won't work for us. So, that's all, Chief.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions?
Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort, you are recognized.
Vice Chairman Gort: I would like to state the job that is being done in Allapattah. We have a lot of
problems, and I think you will see the results of the additional police, especially the problems solving
team that was placed in the...... and all the arrests, especially the bad boys in certain neighborhoods, the
amount of guns that have been taken off the street has been tremendous. I think it should commended for
that. For the film industry I would like to tell you that the DDA is pushing, we pushed that one district,
that at one time, used to be the warehouse district, right now we have a big time productions are in there
and they are doing all kinds of productions and I think that I have seen at least I personally have seen a lot
more film being taking place within the City of Miami. I have had requests both from New York and
from California, and the biggest reason they would like to come here and they are willing to pay whatever
is necessary to pay to settle here, because although they might pay a lot more for some of the places they
have to go into, that they have to purchase, their production costs and the City of Miami is a lot lower that
in New York and in California. So, that's why you will begin to see a lot of that. We at least through the
DDA, we are doing a lot of promotions and we do a lot of presentations to this industry in trying to bring
them in here. The reason being is an industry that spends a lot of money as a very clean industry. And I
agree with you, this is something we have to work with and bring even more to.
Chairman Plummer: Chief, of the grants for example that you received, I don't know how much we
spend on the gym. I am looking here at just one segment, Chief, of thirty-four million dollars
($34,000,000) in grants. Is that for one year or more than a year?
Chief O'Brien: That's multiple years. This year probably about fifteen million ($15,000,000) will
receive.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I am looking at a total of just cops more '98, twelve million dollars
($12,000,000).
Chief O'Brien: That's the technology grant.
Chairman Plummer: Is that for this year? The question I am asking, of the thirty-four million
($34,000,000) in just this segment, and we will go into the rest of it later, is that more than one year, or is
that one year?
Chief O'Brien: It's going to take more than one year to do what this grant is giving us to do.
Chairman Plummer: Alright.
139 September 15, 1999
Chief O'Brien: Probably...
Chairman Plummer: Gang resistance.
Chief O'Brien: Probably about three years.
Chairman Plummer: Is that three hundred and fifty-six thousand ($356,000) for one year or more than
one year?
Chief O'Brien: That's a one year.
Chairman Plummer: OK East Little Havana Youth Diversion Program, Neighborhood Youth Justice.
Chief O'Brien: One year.
Chairman Plummer: Miami Love, another half a million dollars. Police Dive Team, that's one year, and
so we have a fire department dive team, but we need one in the police department also.
Chief O'Brien: Our people are, out on the water every day, and we need that dive aspect to provide the
services to our marine community.
Major Longueira: That's the River Project, it's really not for divers.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I would like for you to come back and tell me the entire total bottom
dollar that the police department is operating on. Because it's looking like about a hundred and fifty
million dollars ($150,000,000).
Chief O'Brien: No.
Chairman Plummer: Thirty-four million ($34,000,000) in just one segment of grants alone.
Chief O'Brien: That's not.
Mr. Warshaw: But that's not operating dollars this year.
Chairman Plummer: I understand numbers. The numbers are here. This doesn't include the VIP
programs, it doesn't include the court money that you derive from the Court's program, all of those are
just, I am asking the Manager...
Mr. Warshaw: Those dollars don't go into the police budget. They go into the general fund revenue, so
VIP dollars.
Chairman Plummer: Where does the money come from on the two-thirds, one-third of the Court traffic
citations?
Mr. Warshaw: It goes into the general funds.
Chairman Plummer: And how much overtime do you pay to get that amount of money? Ali, ha, a lot of
money. A lot of money in overtime. OK, look guys, you know we have been here now for Joe Sanchez's
thirty minutes he wanted, six hours. Now, at this particular point we are trying to find a way to reduce,
140 September 15, 1999
• 0
and I am still looking because I have not found the first one. Now, you guys don't have to sit here and
listen all day to those phone calls like we do, OK I am saying to you we are going to find a way, if for
this vote. I don't know about the rest, but for this vote, we are going to find some ways. Now, some
people better start getting as Commissioner Teele likes to say, innovative, because I haven't heard one
yet, and I don't want anybody up here saying, yes, Commissioner, I think the people of this City deserve a
break. I have not heard that yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any questions from the Commissioners? Chief, thank you. Public Works. Jim
Kay. Increase of two point one percent (2.1%), a hundred and eighty-seven thousand four hundred and
ninety-four dollars ($187,494.00), COLA, anniversary, longevity step_ and staging. Jim, I am going to ask
you the same questions I have asked everyone. Did your department use all its funds in this FY year?
Mr. Jim Kay (Public Works Director): I really don't know, I would have to say yes, that we did not use
all of our funds. I really don't know how much it was, or what that figure was.
Commissioner Sanchez: Jim, if you were asked to cut the budget by three percent (3%) in your
department, how would you do it?
Mr. Kay: If the City Manager asked me to cut, I would have to look at positions, I would have to look at
personnel. Public Works is really a end -of -the -line -department. We provide direct services to
neighborhoods, and to individuals, by the way of laying down new asphalt, fixing sidewalks, cleaning
storm sewage, trimming trees, mowing grass and so on. We also have another aspect of our department
which is to provide professional architectural and engineering services to other departments. We are right
now, replacing all the exterior ramps on the Orange Bowl, this is for Conferences and Conventions, we
also have been working an awful lot the last several years in the marinas. Not to mention the Virrick
Gym and also the Tower Theater, and also replacing sidewalks in downtown Miami. So...
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Any questions from the Commissioners?
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, speaking of the Orange Bowl, what have we done about following up on the
paint contract?
Mr. Kay: That right now is a matter with the City Attorney at this point. I can't really tell you, and. I
don't know if I should.
Chairman Plummer: Can somebody tell me where we are?
Mr. Kay: I don't know if I really can comment at this point.
Chairman Plummer: We filed a lawsuit?
Mr. Kay: I believe he gave us permission to do so.
Chairman Plummer: Well who the hell knows?
Mr. Maxwell: I will get that information for you in a few minutes.
Chairman Plummer: Do you know?
141 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Jim, meanwhile, does the timetable of October for many sidewalk repairs still
is on, or do you expect any delays because of contracts or Oversight Board delays, or law department
delays?
Mr. Kay: You are referring to what now, I am sorry?
Commissioner Regalado: Sidewalks repair, most of your memos to the Manager, to us and to me, you
talk about October when there is a need for sidewalk repair. So, is it because October is the month that
you expect to have contracts already approved, or...?
Mr. Kay: We expect to award, I know we expect to award a contract in the month, in the last meeting of
October for the downtown sidewalk replacement project. It's a one point million dollar project whereby
we are going to be putting in a lot of decorative sidewalk in downtown Miami colorized sidewalks in
downtown Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: No, but I mean, I am talking about neighborhoods. Is it October...
Mr. Kay: We have, right, we do have a sidewalk project on call. The citywide sidewalk rebuilding and
that, actually we have one that's underway right now, and we have a roads area median replacement of
the curb, that was supposed to be awarded at the meeting of yesterday. I guess it will be awarded next
Tuesday.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort, you are recognized.
Vice Chairman Gort: Jim Kay of the funds in your budget here, what percentage would go to fixing work
that was not performed by the other developers, or operators within the City, for example, N.W. 11`h
Street, between 27`h Avenue to 30`h Avenue, you have Water Management going there, dig all kinds of
holes and we have had to go back and repair some of those. We had the same thing on N.W. 17`h Avenue,
and these are repairs that have been done by private operators and sub -contractors, and somehow it
doesn't get done, and then we have to go and do it.
Mr. Kay: What happens there is that, and I can't tell you exactly when those people came in to get their
permits, right now, we are implementing a bond program. All contractors that get work, that come in to
Public Works for a permit also have to post a bond now for the street work, so that we can guarantee that
if the contractor either doesn't do it fast enough, or he leave the job, we go in there and with the bond we
complete the work.
Vice Chairman Gort: Be it the County, the State, they all have to pull a permit?
Mr. Kay: Well, the County, we have been trying to... we haven't got it yet from Miami -Dade County and
I understand there are one of our worst offenders. We are trying to work.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's correct. I mean, we pay, I think my taxes to the County is about five
($500.00) or six ($600.00) hundred dollars.
Mr. Kay: I guess, I hope. you can appreciate the efforts we have been trying to work through the County
Manager's Office. From our City Manger to the County Manager and we have been working very hard to
get these repairs completed on our City's streets.
Chairman Plummer: Can I suggest that you go on Tigertail in front of Jack Luft's house and look at the
four foot square that has sunk down and test my front end..
142 September 15, 1999
Mr. Kay: They are in the process of repairing these. Progress has been kind of slow. But...
Vice Chairman Gort: What you are saying is the County does not have to pull a permit with the City.
Mr. Kay: The County does have to pull a permit, it's just that they did not have to post a bond when this
work was originally done. For future work, we are making them post a bond, that's what I am saying.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you are recognized.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you very much Commissioner Sanchez. I am extremely, warmly disposed
toward the Public Works Department as a general premise, I am very, very disappointed that its seems
that our Public Works Department literally has so much to do all the time, that they really can't plan and
get ahead of some of the big issues that we are dealing with. Help me understand, what happened to the
Burle Marx Project that was a major public works in-house initiative that someone in Washington once
told me that the money just seems to be going out the window. Has that project design ever been
completed?
Mr. Kay: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Was it done in-house?
Mr. Kay: The project design was not done in-house, it was eventually done by the Florida Department of
Transportation. That's where the Burle Marx Project that's in place right now that's already been
constructed.
Commissioner Teele: I thought there was a Berle Marx segment from about 151h Street to downtown.
Mr. Kay: There is a Berle Marx segment that was done by Burle Marx, by the designer. We have a copy
of his plans with the actual hard design and civil plans, were not drawn up by anyone, but it's been sort of
a piecemeal project. I hate to say it, but it's been a sort of piecemeal project, which is being done by the
adjacent owners, as they hold permits from the City, and it has been a requirement for the adjacent owner
all along.
Chairman Plummer: We use a mask and a gun.
Commissioner Teele: How many companies do you use under miscellaneous agreements or under
specific task orders that relate to projects that we're doing in the area of strict roadway drainage, water,
sidewalks? I'm not talking about the projects, for example, that you'd be doing at the Parks Department
or somewhere else. Do you have outside staffs that you're utilizing, outside contractors or consultants
that you're utilizing in any of the design work, or is that work.all done in-house?
Mr. Kay: Most of our work has been done in-house. But we — it's our intention to utilize the engineering
firms that have recently gone through the competitive selection process in the future. And this is going
to be presented to you on the 28`h of this month.
Commissioner Teele: But, Jim, you told us that a year ago. I mean, a year ago, you told us that we were
going to be utilizing outside firms. I mean — and I take you at your word. But again, it seems to me that
there is this almost obsession about trying to hire people and do everything in-house. I mean, there are
going to be — there is no department that has more peaks and valleys and transportation dollars than public
works related activities. And it just seems tome that we would have a really good workforce like you
143 September 15, 1999
have, and then we would augment that from time to time with specific contracts where design work can
be done. And I would just ask you to look at that. I'm very, very concerned about how — how much
grant money do you get a year to run your department? I know this is a general fund budget. The
numbers we're looking at in the works in this are general fund. But about how much grant money do you
get a year?
Mr. Kay: We get very little. We don't get any grant money that I'm aware of, other than community
development. But —
Commissioner Teele: You don't get — let me state it this way: How much money have you requested
through the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) process, and through the State transportation
process? How much money are we requesting a year? Let me tell you something. Miami Beach, Hialeah
and Homestead are scratching, fighting, biting, kicking, pinching each other all the time for dollars. You
remember the very public discussion that Mayor Raul Martinez and Commissioner Natasha Milian had
over a road project in Hialeah very recently? I use that not to point out the debate that they had, but to
point out the fact that there is a real tension and fight always with the other cities to get public works or
State DOT (Department of Transportation) dollars. How much money have we requested over the last
year, two years, three years of monies from the MPO, which are our monies, for City of Miami projects?
Mr. Kay: To the best of my knowledge, all MPO projects and dollars requested have been through the
Planning Department. We have not —
Commissioner Teele: I would hope, Mr. Manager, Madam Manager, that in coordination with our
intergovernmental department that we could really begin to engage the MPO process and the Florida
DOT, and look creatively at ways we can request funds, particularly — Let me give you an example,
because I've received a number of calls about this. Mr. Howell, who is a distinguished citizen that I've
known for years called my office today. Have you seen the Venetian Causeway Bridge?
Mr. Kay: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: It is absolutely one of the most beautiful pieces of transportation work I've seen.
Have you seen the approach to the Venetian Bridge there on — what's that? — 15`h Street?
Mr. Kay: It's 15"' Street. Northeast 15`h Streeet.
Commissioner Teele: Have you seen the approach to it?
Mr. Kay: I've —
Commissioner Teele: It looks like something in — out of — it looks like something out of — I don't want
to get the people in Nicaragua, Managua or Haiti mad at me, but it literally looks like something in some
of the back roads of some of these Central American countries. I mean, how could the City of Miami let
the Florida DOT and the County build such a spectacular, beautiful road -- I mean, if you haven't seen
the Venetian Causeway that was just reopened — and Commissioner Plummer, in your district — it is really
a beautiful piece of work and public works. But to just crap all over it with the approach. I mean, that
thing should have trees along there. They should have separated the median. I mean, that's an example
where that may be a City road, or a County road, or a local road, but the bridge, I can assure you, is a
DOT project. And we should have forced them to bring that out at least a block. I mean, I'm not saying
it ought to come out to Biscayne Boulevard, but I am saying between — and quite frankly it's from —
between the Miami Herald there, you know. So it'll - just for good ink, they ought to do it, or we ought
to do it. But who's going to make them do it if we don't make them do it?
144 September 15, 1999
Mr. Kay: Commissioner I — as I said, the MPO dollars that — can I —
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no.
Mr. Kay: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Listen to me, Jim, please. Who's going to hold the DOT and the County
accountable if we don't do it on public works projects? And all that I'm saying is this: It may not be our
job. It may not be our responsibility. But we should be an advocate in that area. And it may very well be
our job. I don't know if 15`h Street and Venetia Causeway is a State road, or if it's a County road. I can
assure you the bridge is a State project. But it just seems to me that why would anybody have potholes?
And you got — Willy, you've been — you know what I'm saying. That's an example of -- what I'm saying
is it's not just "How much money can we get?" We need to leverage our resources. And I've raised this
issue before. I am specifically going to ask the Manager in the budget hearing next week on the 28`h to
bring in an outside consultant, a firm like Post Buckley or a firm. like Keith and Schnarls, or somebody
that does DOT projects all over this State, and determine whether or not what is an appropriate fee
structure for the City of Miami to charge on the licensing of water and sewer projects. I'm telling you
we're leaving a million dollars on the table of permit fees that water — that the Water and Sewer
Department should be paying us for the way they go in there without regard to our roads, without regard
to anything. We've studied — we've talked about this for 18 months. For 18 months, we've talked about
this. I've raised this in every meeting that I've been in when we talk about the budget. And Jim, I don't
blame you. Don't — I'm not laying this on your doorstep. But if the — if you read the City Charter, the
Budget Office and the — the Management and Budget Office really should be on the lead on this thing.
You know, a lot of people don't understand that the Budget Office is not a Budget Office. It is a
Management and Budget Office. And these are the kind of things, you know, that sort of — how do we
enhance the dollars? Because the more money we can collect from other sources is the less money we
have to charge our residents. And I got to tell you something. We need to develop standards that if the —
that when they pull a permit that we don't release that until they fix it back up exactly the way it was or
better. And Mr. Manager, you can drive all over this City, and you can see that. The final and last issue
is this: I am really concerned about what we have done, and I've looked the other way. And I said last
year, "This is the last year I'm going to look the other way." The Solid Waste Department is getting how
much money in storm water utilities?
Mr. Kay: Three and a half million dollars a year.
Commissioner Teele: OK. I am going to be moving in the budget hearing to take that money out of Solid
Waste and to put it in Public Works, and let you give it back to Solid Waste based upon a contract, an
interagency contract. Because I can tell you this, Jim — and J.L. Plummer was there, you were there,
Commissioner Carey was there, Commissioner Diaz De La Portilla was there — when we had the cleanup
and the graffiti paint over there, right off of 95, on the walls over there by the, you know, Peter —
Chairman Plummer: The old RC Building.
Commissioner Teele: What was that? The RC Buildng. And we were covering up the graffiti, and we
opened up one storm water utility. What did we find?
Chairman Plummer: Sixty park parking meters.
Commissioner Teele: Sixty. Not six. Six -zero parking meters. And what I'm telling you is that we're
hearing it all over this City. And I know the Miami Herald and I know the press is saying how great
145 September 15, 1999
service is gotten. And I'm telling you, service is better this year than it was a year ago. It's a quantum
leap better, but we got a long way to go. And unless we stop playing budget games — and I'm blowing
the whistle, OK? — I'm not going to be a party to the deal this year. The money for storm water utilities
cannot be used this year to balance the Solid Waste budget. The money for storm water utilities must be
used to clean up these storm water utilities. And it's a problem all over the City. People are calling and
complaining about the storm water utilities not — the water not going down, that it's backing up. And you
know why it's backing up? It's because it's goo and plugged up in there.
Chairman Plummer: Well, it's more than that.
Commissioner Teele: The County is giving us three million dollars a year to unplug them, and we don't
have a program to unplug them. And so I'm asking you respectfully, when you come back to the budget
hearing next week, in two weeks, come back with a plan to unclog the storm water utilities to the tune of
three million dollars. Now, I would hope that you would use the Solid Waste — I mean the solid work —
the — what is it called? — the Sanitation and Solid Waste Department to do it, because I think that's the
most cost-effective way to do it: But it will not work to just transfer three million dollars over there, and
we don't have a measurement and a test of how many a week, how many a month, how much per — you
know, on an interagency funded thing, because what we're doing, it's not fair to the residents of this City.
And it's -- You know, the fact that the Oversight Board let us get away with it shows that they just want
the budget balanced, too. But it's time we got that money and did what we said we were going to do with
it. That three million dollars in the Solid Waste budget, I would like to see taken out, put in your
department, and if you contract with Solid Waste to do it, fine.
Chairman Plummer: I don't think you can.
Commissioner Teele: Huh?
Chairman Plummer: I don't think you can.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, you can.
Chairman Plummer: Well, but it's more than what you're talking about, because we just went through
this in the northeast. And what they wanted up there, and we have somewhat acquiesced, was street
cleaning, because street cleaning —
Commissioner Teele: J.L., let's don't confuse the issues. Let's don't confuse issues.
Chairman Plummer: I'm not confusing the issue, at all. I'm trying to tell you
what --
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, I'm not talking about street cleaning. We get
Chairman Plummer: You're talking about storm sewer drainage.
Commissioner Teele: We get three million dollars a year —
Chairman Plummer: You're not listening to me. I'm telling you that in the statute that came down, Mr.
Manager, they were ready in the northeast to file a lawsuit that — because their contention was that money
was for street cleaning, which was a part of the overall storm sewer drainage program. Now, we ran into
more problems than just clogged up mains, because when we went up in the northeast on a Saturday
morning at seven o'clock, we found mains that were not dirty, that were not clogged up. The problem
146 September 15, 1999
was, was the grates. The problem was that they have tremendous foliage in the northeast, and the leaves
would go down onto the ground, one inch of rain, all of the leaves would run in, cover up the grates, and
then we had a flooding problem. Your phone was ringing, my phone was ringing because of the fact that
the streets weren't being swept. Their contention and where they were ready to file a lawsuit in the
northeast — Jim, am I correct?
Mr. Kay: Correct.
Chairman Plummer: -- that if we didn't put street sweepers up there as part of that three million dollars,
they were going to file a lawsuit. So it's not just a matter of cleaning grates. It's more than that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, J.L., I don't know any area of Liberty City, Model City, or Little Haiti, or
Overtown that we get — regularly get street sweeping. And I will tell —
Chairman Plummer: They don't.
Commissioner Teele: And I will tell you that that's another issue. And I am willing to concede that street
sweeping is a part, and very well can be a part of the overall program. But that doesn't at all dispute what
I'm saying. What I'm saying that in more cities, first of all, storm water utilities is a function of Street
and Sanitation or Public Works, or the — it can go either way. There is no question about that. There's
many cities that have it under Public Works as have it under Streets and San. (Sanitation). The point is
this: That money should not go to the Solid Waste Department unless there is a specific program to do
those funds with that — and I'm holding and asking that the Public Works Department be designated to
receive all of those funds, and let them contract with Solid Waste to do whatever it is, whether it be streets
cleaning, whether it be sleeve repair, whether it be -- all of the things that are associated with that,
because unless we have some accountability, and some engineers, and some people who are — who
understand the program, that money is going to be used the way it has been used, and that is primarily to
balance the Solid Waste budget. And that's why — the problem we have. The work isn't being done, J.L.
Chairman Plummer: I understand that.
Commissioner Teele: And it's not Solid Waste Department's problem. It's not Public Works' problem.
It's our problem. We need to ensure that the three million dollars is being used to increase and enhance
the drainage and the storm water utilities in this community, which includes, to some extent, street
sweeping, to include maintenance, and it even may include capital activities that need to be done.
Commissioner Regalado: Just one, one brief question, if I may. Jim, any — any progress on the meeting
with the County for the swale area of Southwest 32°d Avenue between 16`h and 19`"? We were told that
there was going to be a meeting between Public Works, and the County, and the City, but we were —
apparently, it never took place. And Danny Alvarez has said that he has funds to help the City out in
building the whole swale area.
Mr. Kay: OK. You're talking about the westerly swale of 32°d Avenue?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Mr. Kay: Yes, with curbing. That's still an active project. I'll have to get back with you on what the
schedule is for that. But that should —
147 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: OK. And the other question is, were you — were you in touch with the South
Florida Water Management during the threat of Floyd, in terms of opening the floodgates? They didn't
inform you?
Mr. Kay: I was not. They didn't contact me, or I didn't contact them. They control that Tamiami Canal
by telemetry, and they're going to control — an area -wide disturbance like that, they are going to control
it, themselves. I don't think —
Commissioner Regalado: I know. But you know and I know that they don't do it. I mean, we have to be
on top of them, because one hour that they delay opening the floodgates, it's a flood situation for Flagami,
no doubt about it. I would like for you to check with them tomorrow, because of Gert, as you know, that
might be another possibility of potential problem.
Mr. Kay: It's critical when they open the gate. Could I just make one statement with regard to the
Venetian Causeway Bridge? We do have an outstanding request with the County and with the MPO for
landscaping improvements to that entranceway. And I would remind you that at Northeast 151h Street,
east of Biscayne Boulevard is a County road. It's in the County's jurisdiction.
Donald A. Warshaw (City Manager): I'd just like to add, if I can, very quickly. We have — and I think
I've sent you copies — put the County, State, the Federal Government on notice of the roads, the swales,
the entrances and exits to expressways. We sent video tapes. We've also set up a program where utilities
and utility contractors have to post cash bonds when they work on our streets, and if they don't put them
back in better shape than they were before they started, we're going to revoke their bonds. And, you
know, this is something where the City has been abused for a lot of years, because nobody has made a
lot of noise about demanding that they do it the right way. So I want you to know, Commissioner Teele
that, you know, I hear you loud and clear, and that we're going to keep doing that to make sure that the
City's streets and residents don't get abused, as we have been.for a long time.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, I strongly recommend that you take some pictures of some of the
worst cases. And I know Chief Martinez can work with you, that you get with our lobbyist and you write
a letter to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate saying you want to come up and
testify in the hearings, the hearings that are going on now about the need to work with DOT, to get them
to address these areas. And let's come up with some specific examples. And I guarantee you, the minute
you file a request to be heard, you will get a whole lot of results. A whole lot of results.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Gort, you're recognized.
Vice Chairman Gort: I have two questions. One is the — my understanding is they have a lot of canals in
Flagami and in the Grapeland side. A lot of canals that used to be cleanup by the County, my
understanding in a memo I received from you all, is the County no longer is going to be able to do that.
And we need to get that resolved, because that's become a health hazard within that district. Now, the
problem that I have is we make certain commitments, and it takes — we will take a decision here, and the
implementation, the gap that exists in time from the implementation, it takes too long. People are paying
taxes every year. They like to see a result immediately. They would like to see the services. Our biggest
problem is — and I had a meeting at the Blue Lagoon, and we had the State, the County, and just about
everybody who has to deal with it, and I think somehow, we need to follow it up. And I think we need to
check with our attorneys, if some those cases are not being done, if we can sue them. I mean, if we have
to take legal banners, I think we should. I think the City needs to take a stand on all this, and the City has
been taking abuse for too long, and we have to stand our ground. I mean, we have to stay and we have to
count. The other thing is I also received a memo from you where I requested a letter to the State for the
intersections that exist in the — in 37`h Avenue and 11`h Street, and all the intersections from the DOT. My
148 September 15, 1999
understanding is that the reason they were not able to maintain them was because they didn't have the
manpower or the budget to do so, and that they would do it maybe once or twice a month. I have people
that are willing to take over and do the maintenance from the private sector. So I need for you guys to get
together with the DOT and with the State of Florida, and give us a contract where we can get someone
from the private sector to put up a sign saying this is being kept by McDonald's, Burger, whoever. OK?
Mr. Kay: OK. I just would like, Commissioner, just to make one other statement. The Public Works
Department is about eight or nine hundred thousand dollars away from being a completely proprietary
department. We are funded by storm water utility fees, local option gas tax fees, our engineering
services, and fees we get from permits. So budget is nine point one million, and we have about eight
point three million that comes from other sources, so that we're not a drain on the ad valorem tax base.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah, but I want you to understand that the people that pay taxes, they're not
seeing the results. I mean, whenever it rains — and I'll take you to Flagami — we get public swimming
pools there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Jim, thank you so much.
Mr. Kay: OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Purchasing, Ms. Carter, an increase of twelve point three percent. A hundred
and three thousand one hundred and fifty-nine, COLA (Cost of Living Allowance) and anniversary,
longevity step and other personal costs.
Judy Carter (Director, Purchasing Dept.): Yes, sir. If you'd take a look at our operating expenses, we
chose to act before you requested any decrease. If you see those figures, we have decreased our operating
expenses by forty-five percent, already.
Commissioner Sanchez: Increase or decrease?
Ms. Carter: Decrease.
Commissioner Sanchez: Decrease.
Ms. Carter: I cannot afford to decrease anything more from my operating expenses. We are bare -boned.
Commissioner Sanchez: So it's no, you can't reduce your budget?
Ms. Carter: I cannot reduce operating expenses. If the Manager asks that we reduce, I will have to cut
positions. But I will say this to you: We already know there is a backlog in procuring goods and services
with the requirements that we have to follow for buying. We have a bid limit of forty-five hundred
dollars. We have a lot of bids, over forty-five hundred dollars. If we cut any position, then you're talking
about a further backlog that currently exists of 30 days. I want to see this City be more efficient, and I
need to have the staff, particularly in that formal bid section, so that we can increase more Citywide term
contracts and have standing contracts so that when a department needs a good at any time during the year,
we're in a position to access it, as opposed to waiting for the request.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Ms. Carter. I think that everyone here wants to see this City more
efficient. I think that people, when they watch Channel 9, they see each department director come up
here and say, "No, we can't reduce our budget, this is what we're doing," it sends out a good message out.
You know, for once, they're seeing their director, which they probably never would have met, out in front
149 September 15, 1999
0' 0
of the Commission explaining how justifiable their expenses are, what they're doing, what missions they
have, what are they doing to improve services. I think that's a positive role. So thank you so much.
Ms. Carter: And the other thing I want to add. And maybe I'm talking too much, but why not? I need to
stay up. But also, our local vendor outreach program —
Chairman Plummer: You're going to be here by yourself.
Commissioner Sanchez: We're going to have breakfast soon.
Ms. Carter: -- means something to me. I don't want to see it go. I'm not through with it yet.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Any other questions for Ms. Carter? Hearing none, thank you, Ms.
Carter.
Ms. Carter: I saw you walking away. I didn't pray enough.
Commissioner Teele: You know, actually, Ms. Carter, the thing that I'm really concerned about is how
we can insure prompt payments to vendors. What are your priorities for this year --
Chairman Plummer: It's finance.
Commissioner Teele: -- coming up?
Ms. Carter: As it relates to prompt payment, or as it relates to procurement?
Vice Chairman Gort: Prompt payment and small businesses.
Commissioner Teele: What are your Department —
Ms. Carter: Goals?
Commissioner Teele: -- goals?
Ms. Carter: Well, as I shared with Commissioner Sanchez earlier, my desire is to increase by twenty
percent the number of term contracts. We have a lot of —
Commissioner Teele: The number of what?
Ms. Carter: Term contracts. Those are' contracts that are for a year, with the option to renew. They
basically are as needed contracts so that when departments have the need, the contract already exists.
Commissioner, do know that we are piggybacking contracts left and right. You have seen them before
this Commission. We go anywhere from the State of Florida to out of the State of Florida. But even in
spite of that, we are still witnessing an increase of thirty percent in our formal bids.
Commissioner Teele: Two issues. The State of Florida has a — under the Department of Labor — has a
Statewide minority certification program.
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
150 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: The City of Tampa is an affiliate, the City of Fort Lauderdale, the City of
Jacksonville. You get my drift?
Ms. Carter: And I'd like to respond to your drift as it relates to MWBE's (Minority and Women Business
Establishments).
Commissioner Teele: Well, it's a little bit more technical than it seems. But, you know, one of the things
we've got to try to figure out is how can Miami be a part of the mainstream of the State? And when we
have all these local rules, then this serves as a barrier and an impediment. I would very much like for you
to get with the Secretary of Labor in Tallahassee, and determine why the City of Miami should not be a
part of this reciprocal arrangement that they have, which is a Statewide arrangement.
Ms. Carter: Sir, I — let me comment on this. And as I shared to you before, I fully understand what you
were saying, and don't object at all to what you're saying. However, this City Commission several years
ago passed an ordinance that suggested that — and please allow me to make this statement.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I just want to know this: How many members of the City Commission that
voted on that ordinance are here now?
Ms. Carter: I believe it would have been Commissioner Plummer —
Commissioner Teele: I didn't — don't — I didn't ask you to call any names.
Ms. Carter: One. It would have been one.
Chairman Plummer: Two.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Ms. Carter: Two, two.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Ms. Carter: But let me state what it is.
Commissioner Teele: So go ahead and make your point.
Ms. Carter: Yes, yes. The --
Commissioner Teele: But let's don't make this personal.
Ms. Carter: No. And I'm not making it personal. What I want to share with you is that there is a
standing legislation that I abide by. When this Commission is prepared to change it, then, of course, we'll
abide by that new legislation. This legislation essentially says this: That in order for a minority or
woman -owned business to become certified with the City of Miami, and it is for a construction -related
service, that the fifty-one percent owner must also be the qualifying agent. That does not exist with the
State of Florida. That does not exist with Dade County. So as a result we must —
Commissioner Teele: Well, hold it.
Chairman Plummer: But tell the reason why.
151 September 15, 1999
Ms. Carter: We must — well I don't want —
Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Tell — no, no. Put it on the record.
Commissioner Teele: What I don't want to do is — I don't really want to —
Ms. Carter: No. What I'm saying, there's —
Commissioner Teele: What I would like for you to do —
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: -- is within the next two Commission meetings, come to this Commission meeting
with an outline of the proposal, and a resolution sponsored by me, which may not even get a second, to at
least advance the discussion. OK? And that's the time to have that kind of debate. But the point that I
want to make is this: This will allow businesses that are certified and residents of the City of Miami to be
able to do work all over the State of Florida. And the State of Florida, Governor Jeb Bush -- just so that
it's out on the table, and this is not a political statement — has directed the Purchasing Director of the State
of Florida to increase minority participation from what it has been for the last ten years under the last two
Governors. It has been one half of one percent. Jeb Bush's directive is to increase it to five percent,
which means that is like a multiplier of ten times. And so a business in Miami will have an opportunity to
participate in billions of dollars of business opportunities if we are a part of that buying chain. It's pretty
clear to us, if you realize that seventy-five percent of the City budget is going for — what?
Ms. Carter: Salaries, I think.
Commissioner Teele: Salaries and overhead — salaries and expenses. Which means only five percent of
our whole budget is going for bidding, bid activities, five to seven percent. I mean it doesn't -- So seven
percent of four hundred million dollars is twenty-eight million dollars. That's the whole opportunity here.
We need to look beyond the City boundaries for our residents, and get them in the economic game. And I
— that's my goal as it relates to your department this coming year. I would like to at least have a fresh
discussion on that.
Ms. Carter: That would be fine.
Commissioner Teele: And if you need more time — but let's have all of the pros and all of the cons so that
we could do that. And the only thing that I would ask you and the Manager to consider —
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: -- is that I would ask you to consider as an objective for this year —
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: -- creating a program in which our vendors can be paid within 30 days or whatever
the City standard is, and to create a system whereby anybody can — can, you know, have a hotline and
solve those payment problems if there is a payment problem. I would ask you to consider that, because it
doesn't matter if we increase the number of vendors and all of that if we don't pay them. We're just
going to be increasing the number of vendors we're going to put out of business.
152 September 15, 1999
Ms. Carter: Yes, sir. I will be more than happy to consider that. And as I depart, let me let you know
that even though the legislation exists as it is, we have taken — we have made a policy decision that if a
minority woman business vendor is certified by the State of Florida or Dade County, we will
automatically — we will automatically certify them. However, current legislation does not allow us to
automatically certify construction -related contractors.
Chairman Plummer: And the reason that we put that in back in the time that it was instigated was that we
found a man and wife owned a business. Suddenly, overnight, the man was no longer the president of the
company and fifty-one percent owner. The next morning, his wife was president of the company and
fifty-one percent owner, and not qualified by license or any other qualifications. That's why we put it in.
Commissioner Teele: J.L., that may be the case, but what the Director didn't say is that the State rule is
not — doesn't allow that. The State rule says that if you are certified as a minority, then the holder of the
qualification must be a member of the same minority status. So if it's a woman -owned business, the
owner may not have the certificate, but a woman has to be the certificate holder. If it's a Hispanic
business, it may not be the — the Hispanic owner, but it must be a person in that class.
Chairman Plummer: Well, there was the case that said that the certified minority had to be the certificate
holder of the company. It didn't say that they had to be the owner, but it had to be that the female was, in
fact, the certified license holder, which we found was not the case.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Commissioner Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. You're welcome. Judy, thank you so much. Real Estate and Economic
Development, an increase of three point seven percent, almost forty thousand dollars going towards
COLA, anniversary, longevity and other personal — no, correction — COLA, anniversary and longevity.
How are you?
Erdal Donmez (Director, Real Estate and Economic Development) For the record, Erdal Donmez,
Director of Real Estate and Economic Development. Commissioner, as you see on your budget summary,
the personnel expenses actually declined by six thousand dollars which —
Commissioner Sanchez: Erdal, excuse me. First of all, my condolences to you and your family.
Mr. Donmez: Appreciate it, sir. We have lowered the personnel expenses in net dollars about = close to
nine thousand dollars. Where we exceeded the expenses are project -related cost increased about, you
know, forty-six thousand dollars. And the total bottom line is we're asking additionally the forty
thousand dollars.
Chairman Plummer: How much real estate did we sell this year, and how much money did it bring into
the City?
Mr. Donmez: The real estate sales is handled by the Asset Management Office, Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: Aren't you the Real Estate Department? And you don't know the answer?
Mr. Donmez: The name of the Department is somewhat confusing.
Chairman Plummer: Obviously.
153 September 15, 1999
Mr. Donmez: Obviously. I'm sorry. The real estate aspect of my department is the joint private/public
partnership of developing City -owned properties, whether vacant properties or underutilized, you know,
properties. Initially, the Commission asked a number of questions to Asset Management with regards to
Watson Island, you know, developments and Dinner Key Convention Center, you know, development.
Those are the type of the real estate developments, which my department is responsible for. In addition to
that, I'm responsible for the neighborhood and the Citywide economic developments.
Chairman Plummer: When is the RFP (Request for Proposals) for Dinner Key and this complex going
out?
Mr. Donmez: Commissioner, if we didn't have FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) issues,
we would have issued the RFP in October. But we have to wait until the FEMA issue is clear. This
particular project is probably the largest project the City has ever initiated. We're looking at a quarter of
a billion dollars project, and we need to do the due diligence, you know, right, and we don't face issues at
the end. We're trying to predict everything and doing the surveys, and title issues, and complete, you
know, due diligence, so we can provide a package to the developer, free and clear, you know, of these
issues.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Plummer, would you yield?
Chairman Plummer: That doesn't answer my question. My question is —
Commissioner Teele: Would you yield?
Chairman Plummer: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: Why don't you answer his question?
Chairman Plummer: Ha-ha. They like to editorialize.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, look, he asked you a simple question. What does it take? You said there's
FEMA issues.
Mr. Donmez: That's correct, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Who's working on the FEMA issues? Where is the audit — where are the
paperwork, and who in Washington, on our behalf, is working on this, and how long have they been
working on it?
Mr. Donmez: With the assistance of the Building Department, we retained a consultant with expertise in
the FEMA issues. We're looking at 30 to 45 days, you know, completion. That's going to put
approximately two months in a delay in the issues of the RFP. If that's the case, we're looking at —
Commissioner Teele: Did the Commission approve this consultant?
Mr. Donmez: It's under forty-five hundred dollars, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Did the Commission approve — what is it? One o'clock?
Mr. Donmez: You don't have to. It's under forty-five —
154 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: No, sir, they did not.
Commissioner Teele: Did the Commission approve the consultant?
Mr. Donmez: No. No.
Chairman Plummer: And my question still remains, when do we anticipate going out for the RFP on this
complex?
Mr. Donmez: Towards the end of this year.
Chairman Plummer: That means December?
Mr. Donmez: Most likely. Maybe even beginning of January.
Chairman Plummer: OK. And the Parrot Jungle?
Commissioner Teele: Before you go to the Parrot Jungle, I want to be on record, Erdal, as supporting the
fact that we have to do this right, and we can't bulldoze over those issues. But the real issue here is sort
of the same issue that I have with the vouchers in Washington for these people on 61 t Street. We have
got to get this City engaged in a proactive lobbying to represent our interests. And these numbers are too
big to squirrel around with. I mean, the County has got the firm that Jimmy Lee Whit — uh — you know,
they got his high school classmate or something over there. That's how the County has resolved all of the
FEMA issues. They can go right in and see the man tomorrow, with Hurricane Floyd about to go. And if
we need to sit down with the County and buy off of their purchase order and use their FEMA consultant,
whoever they are, we need to do it. But what I'm saying is that we have the resources available, and this
Commission is saying we want to get it done. And we're not looking for reasons why not to do it, Erdal.
We're looking for shortcuts. Let's just do it, and have a sense of urgency.
Chairman Plummer: The Parrot Jungle?
Mr. Donmez: The Parrot Jungle issue is — Development is waiting for the County Commission to —
Chairman Plummer: What are we doing to assist Parrot Jungle in securing the County?
Mr. Donmez: Yes, sir. We are with the Parrot Jungle team at every County Commission in the County,
County official, you know, meetings. The County Commission is going to look at the final approvals
next week on Tuesday, September 21"
Chairman Plummer: Well, that's fish or cut bait.
Mr. Donmez: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Mr. Warshaw: And I've been speaking with Merrett Stierheimand working out some issues of concern
they had, but I think we're right where we want to be right now. It's just around the corner.
Chairman Plummer: OK. The thing that scares me, when you start talking a quarter of a billion dollars in
Dinner Key, immediately, the danger flag goes up and reminds me of the Knight Center — OK? — that you
become so ambitious, so ambitious in your ideas — because I've seen some of the programs, and I'm sure
others up here have seen it, also — an ice skating rink. Hey, don't tell me no. I saw it on their plan. Now,
they might have deleted it since then, but I saw an ice skating rink. I saw a raft museum.
155 September 15, 1999
Mr. Donmez: We have't seen any of those, Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: Well, then you haven't been looking or you have not been approached by the same
people that I have.
Dena Bianchino (Assistant City Manager): Commissisoner, we have hired a design consultant that you
approved from New York City —
Chairman Plummer: Right.
Ms. Bianchino: -- who is putting together an urban design plan for the project. There is no ice skating
rink. We have met with the community at least three times already on the plan. We're very concerned
about the residents of the Grove and their feelings about the project. We have also met with at least eight
very serious developers, very serious developers with money who are —
Chairman Plummer: Three have been to see me.
Ms. Bianchino: They're very interested in this project. We are not going to get stuck with another
Knight Center. This is a private development on public land. We're not — we're leasing our land, and
we're going to get money out of it.
Chairman Plummer: I understand, as long as they're making money. We said that out at the Knight
Center, OK? You're talking about a plan that takes this building, as I recall? No?
Ms. Bianchino: This building is not involved, sir.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Then you — you know, you better understand with some of these others that are
going to be proposed developers, this turns — this building turns into a high-rise, OK?
Ms. Bianchino: This site is not even part of the RFP, Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: OK. That is not what these developers who came to see me are of the
understanding.
Commissioner Teele: Are they registered? Are they registered?
Chairman Plummer: I didn't ask if they're registered or not. You know, you know two out of the three
very, very well.
Commissioner Teele: Well, they didn't talk to me.
Chairman Plummer: They did to me. And I'll tell you something --
Commissioner Teele: Well —
Vice Chairman Gort: Nobody has talked to me. I mean —
Chairman Plummer: The last development that I saw envisioned two hundred and twenty-five million
dollars. That's what they are anticipating that they —
156 September 15, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: It does not include this building at all.
Chairman Plummer: OK. To them, it does.
Commissioner Teele: We'll throw it in.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, right. Sink it.
Commissioner Teele: If they'll take the Knight Center.
Vice Chairman Gort: If they put two twenty-five, yeah.
Chairman Plummer: Sink it, sink it. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, one question. How long has the office, the new Office of Real Estate
been functioning, Erdal?
Mr. Donmez: I believe the appropriations ordinance was passed in May of this year. So approximately
five, five months.
Commissioner Regalado: Five months.
Mr. Donmez: That's correct. Officially, yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: Do — Mr. Manager —
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I would like to know how much property was sold this year, and the
revenue, amount of revenue that was anticipated by the City.
Ms. Bianchino: We didn't sell any property this year, and there was no property in the budget for sale.
The Oversight Board no longer allows the sale of property to be included in our budget.
Chairman Plummer: How much did we get last year, then, from sale of real estate?
Ms. Bianchino: We sold about forty million dollars worth.
Chairman Plummer: And we had no accumulated fund balance at the end of the year after selling forty
million dollars worth of real estate?
Ms. Bianchino: Well, the problem was that the Oversight Board required that the proceeds from the FEC
(Florida East Coast) sale be set aside for blue ribbon initiatives, so it couldn't be carried forward as a fund
balance. It's still set aside as part of the strategic initiatives that Commissioner Teele referred to earlier.
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
157 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, again, I'm not certain of the relationship between the conventions
and the marina, and this, and Asset Management, and this department. I mean, it seems to me that it — it
sounds good, but there's a lot of people doing some of the same things. I would like for you to give me,
please, a work plan or a discussion — not anything concrete, Mr. Manager, but at least a concept in the
context of the Parks Department. And the discussion about trying to really create public/private
partnerships, Erdal talked, just talked about public/private partnerships. I would have thought that the
marine, convention people and the Asset Management would — but it seems to me that you got all three of
them, you know, with some overlap there. It seems to me that a big issue is marketing. It seems to me
that a big, big issue in the parks issue is the marketing, being able to know who the people are and get to
the people, like the convention center, tourism and that. But it also seems to me that when you talk about
public/private partnerships and putting deals together, this real estate, I don't want to solve the issue, but I
do want to try to signal and flag the fact that I am very, very serious about changing the way we do
business in the Parks Department. And I'd like to know next week on the 20`h how you would envision
these three or four departments that may have some overlay or overlap, how would you envision us all
working together with the City Attorney --
Mr. Warshaw: I'll get you that.
Commissioner Teele: -- to get that done, please.
Commissioner Regalado: I haven't— I didn't finish. I couldn't finish. But just very briefly. The reason I
asked, Erdal, is because I was going to say exactly what Commissioner Teele said. I don't understand the
difference between your department, who was created by the Manager — and that was a controversy —
without the knowledge of the Commission and Asset Management, Planning -- Now, they're telling us
that Planning and Zoning has to be together, because of vision that we need for the City. Then you come
in, and you have also vision. And Asset Management manages the property, the City property. What is
the difference? What is the big difference here?
Ms. Bianchino: Asset Management is responsible for maintaining the inventory of City properties. In
other words, keeping track of all the properties, doing an annual —
Commissioner Regalado: No, it's not. No, it's not, because Asset Management runs or sets the prices,
for instances for the Artime, or for that matter, for any property that you have in the City.
Ms. Bianchino: I didn't finish. OK? Asset —
Commissioner Regalado: No, but, Dena, I just want to know the difference.
Ms. Bianchino: Well, I'm trying to explain it. Asset Management is responsible for maintaining the
inventory of City property, for coming to the Commission every single year and letting you know which
properties are declared surplus and should be either leased out or sold. Asset Management is also
responsible for all revocable permits and licenses for the use of City property. That is why Asset
Management is involved in the Manuel Artime Center. They do all the licensing and permitting for the
agencies to occupy the center. The operation of facilities such as the Orange Bowl, the Knight Center, the
marinas, all the operating facilities are handled by Conventions — Christina Abrams' outfit.
Commissioner Teele: What's the name of it?
Mr. Warshaw: Conferences, Conventions and Marinas.
Commissioner Teele: That's a mouthful.
158 September 15, 1999
Ms. Bianchino: They handle all operational operations that bring income into the City. Asset
Management also does all the licenses for activities in the parks. So any time there is an agreement with
someone to use a park building on a permanent or semi -permanent basis, it's done by Asset Management.
Mr. Warshaw: And Conferences and Conventions also is involved in marketing. They're responsible for
the leasing, the renting of those facilities. So part of their job is — and we want to enhance that, and of
course, there's a cost associated with that — to market our facilities, including the Manuel Artime Center,
including the Orange Bowl, the Knight Center and —
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, you know, I don't have a problem in staying here, because I got
to go to work around four a.m., so I don't have a problem at all. But what you're doing is you're
confusing it more, because I just asked what's the difference. There is no difference. I mean, you're
telling me that Asset Management does licenses, and this, and that, and that Economic Development or
Real Estate does another thing, and that Christina does another thing. But what I'm saying is that you
have three departments that, to me, that I'm not a professional, I think that they are doing most similar
thing, if not the same thing. And I just want to know the difference. Why do you have three departments
when you have Planning with a vision, Economic and Real Estate with a vision, Asset Management
running the City properties? I'm just asking, what's the difference? Because, you know, Mr. Manager,
when we leave here, you're going to be told that you're going to have to do some cutting, I hope. And
I'm just saying that what you have here, it's a government that keeps growing and growing. And I know
that we have to do a lot of things for the future, for the long term, but, you know, we want to do
something for now for the people. And this is why I was asking, what is the difference? I know the
difference between Police and Fire, but I don't quite get the difference between what Erdal does, what
Lori does, and what Planning does.
Ms. Bianchino: If you would like, I'd be happy to meet with you before the next Commission meeting
and review it. Also, as a part of what Commissioner Teele requested in regard to the Parks Department,
we can do perhaps a more clear explanation. I just did want to clarify one thing for the record, and that is
that the establishment of Real Estate and Economic Development was not an increase in budget. It was a
splitting of a department. So this isn't a new department. It's a new department, but didn't require new
money.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. No, no. No, excuse me. Excuse me. It was an increase, because
Erdal was brought from the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), right?
Ms. Bianchino: No, no, no. Planning — Erdal used to work at the CRA. That has nothing to do with this
area.
Commissioner Regalado: Right. And then to Planning.
Ms. Bianchino: No. Planning and Development was split. Planning was separate, and Development
became Real Estate and Economic Development.
Commissioner Regalado: Uh-huh.
Ms. Bianchino: So it's not new —
Commissioner Regalado: But don't tell me that there is no increase, because some people were added,
and he had a salary increase. I mean —
159 September 15, 1999
Ms. Bianchino: But we — no, I can — I'd be happy to show you the budget.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, you did. I saw the order.
Ms. Bianchino: But we took money and we divided it, so I'd be happy to share that with you before the
next budget hearing. We just split the department. I'd be happy to show you the numbers.
Commissioner Regalado: I still don't seethe difference. But —
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, we can address that later on. Why don't we move ahead.
Commissioner Teele: But before you do, Mr. — Commissioner Sanchez —
Commissioner Sanchez: Teele, go ahead, you're recognized.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you. I think that really is the essence of what we're here for. I mean, it's
my intention to approve the Manager's reorganization as a part of the budget. But it's also very clear to
me that there is some substantial overlap and overlay in the way this is being laid out, particularly when
we're trying to look at how we can save money. I don't have any problems entertaining what
Commissioner Regalado is saying. And let's talk about, Mr. Budget Director, presenting us an alternative
budget that takes those three departments and makes them one, and takes all the personnel, and all of the
dollars, and puts it under one department and let's see how that works out for a year or so. And I'll tell
you why. GSA (General Services Administration), which is a very recognized agency of the Federal
Government and the State Government, normally has all of the functions we're talking about. The more
you — the more you talk about it, the more you're defining a classic GSA. If you go get an organizational
chart, the only thing GSA — the only thing that's not in here is purchasing. And GSA normally handles
purchasing. I've never seen where purchasing is a separate department. I'm not saying that it doesn't
work, but when you've got a budget that is as small as ours, when you recognize that seventy-five percent
of our budget is personnel and less than five percent, six percent is literally going to be the purchasing of
anything, I mean, you're really — we're really stretching this thing by keeping this organization so flat.
And I'm just not sure, Mr. Manager. And again, we need to have this discussion on the NET
(Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Offices, which Commissioner Plummer has always led. Why do we
have to have thirteen net offices and those kinds of things? A part of what we're talking about is making
the City more streamlined, reduce — looking for ways we can cut costs. I mean, you got — every one of
these things talks about personnel functions. Every department talks about personnel functions and these
things. So you've got three personnel functions, three purchasing functions, three — all of the things that
are associated with the department that may very well be streamlined. The final point on this as it relates
to Commissioner Regalado's point that I'm in agreement with in principle is I hope that somebody has
reviewed the audit and management review that the County did on why the County felt very strongly —
and the County doesn't have all the answers that Building and Zoning — that Planning and Zoning don't
go together, and the built-in conflict, and the problem of lack of check and balance intention that creates
the kinds of problems that we read about. And there was a very long report done. The County had
Planning and Zoning in the same department for twenty years, and split it open after they got into all of
the issues relating to corruption. And there was a very real report issue that those two things don't really
go together, because they tend, quite frankly, to eliminate a check and balance. I only say that as
something that you — I would hope that you'd look at before the next budget hearing.
Commissioner Sanchez: Hearing no other questions, thank you. Well, I forgot to ask you what I've
asked everybody. Are you willing to cut your budget?
Mr. Donmez: The answer is no. Thank you.
160 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: And if you were told to reduce your budget by three percent, where would you
get it out of?
Mr. Donmez: Well, the only place I could reduce is the project cost. And those are the type of costs, you
know, reimbursed by the developers. So that's not really to our advantage to cut them.
Chairman Plummer: Let me ask you a question.
Mr. Donmez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: If you were in private business, and you had an income of one point three and you
were spending two point six, what would you do?
Commissioner Sanchez: Fold.
Commissioner Teele: Go get a job with government.
Chairman Plummer: No, I want to know. What would you do?
Mr. Donmez: I wouldn't be in business for too long, you know.
Chairman Plummer: Huh?
Mr. Donmez: I wouldn't be in business for too long, sir.
Chairman Plummer: You know there's some people saying that about the City, don't you?
Mr. Donmez: Yeah.
Chairman Plummer: Huh? Because it — you know, in the private sector, when you're running your own
private business, you don't have to worry about a thing called profit. In the private sector, between the
amount you take in and your expenses, there's a thing called profit. In government, you don't have to
worry about that. But we're at a level, as Commissioner Sanchez says, where we're taking in one point
three and we're spending two point — what?
Commissioner Sanchez: Four. Four.
Chairman Plummer: -- two point four. You know what that is? That's a straight beeline to hell for
bankruptcy. Something's got to give, my friend. Something has got to give.
Commissioner Sanchez: If this was a corporation, the shareholders would have sued us a long time ago.
Chairman Plummer: They'd have got rid of us.
Commissioner Sanchez: We would have folded a long time ago.
Chairman Plummer: You'd have never stood up and said that answer in front of the board of directors.
It's losing money.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you so much, Erdal.
161 September 15, 1999
Mr. Donmez: Thank you.
Commissioner Sanchez: Risk Management. My favorite. Risk Management. How are you?
Mario Soldevilla (Risk Management Administrator): Good.
Commissioner Sanchez: An increase of seven point one percent. Two million six hundred and fifty-four,
liability expenses for claims management and (unintelligible). Apparently, some of that money went to
close the seven hundred or eight hundred or something cases you have closed.
Mr. Soldevilla: That's correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. We don't need to get into it. I just need to ask you if you had the
opportunity to — or were able to reduce your budget, would you cut your budget?
Vice Chairman Gort: Name and department.
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, if I was told that I had to reduce my budget.
Vice Chairman Gort: Name and department.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's next.
Mr. Soldevilla: Let me — I'm sorry. This is Risk Management, Mario Soldevilla. Let me put the — our
department in perspective. First of all, we have a thirty-nine point nine million dollar budget. However,
of that, thirty-five million is for claims payment. One point eight million is for insurance that we buy for
— commercial insurance policies for the City. And one point one million is for the reserve that we're
supposed to have. That leaves us two million dollars. If I was asked to reduce three percent or four
million, or one point two million, it would have to be from personnel services. There is no other — no
other way. And what that would do is give us a giant step backward in all that we have been able to
accomplish this year.
Commissioner Sanchez: How long do you think it would take this City to pay off the seventy-four
million dollars in long-term liability, having a healthy economy, and having a recurring revenue, a
profitable recurring revenue? How long? You're talking seventy-four million dollars long-term.
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, these are liabilities that have been incurred over —
Commissioner Sanchez: And they're going to continue to —
Mr. Soldevilla: And will continue to be incurred.
Commissioner Sanchez: Right.
Mr. Soldevilla: So what we need to do, and one of the things that we have proposed to do, also, is to first
of all purchase some stock loss insurance so that we can, at a minimum, start knowing what our
maximum liability is going to be. So that's one of the things we want to do.
Commissioner Sanchez: What steps —
162 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: How do you —
Commissioner Sanchez: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Hold on. What —
Chairman Plummer: How do you know that when you don't even know how many cases you've even got
filed?
Mr. Soldevilla: Well we —
Commissioner Sanchez: No, we do. We do have. We know the cases. Of course —
Chairman Plummer: No, you don't. You have cases that have not been filed, which are potential
liabilities.
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, obviously, that's part of the seventy-four million —
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely.
Mr. Soldevilla: -- the seventy-four million dollars.
Chairman Plummer: I can remember back when I went up to the State trying to get a loan for the City of
Miami. At that time, our potential liabilities was eighty-nine million dollars. Doesn't mean that that was
a legitimate number, but that was our potential liability.
Commissioner Sanchez: How many cases have we been able to close during the last six, seven months?
Mr. Soldevilla: We've closed — well, let's see. Originally we started out —
Commissioner Sanchez: We had two thousand seven hundred and ninety-four.
Mr. Soldevilla: We started out with approximately twenty-eight hundred. We got about twenty-one —
two thousand one hundred and seventy right now. So that's a reduction of around seven hundred. But we
have also acquired six hundred and seventy-seven new claims.
Commissioner Sanchez: How many?
Commissioner Regalado: Six hundred and seventy-seven?
Mr. Soldevilla: Six hundred and seventy-seven.
Chairman Plummer: Ha, ha, ha. Is that called one step forward and how many back?
Mr. Soldevilla: Well this is — you know —
Commissioner Sanchez: But wait a minute. You're telling me that right now, as we speak, we only have
two thousand one hundred. And when we first started off, we had two thousand seven hundred and
ninety-three. And we've acquired six hundred?
Mr. Soldevilla: Six hundred and seventy-seven. So we've --
Commissioner Sanchez: So we're back on —
163 September 15, 1999
Mr. Soldevilla: No, we aren't, no. We've closed, you know, thirteen hundred claims, fourteen hundred
claims versus the eight hundred that you think. So we are right now at twenty-one — two thousand one
hundred and seventy. That's what we have open.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but you just said that we acquired in how long of a time?
Mr. Soldevilla: It's for this fiscal year, since October to —
Commissioner Regalado: Six hundred cases.
Mr. Soldevilla: And seventy-seven new claims.
Commissioner Regalado: Why is that?
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, this is — actually, that is a reduction.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, is it going to be like this every year or —
Mr. Soldevilla: Yes. Commissioner, this is actually a reduction.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah. Why not? You fall down, you get a hundred percent right off the bat.
Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. Let me ask a question.
Mr. Soldevilla: Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: With the national average that I've been told — and maybe I've been told wrong, and
that's why I'm asking — the national average in governmental employees, workmen comp. cases are at
about a six percent level.
Commissioner Regalado: That is the national average.
Chairman Plummer: Why is ours eighty percent?
Mr. Soldevilla: It's not eighty percent.
Chairman Plummer: Well, if you have twenty-six hundred — twenty-six hundred claims when you started,
and we have thirty-three hundred employees, maybe it's ninety percent.
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, no, but that's — you know, this — you have twenty-one hundred claims which span a
period of over thirty years. This is not new claims.
Commissioner Regalado: No, it's six hundred, six hundred out of three thousand.
Mr. Soldevilla: Yeah. We had in last year — let's look at last year. Last year, we had eight hundred and
twenty-five claims, new claims. And that's — and comparing it to approximately four thousand
employees —
Commissioner Regalado: That's thirty percent.
164 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Where did we get four thousand employees?
Mr. Soldevilla: Well, because we have to also include not only the general employees, but all the grant
employees, temporary employees. Those are all covered by workers' comp.
Chairman Plummer: But it's still twenty percent.
Mr. Soldevilla: It's about nineteen percent, yes.
Chairman Plummer: All right, call me a liar for one. I mean, but you know, it doesn't make any sense if
-- What is the national average doing that we're not?
Mr. Soldevilla: If you compare it to cities of our size — for example, Tampa has approximately forty-two
hundred employees, and they have around eight hundred claims, which is maybe about twenty percent.
Now, Orlando, for example, has thirty-six hundred employees, and they had a thousand claims during the
year. So we are — we're at that level.
Chairman Plummer: So what you're saying is there is no national average.
Mr. Soldevilla: No. I'm saying that's — you have to compare it to a similar size.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions?
Chairman Plummer: Do we have any group that comes in and does safety for the City? In the Florida
League of Cities, if you want to be covered under workmen's comp., you've got to accept our company
that we send in and do the safety evaluation. Do we have a safety evaluation team or company that we
bring in?
Mr. Soldevilla: No, sir, we don't.
Chairman Plummer: We don't. You see, that is one of the problems. That is one of the problems.
Because in the Florida League of Cities, if you don't accept that team, they will not cover you. I mean,
this even goes to the driving of automobiles, because our record in the City of Miami is atrocious.
Mr. Soldevilla: Mm-hmm.
Chairman Plummer: I mean atrocious. And I tell you, Mr. Manager, I would tell you to contact the
Florida League of Cities through myself or Mr. Gort.
Mr. Soldevilla: Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: And find out what they do, what they're doing through safety teams that we might
want to incorporate in this City to try and reduce the number of claims. Now, I hope that what was
existing before in reference to certain chiropractors who were making a small fortune is being looked at
very closely.
Mr. Soldevilla: Yes, indeed. Yes, indeed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions? Hearing none, thank you. Solid Waste. Mr. Patterson.
Vice Chairman Gort: That's all right. You can stay there.
165 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Patterson, we have to supplement you every year.
Vice Chairman Gort: Keep talking to Tony. Tony, keep him there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, keep him there. Mr. Patterson, your budget increased by two point one
percent, almost four hundred thousand dollars going to. COLA, anniversary and longevity. Mr. "P.," I'm
going to ask you the same question that I've asked everybody, and that is, if able to reduce your budget,
would you be able to reduce your budget?
Clarance Patterson (Director, Solid Waste): Yes. If we're directed to do so by the Manager, we would
have to. But I must tell you what the —
Commissioner Sanchez: Consequences are.
Mr. Patterson: -- impact would be on the level of service that we provide to our citizens. The increase
that you mentioned, of course, is not all in the increase in salary. There's other increases here that we
have no control of, and that is the interlocal agreement with Dade County on tipping fees, which
increased last year, which represents seven hundred and thirteen thousand dollars of that increase. A
hundred and forty thousand of that, of course, is in salary increase negotiated with the unions. And we've
had, interestingly enough, an increase in the tonnage that we collect, since we've been collecting a whole
lot of illegal material around the City. And that's increased to the tune of — which represents some three
hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars. So that represents basically the increase that we have for this
year. We're only requesting three — four new positions this year. And those four new positions only
represent about eighty-five dollars increase in personal services.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. "P," if you were asked to reduce your budget by three percent, how would
you accomplish that?
Mr. Patterson: We would have to look at -- Unlike some of the other departments here, our percentage of
cost is not all in personal services, like some of the others. Only about forty-eight percent of our budget
represents employee cost. So we would have to look at some operating cost, as well as cutting some
employees. One of our big costs, of course, is one, as I said earlier that we don't control, and that's eight
point three million dollars that we pay in disposal fee to Metropolitan Dade County, which we have no
control of. That represents a large chunk of our cost of operating.
Chairman Plummer: Aren't you taking a —
Commissioner Regalado: Are you paying overtime now? I mean, is it a regular policy, Clarance, that
you're paying overtime every day, most every day, every week?
Mr. Patterson: We pay overtime in our trash collection at this time of the year, because we're at the high
growing season, because of rain and other inclement weather. But, no, we've cut overtime in the
department substantially. That's one of the areas that we've been able to cut down on overtime.
Commissioner Regalado: Do we owe anything to the County now in tipping fees, or we are up to date in
the payments?
Chairman Plummer: No. We just paid it.
Mr. Patterson: To my knowledge, we're up to date, yes.
166 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Chairman Plummer: Of the cases —
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions, members?
Chairman Plummer: If I may. Of the cases which the Police Department have caught in the illegal
dumping, have any of those people gone to jail?
Mr. Patterson: I would yield to the Police Department on that. I don't know.
Vice Chairman Gort: I think one.
Chairman Plummer: We don't know?
Raul Martinez (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner, we'll get an answer for you.
Chairman Plummer: OK. I thought that we were not paying the tipping fees. Aren't we still taking stuff
to Broward?
Mr. Patterson: No, sir.
Chairman Plummer: That's no longer?
Mr. Patterson: No longer. We -- You have an interlocal agreement which this Commission entered into
with Metropolitan Dade County, along with all other municipalities in Dade County to take all waste
generated from Dade County to Dade County facility.
Mr. Martinez: And Commissioner, the information from Police is that they know they made arrests, that
they don't have the information of whether they actually went to jail, though. We'll research that for you.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I think that we need to follow up with Fort Lauderdale. I think Fort
Lauderdale has a criminal offense for illegal dumping of jail time. And let me tell you something.
They're very, very strict in what they're doing, and it's showing in the results.
Maj. Joe Longueira (Major, Police Department): Major Joe Longueira, Miami Police. In Lauderdale —
Chairman Plummer: Major? When did you become a Major?
Maj. Longueira: For my birthday.
Chairman Plummer: Whew.
Maj. Longueira: Commissioner —
Chairman Plummer: There goes our budget.
Maj. Longueira: In Fort Lauderdale, if the offense is a misdemeanor — and they do this for like minor
violations, prostitution. Fort Lauderdale has their own jail system, so they have bed space. And they —
167 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. My question had nothing to do with prostitution.
Maj. Longueira: No, but let me understand — let me explain. They have their own jail system for minor —
Chairman Plummer: How about answering my —
Maj. Longueira: -- minor offenses, and that's how they can guarantee they go to jail. Our court system,
there's no bed space in there, so the judges won't put them in jail for minor offenses. And that's how
they get them in jail. They have their own jail system.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, are you done?
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Well, hold on, J.L.
Commissioner Sanchez: Commissioner Teele, you're recognized.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you. Mr. Patterson, how much money do you receive now — well, let's start
with the tipping fee. What did you say your tipping fee number is?
Mr. Patterson: Represents approximately eight point three million annually.
Commissioner Teele: How much of that tipping fee is directly attributable to the collection of household
— household trash, the garbage, as compared to all the other things that we're involved in that we pay
tipping fee on?
Mr. Patterson: Tipping feel represents eight point three million of the eighteen million dollar annual
budget that we have. The trash represents sixty percent of the total volume that we dispose of, and
garbage represents forty percent of that.
Chairman Plummer: How much is the tipping fee per ton now?
Mr. Patterson: It's forty-five dollars and sixty-five cents per ton if you take it to the resource recovery
facility out at 58 h Street. And at the 20th Street transfer station, it is fifty-four dollars and thirty-six cents,
I think there.
Chairman Plummer: Ten dollars a ton.
Mr. Patterson: The difference, yes.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Patterson, what I'm trying to understand on the tipping fee is this: All of these
numbers are being just thrown in. And I think what is happening consistently is that the public and the
Commission may be under the impression that all of this tipping fee is associated with garbage pickup.
That's not true. Some of it is associated with the removal of illegally dumped materials. Some of it is
associated with the maintenance of litter containers throughout the City. About what percentage of the
tipping fee relates to the household pickups, and what percent relates to all else of the eight point three
million?
Mr. Patterson: Garbage and trash collection tipping fee represents about eighty-five percent of the total
cost of disposal.
168 September 15, 1999
•
Commissioner Teele: How much money is in your budget now for the — from the storm water utilities?
Mr. Patterson: I don't know that number off the top of my head. I think that's four hundred and some
thousand dollars.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Budget Director, how much money is in here for storm water
utilities?
Luie Brennan (Acting Budget Director): It's approximately two point eight million dollars.
Commissioner Teele: Two point eight million. So the three million that we were talking about, right?
Are we getting two point eight?
Mr. Patterson: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Teele: Are we getting two point eight million dollars worth of storm water utility services
directly related to that? And how would you quantify it? I would like for you to consider that and give us
a memorandum on that before the next budget hearing, please. Relating to overtime, how much overtime
did you spend actually last year?
Mr. Patterson: I don't have those figures off the top of my head, Commissioner, but I can get them for
you.
Commissioner Teele: Would you mind providing those figures in writing to the Commission?
Mr. Patterson: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: So that we can understand what the overtime budget is. And the point I'm trying
to make is you clearly need to hire more people. And not hiring more people doesn't solve the problem.
In fact, it may cost us more money. And I think if we look at the overtime numbers, it will support the
fact that you need more people. So, I mean, I don't want you to see the overtime request as being
something that's hurtful. I want you to understand that that's your best justification to hire more people.
Mr. Patterson: I can say this to you, Commissioner, that I do know that this year's — this fiscal year's
overtime has dropped significantly, compared to last year's overtime.
Commissioner Teele: Well, it would be helpful if we could have a comparison. And finally, in this
regard, the cleaning of streets. I would like for you to provide by district, by the five district maps by
each of the five districts, I would like for you to provide us the streets that are being cleaned in each
district.
Mr. Patterson: OK.
Commissioner Teele: And the regularity of those cleanings. There are five Commission districts. And
Mr. Clerk, can you all give him some nice sized maps so that we can put them up here?
Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Sure.
Commissioner Teele: And I don't want to know about what we plan next year. I'd like to see what we're
cleaning this year, and what you plan next year.
169 September 15, 1999
1�
Mr. Patterson: OK.
Commissioner Teele: OK? Because it gets down to the fact that if street cleaning money — you see, at
some point — we can all play around with these numbers — but at some point, the numbers have got to rest
somewhere. If the three point — if the two point eight million dollars of storm water utility is not, going to
be used to clean out the storm water utilities, but it's going to be used to sweep the streets, then I want to
make sure that all the streets are being swept with some degree of equality in District I, District Il, District
III, District IV, and District V. OK?
Mr. Patterson: OK.
Commissioner Teele: And you have also another account where you have commercial people that are
paying a surcharge or something, don't you? Is there a commercial surcharge or a commercial — is there a
special commercial account?
Mr. Vilarello: Supplemental — a supplemental waste fee? Is that -- ?
Commissioner Teele: A supplemental commercial waste fee that businesses are paying.
Mr. Patterson: I think you're referring to the supplemental waste fee.
Mr. Brennan: Yeah, supplemental waste and commercial haulers.
Chairman Plummer: And how much is that —
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no.
Chairman Plummer: No, no.
Commissioner Teele: Not commercial haulers. Are the businesses —
Chairman Plummer: Supplemental waste fee.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, yes. You going to get a license, you got to pay.
Mr. Vilarello: It's to cover illegal dumping, street cleaning.
Commissioner Teele: No, we're not — listen, now. Listen. We're talking about does the Burger King
downtown pay anything differently from the barbershop in Allapattah or the beauty shop in Overtown for
solid waste?
Mr. Patterson: That's the supplemental waste fee that you're talking about. How much of that —
Commissioner Regalado: They'll pay.
Commissioner Teele: How much?
Mr. Patterson: Two point one million dollars he said.
Commissioner Teele: Every business pays it?
170 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah.
Mr. Patterson: No. That's the total amount of revenue that's generated from the supplemental waste fee.
Commissioner Teele: But who pays it?
Chairman Plummer: Who pays it? Every commercial business pays it?
Commissioner Regalado: Everyone.
Commissioner Teele: Look, guys, it's real simple here. It's time that we really clean this City up, and we
start treating this City with some degree of equality. Somebody has got to explain to me why some parts
of this City have street sweeping and other parts don't have any. And you've got to provide a rationale.
Now, what I want to see are the maps of what is being swept, because it's either being paid for one of
three ways. It's either being paid for — it's either being paid for with a supplemental, which every
business pays. The business in Allapattah pays it. The business in East Little Havana pays it. The
business in Overtown pays it. The business in Little Haiti pays it. And if all of them are paying it, then
all of them should get the service. That's number one. Or it's coming from the storm water utility, as
Commissioner Plummer talked about, the Upper Eastside, which I never heard before. But I must tell
you, if the Upper Eastside is paying storm water utility, then the Lower Westside ought to be getting the
storm water utility, streets being swept.
Chairman Plummer: Once a week.
Commissioner Teele: And that's — and if they're getting it once a week, then every district on this dais
should get it once a week. And the fact of the matter is I don't believe that the services are being
distributed based upon who's paying for this. And if that's the case, when we get into this budget hearing
on the 28`h, we're going to have an equality in environment plan to be presented by you, Mr. Patterson,
because I want you to tell us how you are going to insure that the taxpayers and the fee payers who are
paying these fees are going to get their service back, the same as everybody. If it's good in District II, it's
good in District IV. If it's good in District III, it's good in District V. Because we've already established
— we've already established that this is a fee that is being paid equally by the taxpayers, or the businesses,
or the people who have water bills. That's where it's put. Isn't it put on the water and sewer bills, the
storm water utility fee? Isn't that put on the water and sewer bill?
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Isn't that — so if —
Mr. Patterson: I don't know if it is.
Chairman Plummer: Twenty dollars per household.
Commissioner Teele: You know, and I talked to a lady yesterday over on 61 S` Street who got a three
hundred dollar water bill, Ms. Warren. And she's entitled to have her street swept, too. So the point is
this — and I don't want to hear about somebody doesn't have curbing, and somebody doesn't have a
gutter. If you're going to provide the service, it's going to be done equitably, or we're going to stop
providing the service to anybody.
Chairman Plummer: How much does the storm water sewer money bring in, total?
171 September 15, 1999
Mr. Kay: About nine million dollars total to the City.
Chairman Plummer: If we're using two point eight in Sanitation, where is the rest going?
Commissioner Teele: Public Works.
Mr. Kay: Part of it goes to capital improvements. Part goes to Public Works, operations, administration
of the system, and five hundred thousand ($500,000) goes to HAZMAT (hazardous material).
Chairman Plummer: So you're saying, though, that under the rules and regulations, it can be used for
those activities?
Mr. Kay: To the best of my knowledge.
Chairman Plummer: Some people are getting ready to test us on that, by the way.
Mr. Kay: I know.
Commissioner Sanchez: Any other questions? Hearing none, do we want to discuss the non -
departmental accounts, ESP it is, twenty-eight million dollars ($28,000,000)?
Chairman Plummer: There was a lot of accounts that we haven't talked about. For example, NET. We
haven't talked about the expenses of NET, police overtime. All of those things have not been discussed.
So I don't know if you —
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, listen. We're heard from twenty-seven (27) departments. And all twenty-
seven (27) departments —
Commissioner Teele: Nobody could cut anything.
Commissioner Sanchez: -- all said they had a surplus. They all said that no, that they couldn't cut their
budgets. So, you know, at least —
Commissioner Teele: Did we hear from Community Development?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Teele: They got the biggest budget in the deal.
Chairman Plummer: Who?
Commissioner Sanchez: Community Development.
Commissioner Teele: Community Development.
Commissioner Sanchez: Gwendolyn, come on up.
Commissioner Teele: Thanks, Commish.
Commissioner Sanchez: Gwendolyn, can you reduce your budget?
172 September 15, 1999
0
•
Ms. Warren: Well —
Commissioner Sanchez: You have 140 positions in Community Development, correct? Ball park figure?
Ms. Warren: In the proposed budget, there are 140 positions. As the Commission may remember, the
Department of Community Development encompasses City Administration, Housing Department and
Work Force Development. The 140 positions, 50 of them or 51 of them are in the Work Force
Development Department, which deals with welfare reform and employment, and training, and summer
programs.
Commissioner Teele: Ms. Warren.
Ms. Warren: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Before you try to confuse everybody, how much of your budget is general fund?
Ms. Warren: Not a dime.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So all of your money is grant money, right?
Ms. Warren: Every penny.
Commissioner Teele: OK. So it's — I know you want to give us all the numbers, .but the bottom line is
you are not costing the taxpayers —
Commissioner Sanchez: Any money.
Commissioner Teele: -- of the City of Miami one dollar, based upon the way your budget has been
constructed.
Ms. Warren: Correct. And consistent with the Commission direction, our department funds code
enforcement. We're also working with Economic Development. We're making plans to bring a proposal
to you to assist in Building and Zoning. We're also working in the Planning Department. We're also
funding seven million dollars (57,000,000) of your CIP (Capital Improvements Program) Programs.
We're supplementing the City general fund.
Commissioner Sanchez: Gwendolyn, how much money can you send back to Washington?
Ms. Warren: None unless you can —
Commissioner Sanchez: None. No, no.
Ms. Warren: -- you can support economic development and get rid of some of the poor people. So until
we put people to work, we need as much federal funds as we can have.
Commissioner Sanchez: You're absolutely right. Thank you, Ms. Warren.
Chairman Plummer: I'd like to know, Mr. Manager, on police overtime —
173 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Before you do, Ms. Warren, on Tuesday when you come back, I'd like to get a
report on Winn -Dixie and how many people are being trained, and the addresses of the people that are
being trained. That Winn -Dixie is about 60 days before they open.
Ms. Warren: OK.
Commissioner Teele: And I understand nobody's being trained, and something about the Beacon Council
and you all sent them. But we'll take it up on Tuesday, please.
Ms. Warren: I'll check into the whole controversy.
Chairman Plummer: I sure hope Beacon Council is not involved in that.
Commissioner Teele: Well, that's what I heard, J.L. I'm going to be honest with you. And they said that
the Community Development referred them there.
Chairman Plummer: Unless they're a service provider.
Ms. Warren: We don't have —
Commissioner Teele: Can you imagine the Beacon Council going into Overtown and recruiting people to
train them as checkout people in Winn -Dixie?
Chairman Plummer: No.
Commissioner Teele: Or in Allapattah?
Chairman Plummer: Because that's — we're about that business, and we're a service provider ourselves.
Ms. Warren: Absolutely. I'll get you a report on it. And I'm not sure what the Beacon Council is doing,
but I'll report on it.
Chairman Plummer: Give me one answer, if you would.
Ms. Warren: Sure.
Chairman Plummer: I'm having a problem of your budget the previous year of fifteen million
($15,000,000).
Ms. Warren: Uh —
Chairman Plummer: Estimated now for this year at forty-two million ($42,000,000).
Ms. Warren: The budget is constructed a little bit differently.
Chairman Plummer: I sure hope so.
Ms. Warren: What you basically have is, of the three divisions, what you're showing this year is the
administrative cost for administration, housing, and all of the grants for work force development, which is
the thirty-four million ($34,000,000). What you've had in the past is we have had both our administration
plus all our subcontracts in our budget. This year, we didn't do that. So —
174 September 15, 1999
•
•
Chairman Plummer: So you're actually administering forty-two million dollars ($42,000,000).
Ms. Warren: That would include all of the grant applications under work force, and that does not include
any of the Community Development grants, contracts that you award. So actually, if you add the
Community Development grants, it would be approximately another twenty-eight million dollars
($28,000,000). So what you have in the budget is our actual administration, our operating cost for
housing and CD (Community Development), plus all of the grant applications and budget for work force.
The operating budget for work force is five million ($5,000,000). The balance of the thirty-four are grant
applications. The housing and administration only shows the operating budget, and none of the contracts.
If you were to add back in all your subcontract agreements, you'd put another twenty-eight million dollars
($28,000,000) in. But it's in a — you've already done that at your budget hearing.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, explain to me public services taxes for thirty-seven million dollars
($37,000,000).
Ms. Warren: That's not me.
Chairman Plummer: Page 12.
Ms. Warren: I can go now? Bye.
Chairman Plummer: Public service taxes, thirty-seven million three hundred and sixty-one dollars
($37,000,361).
Mr. Brennan: That's revenue.
Chairman Plummer: On Page 12. What is it?
Mr. Brennan: Page 12?
Chairman Plummer: Am I calling collect?
Mr. Brennan: Here. That's the utility service taxes.
Chairman Plummer: It is what, sir?
Mr. Brennan: Utility service taxes that we collect.
Chairman Plummer: That's a revenue?
Mr. Brennan: That's a revenue item.
Chairman Plummer: Are you collecting from cell phones?
Mr. Brennan: Yes. We collect from all phones.
Chairman Plummer: Cell phones.
Mr. Brennan: Cell phones.
175 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Do you know how it's being done?
Mr. Brennan: No. I would have to get the information how it's being done.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I'll tell you how it is. It' on zip codes.
Mr. Warshaw: We have the answers for you, Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: Go ahead. Please don't argue.
Julie Weatherholtz (Director, Finance): Telecommunications tax for the City. We charge seven percent
on all telecommunications. And the person that pays the tax is based off of their billing address. So if
you have a cell phone and your billing address is within the City limits of Miami, then you will be
charged seven percent.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you. You just saved me about sixty dollars ($60) a month, because my cell
phone that I pay for, for my company is on 60th Avenue and Bird Road, and I'm paying seven percent
Miami service tax, and I do not reside with my business in that City. So I appreciate the money you just
saved me. The Neighborhood Enhancement Teams.
Commissioner Teele: What do you mean?
Chairman Plummer: What?
Commissioner Teele: You're not going to change the billing, are you?
Chairman Plummer: No. The billing presently is at 601h and Bird. It's not in the City of Miami.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, they know you live in the City and like to —
Chairman Plummer: No, I don't give a damn where I live. NET offices are up almost eight hundred
thousand dollars ($800,000). What are you doing this year in the NET offices that you didn't do last
year?
Manuel Diaz (NET Coordinator): Manuel Diaz, NET Coordinator. This year, we're requesting 20 new
positions, 13 code enforcement inspectors, one assigned to each one of the NET offices.
Chairman Plummer: If I were to take this amount of money, the three point eight, and divide it by 13, is it
equal? I'd like to see a breakdown.
Mr. Diaz: I'll get you the breakdown.
Chairman Plummer: OK, because I don't think it's equal.
Mr. Diaz: Well, there's a number of funding sources.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, no, no, no. We're talking about if we have five districts and we're dividing by
five. Then we have five districts, and there's 13 NET offices. I want to make sure that they are all
receiving equal amounts of money.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, doesn't work like that.
176
-�ZA
September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Oh, oh, why doesn't it?
Commissioner Teele: Oh, no, because you, for example, have got about five NET offices in your district.
Chairman Plummer: No. I have three, plus I split two.
Commissioner Teele: You have five NET offices in your district. So don't — let's don't double dip, now.
Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Listen. That's what I'm trying to say, that we're not going to double
dip.
Commissioner Teele: J.L., J.L. —
Chairman Plummer: Look, regardless of the district, regardless of the district, there are 13 NET offices.
Commissioner Teele: Why?
Chairman Plummer: I didn't create them.
Commissioner Teele: Well, but the - but that doesn't mean we ought to go ahead and start doing things
the way we used to do in Miami.
Chairman Plummer: The only thing I — only question I'm asking —
Commissioner Teele: It doesn't make sense. J.L., it doesn't make sense to have 13 NET offices. It
doesn't make sense. That's a political decision that you guys made long before most of us got here. And
if somebody would do the right thing, they'd eliminate about five of these NET offices and get down to
some reasonable numbers.
Chairman Plummer: And I don't disagree with that.
Commissioner Teele: And everybody up here knows —
Chairman Plummer: You remember I brought it up last year, but nobody around here had the guts to vote
to do it.
Commissioner Teele: Then make a motion, and I'll second it.
Chairman Plummer: OK. My --
Commissioner Teele: Any time you are ready to reduce the number of NET offices to -- There needs to
be some relationship. What is the population breakdown of each NET office?
Chairman Plummer: Sixty-five thousand, give or take, five percent.
Commissioner Teele: That's not true. That's not true.
Chairman Plummer: Welll, then, we're out of sync with the Federal edict of one man, one vote.
177 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Well, J.L., and that's exactly right. These NET offices have nothing to do with the
five districts. They are political decisions that Mr. Odio and the previous Administration made. These
things predate me, they predate Regalado, they predate Gort.
Chairman Plummer: No, they don't predate you.
Commissioner Teele: They predate Sanchez.
Chairman Plummer: They do not —
Commissioner Teele: And what we should do here is get some order about these NET offices. This
doesn't make sense, to have 13 NET offices.
Commissioner Sanchez: Fifteen.
Commissioner Teele: It doesn't make sense. They don't bear any relationship to population, as
Commissioner Plummer is alluding to. They don't bear any relationship to population. Is that true or
false?
Chairman Plummer: That is absolutely true.
Vice Chairman Gort: False.
Commissioner Teele: That's true.
Chairman Plummer: No, it's true.
Commissioner Teele: They don't bear -- One NET office may have 8,000 people residing in the district.
Another one may have 30,000.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, but Mr. Teele —
Commissioner Teele: And so don't start talking about making — dividing it by 13, because the NET
offices that have 30,000 should have three times what the NET office that has 10,000 people have.
Chairman Plummer: You're not listening. What I'm trying to say to you is in my particular district, one
of the NET offices, for example, is Shenandoah. And I have about that little piece of that NET office that
exists over into my district. Correct? OK.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. Yes, yes, yes.
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: Coral Way NET?
Raul Martinez (Assistant City Manager): Coral Way.
Mr. Diaz: Coral Way NET.
178 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Yes. Shenandoah has a small piece —
Commissioner Regalado: It reaches to Virginia Key, J.L. It's —
Chairman Plummer: All I'm saying to you —
Commissioner Teele: Is Virginia Key in the Shenandoah NET or not?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Mr. Martinez: In the Coral Way NET. Coral Way NET.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, yes.
Chairman Plummer: On Virginia Key?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, yes.
Chairman Plummer: Where is there a NET office on Virginia Key?
Commissioner Regalado: Coral Way.
Commissioner Teele: Coral Way.
Commissioner Regalado: Coral Way.
Chairman Plummer: It goes over to the Brickell area, but it is only a small part of the Shenandoah Coral
Way NET office.
Commissioner Teele: J.L., last year, you led a 20 minute discussion with Chief Martinez, asking him to
make sense, to rationalize these NET offices. If you pull the transcript, what he says is: I just got here.
I'm studying these NET —
Chairman Plummer: He's still studying.
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to have a retreat. It was a discussion about a retreat. Raul, do you
remember that? And that you were going to come back with a plan. You were going to come back with a
plan to look at the NET office structure and how that should be.
Chairman Plummer: He's still studying.
Mr. Martinez: Well, no, no. If you'd allow me to respond to all that.
Chairman Plummer: Sure, absolutely.
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, I've been here for close to a year. The NET offices, we're getting good
staffs for all the NET offices. The improvement of productivity for the NET office has been tremendous.
There's still room for improvement. The question you have asked is, "Can we cut down NET offices?"
That is really your decision to make. For the Administration right now, we feel comfortable. We have —
the NET offices are working. They are not related to the districts at all. When they were created, there
were no districts in the City of Miami. They were created by neighborhood to provide neighborhood
179 September 15, 1999
services. The Overtown NET office is probably the smallest of the neighborhoods that we have that are
serviced. Allapattah is probably one of the largest of the neighborhoods that we provide neighborhood
services. But nothing in mind was taken into districts when that was created. The staffing that's provided
to the NET offices, basically, police staffing has to do with the people that they serve. Inspector staffing,
also, likewise. There's more inspectors in Allapattah than there are in Overtown, because there's more
houses, more buildings, and so on and so forth. The difference in funding between the NET offices is a
slight difference in staffing — two inspectors versus three inspectors — and difference in whether they rent
the NET office or they're staying at a City building where they don't pay rent. Beyond that, the staffing,
you know, the budget is basically the same.
Commissioner Teele: Chief Martinez, when and under what Administration were 13 NET offices
decided?
Commissioner Sanchez: Cesar Odio.
Mr. Martinez: The initial offices, I believe, was eleven under Cesar Odio. It started with eleven NET
offices. Then shortly after that, they created two additional offices. They broke up Coconut Grove and
they broke up Little Havana.
Chairman Plummer: There were nine originally. Hey, I brought the concept of NET from Atlanta,
Georgia. I think the Chief will remember —
Mr. Martinez: Red Dog.
Chairman Plummer: That we — Melvin Bell, our very good friend, had a thing up there he called Red
Dog.
Mr. Martinez: Red Dog.
Chairman Plummer: We sent Police Department people up there. They didn't like the name, of course.
And I didn't understand why they ever did it up there, but I was the one who brought it here. Now, as I
recall, it was nine original, then it went to eleven, and then the two that were added when they asked for
one in East Little Havana. It was Miller who said if they're going to get one in East Little Havana, then
we want one in West Grove. And that's where the 13 came about.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner, my question is one thing. Please tell me when the NET offices, 13
NET offices were established.
Chairman Plummer: We're telling you they were at different times.
Mr. Warshaw: And it was in the 1980s.
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no. There was a point in time when we had 13 NET offices. What is
that point in time?
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, I will have to get you that date where they got to the 13.
Commissioner Teele: And my question is, since we know it was at least seven years ago, at least seven
years, since we know it was at least seven years ago, you have said — and I think you've said it very
eloquently — that you are comfortable with the seven — the 13 NET offices.
180 September 15, 1999
Mr. Martinez: That's correct, sir.
Commissioner Teele: What Commissioner Plummer said last year, what I've said this year is that I had
hoped that we would figure out a way to reduce the number of NET offices. I don't think the
Commission is going to take the directive of ordering the Manager to do that, because I think that really is
something that should be a professional recommendation. But the only thing that I'm saying here is that
it ought to be very clear that this is something that has its genesis some years ago, and it should be
updated. With that, I'm through with the question of how many NET offices, if you're going to live with
the 13. And now, what I would like to understand would be the relationship to population.for each of the
NET offices, because I really do believe that the resources should not be divided based upon the number
of NET offices, but some relationship to the population that is being served.
Mr. Martinez: Commissioner, that's something that we'll get to you, the population per NET. I mean
that's — we don't have it here with us, but it's real simple to get.
Commissioner Teele: And finally, in this regard — and since you're here I — this is certainly not personal.
I cannot find your budget. Is your budget in the NET offices?
Mr. Warshaw: What? The City Manager's budget?
Commissioner Teele: No, the Assistant Manager.
Chairman Plummer: Raul, where does he exist?
Mr. Martinez: The Assistant City Manager's budget are broken up into the departments that the Assistant
City Manager oversees.
Commissioner Teele: Then I would ask the City Manager and the budget' officer to prepare an
amendment that would place all of the Assistant City Managers and their staff properly in the budget of
the City. Manager's Office, and wherever those dollars are, to transfer them. And it'll be an up or down
vote, but I just think we ought to be — you know, we get all these editorials that talk to us about the cost of
government and all of that, I mean, but we need to be very candid, and very clear, and very intellectually
honest about what it costs to run government.
Chairman Plummer: Relax.
Commissioner Teele: And I'm not trying to cut anything. I'll say right now, I think the way the Assistant
Managers function, at least certainly as it relates to the NET office, is one of the best things that is going
on under Donald Warshaw's Administration; that and the way the Finance Department is run. I don't
mind saying that publicly. But I don't think it's fair for you all to have an Assistant Manager like
yourself that is being funded under the NET offices of something and — wherever it's funded. I'm not
going to look for it. Your secretary, your staff, your special assistant, your public affairs officer, your
press secretary, all — whatever that —
Mr. Martinez: We don't have any of those, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Whatever that bundle is, for you and all of the Assistant Managers, I would like to
see —
Mr. Warshaw: We'll make that change.
181 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: -- a budget resolution or a budget adjustment in the next one. And on that issue,
the Protocol Office. Who is the Protocol Office, and where is that?
Mr. Warshaw: The Office of Protocol is probably under SP&A (Special Projects and Accounts).
Commissioner Teele: It's 1:58. How many personnel are associated with that?
Commissioner Sanchez: It's the Mayor's office.
Chairman Plummer: It's out of the Mayor's office.
Commissioner Regalado: That's sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) projected.
Commissioner Teele: How many people are associated with that office?
Chairman Plummer: It's the Mayor's office.
Mr. Brennan: I would have to get this information for you. I'm not too sure.
Mr. Warshaw: Excuse me. It's done by the Mayor.
Commissioner Teele: I would like for a budget amendment to be made for this item for the second
reading to place this item where it actually is, and that's in the Mayor's office. Take it out of SP or
whatever this thing is, and place it where it is. Let's have some truth in budgeting this year.
Vice Chairman Gort: The Sister Cities Program.
Commissioner Teele: You know, the Sister Cities Program, if it is in the Mayor's office, then let it be in
the Mayor's office. If it's a stand-alone office, if it reports to a board -- Does it report to a board, J.L.?
Chairman Plummer: No. It was — that's the one that does the proclamations and all of that.
Commissioner Teele: But if the Sister Cities Office reports to a board, in the County, it didn't report to
the Mayor. You remember Sherman Winn?
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: He chaired a board, and it was properly listed as a non -departmental account. If it
is reporting to the Manager or the Mayor, it should be where it is. And if it's reporting to the Mayor, then
it should be added to the Mayor's budget. If it's not reporting to the Mayor, it should be reporting, you
know, where it is. If it reports to an outside board of directors, it should be a non -departmental account.
Chairman Plummer: It reports to the Mayor, the ceremonial head of the City.
Commissioner Regalado: Why is the Sister Cities funded with a hundred and sixty thousand dollars
($160,000)? Is it any reason for it, Mr. Manager?
Chairman Plummer: For what?
Mr. Warshaw: Why is it funded at a hundred and sixty thousand ($160,000)?
182 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Up from a hundred and thirty-six to a hundred and sixty.
Commissioner Regalado: Right. It's thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) more. Is it operating at all?
Mr. Warshaw: It is operating out of the Mayor's office, yes.
Chairman Plummer: Sister Cities is?
Commissioner Regalado: Well, what is the role of that? What is the role of that office?
Mr. Warshaw: What is the role of the office?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Mr. Warshaw: The role of the office is enhancing the City's relationship with its sister cities around the
world.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but --
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, I think you'll find at this time that there are no active — active Sister
Cities programs.
Commissioner Regalado: Last time we heard from one sister city was in '97. Palermo, I think it was.
But —
Commissioner Teele: Zero.
Commissioner Regalado: Huh?
Chairman Plummer: Ha, ha. Didn't we know that one.
Commissioner Regalado: But that's what I'm asking. What is — why is the raise?
Commissioner Teele: Can we get a report on the Sister Cities' actitivities for last year?
Chairman Plummer: Of course you can.
Mr. Warshaw: We'd like to, if we can, touch on the whole issue of the non -departmental accounts, the
SP&A, and where we've been, where we are now, where we want to go with this, because I think this is a
big issue, and it represents a lot of money.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I'm going to be asking two questions. They might need the answers. I am
still asking for the amount of overtime in the Police Department.
Mr. Warshaw: We're going to give you that.
Chairman Plummer: And I want to know the PSA(Public Service Aide) Program. We had allocated for
100. I want to know how many we've got.
183 September 15, 1999
•
Mr. Warshaw: OK.
Chairman Plummer: I'll wait.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Julie Weatherholtz, Finance Director. One thing that we want to do for the FY (fiscal
year) 2000 is to do exactly what Commissioner Teele is suggesting, which is review everything that has
been in the past recorded under ,SP&A, determine what department it should be associated with, and then
move that budget to that department. We've also retitled SP&A to be non -departmental accounts. And
we feel that that's more descriptive, and that that's the type of expenditures that should be budgeted, those
expenditures that are non -departmental, and cannot be associated with other departments. So therefore,
the things that should remain in non -departmental are the things such as your reserves that you're setting
aside, because they are not attributable to any one particular department. You may even have some type
of across the board salary savings, or maybe some foreseen pension increases that might go into a non -
departmental account. But as far as for these other line items, if we can identify a department, then we'll
associate it with that.
Chairman Plummer: IRS (Internal Revenue Service) won't allow it.
Ms. Weatherholtz: And we'll try to do some of that between now and two weeks from now with the final
budget hearing, if we can.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, just out of curiosity, is the Sister Cities still actively -- Are we
still participating in the Sister Cities?
Chairman Plummer: Sir, we have a lot of sister cities. We are proliferated with Sister Cities. The basic
sister cities we had was two in Colombia, one in France, one in Israel, one in Spain.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is it active now? Because if it's not active, I don't see —
Chairman Plummer: Sir, I just made the statement to my knowledge, there are no active Sister Cities
programs.
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, then, I would like to make a motion to leave fifty thousand dollars
($50,000) in the Sister Cities, and transfer the rest of the funds to the Building Department, so we could
expedite building.
Chairman Plummer: I don't disagree with that if we find that there are no active Sister Cities programs.
But I think we should wait until the next budget hearing to make that kind of a motion.
Mr. Warshaw: And I will get you the answer to that.
Chairman Plummer: I'm asking for my —
Commissioner Teele: I agree with —
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no, no. If I make a motion —
Commissioner Teele: I agree with the way you're ruling on this, but I think it's important that each
Commissioner be able to give the Budget Director a request to prepare an alternative.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, absolutely.
184 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: And I think that this is the time, and what — Commissioner Sanchez, if that's his
view, this is the time to do it, so we don't get there and then start trying to get the Budget Office
scrambling around saying, well, we didn't know.
Chairman Plummer: Sir, if you want to make a motion and it's seconded, we'll vote on it. I just said that
before we do that, I think we ought to know — and you — because your motion that you're speaking of sent
the money somewhere else. Now, if we find that we've got active programs that I'm not aware of and
you've already sent the money somewhere else, then we're going to be doubly in trouble. So —
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Sanchez —
Commissioner Teele: I would ask that Commissioner Sanchez' motion be a motion to instruct the Budget
Office to prepare an amendment or the Manager to prepare an amendment for the second reading that
would accomplish that.
Chairman Plummer: I'm sure glad —
Commissioner Teele: And give them time to study it, and let everybody weigh in and get some reports in,
and not try to do it here tonight, but make the motion that that's what we're going to do, and give them
the instructions to do it.
Chairman Plummer: Motion by Sanchez. Seconded by Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Teele.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, wait a minute.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Discussion. Explain what the motion is going to do.
Commissioner Sanchez: The motion is going to transfer —
Vice Chairman Gort: What's the motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: It's going to leave fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in the Sister Cities.
Chairman Plummer: Doesn't do anything else.
Commissioner Sanchez: And it's going to transfer the reset of the funds to Building Department, the
Building Department, so we could expedite building.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, let me tell you, I'm going to vote —
Chairman Plummer: All it —
Vice Chairman Gort: No, wait a minute. I'm going to vote against the motion. Let me tell you the
reason why I'm going to vote for the — against the motion. I'm going to make a motion or someone is
going to make a motion where we're going to ask the Manager to reduce the budget by at least three
percent.
185 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let the Manager use his judgment on where to take it, where to come from, and so
on.
Chairman Plummer: Give him as much flexibility.
Vice Chairman Gort: Give him as much flexibility as possible. Then we'll take — we can take this later
on.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, if you're done, I'd like to say something. You know, I'm a little
disappointed.
Chairman Plummer: Well I — excuse me. I still have two questions hanging out there that I haven't got
answers to.
Commissioner.Teele: What are they?
Chairman Plummer: How much overtime in the Police Department? And the second one is, how much
do we have in the PSA Program? You know, I was told to allow the Administration to give them
benefits, and we'd have them running out of our ears. Now, how many are we allocated for? How many
do we have and how much is the police overtime?
Chief William E. O'Brien (Chief of Police): We're allocated for 67 PSA's. Presently, we have 21. The
test is being done —
Chairman Plummer: We had more before we gave benefits. We had 29.
Chief O'Brien: The number kept shrinking, and would continue to shrink without the benefits.
Chairman Plummer: They went from eighteen thousand ($18,000) to how much with benefits?
Chief Ray Martinez (Assistant Chief of Police): It went from approximately sixteen thousand seven
hundred ($16,700) to eighteen thousand ($18,000) starting, plus benefits.
Chairman Plummer: No way.
Chief Martinez: Plus benefits. That was their salary.
Chairman Plummer: Huh?
Chief Martinez: Plus benefits.
Chairman Plummer: How much is the benefits package? That's what I'm asking. They're at eighteen
thousand ($18,000) plus —
Chief Martinez: Whatever the AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees) benefit package is. Forty percent, I believe.
Chairman Plummer: They don't come under the Police and Fire?
186 September 15, 1999
•
•
Chief Martinez: No, sir.
Chairman Plummer: So in other words, 40 percent would be then — thirty-six twice — seventy-two
hundred dollars ($7,200) more. They increased almost 40 percent in cost.
Chief O'Brien: Which is compatible with other agencies.
Chairman Plummer: You figure that one out and tell me where that's a winner. And how much is the
police overtime?
Chief O'Brien: The police overtime budgeted was six mil. -seven ($6,700,000). We're projected at six -
nine ($6,900,000), but we have reimbursable amounts in grants and other funds for approximately three
hundred and seventy-five thousand ($375,000).
Chairman Plummer: So we went from last year of six million ($6,000,000), trying to reduce it, we went
to six -nine ($6,900,000) this year.
Chief O'Brien: Actually, we're less overtime this year than last year.
Chairman Plummer: You know, in most businesses, police overtime — I'm sorry — in most businesses,
overtime is very poor planning, very poor planning. Six million dollars ($6,000,000) of overtime.
Chief O'Brien: Last year, the overtime was seven -three ($7,300,000).
Chairman Plummer: It's six percent of your budget.
Chairman Plummer: OK, guys. I'm glad you're not in the private sector. You'd be at Camillus house
every night. Next item. You have anything — you wanted to speak, Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. There is a motion on the table.
Commissioner Sanchez: No, it was seconded by Teele.
Vice Chairman Gort: We have to vote on it.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry. Do you understand the motion, Mr. Clerk?
Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: Read it for the benefit of mine.
Mr. Foeman: OK. A motion instructing the Manager to prepare an amendment to transfer fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000) from Sister Cities —
Mr. Vilarello: Leaving fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in the Sister Cities —
Mr. Foeman: Leaving fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in Sister Cities, and transferring the remaining
balance to the Building Department.
187 September 15, 1999
0
•
Chairman Plummer: That's not knowing what is the requirement of the need of the dollars in that
account, right?
Mr. Foeman: Subject to a determination being made as to —
Chairman Plummer: All right. Well, I'm sorry, I can't — I mean, I can't vote for it. If I knew that they
didn't need the money, then I'd be all in -favor of the motion. I think it's a good motion. But I don't
know what the current needs are.
Commissioner Teele: J.L.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: The motion is not to transfer the money.
Chairman Plummer: It sure is.
Commissioner Teele: No, it's not. The motion that he made was to instruct the Manager to prepare an
amendment for the next reading. This doesn't — that's what the motion was.
Chairman Plummer: Are you — Mr. Sanchez —
Vice Chairman Gort: Transfer the funds to the Building Department.
Chairman Plummer: That is not what he said.
Commissioner Teele: No, that's not what the motion was. That's not what I seconded.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez, you're the maker of the motion. Please explain your motion again.
Vice Chairman Gort: The motion was to transfer the money to the Building Department.
Commissioner Teele: It was not. It was to prepare the motion.
Chairman Plummer: Well, could we ask Mr. Sanchez instead of you all arguing?
Commissioner Sanchez: To prepare the motion.
Chairman Plummer: Right.
Commissioner Sanchez: To transfer — to leave fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) in that account.
Chairman Plummer: Correct.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the rest would go to the Building Department.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, do you understand that?
188 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: To prepare -- His motion is to prepare — to instruct the Director, the Budget
Director to prepare the motion or the paperwork. That's all he's directing. He's not transferring the
money.
Chairman Plummer: Is that your intent?
Commissioner Sanchez: That's my intent.
Chairman Plummer: Then I got no problem with that motion. All right. Call the roll, because Mr. Gort
has indicated he wants to vote against it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yeah, I'm — no, no, don't worry about it. I have — let me — let me get this motion
correct. My understanding is you're not proposing for that money to be transferred.
Commissioner Teele: Not tonight.
Commissioner Sanchez: To prepare it.
Commissioner Teele: To prepare it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Because we're going to request that the budget be lowered, and we have to give the
flexibility to the Manager to do so.
Commissioner Teele: Right.
Vice Chairman Gort: All right. OK.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's my next motion.
Chairman Plummer: Call the roll.
Vice Chairman Gort: Just to prepare. OK.
Chairman Plummer: Call the roll. Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 99-618
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE
AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROPOSED CITY OF MIAMI BUDGET
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000, TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE
CITY COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1999, DURING THE
SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET; SAID
AMENDMENT WOULD LEAVE $50,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR
THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM AND TRANSFER THE
REMAINING BALANCE TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
189 September 15, 1999
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted b the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Plummer: We're not on Item D, I think. Has any Commissioner got any ideas before we go to
"D"? We're now on Item D. Amend the tentative budget if necessary. Mr. Manager, Budget Director.
Mr. Brennan: Item D, Number 1, amend the tentative budget —
Chairman Plummer: That's what I just said. Are there any amendments to the budget?
Mr. Brennan: Right now, there is no amendment to the budget.
Chairman Plummer: This is for ten mils.
Mr. Brennan: It's nine point five mils.
Commissioner Sanchez: A reduction of the nine point five —
Commissioner Teele: Did you just say there are no amendments?
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Teele: Did you really just say there are no amendments?
Mr. Brennan: There are no amendments.
Vice Chairman Gort: But the budget shows different.
Chairman Plummer: OK. He said that, so let's proceed. I want you to know I am voting for the ten mils
tonight.
Mr. Brennan: Let me just state that where CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) is concerned, we
will be amending the special revenue budget for CRA.
Chairman Plummer: Who asked about the CRA? That didn't come before us now.
Commissioner Teele: Well, hold on a minute. This is first reading, right?
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
190 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: OK. I am going to offer an amendment that basically puts the CRA on Page 12
and wherever else it goes as an authorized agency, along with Bayfront Management Park, along with
Off -Street Parking, along with the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), along with the Miami
Sports and Exhibition Authority, and adding the Community Redevelopment Agency, and placing under
an estimate which includes Margaret Pace Park and all of the safe bond neighborhoods at twenty-two
million dollars ($22,000,000).
Chairman Plummer: Where is the money coming? Twenty-two million ($22,000,000)? Where's the
money coming from?
Commissioner Teele: I just told you, J.L. It's coming from all of the park activities that are being funded
through us.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: It's coming from the various activities associated with the Omni. All of the funds
that we collect from the Omni have to go out the door, back to the County. All of the funds that are
coming in from the Southeast Overtown Park, plus all of the funds that we have in our fund balance will
be made available for the completion of the Margaret Pace Park and other activities.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Julie Weatherholtz, Finance Director. If I could speak? The request that you're
making would drop the — a portion of the CRA down to the component unit section of the —
Commissioner Teele: Right.
Ms. Weatherholtz: -- City budget. The CRA is considered a special revenue fund of the City, and no
portion of it qualifies under the description of a component unit, based on how it's established under the
Government Accounting Standards Board. So therefore, it's recommended that any activity associated
with the CRA's would be placed under the special revenue section of the budget.
Commissioner Teele: And what page would that be?
Ms. Weatherholtz: That is on Page 12, where you were discussing —
Commissioner Teele: That's exactly what I said.
Ms. Weatherholtz: And it would have to go up under the special revenue funds, not under the authorities
with the Bayfront Park, Department of Off -Street Parking, DDA and MSEA (Miami Sports and
Exhibition Authority). Those four entities are all component units of the City, and they're reported as
such under the financial statement.
Chairman Plummer: So what you're saying is that his motion is out of order by virtue that it doesn't
comply?
Ms. Weatherholtz: I'm just recommending that everything associated with the CRA is under the special —
Commissioner Teele: She's recommending that it be in a different category.
Ms. Weatherholtz: Yeah. It's up on the top part of Page 12, under special revenue.
191 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: I have no objections if that's the way you want to carry it, although that's not how
it's been carried for the last ten years.
Ms. Weatherholtz: You are correct. The City has been recording their CRA as a trust and agency fund,
which is —
Commissioner Teele: Well, I will carry that with the first reading.
Ms. Weatherholtz: -- was in the budget. But for a financial statement, it's always been a special revenue
fund.
Commissioner Teele: I'll carry it that way for first reading, but I'm going to ask the City Attorney, and
the City Manager, and the external auditor to provide us with a written report as to how it should be
carried, since we've carried it that way, the way I read it in, for ten years, and now we're going to do it
differently. I've seen no documentation to support what you're saying, but I'm not going to debate the
issue. I'll accept it as you have read it into the record.
Ms. Weatherholtz: And just for the record, I do want to again clarify that regardless of how it's been
done in the budget document —
Commissioner Teele: We want to do it correctly.
Ms. Weatherholtz: -- on the financial statements of the City, on the comprehensive annual financial
report, it's always been recorded as a special revenue fund.
Commissioner Teele: All right.
Chairman Plummer: All right. There is a motion in front of us.
Bertha W. Henry (Assistant City Manager): Commissioner Plummer —
Chairman Plummer: Is the motion understood?
Ms. Henry: Commissioner —
Chairman Plummer: Call the roll. I'm sorry?
Ms. Henry: Commissioner Plummer, there is a request for an amendment to the budget.
Chairman Plummer: Well, let's vote on the motion on the floor.
Vice Chairman Gort: But there is an — there has to be an amendment, because originally, the budget
presented to us —
Chairman Plummer: Well, that was —
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: He was making the amendment.
192 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: They have to make an amendment, because the budget presented to us, it shows the
ten mils.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Make your amendment.
Ms. Henry: Yes.
Vice Chairman Gort: And they changed it to nine point five.
Chairman Plummer: Well, are you going to go with your motion, Commissioner Teele?
Commissioner Teele: I am proposing to, as modified by the Finance Director.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Is there a second to the motion?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Plummer: Is there any further discussion? I don't think there's any opposition. All in favor,
say "aye."
The Commission Collectively: Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Show unanimous without any reverse consent. All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: D-1, it has to be amended.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 99-619
A MOTION AMENDING PAGE 12 (ENTITLED "APPROPRIATION
SUMMARY — COMPARISON BY FUND AND SPENDING
AGENCY") OF THE BUDGET ESTIMATE, THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 TO INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) AS AN AUTHORIZED
AGENCY IN THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND SECTION OF SAID
BUDGET; FURTHER STIPULATING THAT FUNDS FOR SAME
WILL COME FROM THE CRA'S FUND BALANCE, VARIOUS
PARK ACTIVITIES THAT ARE BEING FUNDED THROUGH THE
CRA, ALONG WITH THOSE ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH
OMNI AND SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST DISTRICTS
(INCLUDING MARGARET PACE PARK AND ALL OF THE SAFE
BOND NEIGHBORHOODS), TOTALING TWENTY-TWO MILLION
DOLLARS ($22,000,000).
193 September 15, 1999
•
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted b the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Plummer: Now, I want you to know, Mr. Manager, I'm going to vote tonight for the ten mil
cap. All right? But I want you to know when it comes back, I — if it's —
Commissioner Regalado: How can you do that, J.L.?
Vice Chairman Gort: Excuse me. They're going to amend it to nine point five. They have to amend it.
Commissioner Sanchez: That's the amendment they're going to make now. Right?
Chairman Plummer: No. That's my problem. I am not going to vote for the nine point five. I will vote
against that. And the reason for it, I previously stated. The fire fee — if you take the surcharge from
parking and you apply it to knock down the fire fee — the fire fee, not millage. Remember, the millage a
person can deduct from their income tax. Fees, they cannot. I would much prefer as a City resident to
leave my millage at ten, and give me a reduction in my fire fee from the surcharge of the parking, so that I
can deduct my ten mils and I have less to pay in the fire fee. So if what the amendment is, is nine point
five (9.5), rather than the ten, I'll have to vote against it.
Vice Chairman Gort: OK. Good.
Commissioner Sanchez: Go ahead. I'll yield to Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, they're the one that has to make the amendment.
Ms. Henry: Yes. The changes that we're recommending is that the general fund budget be reduced from
the three hundred and eight point six million ($308.6 million) to three hundred and seven point five
($307.5 million) as a result of the changes in the — in the total amount of parking surcharge revenue we
will be able to incorporate in the budget. As such, the Administration at this — as part of this
recommendation would recommend a half mil reduction, so from ten mils to nine point five (9.5) mils,
that the —
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Ms. Henry: -- that the fire fee be — as part of the overall budget that the fire fee increase, pursuant to the
plan.
Commissioner Teele: The five-year plan.
194 September 15, 1999
Ms. Henry: The five — the current five-year plan.
Commissioner Regalado: If I may,. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Yes, Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Your concern is the fire fee, and so the concern of the people that were here
today, and the people that we all talk to in the streets. And several members of this Commission have
already said that they will be requesting the Manager to come back with a three percent reduction, at least
that. I have heard that from two members of the Commission, and myself, too, so you have three votes
here. I — if that is the case, if that is the motion that someone or myself, or Joe, Willy or any one of us is
going to make, I would request that this reduction be applied to the fire fee, in order — But J.L., this is not
the parking surcharge. This is different. What I will be asking is that any reduction in the budget besides
what you're proposing now will be used to reduce the fire fee, or at least leave it as it is now, and no
increases in the budget `99/2000. So —
Chairman Plummer: Tomas, Tomas, the half a mil reduction in the millage was brought about by the
parking surcharge. That was an offsetting revenue source to balance it out.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: It was my hope, and I think other members of this Commission that when we heard
that there was thirteen to fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) in surcharge parking fees that we could do
the half a mil and address the issues of the fire fee. But the super -intelligent people in the so-called
Downtown Ivory Tower said you can only use five point seven (5.7) or seven — how much was that?
Ms. Henry: Five point seven (5.7).
Chairman Plummer: Five point seven (5.7) is all that they will allow, because there's nohistory. So what
I'm saying to you, sir, is ad valorem taxes are deductible from your income tax. Fees are not. And if you
don't reduce the fire fee, you've really not helped the homeowner. It's as if you had taken, left it at the
ten, which he can deduct that extra half a mil, and reduced so that there's no — at least no increase in the
fire fee for next year.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what we're doing, J.L.
Vice Chairman Gort: We're doing both.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what we are — we are doing both.
Chairman Plummer: You're not. You can't. You have —
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, we can.
Chairman Plummer: You don't have the money to do both, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, we can.
Chairman Plummer: You're talking about six point two million dollars ($6.2 million) total; is that
correct?
195 September 15, 1999
Ms. Henry: Correct.
Chairman Plummer: The fire fee will —
Commissioner Regalado: But they already came up with that budget —
Chairman Plummer: The fire fee will raise —
Commissioner Regalado: -- and we're saying you got to come back with a reduction of three percent,
that's all.
Commissioner Teele: Gentlemen, gentlemen —
Chairman Plummer: Oh, if you're going to do the three percent and that's going to happen — but I haven't
heard or got an indication, or with any comfort this evening said that they were going to have a three
percent reduction.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, that's for us to say.
Commissioner Teele: Gentlemen, let me —
Chairman Plummer: Just remember one thing, and I'll be quiet, Teele. OK? You can set it at the
maximum tonight. If you put it at nine -five tonight, you cannot go back to ten at the second hearing.
Ms. Henry: You're correct.
Chairman Plummer: I'm absolutely correct. That's why I'm saying, gentlemen, leave yourself with the
flexibility. At the ten, you can always reduce it at the next hearing, the final hearing. But if you reduce it
tonight, you cannot change it to go back up at the next hearing.
Commissioner Teele: Look —
Chairman Plummer: I know how I'm voting. You guys do what you want. God bless you.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Look —
Chairman Plummer: Somebody better.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioners, we're getting ready to — I mean, it's late. And this generally
happens, people get — we get punchy. Now, let's just all take a deep breath and think this thing through.
We have a basic problem, number one. The fire fee is not on this agenda.
Chairman Plummer: Correct.
Commissioner Teele: The fire fee. is on Tuesday's agenda. Now, one of the things -- let cooler heads
prevail, because I can tell you, this thing is getting ready to wind up with everybody who's running for
election getting ready to get a total nuclear bomb dropped on them. And I'm being very candid with you,
now. I'm not up. But what we're about to do now is get this thing sideways going over the bridge here.
Now, if we play around and try to reduce the fire fee right now, which I know there's strong support for,
the money for the fire fee is earmarked for capital. All right?
196 September 15, 1999
•
0
Chairman Plummer: Plus.
Commissioner Teele: And when we start talking about reducing the fire fee and eliminating the capital,
you are basically inviting the Oversight Board to come in and reject this plan, because the Oversight
Board is not going to let us get away with taking a one-year pass and deferring some capital items that are
necessary and needed. And then they're going to impose something on us. But worse than that, you
know, it's going to be a Chinese water torture treatment by ink coming from One Herald Plaza until all of
that stuff gets resolved. OK? So we need to understand. As far as I'm concerned, if you really want to
do, J.L., what you're saying you want to do — and I don't agree with you — then the thing to do, I think, is
to recess this meeting until Tuesday, where you can get the fire fee on the table along with this item for
first reading.
Chairman Plummer: I have no problem with that.
Commissioner Teele: OK. I mean, I would strongly recommend that. But I'm telling you, I think it is a
tragic mistake that this Commission is about to make if you're getting ready to try to get savings this year
out of the fire free, because the Oversight Board is not going to let you cut the fire fee, reduce the
expenditures for capital items that are necessary for the Fire Department, and say we've balanced the
budget. Now, the other problem with this is this: The taxpayers are talking about property tax relief.
And J.L. is right in terms of this issue he's become totally affixed with. But corporations don't look at
fees when they make decisions. All of the analyses and comparisons in the League of Cities and in the
various associations of Counties doesn't normally talk about fees. It talks about ad valorem taxes. That's
the common denominator in the State of Florida that everybody looks at to define what's going on in a
City. And quite frankly, if we can provide significant ad valorem tax relief -- And I looked at these bills.
I mean, I can't believe that the County, with this one homeowner — with this one homeowner that — and I
just picked this up off of the dais from my colleague. It says your taxes in the County last year were six
hundred and twelve dollars ($612). Your taxes this year, if the proposed budget changes are made, is six
forty-nine ($649). Your taxes if no changes were made would be six-o-six ($606). That's the roll -back
rate, which nobody has even mentioned tonight.
Commissioner Sanchez: Now, go to the City.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Now, go to the City. The City taxes last year was one thousand and eighty-
five dollars ($1,085). The City taxes this year, if the proposed budget change is made, is fourteen
hundred dollars ($1,400). That's going from one thousand and eighty-five dollars ($1,085) to one
thousand four hundred and eighty-seven dollars ($1,487). That's four hundred dollars ($400) that I — I
would defy anybody to say that if we provide the relief to the homeowner that they're not going to see it
and they're not going to feel it. And so the point here is this: We can't do everything at once, but the one
thing we cannot do is try to do the mix and match on this. This shouldn't — this cannot be a smorgasbord.
If we do a smorgasbord on this thing, we're going to get ourselves sideways on it. This Commission
either ought to vote to apply all of the tax relief from the fire fee, which I'm strongly against, or from
property taxes, which I support. But please, let's don't try to do both. Please, let's don't try to do both,
because we're going to get smacked from both sides. I'll tell you .this. I just want to say one thing.
There's a great man who walked this way, who advised a lot of people, and he's not here today, J.L., but
my God, I wish Phil Hammersmith were here tonight, because I'm going to tell you something, J.L., the
best thing you got going for you right now is that the Herald has gone to bed with their newspaper. But if
you — if this — if this were 10 o'clock or 9 o'clock earlier, and we start talking about the fact that we're
going to vote on a ten mil tax, I can tell you that the screaming headlines would be, "The City raid — The
City maintains ten mil taxes." And I got to tell you, J.L., that affects you and that affects Tomas more
than —
197 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: And me.
Commissioner Teele: -- and Willy more than it does Sanchez and myself. And I'm not trying to make
this a political issue. But J.L., this is not the right way to go, in my judgment, based upon what the
citizens of this community want.
Chairman Plummer: My question is, if you gave a half a mil reduction in ad valorem to the average
homeowner, how much is that in his pocket?
Ms. Henry: Well, we've looked at it at the — if the average home is a hundred thousand dollars
($100,000) — I mean, obviously, that number is going to change — but that's thirty-seven dollars and fifty
cents ($37.50).
Chairman Plummer: If you do not impose the ad — the fire fee increase, how much is that?
Ms. Henry: It's about twenty-four dollars ($24).
Chairman Plummer: That's the point I'm trying to make. Mr. Sanchez?
Commissioner Sanchez: J.L., I don't think that — you know, I agree with Commissioner Teele on this. I
think that we would be sending the wrong message to go after the fire fee. But I'll tell you, we passed a
resolution not long ago that this legislative body voted on, and it was to lower the millage by point five
percent (.5%). And I think that if we divert from that, I think that in the long run, I think the taxpayers —
and he's right about this — the people that the taxes are increasing, I think that if we don't do it now and
we go for the fire fee — and I could understand why you're trying to go for the fire fee, because the area
that you represent has a lot of condos. But let me tell you, we have the perfect opportunity today, and
don't let it pass by. And if — I'm willing to make the motion that we accept the point five percent (.5%)
reduction, which as an ordinance, it was already passed in this legislation. So I would motion that we
accept the point five percent (.5%) reduction of the millage.
Commissioner Regalado: I will second the motion, but I have to say — and to Commissioner Teele, I have
to say that we can do both things. And —
Chairman Plummer: If we can do both things, that's fine.
Commissioner Regalado: Let me tell you why. I have heard members of this Commission, once and
again, to say that we — all of we — we would like to direct the Manager to come back next budget hearing
with a three percent reduction in the budget. Three percent, not ten percent, not even five percent. That
would mean maybe six or seven million dollars ($7,000,000). That money is not related in any way to the
nine point five (9.5) mil. That's something that the Manager has brought right here, because of the
parking surcharge that this Commission approved. So I will tell you that with those seven million dollars
($7,000,000), the Manager has enough money not to reduce — not to increase the fire fee, and still have
some money if this Commission wants to budget more money into one or another department. So I'm
telling you that we can do both things.
Chairman Plummer: Let me ask the Manager. Mr. Manager, you heard —
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman, let me —
Chairman. Plummer: No. Let me ask the Manager, because let me tell you something, if we can do both,
that's great, and I'm all in favor of it. All right?
198 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: You have to combine them.
Chairman Plummer: That's right. But if you are going to ask the Manager tonight to decrease his
spending by three percent, then I got to know, what are you going to use that money for? Is it going to go
into a reserve? Is it going to, in effect, cut the ad valorem to nine -five?
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman —
Chairman Plummer: And eliminate —
Commissioner Teele: J.L., it's going to go for what you and two other Commissioners vote on.
Commissioner Regalado: Right, right, right.
Commissioner Teele: You know, why do you keep asking the Manager? If you tell him to cut three
percent —
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Commissioner Teele: -- and he comes up with the three percent —
Commissioner Regalado: You use it.
Commissioner Teele: -- it's going to go where you direct him with two other Commissioners.
Commissioner Regalado: You will be able not to increase the fire fee, and you an also —
Chairman Plummer: Let me finish, if I may. Mr. Teele, if you're telling me that in your conscience —
I've already heard Regalado and Sanchez — that we have the ability to cut a half a mil and to stop the
increase in the fire fee, you got my vote, because that's what I made a commitment to.
Commissioner Regalado: We have it.
Commissioner Teele: J.L., I don't want to mislead you. I'm not saying that, because let me tell you why.
We have a timing problem. J.L. —
Commissioner Sanchez: Everybody vote.
Commissioner Teele: J.L., let's just focus on this issue for one minute. This issue of the fire fee was
supposed to be on the — a certified copy of what it is was supposed to have been transmitted to the County
on yesterday. But because of the hurricane —
Chairman Plummer: There was an extension.
Commissioner Teele: -- the County gave us an extension. I assume that they're giving us till Tuesday. I
assume they won't give us until the 281h. Tuesday, the 21St —
Mr. Vilarello: We advised them that Tuesday, the 21St was when we would hear the item.
199 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: So I don't think the Oversight Board, J.L., is going to let us cut the fire fee,
because it's in our five-year plan, unless we substitute that with some other revenue.
Chairman Plummer: That's my point.
Commissioner Teele: Now, three percent equals how many dollars?
Ms. Henry: That's about nine million dollars ($9,000,000).
Vice Chairman Gort: We don't need the three percent.
Commissioner Teele: Three percent equals nine million dollars ($9,000,000). The fire fee increase
equals how much money?
Chairman Plummer: Four point two (4.2).
Ms. Henry: Four point two (4.2).
Commissioner Regalado: Four point two (4.2).
Chairman Plummer: Hey guys, tell me —
Commissioner Teele: And so —
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Chairman Plummer: Tell me that you want to take that nine — less than nine, but that you'll put four — if
we get a reduction —
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman, if you'll —
Chairman Plummer: -- that four point two (4.2) will go towards the fire fee, you got me.
Vice Chairman Gort: If you'll allow me, I think we can do away with a lot of the discussion that we're
doing right now.
Chairman Plummer: All right. You're allowed.
Vice Chairman Gort: If you recall, at 5:30 this afternoon, I asked the City Manager what was the need to
accomplish what we're trying to accomplish right now. The figure that I got from the professionals was
four million dollars ($4,000,000). Now, four million dollars ($4,000,000) is what percentage of the total
budget? One point five percent (1.5%)?
Ms. Henry: That's about — a little less than one and a half.
Vice Chairman Gort: One point five percent (1.5). All we need to reduce the budget is one point five
percent (1.5%). If we cannot reduce four million dollars ($4,000,000) out of a three hundred and eight
million dollars budget ($308,000,000) —
Mr. Warshaw: If your intent is to find a sufficient —
200 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Revenue.
Mr. Warshaw: -- substitute revenue to offset the fire fee, then you're talking about — about one and a half
percent.
Vice Chairman Gort: Are you guys listening? Are you guys listening?
Ms. Henry: May I add something also?
Chairman Plummer: I'm listening but — but are these guys that are listening or not listening —
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, I'm ready to make a motion.
Chairman Plummer: -- committed or are comfortable in saying that that reduction —
Vice Chairman Gort: All we need to reduce is one point five percent (1.5%) of the budget to accomplish
them, both the nine point five (9.5) and not to increase the fire fee, maintaining it as it is.
Ms. Henry: Commissioners, may I make a comment, please?
Chairman Plummer: Please.
Ms. Henry: What we're technically dealing with here, in addition to the discussion that we had, that you
just engaged in, the Oversight Board has asked us to budget four point two million dollars ($4.2 million)
for attrition. So this is — this is money we don't have today. We're going to have to, within this current
budget of what we would — that we proposed to you, we would have to come up with the four point two
million dollars ($4.2 million). In addition to that, we would have to come up with another four point two
(4.2) to balance the budget. I can tell you I have had marathon discussions with the Oversight Board,
with the Estimating Conference, with the consultant for the Oversight Board. They are — any reductions
in expenditures will have to be very specific, very explicit. And if it has — if it has —
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me, Bertha. I was there and Commissioner Sanchez was there when —
is it Shelling? That's the name of the person?
Ms. Henry: Sheldon Snyder.
Commissioner Regalado: Through the phone said: It's our — it's our policy that it's either you — referring
to you, you were sitting there — either you increase the fees or taxes, or reduce expenses in the budget.
Did he say that?
Ms. Henry: Yes, he did. But —
Commissioner Regalado: OK. What we are saying here is that you came with a proposal, nine point five
(9.5) mil that everybody — you agreed, we agreed, the Oversight Board agreed. Is that — is that reasonable
to say?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. Now, what we're telling you is you have to go back, Mr. Manager, and
you have to cut expenses — like the Oversight Board says — cut expenses to the tune of what you want to
201 September 15, 1999
0 . 0
increase in the fire fee. No new revenues are needed. We just want the Oversight — we just want to
follow the philosophy of the Oversight Board.
Chairman Plummer: I can't buy that.
Commissioner Regalado: If you're going to do this, you're going to have to reduce expenses. And mind
you, this — they cannot say this is for capital improvement, because you've got eleven point five million
dollars ($11.5 million) of the fire fee going to the general fund; is that correct?
Ms. Henry: Yes. Eleven point two (11.2).
Commissioner Regalado: OK. OK. So what I'm saying is that, guys, we can do both, because if we
reduce expenses of the budget, there is no problem with the Oversight Board. Or did I —
Ms. Henry: I disagree in the sense that —
Commissioner Regalado: Well, then — then, he was lying.
Ms. Henry: No. It's not —
Commissioner Sanchez: Well, Tomas, if you could yield. What I think that the Oversight — the
Oversight Board is concerned that — see, one of the things that the Oversight Board says is that we're too
generous. We've been too generous in the past. We give back to our citizens. We've given away a lot of
things. So now, if we're able to reduce the budget, the budget has to go. You can't reduce the budget and
apply it to tax cuts, because the Oversight Board is not going to support it. What they want is to reduce
the budget, and take that money and put it towards a reserve, towards the recovery of the City of Miami.
So the opportunity that we have here today is —
Commissioner Regalado: Well, you know, Joe, they have rejected several budgets. I mean, why cannot
we try?
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, in principle, you are right. And I think what Bertha was trying to say, and
I heard the same thing, is that the Oversight Board does have the right, even though they haven't said,
because they don't know what's going to happen here tonight, they have the right to reject expense
reductions if they think those expense reductions are in some way — reductions would in some way be
harmful to the City.
Commissioner Sanchez: But, Mr. City Manager, if I may interrupt you.
Mr. Warshaw: But we'll have to evaluate that when we get there.
Ms. Henry: And they have done so.
Commissioner Sanchez: If I may interrupt you for a minute. I think that the Oversight Board will
support a reduction of the budget if we're cutting out fat and we're taking that money and putting it back
into the recovery of the City of Miami.
Chairman Plummer: All right, let's go with a motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think the Oversight Board is going to have a problem with that.
202 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Entertain the motion, the motion.
Ms. Henry: Also, if I might add, because I didn't hear this part of discussion. Also, earlier today, there
was some discussion about Save Our Seniors and the impact of that, as well. We've not — we've not —
Commissioner Sanchez: But that's not this year. That's next year.
Ms. Henry: It is for next year, but there is — we have to address that this year if we're talking about not
increasing the fire fee and we're talking about not --
Commissioner Regalado: Well, we should have addressed that last year, because we've been talking that
since last year, Bertha.
Ms. Henry: I don't disagree.
Mr. Warshaw: But I think what Bertha is saying is if we're going to move forward to try to do something
to cut back on the fire fee and then we don't address the Save Our Seniors, that could become an issue.
But — well —
Ms. Henry: It will definitely be an issue with the Oversight Board.
Chairman Plummer: Right. All right. The floor is open for a motion.
Commissioner Sanchez: There was a motion. My motion was the reduction of point five (.5) to the
millage..
Mr. Vilarello: Actually, it's a motion to adopt a tentative millage rate at nine point five (9.5).
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes, sir, that's my motion.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll second that.
Chairman Plummer: All right. But there's going to be another motion in reference to the reduction.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, yes, another motion.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Motion understood. Call the roll.
Mr. Vilarello: It's an ordinance, Commissioner. I need to — before I read the ordinance, I just need to
remind you at this point — it's been stated several times — if you set the tentative millage rate at nine point
five (9.5), at your future hearing, at the September 28`h hearing, you may not go up from that nine point
five (9.5). So this is irreversible with regard —
Commissioner Regalado: We know.
Chairman Plummer: It can go down. Call the roll.
203 September 15, 1999
An Ordinance entitled -
AN ORDINANCE DEFINING AND DESIGNATING THE
TERRITORIAL LIMITS FOR THE City OF MIAMI FOR THE
PURPOSE OF TAXATION; FIXING THE MILLAGE AND LEVYING
TAXES IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER
30, 2000; CONTAINING 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: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
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.
[COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL:]
Commissioner Teele: This is as amended, right?
Commissioner Sanchez: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: This is the amendment.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, this is the amendment. Yes.
Mr. Foeman: Chairman Plummer?
Chairman Plummer: I'm voting yes, because I'm waiting for the other motion which is going to be to
reduce, not to increase the fire fee. So that's all right.
[COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL:]
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to introduce a motion.
Chairman Plummer: All right, Mr. Regalado. Wait a minute. Mr. City Attorney first.
Mr. Vilarello: Just to correct the record. At the beginning of the meeting, there was a discussion about
the percentage increase of this millage rate over the rollback rate. And that was announced at 33
hundredths of one percent, or point 33 percent (.33%). There was some discussion that, that had not been
discussed, but in fact, it was discussed earlier in the meeting.
204 September 15, 1999
LJ
0
Chairman Plummer: It was discussed, yes.
Commissioner Teele: What is the rollback rate?
Vice Chairman Gort: Point 33 percent (.33%), wasn't it?
Mr. Vilarello: No. That's the increase over the rollback rate.
Vice Chairman Gort: Oh, the increase. OK.
Commissioner Teele: What's the actual rollback rate? I thought they printed that. Doesn't the State print
that on the trim notice?
Mr. Brennan: It's thirty-three one hundredths of one percent.
Chairman Plummer: No, that's — that's the increase.
Ms. Henry: That's increase. That's what the actual rollback rate is. That's on the DR-422.
Chairman Plummer: They had to ask.
Commissioner Regalado: In one hour, I got to go to work. One hour.
Commissioner Sanchez: Get some Cuban coffee. You'll be ready.
Mr. Brennan: The current rollback rate is nine point four six eight seven (9.4687).
Chairman Plummer: OK. That answered Mr. Teele's question.
Vice Chairman Gort: Nine point four six seven (9.467).
Chairman Plummer: That would have been the rollback from the trim mill, correct.
Mr. Warshaw: Nine point four six eight seven (9.4687).
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: That is the rate that if we were to take in the same amount of money this year, as
we took in last year, that's the millage rate that we would set.
Mr. Brennan: That's correct.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Regalado, you wish to make a motion?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir. I would like to direct the Administration to come up in the next
budget meeting with a reduction of the budget comparable to the increase that is proposed in this budget
for the fire fee. So that way, we will leave the fire fee as is right now.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Is there a second?
205 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: Second.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Any discussion? Call the roll.
Commissioner Teele: Let me understand one thing.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: What percentage of the fire fee next year of this increase is oriented or is
earmarked for operational, personnel cost, and what percentage is for capital?
Ms. Henry: Commissioner, if the fire fee were to increase, the total revenue would be fifteen point four
million ($15.4 million). Four point two (4.2) of that would support capital. The remaining eleven point
two (11.2) would support operations.
Chairman Plummer: But in effect, what Commissioner Regalado is doing is to raise the same amount.
Commissioner Teele: OK, but listen. But listen. You see, you can't cut the personnel cost. Just
understand this. Nobody is going to lay off a fire fighter. We can talk about this all day and all night.
All of the money that you're saving is going to go first toward the capital items. And how much does this
save? What's the dollar amount of Commissioner Regalado's motion?
Commissioner Regalado: Four point two (4.2).
Ms. Henry: The four point two (4.2).
Chairman Plummer: Four point two (4.2).
Commissioner Teele: Which is the capital.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no.
Chairman Plummer: No.
Commissioner Regalado: Commissioner, if I —
Chairman Plummer: It's going to raise the same amount of money.
Commissioner Regalado: If I — Commissioner Teele, if I may say. We are not telling the Manager to cut
the fire fee. We are telling the Manager to take money out of the fat of the rest of the budget and use it
not to increase the fire fee. And by doing that, we are not affecting nor the capital improvement or the
personnel.
Commissioner Teele: Then make your motion to say that. Make your motion —
Chairman Plummer: He did.
Commissioner Teele: No. — to reduce by three percent (3%) and to make the Fire Department —
Commissioner Regalado: No, I didn't say by three percent (3%).
206 September 15, 1999
•
17J
Commissioner Sanchez: No, no. Three percent (3%) is like nine million (9,000,000).
Commissioner Regalado: I said comparable.
Chairman Plummer: This is a comparable amount of money.
Commissioner Regalado: Comparable —
Commissioner Teele: A comparable amount of money —
Commissioner Regalado: -- to not to increase the fire fee in the budget year `99/2000.
Commissioner Teele: So what you're really saying, and that may be — I understand what you're saying,
but the effect of what you intend, is it to cut that amount and make — I mean to identify that amount and to
place it in the Fire Department budget?
Commissioner Regalado: Exactly. That's what I'm saying. That's what I'm saying.
Chairman Plummer: Instead of an increase in the fee.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Mr. Warshaw: I understand.
Commissioner Teele: What's he's saying is that by making cuts, he's going to take the revenues and put
it in the Fire Department, so the Fire Department budget will still be as if the fire fee —
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely.
Commissioner Teele: -- increase had gone into effect.
Chairman Plummer: That's correct.
Commissioner Regalado: That's right. That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Teele: That's what he's saying.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying, because, you know, I started saying, Commissioner,
that we should freeze —
Chairman Plummer: All right. Everybody understands. Don't push it.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, OK.
Commissioner Teele: So all of the capital items in the Fire budget will be —
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely the same.
Commissioner Teele: -- in the budget, just like nothing happened?
Chairman Plummer: That's correct.
207 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Gort: They'll get their Mercedes.
Chairman Plummer: No Mercedes. No more Mercedes. Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 99-620
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO AMEND THE
CITY OF MIAMI BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 WHEN
IT COMES UP FOR SECOND READING ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
BY LEAVING THE FIRE FEE AS IT PRESENTLY IS; FURTHER
DIRECTING THE MANAGER TO TAKE THE REVENUES OF SAID
REDUCTION AND ALLOCATE THEM TO THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT FOR PURCHASE OF CAPITAL ITEMS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the motion was passed and adopted b the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
[COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL:]
Chairman Plummer: Well, as Teele says, I came out a winner both ways. I got no problem. I vote yes.
We are now on Item 2. By the way, Mr. Sanchez, if you ever ask for a half hour again and take eight
hours, I will not allow it. Item A. Defining and --
[COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL:]
Commissioner Sanchez: Hey, it's the first time you've ever been here that we've gone through a whole
budget. All right?
Chairman Plummer: Defining and designating the territorial limits —
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: What?
Mr. V ilarello: You have to adopt the tentative budget of the City of Miami.
208 September 15, 1999
•
•
Chairman Plummer: Adopt the tentative budget, which is nine point five (9.5).
Mr. Vilarello: No, no. That's the tentative millage rate. You've already done that.
Chairman Plummer: Oh.
Vice Chairman Gort: With the amendments made in the motion.
Chairman Plummer: All right. How about —
Commissioner Teele: I would move the budget as amended by the Finance Director, and other
amendments that may have been made.
Vice Chairman Gort: Second.
Mr. Vilarello: Just so the record is clear, but not including Commissioner Regalado's moton just now.
Commissioner Teele: No.
Mr. Vilarello: That will be done at the September 281h meeting.
Commissioner Teele: That's on September 281h
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Mr. Vilarello: OK. This would be an ordinance, Commissioner.
Chairman Plummer: It's an ordinance. Read it. Call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION MAKING
APPROPRIATIONS RELATING TO THE OPERATIONAL AND
BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000; REVISING ONGOING CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS
FOR NEW PROJECTS SCHEUDLED TO BEGIN IN FISCAL YEAR
1999-2000; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
209 September 15, 1999
was introduced by Commissioner Teele, seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, and was passed on first
reading by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
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.
4. APPROVE FIVE-YEAR FORECAST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000-2004.
Chairman Plummer: Item 2 is to approve a proposed City of Miami five-year budget forecast. It's a
resolution. Is there a motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: So move.
Chairman Plummer: Is there a second?
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Plummer: Any further discussion? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: All opposed? Show it unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Sanchez, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-621
A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION APPROVING A PROPOSED "CITY OF MIAMI
FIVE-YEAR FORECAST" FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000, THROUGH
AND INCLUDING FISCAL YEAR 2004, ATTACHED HERETO AND
MADE A PART HEREOF; AND FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE
CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT SAID PROPOSED FORECAST TO
THE FINANCIAL EMERGENCY OVERSIGHT BOARD.
210 September 15, 1999
(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: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
5. DEFER CONSIDERATION OF MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT, INCLUDING BUDGEOUTLOOK AND;";:
UPDATE:: - -., <;
Chairman Plummer:
Number 3, discussion concerning the — Mr. Manager, discussion the concerning the
monthly financial report,
including the budget outlook and financial update.
Commissioner Teele:
Can that be taken up on Tuesday?
Vice Chairman Gort:
Yeah, yeah, let's take it up Tuesday.
Chairman Plummer:
Can it be taken up on Tuesday?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: It will be taken up on Tuesday.
6. (A), FIRST READING: TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT`—. ,Z
,.,
FIX MIL,LAGE AND ;LEVY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT —FIX =MII;LAGE AND LEVY, TAXES;; Y,
(B) FIRST�-READING: ;APPR.OP,RZATZONS FOR -DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ` `~
(DOA) FOR FY:.1999-2000.
(C) COMMENTS RELATED TO PARKING REVENUES TO BE,EA`RMARKED,FOR
DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENTS.
Chairman Plummer: We're now on Item 4. Proposed millage rate and tentative budget for the DDA
(Downtown Development Authority).
Vice Chairman Gort: I want my sunny side up.
Chairman Plummer: Sunny side up. Percentage increase in millage over rollback rate. Mr. Manager?
Hello?
Donald H. Warshaw (City Manager): The DDA.
Chairman Plummer: 4-A. Mr. Budget Director? Hello?
211 September 15, 1999
•
E
Mr. Warshaw: The DDA is here.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Patty Allen?
Patricia Allen (Executive Director, DDA): Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Name and address.
Chairman Plummer: What is the percentage increase in the millage over the rollback rate?
Ms. Allen: Thirteen percent (13%).
Chairman Plummer: Specific purpose for which ad valorem tax revenues are going to be increased.
Ms. Allen: Downtown economic development programs.
Chairman Plummer: And the cost factor?
Ms. Allen: A hundred percent (100%).
Chairman Plummer: It's also one hundred and ninety-three thousand one hundred and thirty-four dollars
($193,134). Are there any members of the public — uh-oh.
Commissioner Teele: My man.
Chairman Plummer: Even at 3 o'clock in the morning.
Vice Chairman Gort: Even at 3 o'clock.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Citizen Q. Public, you have three minutes at 3 a.m.
Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga. Let me tell you —
Chairman Plummer: Your name? Which one are you using this time?
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: My name is Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: And I want to thank papa, Commissioner Teele of what he said about me. But I
want to add, if I do have a little bit of common sense, then I can assure you that this City is in a very bad
shape, because my reputation in Miami is that I am a little nuts.
Chairman Plummer: A little nut? No, no. A big nut.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: Big nuts. So then you can realize the position. And we have been here since 5
o'clock. This is the example. If you would have followed my original suggestion, then we would have
cut off all of this in five minutes.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir.
212 September 15, 1999
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: I hope you get the message.
Chairman Plummer: Nothing to do with DDA. He just had to say that. Had to come out. Are there any
other citizens who wish to speak to the issue of DDA?
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Chairman Plummer: Actions by the City Commission. Mr. Gort moves. Is there a second? Hello? Is
there a second?
Commissioner Teele: Second.
Chairman Plummer: Thank God. Re -compute the proposed millage rate if necessary. We do not have to.
Publicly announce the percentage by which the recomputed — we don't have to. Adopt a tentative millage
rate. Patty Allen.
Ms. Allen: Point five (5)
Chairman Plummer: Point five (5). Adopt the amended tentative budget.
Mr. Vilarello: First a — it's an ordinance, Commissioner. You need a motion on an ordinance adopting
the tentative millage rate.
Vice Chairman Gort: I moved it.
Chairman Plummer: Let me tell you something. My agenda is put together very, very badly.
Vice Chairman Gort: I moved it:
Chairman Plummer: OK? Mr. Gort moves it. Seconded by Commissioner Teele. Read the ordinance.
At 3 o'clock, you don't read too fast, do you? Call the roll.
213 September 15, 1999
0
•
An Ordinance entitled -
AN ORDINANCE RELATED TO TAXATION, DEFINING AND
DESIGNATING THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA;
FIXING THE MILLAGE AND LEVYING TAXES IN SAID
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER
30, 2000, AT FIVE -TENTHS (.5) MILLS ON THE DOLLAR OF
NONEXEMPT ASSESSED VALUE OF ALL REAL AND PERSONAL
PROPERTY IN SAID DISTRICT; PROVIDING THAT SAID
MILLAGE AND THE LEVYING OF TAXES WITHIN THE
TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AS REFLECTED
IN THE CITY'S MILLAGE LEVY ORDINANCE FOR THE
AFORESAID FISCAL YEAR WHICH IS REQUIRED BY CITY
CHARTER SECTION 27; PROVIDING THAT THE FIXING OF THE
MILLAGE AND THE LEVYING OF TAXES HEREIN SHALL BE IN
ADDITION TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE SHALL NOT BE DEEMED AS REPEALING OR
AMENDING ANY OTHER ORDINANCE FIXING MILLAGE OR
LEVYING TAXES, BUT SHALL BE DEEMED SUPPLEMENTAL
AND IN ADDITION THERETO; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION, SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first
reading by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
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.
Chairman Plummer: Adopt the amended tentative budget. How much is the tentative budget?
Ms. Allen: One million six eighty-six seven six one point zero zero ($1,686,761.00)
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Chairman Plummer: Motion made by Gort to adopt. Seconded by Teele. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): "Aye."
214 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Call the roll.
An Ordinance entitled -
AN ORDINANCE MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AD VALOREM TAX
LEVY AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS INCOME FOR THE
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING
OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000;
AUTHORIZING THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
TO INVITE AND ADVERTISE REQUIRED BIDS; PROVIDING FOR
BUDGETARY FLEXIBILITY; PROVIDING THAT THIS
ORDINANCE BE DEEMED SUPPLEMENTAL AND IN ADDITION
TO THE ORDINANCE MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 FOR THE OPERATIONS FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION,
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, seconded by Commissioner Teele, and was passed on first
reading by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
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..
Chairman Plummer: Item A, first reading. Defining and designating the territorial limits of the DDA.
Moved by Gort, seconded by Teele. Read the ordinance.
Mr. Vilarello: That's the one we just finished.
Chairman Plummer: Next item.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's 3:03.
Chairman Plummer: Wait a minute. What about `B"? Did we do `B"?
Vice Chairman Gort: It's 3:03. Make sure you put the time on the record. A lot of people are not going
to believe that we were here until that time.
215 September 15, 1999
•
•
Chairman Plummer: Did we do `B"?
Vice Chairman Gort: The sponsors need to know.
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Plummer.
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Before the DDA leaves. I was downtown shopping the other day. My son was in
town. And a number of business owners really have expressed concern about the parking fee.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah.
Commissioner Teele: The Oversight Board, J.L., Commissioner Gort, is not allowing us to spend
percentage of this money. What is it? About a million and a half, two million dollars ($2,000,000)?
Chairman Plummer: Of the DDA?
Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, of the parking fees.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, OK.
Commissioner Teele: I really believe that that may be a good thing, because I would like to see the DDA
come up with some creative matching proposal where the City and the DDA, or the City and the
downtown business people could work to match money for some enhancements, based upon the parking
fees. In other words, they're not in our budget this year. They're reserved. Next year, they'll be
released. And either you all can get them to spend, or the staff is going to spend them in that immemorial
black hole. But the fact is this: I think this year, we ought to really look together, whether it be Gusman,
whether it be some special initiatives but —
Chairman Plummer: Bayfront Park.
Commissioner Teele: Bayfront Park.
Chairman Plummer: Miami Sports and Exhibition.
Commissioner Teele: But disproportionately, the funds for the parking are going to come from
downtown. Now, that's not to say that they're not going to come from Upper Eastside, they're not going
to come from the Grove. But I think we all know that it's the downtown that's the hub that's drawing
people here. Some of it will come from Jackson Hospital, as we've heard. But I want to be on record. I
didn't go to that public hearing that you all had on downtown, but I want to be on record, Commissioner
Plummer and Commissioner Gort — Commissioner Gort is Chairman of the DDA. Commissioner
Plummer represents the area — that I believe that the merchants of downtown are looking for some
proactive and creative way to move the downtown business community. And I am prepared to work with
the DDA in formulating a matching arrangement whereby if funds are put up from the DDA -- Don't you
all have that Metro Mover special? Doesn't that end this year?
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Teele —
216 September 15, 1999
Commissioner Teele: And I'm just throwing that out. I don't want to get into — I mean, "J," Willy, I'll
support whatever you all want to do.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right now presently, we have a matching fund that we have put together up to
about eight million dollars ($8,000,000) to do all the repair needed within Flagler Street.
Commissioner Teele: To do what?
Vice Chairman Gort: The Flagler Street main street program, which would change the whole facade of
the Flagler Street area. At the same time, improvements have been taking place in the avenues between
51h Street and Southeast 2°d Street. And the merchants, what they would like to do, the property owners,
what they'd like to do — because it's important that people understand, this tax is an additional tax that's
being imposed by the property owners, so this does not come from the general funds — they're going to
put —
Commissioner Teele: And Willy, what I think we should do is we should match it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, that's the idea. In the future, it should be matched.
Commissioner Teele: The City should match it. And we should think right now in terms of taking those
parking fee reserves that the Oversight Board won't let us use and let's prepare to — what is that going to
be? About seven hundred (700) a year, six hundred (600) a year that the homeowner — that the business
owners are going to create?
Vice Chairman Gort: I think it's going to be a little bit more than that. It's going to be a lot more than
that. But let me tell you, not only are we going to get the City to match it, but we've gotten the State and
the County to understand the importance of downtown, and they're going to be matching it, also.
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort, I will follow your lead, but I really do think that before the
funds get spent — and you can believe that once this budget goes into effect, there will be a lot of people
figuring out how to spend that money next year — that you, that the DDA, as far as I'm concerned, has
first call on any parking revenue funds ahead of anybody else, because the vast majority of those funds
are being generated from downtown.
Chairman Plummer: That's what they talked about when we had that town hall meeting down at the
Olympia Theater or the Gusman Center, that such — a great amount of the parking revenue was going to
be coming from downtown and that some of that revenue should go back. Now, you know, they got to go
argue with the Oversight Board. If they're going to say no, I think we're going to say yes, from the 20
percent aspect of it.
7.',APPROVEe BUDGET:OF BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST: ($2;923,500)' FY ..1999-
2000.
Chairman Plummer: Item Number 5, Bayfront Park Management Trust, two million, nine twenty-three
five hundred ($2,923,500).
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman —
Vice Chairman Gort: We're ready to go home.
217 September 15, 1999
•
Chairman Plummer: We're ready to go home.
Commissioner Teele: I would move the item.
Chairman Plummer: Moved by Teele. Seconded by Gort. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-622
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL
BUDGET OF THE BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST IN
THE AMOUNT OF $2,923,500, TO PROVIDE FOR THE
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF BAYFRONT PARK, FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
[Although absent during roll call, Commissioner Joe Sanchez requested of the Clerk to be shown as
being in agreement with the motion.]
'8. rAPPROVE'BUD.GET OF MIAMI SPORTS f1N=D'EXHIBITION>AUTHORITY;($735 000),-FOR FY -
1999-2000.
Chairman Plummer: Item 6, the Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority, seven hundred thirty five
thousand dollars ($735,000). Is there a Teele? Is there a Teele?
Commissioner Teele: So move.
Commissioner Sanchez: Second.
218 September 15, 1999
r�
n
Chairman Plummer: That's on the Sports and Exhibition. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-623
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL
BUDGET OF THE MIAMI SPORTS AND EXHIBITION
AUTHORITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $735,000, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR COMMENCING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
9. APPROVE BUDGET OF, DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET.PARKING ($7,610;036) FOR FY
1999=2000.
2"
Chairman Plummer: Item 7, the annual budget, Off -Street Parking Authority.
Mr. Cook.
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I have two amounts here. In the amount of seven million six ($7,600,000) —
Clark Cook (Director, Off -Street Parking): That's the operating expenses.
Chairman Plummer: And non -operating expenses of a million seven ($1,700,000); is that correct?
Mr. Cook: Yes, that is the correct budget for —
Chairman Plummer: Motion by Teele. Seconded by Gort.
219 September 15, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is you're going to give the City two point —
Mr. Cook: Two point three one seven (2.317). Two million three hundred and seven thousand
($2,307,000).
Chairman Plummer: All right. All in favor of Item 7, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show it unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-624
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL
BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING,
ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, FOR FISCAL
YEAR COMMENCING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,610,036,
EXCLUDING DEPRECIATION, .AND OTHER NON OPERATING
EXPENSES OF $1,727,723.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
10. APPROVE BUDGET FOR OPERATION OF GUSMAN CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING
ARTS AND THE OLYMPIA BUILDING (DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING).
Chairman Plummer: 8-A, also Off -Street Parking, for the operation of Gusman Center and the Olympia
Building. How much, Mr. Clark Cook?
Clark Cook (Director, Off -Street Parking): This is the one that shows you a hundred and sixty-five
thousand dollar ($165,000) deficit. This is the one I recommend you approve. There are two on there,
because I gave you two, if you remember, the last time; one showing Exhibit A. The one — Exhibit A
under 8-A is the one you should approve, not `B." So I'd ask you to approve that.
220 September 15, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Well, "B" is nine hundred and eighteen thousand ($918,000).
Mr. Cook: Yeah. See, that's more money.
Chairman Plummer: OK. 8-A is now being --
Vice Chairman Gort: Move it.
Chairman Plummer: -- in the amount of one hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars. Moved by Gort.
Seconded by Regalado. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show it unanimous.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice Chairman Gort, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-625
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL
BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING OCTOBER 1, 1999 AND
ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $601,800,
EXCLUDING DEPRECIATION, TO PROVIDE FOR THE
OPERATION OF GUSMAN CENTER FOR THE PEFORMING ARTS
AND THE OLYMPIA BUILDING.
(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: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Plummer: Now, Mr. Cook, the "B" portion.
Mr. Cook: The `B" portion, you can just — you don't have to pass. That is — has nothing to do — that is
the rest of Gusman.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney —
221 September 15, 1999
Mr. Cook: I gave you two Gusmans right there.
Chairman Plummer: -- since this is a `B" item on the agenda, do we have to deny it, or can we just say
it's withdrawn? That would be 8-B.
Mr. Cook: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: Withdrawn.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Cook has indicated —
Mr. Cook: What we did, we gave two budgets to the City Manager. We gave him one budget showing a
hundred and sixty-five thousand dollar ($165,000) deficit, and another budget showing a four hundred
thousand dollar ($400,000) budget. We clearly stated that they had to pass one or the other.
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): They're both -- Item A is already passed.
Mr. Cook: That's correct.
Chairman Plummer: What do I do —
Mr. Vilarello: `B" is withdrawn.
Chairman Plummer: So that's all that we need to do.
Mr. Vilarello: By DOSP (Department of Off -Street Parking).
Chairman Plummer: All right.
I I _NEXT. MEETING:SEPTEMBER'21, 1999 AT 9:30-A,.M. — FIRE ASSESSMENT AND SOLID
VWASTE FEE, MATTERS TO BE HEARD AFTER 5:05I`.M. (see session 2). '. 'A
Chairman Plummer: For the public record, we will be meeting again on Tuesday, September the 2 1 " — no
— yeah, the 21s2 at 9:30 in the morning for the regular Commission meeting. It was cancelled from
yesterday's storm. And the second and final hearing —
Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner before— on the 21 st —
Chairman Plummer: Hold on.
Mr. Vilarello: The Fire Rescue assessment, Solid Waste assessment will be heard after 5:05.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Thank you and good night.
Mr. Vilarello: The next budget meeting is the 281h of September.
'Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, there were certain items referred to the next — to the Tuesday
agenda, and I would hope that that is a part of the adjournment.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Manager? Mr. City Manager, there were a —
222 September 15, 1999
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT NOT INCLUDED IN THE RECORD)
Commissioner Teele: OK. But they were —
Mr. Vilarello: You had other items.
Commissioner Teele: We had other items, and we'll take it up. But this meeting is being adjourned and
not continued.
Chairman Plummer: Does not need to be continued.
Mr. Vilarello: This is adjourned. It was.
223 September 15, 1999
THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION,
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 3:12 A.M.
ATTEST:
Walter J. Foeman
CITY CLERK
Maria J. Argudin
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
JOE CAROLLO
MAYOR
224 September 15, 1999