HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1999-10-12 MinutesL
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 12th day of October 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.
The meeting was called to order at 9:05 a.m. by Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr., with the following
members of the Commission found to be present:
Chairman J.L. Plummer; Jr. (District 2)
Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3)
Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4)
ABSENT:
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort (District 1)
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5)
ALSO PRESENT:
Donald Warshaw, City Manager
Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney
Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk
Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk
[COMMENTS MADE PRIOR TO CONVENING:]
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Clerk, Special Meeting of this Commission is called for 9:00, am I correct?
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): That's correct.
Chairman Plummer: OK. We don't have a City Manager. I don't think we have a City Attorney. Are there
any other Commissioners in the house? All right. I'll ask that Commissioner Sanchez give the prayer and
Commissioner Regalado will give the pledge to allegiance, and I assume we'll open. Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes, sir.
Chairman Plummer: This is a special meeting and we'll open it up and then just go into the other one?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Yes.
Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Sanchez, the prayer, please. Everybody would please stand.
October 12, 1990
• ! E
An invocation was delivered by Commissioner Sanchez, followed by Commissioner Regalado leading those
present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
1. (A)REVIEW MAYOR'S BUDGET PROPOSALS.(NAME RIGHTS OF ORANGE BOWL; USE OF
LAW'ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND FOR POLICE OVERTIME),
JB) ORDER REPORT; T- IMETABLE;.AND-PLAN TO. ANALYZE PROPOSED PRIVATIZATION
OF OFF-STREET PARKING DEPARTMENT;
(C) BOND COUNSEL RE PRIVATIZATION OF OFF-STREET PARKING
fSee section 31
Chairman Plummer: All right. As you're probably aware, we're going — this meeting was called as a special
meeting of the Commission for the handling of matters and Mr. Warshaw is here now. The first item is
concerning the Administration's analysis and recommendations in reference to the Mayor's budget
proposals. Mr. Manager.
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): Good morning, Commissioners.
Chairman Plummer: Good morning, sir.
Mr. Warshaw: As I discussed with you at the last Commission meeting, the Mayor had made certain
recommendations and proposals regarding some revenue enhancements. I've distributed to you copies of
memorandum from Christina Abrams regarding naming rights to the Orange Bowl. It's something that we're
going to be looking at for this year but, at this point, there's really not more to share with you, other than
what I did at the last meeting. But the key issue in that recommendation had to do with the privatization or
the taking over by the City of Off -Street Parking Authority and, on that issue, I'm going to defer it to the
City Attorney but tell you that Quinn Jones had issued an opinion in 1992, that the City could do that.
However, the attorneys representing Off -Street Parking don't agree with that and, basically, it,would have to
be something, I assume, for the City Attorney to opine on.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Just briefly. The Department of Off -Street Parking has created
and authorized, pursuant to a Charter provision. Typically speaking, in order to abolish such provisions -- a
department, it would require a referendum. However, Mr. Jones issued an opinion, with which I concur,
which allows for the department, essentially, to be removed of its obligation by ordinance and it would still
continue to exist as a board. The Department of Off -Street Parking Board will continue to exist, but it
would be stripped, essentially, of its powers and responsibilities. That would be delegated to the City
Manager, as a division under the City Manager. Now, in the last year, there's been new bond issues from
the Department of Off -Street Parking. Of course, those were issued by the City of Miami. However, before
this Commission considers an ordinance abolishing the Department of Off -Street Parking, I would advise
you that we need bond counsel direction/advice retained by the City to consider the consequences of the
abolishment of the Department.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: A question for the City Manager or the City Attorney. If we were to take over
2 October 12, 1999
2
Off -Street Parking, the City would administer Off -Street Parking. Therefore, we would be responsible for
the employees and the way that it's run and how the administration of that such departments were to be
handled? -
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir, that's correct, if that were to be the case.
Commissioner Sanchez: And the toughest issue now that we would inquire about or look into would be the
bond issues?
Mr. Vilarello: Certainly. Obviously, even under any circumstances, we couldn't impair the debt of the
Department of Off -Street Parking issued through the City of Miami. However, I would be concerned that
the abolishment of the department and independency of the board may have a consequence that bond
counsel would advise us as because — one of the consequences, of course, could require the bonds to be paid
off, as a result of the abolishment of the department. So, I would recommend, strongly, that, if we -- if the
City Commission is going to consider that, that we retain bond counsel to give us direction with regard to
the existing debt.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. City Manager, just as a clarification. Do you have any idea why this issue
was placed and taken off the agenda on June 22nd, July 13, July 27th, September 14th?
[COMMISSIONER TEELE ENTERED THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 9:09 AM]
Commissioner Teele: What are you reading from?
Commissioner Regalado: This here.
Mr. Warshaw: You're talking about in Off -Street Parking?
[VICE CHAIRMAN GORT ENTERED THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 9:10 AM]
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. This same issue that we're discussing now. It was on the Mayor's Citywide
blue issues but it was taken off the agenda since June and we never get any back-up information on this
issue.
Mr. Warshaw: I don't know why — other than to tell you, it was taken off at the Mayor's request.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Gort,-you have any comments on "A"?
Vice Chairman Gort: No.
Chairman Plummer: We're now on "B." Discussion concerning the budget for Sister Cities Programs.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
3 October 12, 1999
f
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: May I be afforded the same opportunity as my colleagues on "A"?
Chairman Plummer: I'm sorry, sir. I didn't see you come in. I'm sorry. On "A."
Commissioner Teele: Is there a written...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager?
Commissioner Teele: ...recommendation or analysis from the Manager on this?
Mr. Warshaw: No, sir. Other than to tell you, there is a one hundred and sixty thousand dollar ($160,000)
line item in Special Programs and Accounts.
Chairman Plummer: No. Excuse me. Excuse me. I did not see Mr. Teele come in and I. went to, "B." He
asked to be recognized on "A" and he is now on "A."
Mr. Warshaw: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm song.
Commissioner Teele: Well, Mr. Chairman, I — the Mayor has given us four proposals, I believe?
Chairman Plummer: The Orange Bowl, Off -Street...
Mr. Warshaw: The Orange Bowl, Off Street Parking, the Law Enforcement Trust Fund...
Commissioner Teele: Can we have copies of the Mayor's memorandum that's available? It was not a part of
the agenda packet.
Mr. Warshaw: The memorandum from the Mayor? -
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Warshaw: We'll get you a copy.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I realize we have a long agenda today but I think, you know, we were
criticized, I think, unfairly for not discussing the Mayor's proposals. But I think 13 minutes is hardly
sufficient deference to the Office of the Mayor and I think we should have a thorough discussion. I think we
should hear from the management on each and every one of the Mayor's proposals and...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, prior to your arrival, we gave every Commissioner the right to say whatever
they wanted.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm...
Chairman Plummer: The Manager gave us a full detail on both the Orange Bowl and Off -Street Parking and
the City Attorney and if you wish to discuss it any further, I don't think — I gave everybody the opportunity
to speak.
4 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Well, Mr. Chairman, I do wish to give great deference to the Mayor's
recommendations and I...
Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. And you have that opportunity.
Commissioner Teele: I would like to hear from the staff on each one of the .proposals. I would like to
develop a plan, before we go to the next item, to deal with those proposals. The one of Off -Street Parking
is, I think, of great interest and I think it is totally complicated by legal issues and I want to hear from the
City Attorney. I understand that the.previous City Attorney issued an opinion. I want to know, is this City
Attorney standing by that opinion? Are you prepared to issue a new opinion on the Off -Street Parking? I
would like to hear from Off -Street Parking. But I think the point that .Commissioner Regalado has made
deserves some deference. Well -- and that point is simply this. This item has appeared on this agenda. at
least, five times. Even before Mayor Carollo was here, there was discussions about this by Mayor Suarez.
in fairness to the record. And A think we need to deal with the issue of Off -Street Parking in a
comprehensive manner and we need to not put it on the agenda if it is designed to get somebody's attention
or if it's designed really to have a thoughtful discussion on it, and I need to understand where we're going on
that. So, do you have the first recommendation of the Mayor?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney, I will ask you to repeat, for Commissioner Teele's benefit, that
which you told us earlier in reference to the Off -Street Parking.
Mr. Vilarello: As I mentioned before, Mr. Jones did issue an opinion with which I concur and a copy of it
was distributed last week or, at least, after the last budget meeting.
Commissioner Teele: Could I get a copy of it at this time? And could you also make one available to the
Off -Street Parking?
Mr. Vilarello: And I, at the time, made it available to the board. Exactly what distributed to the City
Commission, I distributed to the Off -Street Parking Board and its Executive Director at the same time. I do
continue to concur with the opinion; however, because of the new debt issued, before this City Commission
would consider an ordinance abolishing the Department of Off -Street Parking, I would highly recommend —
in fact, I do recommend that we retain bond counsel to review both Mr. Jones' opinion and the effect on the
existing debt.
Commissioner Teele: Let me ask you this. If we're going to discuss Off -Street Parking, I'm prepared to do
that. The question that I have is this: First, who is general counsel to Off -Street Parking?
Mr. Vilarello: The City Attorney is. I am.
Commissioner Teele: OK. Do you believe that, in light of this, discussion that the Off -Street Parking -- that
the City Attorney should make appropriate, legal — do you believe that, as we begin this discussion on
Off -Street Parking, do you believe that the Off -Street Parking or the City Attorney should make other
arrangements or adjustments?
Mr. Vilarello: If the City Commission considers the abolishment of the department, I'm certain that the
Department of Off -Street Parking will...
Commissioner Teele: Well, I think it's on the agenda. We're discussing it now. And I think, from a legal
point of view, Mr. Attorney — I mean — see, I'm looking at the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency)
October 12, 1999
and I'm looking at the Miami Arena and what was done there was totally illegal, in my opinion, but I'm not a
lawyer for the purposes of the City Attorney. I'm just a mere lawyer for the purposes of Florida Bar. But I
don't want to get into something where we're in the same situation. I'm very uncomfortable with the City
Attorney representing Off -Street Parking, if this issue is on the agenda for discussion, as it is on our agenda.
Because I am prepared to make the motion that number one, we retain bond counsel for the purpose of
evaluating the Mayor's proposal or recommendation dated September 26, 1999, and that counsel should be
counsel that is done in consultation with the Office of the Mayor, to ensure that that person is fully
satisfactory to the Mayor. And, again, I think we need to begin to look at this issue. I am not in favor or
opposed to what the Mayor's recommending. But I think it is a hype of what has been wrong with this City
too long, that we not look at issues in a comprehensive way so that we can make intelligent votes based
upon facts and information, not based upon history and everyone's gut instincts. So, I would ask you, again,
this issue is on the agenda. It is one of the Mayor's written proposals.. Do you believe that Off -Street
Parking, for the purpose of this discussion and these discussions that will go on in the future, should have
the right to have their own attorney?
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, let me address one issue. Let me ask you a question directly. Now, certainly,
if this City Commission considers abolishing the department, that I would recommend — I'm sure they
would seek to have independent counsel analyze the issue. However, let me address one issue with regard
to MSEA (Miami Sports and Exhibition Authority). At the time, I was not the City Attorney at the time of
that transaction. However...
Commissioner Teele: And, at the time, I wasn't a City Commissioner.
Mr. Vilarello: However, the City Commission — the City was represented by counsel. MSEA was
represented by independent counsel.
Commissioner Teele: Who represented the CRA? That's whose assets you transferred. Who represented
the CRA? Those are the assets that were transferred illegally.
Mr. Vilarello: As far as I know, Holland and Knight has been on board as CRA counsel for many years.
Chairman Plummer: For your edification...
Mr. Vilarello: They were also involved as bond counsel.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, to my knowledge, at all times that I've sat there, as I recall, Holland and
Knight has represented the CRA, unless I'm mistaken. That's what my memory recalls.
Commissioner Teele: It's a wonderful firm and...
Chairman Plummer: I didn't say yes or no to that, but I'm just trying to give you apiece of history.
Commissioner Teele: I mean — it was a gratuitous reference to the CRA. But what I don't want to do is get
into a situation where we start down the road and then someone challenges the action because Off -Street
Parking was not properly or fairly represented in the discussions. The second issue is this: Does your
opinion or does the Mr. — the previous counsel's opinion suggest that a referendum would be required to
abolish or to take over or to provide a management company or to provide a management option or a series
of options that may occur?
Mr. Vilarello: Certainly that is the first alternative. Although, the he does provide an alternative method of
6 October 12, 1999
• a.
dealing with the abolition of the department.
r
Chairman Plummer: Are you finished, sir?
Commissioner Teele: Nowhere near.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Gort, you'll have to wait.
Commissioner Teele: I'll be happy to yield to Commissioner Gort.
Chairman Plummer: Former chairman of the Off -Street Parking.
Vice Chairman Gort: Commissioner Teele, I think the information that we need to know from our
department is, number one, what are the legal issues behind it? Number 2. The feasibility study of how are
they performing and what is — the funds are being used and if we can maximize or do better by
administrating ourselves or look at the third options that we've done with all the other boards, is to have a
City Commissioner as the chairperson of that board. I agree with you. I think we need all that information
to come along with this.
Commissioner Teele: And I agree with you, Commissioner Gort, and I have great deference to you on the
issue, having served on the Off -Street Parking before becoming a Commissioner. But one of the problems
that you have with any agency that is administered is that you don't know what the industry can provide
until you go out with a bid. Now, the problem with going out with a bid means you have the legal authority
to award that bid. Now, there may be some mechanism — and I'll yield to the Development Office and to the
Legal Office and the Audit and Management — or Budget and Management Office — but there may be some
mechanism whereby we could go out with something like a letter of interest that would be non -binding,
whereby we would basically say to the industry, "Here are the numbers. Here are the books. Give us your
concepts of what we could do. We're not going to necessarily award this to you." Obviously, the
disadvantage of that is, nobody's going to show their ace in the hole or they'll put their best foot forward
necessarily. But, you know, someone may say, "Well, look, the Off -Street Parking is providing you with
two million dollars ($2,000,000) a year. If we were managing this thing, we could provide you with four
million dollars "($4,000,000) a year." Because that's what it really gets down to on one level, I believe. And,
Commissioner Gort, I would yield to you because I really would like the benefit of your input.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding — and this was way back before I was in part of it. The reason the
Off -Street Parking was created is because the way our downtown was built, it was built without parking
facility. For that reason, it was created to provide parking in. downtown. Then, they expand to other
neighborhoods. My understanding also, the reason it stayed is because the rates are comfortable and they're
below the industry, which makes it affordable for a lot of the people that work in downtown who utilizes the
Off -Street Parking facilities. So, it serves two purposes.. The Off -Street Parking, my understanding, it
serves the revenue -producing. At the same time, it's got its social responsibility towards the community.
Like they're providing parking in places — it's not feasible for them and still they have parking and we're
going to request that they provide even more parking. In other neighborhoods, what we need in order to
expand the economic development to those areas. And I think that we should look at all the options. I think
we have to. We have to look at the options that — if the private sector comes in and it could make it better
for the city, I think we have to look for what's best for the city. But we need to analyze, presently, how
much they contribute to the city and what are they doing? And if the private sector could do better. I think
we do need to do comparisons. My understanding is, when I was the chairperson at that time and before I
became a chairperson, this was taken to the ballot once already and it was defeated. And I think that was
about 10 years ago or something like that.
7 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: What was taken to the ballot?
Vice Chairman Gort: The doing away with the Off -Street Parking. It was election — I think it was 10 years
ago or something like that.
Chairman Plummer: Or more. Mr. Cook is here.
Vice Chairman Gort: Way before us.
Chairman Plummer: He could probably answer the question. Mr. Cook, do you recall?
Mr. Clark Cook (Executive Director, Off -Street Parking): I do not remember the exact date, Commissioner.
but I think it was somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 years ago.
Chairman Plummer: OK. That's reasonable.
Commissioner Teele: Clark Cook with the Off -Street Parking Board.
Mr. Cook: I apologize.
Commissioner Teele: Well, it just seems to me that if a ballot question may or may be required, that's
something the City Attorney can advise us on. Whatever we're doing should be time lined, based upon a
March Presidential Election. I think, realistically, we need to begin to look at time lines and milestones. So,
I would ask my colleagues if — is a March timetable — or the Manager — is a March decision line timetable
— and that means, we have to have a decision to put something on the ballot or off the ballot by -- what is it,
60 days before that?
Mr. Vilarello: The window is not sooner than 120 days, not closer to the election than 60 days.
Commissioner Teele: So, we would be talking about, literally, by the first meeting in January?
Chairman Plummer: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: So, I would ask the Manager, do you believe that that time line is sufficient for you
all to provide us with options and recommendations, including, perhaps, a letter of...
Mr. Warshaw: Interest.
Commissioner Teele: A letter of interest from the industry on that?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: I would like to state clearly that I think Off -Street Parking has done what it perceives
its Charter to be, but I think this Commission needs to consider an ordinance between now and then relating
to Off -Street Parking because the number one fallacy of Off -Street Parking — the concept of Off -Street
Parking, as I see it, is that the Off -Street Parking Board and management has the position that they're there
to make a profit; they're there for the long-term benefit of the financial viability of parking. Therefore,
Economic Development, Community Redevelopment, those issues are not a part of the Off -Street Parking
agenda, if it doesn't make a profit. We will spend, over the next — the CRA, for example, will spend, over
the next three years, at least two million dollars ($2,000,000) in just parking infrastructure. I think that
8 October 12, 1999
"T;
when the Community Development Office comes around withneighborhood revitalization. on a citywide
basis, I think every Commissioner here knows of parking needs in the neighborhood that would facilitate
greater job creation by business expansion, et cetera. The problem is. Off -Street Parking isn't going to do
that unless they can figure out how to make the money on it. The Off -Street Parking Board committed to
build one parking lot to the CRA a year ago on 3rd Avenue and loth Street. Then, they totally reneged on
that agreement because they said, once we had to come up with two million dollars ($2,000,000) for the
City, our funds were gone, even though the board voted to do it. I don't quarrel with the Off -Street Parking
Board. I don't quarrel with their reneging on the deal. I mean, change in conditions. The problem is, is that
this Commission has never said to Off -Street Parking that "we expect you to provide non -revenue
generating parking infrastructure needs in the neighborhoods as a part of a neighborhood revitalization plan"
and say that "we expect you to spend some amount of money to do that." And, so, you know, the problem
is, is that if it doesn't generate a dollar, Off -Street Parking is really not going to do it and, quite frankly, there
are a lot of neighborhoods, particularly in the poor areas, Allapattah, in some of the Wynwood areas, in
some of the areas in Liberty City and Overtown, and Little Haiti, Little Havana, where there is a need for
parking for businesses, the businesses cannot afford to do it; the City won't do it unless it could generate --
and that is one of the fallacies I would be willing to predict, if the Planning Department were to do a
neighborhood study of all five districts, the unmet parking needs that would create jobs in the end -- because
the only way you can create a job is through business expansion. If businesses had that parking, they could
expand and create jobs, would be in the magnitude of ten to twenty million dollars citywide. But it doesn't
get addressed. So, I think we need to put that on the table because I'm not — I'm certain that someone could
come in and give us more money. And the second and final issue on that, in response to Commissioner
Gort, is this. I'm not sure that Off -Street Parking should make parking policies relating to pricing and
structure. I heard very carefully, Commissioner Gort, what you just said and that is...
Vice Chairman Gort: Going back to what you were saying, that the facilities would not build parking unless
they make money. Unfortunately, to build the parking, you have to borrow it. To borrow, you have to do
the bond issues and you have to maintain. When you do a bond issue, you have to do the debt services.
You also have to maintain reserve and it's a lot of funds required. My understanding, the reason they can
keep the price that they do it because the price sufficient to stay just a board and to create the reserve that is
required. That's something we need to look at. If we really have a lot more than what they're required to
have and this is the information they have to get back to us.
Commissioner Teele: The issue of parking — and I agree with you. And I think Off -Street Parking bonds
are probably some of the highest rated bonds in the City because they have taken a very pure approach. But
— I mean, again, we ask corporations to be good corporate citizens. We asked American Airlines. We
asked the Miami Heat. We ask everybody to be a good, corporate citizen. Why shouldn't government,
especially, in the area where they're doing work, be good, corporate citizens as well? And I think that's a
policy question that we ought to discuss at some point. But as it relates to the parking strategy and pricing,
there was a state representative in the early '80's from Urbandale, Florida named Fred Jones, and Fred Jones
was a czar of transportation. He was chairman of the Transportation Committee for about eight years,
which is unprecedented. And the one argument Fred Jones would also make to not give money to Dade
County and to the South Florida for transit was, if you can you go downtown and park for seven dollars ($7)
all day, then, why should we give you money for transit because you basically are undermining a transit
policy? The fact that we put in a surcharge shows that there is elasticity on the parking. And I really do
think that one of the things that the City Attorney and the Manager should give us is some flexibility to
maintain control over parking pricing, and I don't know who has that authority now, if that's with the
Off -Street Parking Board or not. But I do think that parking is too low. I think one of the biggest problems
in downtown Miami and all over Miami is that we have this population base of 380,000 people in the day. 1
mean, all week and then, during the day, what's the population? Does anybody have any idea?
9 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Anybody's guess.
Commissioner Sanchez: Seven hundred thousand?
Mr. Warshaw: Goes anywhere from five to seven to eight hundred thousand, but it's large.
Commissioner Teele: Seven hundred thousand. And these people are coming in; they're using City
resources; they're using City streets, the streets that have to be swept, in which neighborhoods don't get
swept and, yet, they're paying nothing. And I think one way to do it is to look at the parking pricing
structure. And I don't know if we have that authority, Mr. Attorney, Mr. Manager or if the Off -Street
Parking has that. But I think those are the...
Vice Chairman Gort: We do have.
Mr. Vilarello: The authority to fix rates and charges -for Off -Street Parking is vested by Charter and the
Department of Off -Street Parking. And I'm sure it's a condition of the bond documents...
Vice Chairman Gort: We have to confirm them.
Mr. Vilarello: Pardon me?
Vice Chairman Gort: Have to be confirmed by the Commissioner. Have to be approved by the
Commission.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Gort: Have to be approved by the Commission.
Chairman Plummer: Because I'll tell you, we've had some real screaming matches here when we went to
raise rates.
Commissioner Teele: Well, we have screaming matches anytime we raise revenues. I don't care where it is.
And I mean...
Chairman Plummer: No. But I could very well remember where this Commission, on any number of
occasions, had to approve the rates.
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes, we did.
Mr. Cook: If you would like me to answer that question, Commissioner Teele, I would be glad to. I know
the answer.
Commissioner Teele: I would be very happy if you would answer. Tell me, first of all, what are the current
rates and what are comparable rates in other cities? And, then, just answer the question.
Mr. Cook: My name is Clark Cook. I'm the Parking Director for Miami Parking System. Commissioner,
our rates are somewhat below what they are in other cities because it's for a lot of various reasons. This
Commission controls those rates. We have to come to you for rate increases.
Commissioner Teele: I didn't hear a number, Mr. Cook. I asked you...
10 October 12, 1999
Mr. Eook: I do not know the exact number — example, Commissioner. If you go to New York. you're
paying nineteen dollars ($19) an hour.
Commissioner Teele: No. But what do we charge right now?
Mr. Cook: We charge about dollar seventy-five ($1.75) per hour. It varies in each garage, Commissioner. 1
can't quote. I'll be glad to send you a copy of that, of one of our rates, if you'd like. Our five...,
Commissioner Teele: An average would be fine.
Mr. Cook: Somewhere in the neighborhood of a dollar and a quarter ($1.25) an hour, probably average.
Commissioner Teele: Or a median.
Mr. Cook: I would be guessing, Commissioner. I'll be glad to send you a rate — a copy of every one of our
rates.
Commissioner Teele: Every one of them would be very misleading....
Mr. Cook: Well...
Commissioner Teele: ...and very harmful because I, first of all, wouldn't understand it. And second of all,
what I really need is an average or a medium.
Mr. Cook: I will provide that for you. Our rates are lower...
Commissioner Teele: And I would like...
Mr. Cook: Our rates are lower. Our Board's philosophy has been to maintain the rates in an affordable area,
but our rates...
Commissioner Teele: What do you mean, in an affordable area?
Mr. Cook: The object is to keep the rates at a level and where people can afford to park when they come to
downtown and to keep the people where they can afford to park in other areas.
Commissioner Teele: See, Commissioner Sanchez, you're an accountant. But I think what we've done —1
mean — and I appreciate what the Mayor has put on the table. But I'll be very honest with you. I had. no idea
that we control the rates. But if we control the rates, I think we ought to have our heads examined for
having rates so low in a city that is the only city in the state that's in a financial emergency. We just took
thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) from the Clerk, thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) from the Attorney; a
hundred thousand and eighty thousand dollars ($180,000) from the Police Department. I mean, on and on
and on and on, which we need to restore, I don't mind saying, and we're subsidizing the lowest rates or some
of the lowest rates in the state, with the only rail system in the state. With the only rail system. I mean,
who's running the ship?
Mr. Cook: Commissioner, I don't mean — I would like to point out that, in the Five -Year Plan, we show the
rate increases that we're planning in the Five -Year Plan, which we've sent you a copy out for some time.
11 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Do you plan any rate increase this year?
Mr. Cook: Yes, sir. Two hundred and about — a little over two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000).
Commissioner Teele: No. I'm talking about in...
Mr. Cook: This year, yes, sir. Those rate increases will be in front of you in November.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I can tell you this. I don't see why we haven't looked at the most important way
to raise revenues. I mean, all we can do is hit the taxpayers; hit the homeowners; hit the businesses. I mean,
at some point we ought to hit the freeloaders who are coming to town and getting out of town and literally
paying nothing. At some point — I mean, you know, are we protecting the homeowners, the taxpayers, the
property owners or are we protecting, you know, the employees who come here to work? But they, you
know, retreat to a much wonderful quality of life in all over this — I would ask that the Manager would
provide us, at the next meeting, some discussion of the rates and some options, particularly, in light of
options that could be implemented this year, that would exceed what the Off -Street Parking currently plans
in the Five -Year Plan, and with a view toward determining whether or not any of those dollars could be
available for any of the special activities that need to be addressed immediately and maybe we need to
revisit that when we take up Item Number "C" here below. But, Mr. Cook, again, I appreciate your candor
but it would be very helpful if you could give, at least to me, the average rate and the median rate and what,
you know, twenty-five cents ($0.25) represents on a fiscal year basis against the average of the median. In
other words, if we were to increase parking by twenty-five cents ($0.25) an hour beyond what's proposed,
what does that represent in terms of dollars?
Mr. Cook: I would be delighted to do that, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I don't have any other items.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Teele, there were three other items. Do you wish the Manager to
speak?
Commissioner'Teele: Well, I would like to have — I would like to make a motion, if I could get a second, to
instruct the City Attorney and the City Manager to jointly come to this Commission, in the next committee
meeting, with a report analyzing the numbers that have been presented by the Mayor. I don't have any
back-up on the million dollars ($1,000,000) that has been represented that it could provide in the first year.
I assume — I'm certain that there are some back-up but I would like to see the back-up for the numbers that
are cited and the Manager and Attorney's comments. I would also ask that the Manager and the Attorney
work jointly to prepare a timetable that would afford us the opportunity to go to the voters during the March
Presidential Primary for any adjustments or to respond positively to the Mayor's request. Whether or not we
need that is another issue, Mr. Attorney.
Chairman Plummer: I don't think we need a motion. I think they -both understand it and they will be
forthcoming with it.
Commissioner Teele: Well,...
Chairman Plummer: If you want it as a motion...
Commissioner Teele: ...I don't...
12 October 12, 1999
Vice Chairman Gort: Second.
Commissioner Teele: I won't make a motion if you don't want one, Mr. Chairman, but 1 think one of the
things that this board needs to do is, we need to have formal actions taken...
Chairman Plummer: Fine, sir.
Commissioner Teele: ... on things by — that have been presented to us by the Mayor because I think we
should give great deference to the Mayor.
Chairman Plummer: All right. There's a motion.
Commissioner Teele: I would also ask, as a part of -that motion, that a bond counsel be engaged, that is
satisfactory to the Mayor, for the purpose of assisting the City Attorney in engaging in an analysis of this
and, at the same time, that the Off -Street Parking be afforded the opportunity to retain counsel of their own
as it relates to this issue of the so-called take-over or the issue related to the Mayor's recommendations.
Chairman Plummer: All right. There is a second by Commissioner Gort. Now, the City Attorney.
Mr. Vilarello: With regard to the retention of counsel, I'd like that to be a separate item, authorizing, by
resolution, me to retain bond counsel to address this issue in an amount not to exceed twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000).
Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Teele, you heard the request of the City Attorney?
Commissioner Teele: I certainly withdraw that portion from the motion and would carry this motion and,
then, would make a second motion.
Chairman Plummer: What is in reference to bond counsel? What is the cost factor of that?
Mr. Vilarello: Bond counsel...
Commissioner Teele: Well, let's take this motion.
Vice Chairman Gort: Let's vote on this one, then.
Commissioner Teele: I'm withdrawing this portion — I'm withdrawing any reference to bond...
Chairman Plummer: All right. You want to draw on the — you want to do on the counsel first alone?
Commissioner Teele: No, on the motion that's on the table...
Chairman Plummer: The motion on the...
Commissioner Teele: ...instructing them to come back at the next meeting and to prepare us a report with
timelines, et cetera, and an action plan.
Chairman Plummer: No, but I'm in reference to engaging bond counsel.
Commissioner Teele: I'm withdrawing that from the motion.
13 1 1 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. There is a motion on the floor. Is it understood? All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show no negative votes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO.99-741
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY ATTORNEY AND THE
CITY MANAGER TO COME -BACK AT THE NEXT CITY
COMMISSION MEETING WITH A REPORT ANALYZING THE
MAYOR'S REVENUE PROPOSAL WHEREIN PRIVATIZATION OF
THE OFF-STREET PARKING AUTHORITY COULD REALIZE
$1000,000 IN THE FIRST YEAR; IN ADDITION TO THE REVENUE
STREAM WE CURRENTLY RECEIVE; FURTHER REQUESTING
BACKUP DOCUMENTATION TO THOSE NUMBERS CITED AND
THE MANAGER'S AND CITY ATTORNEY'S COMMENTS
REGARDING SAME; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY
ATTORNEY AND THE CITY MANAGER TO JOINTLY PREPARE A
TIMETABLE AND AN ACTION PLAN THAT WOULD AFFORD
THE CITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO BEFORE VOTERS DURING
THE MARCH 14, 2000 PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY
FOR ANY ADJUSTMENTS, TO RESPOND POSITIVELY TO THE
MAYOR'S REQUEST; FURTHER INCLUDING IN SAID REPORT
WHAT THE AVERAGE AND THE MEDIAN RATE FOR PARKING
WOULD REPRESENT IN TERMS OF PARKING REVENUE ON A
FISCAL YEAR BASIS.
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, ' would you include in that the average and the median and what
twenty-five cent ($0.25) increments would mean on a fiscal year basis, if directed in terms of increases?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Cook, I have one question of you, sir. As you know, one of the things that this
Commission is trying its best to do is, in fact, to do for the senior citizens. Do you have what you could
consider any surpluses that you could give to the City to help us implement?
14 October 12, 1999
Mr.:Cook: No, sir. I reported to the City Attorney what my surpluses are. I am required, by ordinance and
agreement with the City, if I have surpluses, they go to the City. All my operating dates go to the City.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, there are other items that had been discussed.
Commissioner Teele: Well, a follow-up on that. Would you provide us, Mr. Attorney — Mr. Manager, with
a list, over the last 15 years, of the surpluses that have been turned over to the City from Off -Street Parking?
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, until this year, I don't believe there's ever been a surplus...
Mr. Warshaw: It's only been the first time.
Mr. Cook: It's only been — this is the first year, Commissioner.
Mr. Vilarello: ...turned over to the City.
Commissioner Teele: Well, that speaks volumes.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Teele, you still have the floor, sir. Do you wish the Manager to repeat...
Commissioner Teele: Yes, I do. But I would yield to Commissioner Sanchez.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you, Mr. Teele. Mr. Cook, the information that Commissioner Teele
requested on the increase from — a quarter of what we would bring in revenue for the whole year. Can you
also provide me with all that information?
Mr. Cook: I will provide all the Commissioners with that. If I provide one, I should provide all of you.
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to touch on the other two items that are of great
importance and I just, for the record, would like to state the...
Commissioner Teele: Did we vote on that second motion?
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): No. No.
Chairman Plummer: In reference to counsel?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Chairman Plummer: No, sir.
15 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: No.
Commissioner Teele: Before you move, could we just vote on that?
Commissioner Sanchez: You withdrew that motion.
Commissioner Teele: I withdrew that portion because the attorney asked that it be a separate motion.
Chairman Plummer: Motion is on the floor by Commissioner Teele for the City Attorney to have.the ability
to engage outside counsel of an amount not to exceed twenty-five thousand. Is there a second?
Commissioner Teele: Bond counsel that is satisfactory to the Mayor.
Chairman Plummer: Is there a second?
Vice Chairman Gort: Second.
Chairman Plummer: Seconded by Commissioner Gort. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Any negative? Show no negative votes.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-742
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENGAGE A
QUALIFIED LAW FIRM, ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
OFF-STREET PARKING ("DOSP"), TO PROVIDE LEGAL
SERVICES TO ASSIST IN DOSP'S ANALYSIS OF BINDING BOND
INDEBTEDNESS AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY COMMISSION'S
DELIBERATIONS CONCERNING THE DISSOLUTION OF DOSP;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $25,000, FROM DOSP'S GENERAL OPERATING
BUDGET FOR SAID SERVICES.
16 October 12, 1999
(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: Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, the other two items that are.on this budget proposal by the Mayor is
the addition — asking the Law Enforcement Trust Fund to come up with two million dollars ($2,000,000)
from that fund and, as Commissioner Teele stated, I think that we need to emphasize more time on this
matter to make sure that whether the money could be — if we could come up with the money or not and,
therefore — Chief O'Brien, is he here?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Chief William O'Brien (Chief of Police): Yes, sir.
Commissioner Sanchez: It's my understanding that the Law Enforcement Trust Fund, which is money
seized from drug activities or criminal activities that are therefore given to the Police Department, could
only be used for crime prevention and anything pertaining to crime prevention. I know that we had
extensive discussions here in the Commission to try to come up with money from the Law Enforcement
Trust Fund to be put forth into the budget. Some of the discussions were half a million dollars ($500,000)
that were given to the budget through the proposal of being the VIP (Vehicle Impoundment Project) or
whatever that process was, and that was the only way. But I think that the Oversight Board rejected that. It
was not allowed to be put in the budget, is that correct, Mr. City. Manager?
Chief O'Brien: No. They did accept that half million.
Commissioner Sanchez: They did accept it? It was accepted. Now, .I just want on the record, could these
two million dollars ($2,000,000) that — whether you have it or not, I don't know. I think it's in the — it's in
your account, the two million dollars ($2,000,000) of Law Enforcement Trust Fund. Could that money be
used to go towards the budget?
Chief O'Brien: At this time, we're still exploring possible uses but, at this time, we have not been able to
find a legal use of that money to offset the general budget.
Commissioner Sanchez: So, at this time, we have not been able to find a legal term to be able to transfer
that money into the budget and implement it, correct?
Chief O'Brien: That's correct.
17 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Thank you, Mr. O'Brien.
r
Chairman Plummer: Is there any other questions in reference to the Mayor's memo?
Vice Chairman Gort: I have a question.
ChairmanPlummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: These funds are going to be utilized by the Police and supplement some of the general
funds he uses?
Chief O'Brien: No, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: No?
Chief O'Brien: It can't be used supplant any of the funds that are ongoing.
Vice Chairman Gort: Thank you.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Thank you very much, Chief O'Brien. The placing of this item on the — in the memo
dated September 28, itself, raises a number of legal issues and I'm just wondering, Mr. Attorney, does the
Mayor have legal counsel? Do you provide legal counsel to the Mayor? Didn't we...
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: During the Suarez era, didn't we authorize the Mayor to have legal counsel?
Mr. Vilarello: - There's an ordinance that authorizes, subject to Commission's approval, the Mayor to .have
separate counsel on particular situations but, otherwise, I provide legal counsel to the Mayor.
Commissioner Teele: Does the Mayor have legal counsel?
Mr. Vilarello: Independent of my office?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.
Mr. Vilarello: No, sir.
Commissioner Teele: See, this memo...
Mr. Vilarello: I should say not that I'm aware of.
Commissioner Teele: This memo, September 28 memo, the third bullet or the second bullet, really
represents a real legal problem for Chief O'Brien or for the — you see, the State Law is very clear, that you
can't use Law Enforcement Trust Fund monies to supplant or supplement the fiscal budget and it states it
right here in the memo from the Mayor. "Please find some possible revenues to supplement the budget for
18 October 12, 1999
fiscal year '99. I submit these sources to the possible reductions, as previously indicated." And, then, the
bullet says "Up to two million dollars ($2,000,000) of Law Enforcement could be used for Police overtime
rather than General Funds." I mean, no one would accuse Mayor Carollo of intentionally but, you know, 1
think we're not doing him or the City a service by allowing him to write something like this, which is clearly
illegal. It flies directly in the face of the intent of the law and even if he were to come up with something
now, it has a chilling effect. I mean, anybody could take a lawsuit and say, "Well, this is being done
pursuant to this, for this reason." That's illegal. So, I just regret that this is on the public record because I
think it has a chilling effect, Mr. Attorney, and I think that you and Chief O'Brien and the Mayor should
confer on the matter.
Mr. Vilarello:: Commissioner, obviously, this item came up at — on the 28th and I did not have — and the
Mayor did not have an opportunity to discuss it with me. However, there are significant opportunities for us
to use LETF funds for special non -recurring type projects and use overtime — and use that to pay overtime.
So, there's circumstances where that could be an appropriate use of LETT funds and it does condition it on
the consent of the Chief and the Chief is fully advised on the appropriate use of LETF funds and I believe
he's working toward finding some kind of use for it; however, at this time, as he's indicated, he's not had a
particular project that he can address those overtime funds or LETF funds towards.
Commissioner Teele: Chief O'Brien, how much overtime did we have last year and how much do we have
in the budget this year?
Chairman Plummer: About seven...
Chief O'Brien: Six point eight. Almost seven million dollars ($7,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: Seven million dollars ($7,000,000).
Chief O'Brien: The point...
Commissioner Teele: Is any of that overtime paid by private companies? I mean, is any of that overtime,
for example, reimbursed by the Miami Heat or by special events? Is any of that seven million dollars
($7,000,000)...
Chief O'Brien: A certain amount of that is reimbursed.
Commissioner Teele: About what percentage?
Chief O'Brien: Probably less than five percent.
Commissioner Teele: So, this is planned overtime?
Chief O'Brien: That's correct.
Mr. Warshaw: Planned in the sense that, contractually, as an example, police officers go to court. You
know, those dollars are built in. So, in that sense, some of those monies are planned...
Commissioner Teele: But that's a question of management and how you're scheduling your management, I
mean, largely. And — well, let me ask you this. Do .other cities have — the same of similar size, have the
same amount of overtime in their budget? Commissioner Plummer, you've been around more so than any of
US.
19 October 12, 1999
Chaisman Plummer: Our overtime is absolutely — I have said for years — out of control. Out of control.
Commissioner Teele: Then, why do we budget it and why are we approving it?
Chairman Plummer: Well, I can't answer that. I have, actually, every year, voted against it because of the
fact, you know, that it's just — I mean, they use it to their advantage. And all I'm...
Commissioner Teele: But, Mr. Chairman, we are the legislative authority. If we don't appropriate it, they
can't use it. So, I mean, why — I mean, is this a good ole boy thing? I mean, is this good government? I
mean, what are we doing here?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, I will share with you, sir, the documents presented to me to justify, not in
my opinion, but justify the overtime, which is just out of control. I mean, it's ridiculous that you should
have 10 percent of your budget more than that for overtime. It's very poor planning, at best. And when you
start taking and looking at the court costs, you know, they tell us how much we make in court. Those are
two-third/one-third. And you've got to pay overtime in that. And, yet, the subpoena fees go to the Police
Department, which has always been the case. But as far as the overtime is concerned, I've said for years, it's
— to me, it's out of control.
Commissioner Teele: Well...
Chairman Plummer: Never got a third vote.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the Manager present us with the comparable overtime
for Miami -Dade County and the number of police officers and give it to us based on per officer to per
officer. The same thing for Fort Lauderdale. The same thing for Broward County or in any other city or
municipality that the Chief would like for us to look at. But I think, if the overtime is out of line, we should
revisit it as a part of the budget process. There is no reason we should subsidize overtime that is clearly out
of line with the industry standards, and I don't know what the standards or the norms are.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Now, are there any other questions...
Commissioner Teele: May I hear from Chief O'Brien, please? Because I don't want him to...
Chairman Plummer: Sure.
Chief O'Brien: Let me just say this.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort is trying to get the floor, so — but go ahead, Chief. --
Chief O'Brien: A great deal of the overtime is contractually required.- When we send officers to court and
they're off -duty, the get three hours minimum. That's a contractual item. we have no option, on that. Our
overtime has been managed, I think, quite well. And, in fact, there's been almost a million dollar
($1,000,000) reduction in overtime as opposed to last year.
Chairman Plummer: Last year was seven. It's down two hundred thousand.
Commissioner Teele: Well...
20 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: It's part of the Union deal, where the Police Department, if they go and they go to
courts regardless of how long they are there, we pay them a minimum of three hours, correct. Chief?
Chief O'Brien: That's correct. That's a contractual item.
Chairman Plummer: That's a minimum of three hours.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But, J.L, let me tell you something. -
Chairman Plummer: And that could be scheduled.
Commissioner Teele: "The Miami Herald" and everybody have done all of these studies., The City of
Miami was one of the agencies — I mean, we need to find that story. But the City of Miami did not look like
eagle scouts when it got to overtime abuse in the court system.
Chairman Plummer: That was DUI (Driving Under the Influence).
Commissioner Teele: Say again.
Chairman Plummer: DUI.
Commissioner Teele: But it was overtime.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, yeah. And that...
Commissioner Teele: And the fact of the matter is, what remedial actions have we taken? And it's a
scheduling issue. I mean — then, we ought to schedule police officers to go to court during their regular
hours, then we basically have to do it, if that's what everybody else is doing. But I can tell you what's going
to happen here. Once you pay people overtime so long, instead of buying a Mercedes 190, they buy a
Mercedes 330 or it a 330 or a 320?
Chairman Plummer: That's only in the Fire Department.
Commissioner Teele: Three twenty. Once — I mean, instead of buying a house of two hundred thousand,
you buy a house of two fifty because you know you're going to get that extra money. And, at some point, it
becomes a real morale issue and I hope that we haven't reached into that point.
Chief O'Brien: If I could respond. Again, with regard to the DUI. Miami Police Department, in
coordination with other departments and the County, initiated a court standby system, that DUI overtime for
court has drastically reduced. Additionally, when you look at our overtime, compared to last year and
compared to previous years, you have to appreciate that our staffing is at an all-time high. So, when you
start to — as you're suggesting — taking a look at overtime per person, again, you'll see a significant
reduction.
Commissioner Teele: But I think a comparison of cities and jurisdictions...
Mr. Warshaw: I'll get that for you.
Commissioner Teele: ...on a per, sworn police officer basis — in other words, you know, obviously, Dade
County has got what, 1500 sworn police officers?
21 October 12, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Thirty-five hundred.
Commissioner Teele: Sworn? I'm talking about police officers,'not Corrections.
Chief O'Brien: Twenty-eight — twenty-three hundred.
Chairman Plummer: It's twenty-two.
Commissioner Teele: So, they're going to have a...
Chief O'Brien: Yeah, twenty-two and change.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, twenty-two is what I understood.
Commissioner Teele: Whatever they have. I mean, you know, if you divide that into the sworn — you
know, per police officer or Tampa or Fort Lauderdale, you're going to get a comparison.
Chief O'Brien: One of the other items, also, a significant portion of our overtime is offset by grants. For
instance, when the five-year old girl had sexual battery, we spent a lot of overtime in that week bringing the
perpetrator to justice. That overtime was offset. Was paid for.
Mr. Warshaw: There's also a million dollars ($1,000,000) in that number, approximately, of monies that are
reimbursed either through grants or other sources. So, what I'd like to do is get you the full analysis of how
we spend that money, along with the comparison of Dade, Broward, Fort Lauderdale and other counties.
Commissioner Teele: Can we have that by next week?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Has anybody — has budget or the -- what is that office called, Budget — Management
and Budget?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Has Management and Budget or any outside office done an analysis of this issue?
Mr. Warshaw: I think, over the years, we've done a lot of overtime analysis. I don't know if Management
and Budget did it. Certainly, the Police Department did it, I know, when I was...
Commissioner Teele: Could we have an outside office, of your choice, to do a full analysis...
Mr. Warshaw: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: ... and report within 90 days and give it to us before we break for Christmas?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Of the overtime, please? Thank you.
22 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: That's what I asked for last year and couldn't get three votes.
,,
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Also, request...
Commissioner Teele: No. You asked for an outside consultant.
Chairman Plummer: I asked for an outside consultant to do a review, yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I'm asking for an outside department to do a review.
Vice Chairman Gort: For an inside.
Commissioner Teele: Inside the city...
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: ... but outside of the Police.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: If you remember, when you go to court, there's certain charges and we requested for
you to find out if we could charge to those charges the funds being spent by — to our office or by the City of
Miami.
Mr. Warshaw: There is a program like that and...
Chairman Plummer: Reimburse
Mr. Warshaw: ...fortunately, the recovery rate is extremely low. I don't know what we've recovered, if
anything, to date.
Chief O'Brien: Well, whatever we can recover, it would be — it would be welcome. Mr. Chairman, my
understanding is, I've been told by the Clerk that we announced that, at 9:30, we were going to have
recognitions and awards.
Chairman Plummer: Sir, I understand that. Remember me, I wanted to start this meeting at seven.
Everybody said nine.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: I would move that we break for the award ceremony.
23 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: All right. The only awards that I have are by Mr. Gort and, Mr. Gort, you can handle
it th&best way that you see fit.
2. PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS
CERTIFICATES OF . APPRECIATION TO SPONSORS OF DOMINO BRIDGE COMMUNITY
TOURNAMENTS: COCONUT GROVE BANK 'COCONUT GROVE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
CASINO PRINCESA, BAYFRONT PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST AND HUMANA
3. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ TO CHAIR'CommiTTEE .TO RESTORE ORANGE BOWL -
INVOLVE ATHLETIC DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSITY'OF M0 AMI.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Back to work. Just -for the record, ladies and gentlemen, we're still on a
Special Commission Meeting. It was convened with supplemental budget at 9 o'clock. We have not, yet, to
start the regular agenda, which is scheduled for two. Also, for the record, the only thing that I see pulled by
the administration is Item Number 32. Should you be here on Item 32, it will not be heard today. All right.
Now, are we finished with the Mayor's proposals or do we have...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: ...more conversation there? Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, one other item. On the Orange Bowl. I know that Commissioner
Gort had had some discussions about the Orange Bowl. I'm also cognizant of the fact that I believe
Commissioner Sanchez represents the area. Commissioner Gort, could you tell us what we're doing on the
Orange Bowl or what your initiative was? I just would like to understand it.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mainly, what it was is to create a committee. Which committee would sit down and
try to find ways — people within the industry, people that have certain interests and have played in the
Orange Bowl. They have names. And for these individuals to find ways that — create a foundation to find
ways to get funds for the Orange Bowl. To make sure the Orange Bowl stays here and we can make
improve it and make it better. My understanding also is, the University of Miami is willing to sign a 14-year
contract or above and they would like to create some sky boxes in there and we're going to need funds for
that.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: I would ask the City Attorney to prepare a resolution- that would authorize
Commissioner Sanchez as the person who lives — who represents the area, to chair a committee related to
the Orange Bowl Restoration. I have met with — at the next Commission meeting. I have met with the
University of Miami Athletic Director last week at the Orange Bowl. I really believe that the Orange Bowl
is a truly, under utilized gem and treasure in our community. I think there's a lot that could be done to
enhance the Orange Bowl. The University of Miami has already signed that agreement. I walked through
the area. Mr. Chairman, the grounds that are kept there are just pristine, immaculate. They are some of the
best grounds in college football, I understand. There is such high esprit de corps within the employees at
the Orange Bowl. I would certainly hope, at the appropriate time, Commissioner Sanchez, you would bring
them here, if you agree that there's that esprit de corps to be recognized. I think the Orange Bowl is one of
the things that's going right. At the same time, I think we really need to look at positive ways to make the
24 October 12, 1999
' 1 i
Orange Bowl a first-class facility. And let me say that. There will be very powerful forces in this
community that will not want to see that, for a number of reasons. And, again, I think this Commission
needs to be very careful that we don't allow that to happen. I also believe that the University of Miami is
prepared to come forward with a consultant to advance a joint venture, perhaps, on how the requisite boxes
can be acquired. They are, for the record, at least 150 seats short of what they need right now for their
Golden Hurricanes or whatever...
Commissioner Sanchez: Club.
Commissioner_ Teele: ' Club. And there's a tremendous opportunity, I think, to do that, even if it means
going to the Oversight Board and working through the strategic reserves. I believe that a private venture
could be put together, wherein effect we could lease the space and let them do a turn key and let them make
some money on it and do that. The Mayor has recommended the naming rights. And I would also ask that
the Chairman, if this Commission were to agree to set up that committee, would be responsible for reporting
back to us in 90 days on a naming rights issue. But I think that should be done in careful consultation with
the Manager and the University of Miami. And if you would allow it, Mr. Chairman, I would so move, at
this time, that Commissioner Sanchez be named...
Vice Chairman Gort: Before you make that motion, I think we already approved that in the last meeting,
when we presented the committee to be created.
Commissioner Teele: Oh, the Committee's going to do the naming rights?
Chairman Plummer: No.
Vice Chairman Gort: No. I'm talking about the creation of this committee. Your motion today should be
that we should have Sanchez for the representative — as the chairperson for that committee. And I think...
Commissioner Teele: As the co-chair maybe with someone else that's already there. I don't know if they've
named the chair.
Vice Chairman Gort: No, no, we have not named a chairperson. And I think it would be right to have the
Commissioner as the chairperson.
Commissioner Teele: I would — well, then, I would yield to you to make the motion.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Well, the motion will be to — and my understanding is, the resolution was to come
back with each one of us who appoints an individual to that board.
Commissioner Teele: Right. -
Vice Chairman Gort: At the same time, the athletic director of the University of Miami, whoever that .
person, that position will be one of the board members also.
Commissioner Teele: Exactly.
Vice Chairman Gort: And the Mayor would also get to appoint an individual to that — a person to the board.
25 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: I would second the motion, with Commissioner Sanchez being the chairman.
Chairman Plummer: Motion understood? All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Anyone wishing to be registered as negative? Show it unanimous.
The following motion was introduced by Vice Chairman.Gort, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO.99-743
A MOTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ TO CHAIR
THE COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF
RESTORATION OF THE ORANGE BOWL; FURTHER
STIPULATING THAT THE ATHLETIC DIRECTOR OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SHOULD SERVE ON SAID COMMITTEE
AS ONE OF THE APPOINTEES, ALONG WITH THE OTHER
DESIGNATED COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS, WHICH WILL BE
FORTHCOMING; URGING THAT COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ
PROVIDE THE COMMISSION WITH A REPORT CONCERNING
ORANGE BOWL RESTORATION EFFORTS WITHIN 90 DAYS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Regalado: Question for the City Attorney.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney.
Commissioner Regalado: On the Orange Bowl paint job, what is the status?
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): We have filed the lawsuit and we're in the process of proceeding
through the discovery phase of the litigation.
Commissioner Regalado: And the timetable?
Mr. Vilarello: Litigation takes quite a long period of time, Commissioner. I can't, at this point, give you any
kind of specific time, although, we will expedite the litigation as fast as possible.
26 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: What are we seeking from them, I mean, specifically?
r
Mr. Vilarello: We're seeking to have the paint — apparently, the paint was put on the Orange Bowl without
the appropriate preparation and to have the Orange Bowl either painted or dollars sufficient to cover the
painting of the Orange Bowl again.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
4. DISCUSS BUDGET OF SISTER CITIES PROGRAM — DISCUSS CITY'S INVOLVEMENT WITH
MAYOR'S "SUMMIT OF THE AMERICAS" CONFERENCE.
Chairman Plummer: All right. We'll now move on to Item B. Discussion concerning a budget for the Sister
Cities Program. We're still on the Special Agenda.
Mr. Luie Brennan: Lieu Brennan, Interim Director, Department of Management and Budget. The budget
for Sister Cities program is a hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($160,00.0).
Commissioner Teele: Excuse me, Mr. Brennan. Did you_pass out anything? My — I don't...
Mr. Brennan: No, I did not pass anything out.
Commissioner Teele: You know, Mr. Manager, again, I — for the record; I really do object to the fact that
we have a professional staff. We have nothing in writing. We have — this has been going on now for two
weeks. We should, at least, have a document before us that outlines that this was a specific motion and
request that we get a report, and those reports should be in writing. There's nothing in the record, once we
move on from this.
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): Commissioner, I apologize for that. I know this is a discussion item.
And the Sister Cities budget is part, you know, of the appropriated budget that's already been passed, but I'll
get you something in writing.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Are we going to discuss this item any further?
Commissioner Teele: Well, have we heard a report? I mean, what are they doing? What are our Sister
Cities? I mean, what activities have we had over the last year? What are we getting for the taxpayers'
money? How much are we spending?
Mr. Brennan: A hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($160,000) budgeted for 2000.
Commissioner Teele: How much did we spend last year?
Mr. Brennan: Last year we spent about seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000).
Commissioner Teele: So, what's the justification for increasing it from seventy-six thousand to a hundred
and sixty thousand?
Mr. Brennan: I do not know the plan for the Mayor for Sister Cities program, but he took on an additional
employee to assist with the Sister Cities program, and we added that.
27 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: Did you get any justifi — I mean, these numbers are here without any backup? Are
you suggesting that you all increased — you doubled the budget?
Mr. Brennan: The budget was not doubled, Commissioner. The budget...
Commissioner Teele: Well, from the actual expenditures of seventy-six thousand dollars ($76.000) to a
hundred and seventy-six — a hundred and sixty...
Mr. Brennan: The budget was a hundred forty-one thousand five ninety-eight.
Commissioner Teele: But based upon actual expenditures, was seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000)? So,
you're...
Mr. Brennan: Actual expenditures to -date is seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000).
Commissioner Teele: Well, the year's over now.
Mr. Brennan: But at the time when we were doing this budget, we did not know that he would only be
spending seventy-six thousand dollars at the end of the year.
Commissioner Teele: Are you suggesting that you all increased the budget without any paper work, without
any justification, without any documentation?
Mr. Brennan: We had paperwork that he had one employee and we increased it for that one employee.
Commissioner Teele: Has any other employee been hired?
Mr. Brennan: No, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: I've got a question on this. I'm a little...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm a little confused. I — Mr. Manager, is the Sister Cities program working on
the Mayor's Conference? Is the person hired — this is my question. Is the person hired working for Sister
Cities for the activities or for the Mayor's Conference? And the reason I'm asking this is because the Mayor
has said that this is not costing the City one dollar.
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, I don't know the answer to that. I don't know what the relationship is
between the Sister Cities program and the Mayor's Summit. I assume there's probably some linkage
between the two but I don't know the answer to that.
Commissioner-Regalado: So, you're saying that — is that budget covered already? I mean, is it being used?
Is it — to your knowledge, there's a hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($160,000) are being used now?
Mr. Brennan: To my knowledge, I cannot answer that. Apart from the salaries that are being charged there.
Commissioner Regalado: How much is that, the salaries?
Mr. Brennan: We have two employees right now that are being charged there.
28 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: When was the second employee brought on?
Mr. Brennan: Some time in July.
Chairman Plummer: Did not this Commission, as I recall, reduce that amount...
Commissioner Regalado: No, we did not.
Chairman Plummer: ...for the actual budget?
Commissioner Regalado: No, we did not.
Chairman Plummer: Did not. All right.
Commissioner Regalado: We told them that we needed to know information in order to reduce.
Chairman Plummer: Oh, that's the point I was trying to make, when there was supposedly a motion that was
going to kill the budget completely. I said, at least, find out what's happening and what's going on.
Commissioner Teele: Well, that's why it's on the agenda now.
Chairman Plummer: Yeah, I understand that. But know we don't have — we still don't have any material.
Commissioner Teele: We have no material — can we get, at least, a copy of the reductions? You know, the
sheet of paper that had the reductions that were made in the budget?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Could we get that passed out?
Mr. Warshaw: 'Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: What Sister Cities — I have been here for 18 months — 20 months. No one has talked
to me about Sister Cities since I've been here. Are the Commissioners involved in Sister Cities? I mean, do
we have Sister Cities assigned?. Is there a Sister Cities Program? I mean...
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Mr. Warshaw: Yes. I think I stated...
Commissioner Teele: Do you have a Sister City?
Chairman Plummer: Well, wait. Whoa, whoa.
Commissioner Regalado: I don't even have a cousin city.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Let me interject here, if I may. Mr. Teele, we do have Sister Cities. Are
they active is another question. We have Sister Cities that are legitimate with the Sister Cities International
in Washington, Bogota, Columbia; Cali, Columbia; Santo Domingo, and San Jose, Costa Rica.
29 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Sanchez: But the question is, are they active?
Chairman Plummer: Those are the ones that I am very much familiar with...
Commissioner Teele: Well — but, J.L.?
Chairman Plummer: ...but none of them are active at this time.
Commissioner Teele: But why are we spending a hundred and sixty thousand dollars ($160,000)...
Chairman Plummer: Sir, I'm not speaking to that. I'm saying that we had, at one time, 11 Sister Cities, OK.
We had one in Israel. We had one in Mexico.
Commissioner Teele: But there was a hell of a Sister Cities program in Italy, I recall reading.
Commissioner Regalado: ' Palermo.
Commissioner Teele: They took a band, a choir...
Commissioner Regalado: Palermo.
Chairman Plummer: You're very right, but that one is completely dead now. We had one supposedly...
Commissioner Teele: What do you mean? We've invested a million dollars ($1,000,000) in that city.
Chairman Plummer: Nice, France.
Vice Chairman Gort: My under - Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding in reading back, before we had the crisis, we were very helpful to
many of the Sister Cities and we gave them a lot of support, a lot of help. And, unfortunately, when we
went into the crisis, a lot of that help, that assistance was stopped. And I think there was only one Sister
City, which is Kagoshima, that sent some funds to us during the hurricane, when we had the problem here.
So, some of those Sister Cities were very much alive at the time. In the last two years, right after the crisis, I
think that program has been stopped quite a bit.
Chairman Plummer: All right, gentlemen. What do you wish to do with Item B? --
Vice Chairman Gort: We need more information.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I thought we'd want to get a little information, Commissioner Plummer. I
would ask the City Clerk, if you could provide us with a list of the Sister Cities that have been approved?
And, to the best of your ability, in working with the Manager's Office and the Sister Cities program, to give
us a list of the active Sister Cities that are, at least, on the way. I mean — but, Mr. Manager and Mr.
Chairman, at the appropriate time, I would move that the Sister Cities budget be rolled back to the last year's
expenditure, and that all employees that are working for the Sister Cities program be detailed to an
appropriate office, to write a plan relating to Sister Cities, to be submitted to this Commission and that their
30 October 12, 1999
activities be limited to the writing of a plan that will be approved by the Mayor of the City and submitted to
the Commission for ratification, and...
Chairman Plummer: Is that in the form of a motion?
Commissioner Teele: I would certainly so move it, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Plummer: Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: I'll second. I don't want to include anything in the motion, but 1 just like to know
if city - Sister Cities staff is working on the Mayor's Conference? I mean, what is the role of those
employees for the Sister Cities programs? What do they do?
Mr. Brennan: Commissioner, I don't think I could answer that question.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I'm asking you.
Commissioner Teele: Well, somebody...
Commissioner Sanchez: Somebody needs to answer that question.
Commissioner Teele: The Manager is the one who should answer it because, you know, I heard the script a
year ago. I've read Ms. Gwen Warren's memo about employees of the City and what they can do and can't
do and how they all must report to the Manager and how no employee of this City cannot report to the
Manager, which is all horse, because that's not true. All of our staffs report to us, and the City Attorney's
staff reports to him and the Clerk. But, in any event, Attorney Warren gave us that memo and I just want to
know, Mr. Manager, where are these employees and who do they report to?
Mr. Warshaw: Well, Commissioner...
Commissioner Teele: What are they -doing?
Mr. Warshaw: The employees work in the Office of the Mayor and, honestly, I don't know specifically
what they do. Although, you're right, technically, all employees of the City do report to the Manager. But I
can tell you, I don't know exactly what they do. I told you last time a little bit about what Sister Cities is,
what my understanding is. But I'll try to get that answer for you. I don't know, specifically, what their
day-to-day responsibilities are.
Commissioner Regalado: So, what you're saying is that we should add to the Mayor's budget the hundred
and sixty thousand dollars ($160,000)? Is that a fair statement?
Mr. Warshaw: No. What I'm — no. You've already passed the fiscal year 2000 budget, which included a
small increase for the additional employee. That's already been done. If you're now going to change that -- I
mean, that's up to the will of the Commission. I will get you the answer asto what the employees do.
Commissioner Teele: He's asking a different question.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Teele: Didn't you provide us with'a list of the fully loaded costs of each department?
31 October 12, 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Including the Mayor's Office?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Can we get a copy of that?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Does that include the office of Sister Cities? I think it does.
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: I think they gave us — I mean, it was never properly — I mean, it was never presented
in the Commission meeting so that it could be a part of the records of the Commission, which I'm trying to
get it done now. But the Manager did an outstanding job of providing us with the fully loaded costs of
every department, including the Commission's office, including the Mayor's office, and I think including the
Manager's office. By the way, Commissioner Plummer, you where right again. The Police costs, as I recall
it, was about a hundred and thirty-three million dollars ($133,000), not the ninety million dollars
($90,000,000) that we had been throwing around.
Chairman Plummer: No, no, eighty-six, to be exact.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. And;the fully allocated costs of the Police Department is one hundred and
thirty-three million dollars ($133,000,000), and the fully allocated costs of the Fire Department was
sixty-six million dollars ($66,000,000). Substantially higher than the numbers that we quote and that are
reported in the media widely, as to the cost of the government.
Chairman Plummer: All right. We're on B. We have a motion on the floor. Mr. Clerk, read the Motion
back, so everybody make sure we understand the motion.
Mr. Foeman: This is a motion by Commissioner Teele to roll back to the last fiscal year expenditures... the
City Clerk ... Sister Cities program's budget — and further directing the administration to have the employees
that are, in fact, serving and working as employees in the City's Sister Cities' budget to report to an
appropriate office to write a plan, to be approved by the Mayor, and submitted to the City Commission for
ratification.
Chairman Plummer: OK. And it was seconded by Commissioner Regalado, as I recall.
Commissioner Teele: That was to work exclusively on the plan. That was the language. Exclusively work.
Mr. Foeman: Work exclusively on the plan.
Chairman Plummer: And the second question was part of the motion or not, Mr. Regalado? Your question,
do you make it part of the...
Commissioner Regalado: I don't wish to make it part of the motion. I just want to know...
32 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: All right.
11
Commissioner Regalado: What — you know...
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, you understand the request? Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Vilarello: Just to clarify. As I understand the motion, it was a direction to the City Manager to proceed
under those obligations. However, if you want to amend the appropriations ordinance, that will have to be
done by amendment. At this point, I think the Commissioner is simply asking for a report and a
recommendation from the Mayor.
Commissioner Teele: That's not at all. What we've done is, we've instructed the Manager, through the
Budget Office, not to make those funds available until such time as a report has been issued, and we can do
that. That's not an appropriation, but that is an instruction to the Manager's Budget Office and Finance
Office, that no funds can be made available in excess of last year's allocation on a proportionate basis. And,
at the time we do the report, we'll do the budget adjustment, if necessary.
Mr. Vilarello: The correct direction is to the Manager and in order to change the budget, in fact, an
appropriations ordinance will be required.
Commissioner Teele: But this motion instructs the Manager's Finance Department and Budget Department
not to release funds in excess of last year's level, until that report has been written.
Chairman Plummer: Are you saying last year's expended?
Commissioner Teele: Last year's expended...
Chairman Plummer: That's what you said before.
Commissioner Teele: ... level of seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000).
Chairman Plummer: Now, for the"record, Mr. Budget Director, has any of those funds been allocated?
Mr. Brennan: We're just within the year and we have not allocated anything to that budget, as yet.
Chairman Plummer: In other words, that budget has not been touched, as of yet?
Mr. Brennan: Right.
Commissioner Teele: Other than the salaries.
Mr. Warshaw: It's being loaded.
Mr. Brennan: Well, based upon your direction, now, the salaries will be directed maybe in the Mayor's
office.
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: The salaries will be expended, based 'upon this motion, exactly like they were
expended last year. .
33 October 12, 1999
Mr. Brennan: So, Commissioner, what you're saying is that the salaries can continue to go there but...
Commissioner Teele: Absolutely.
Mr. Brennan: ...should not exceed the seventy-six thousand dollars ($76,000)?
Commissioner Teele: The seventy-six thousand on a pro rata basis. On a 1/12th, 1/12th, 1/12th basis.
Chairman Plummer: OK. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Any opposition? Show it unanimous.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO.99-744
A MOTION ROLLING BACK THE BUDGET EXPENDITURE FOR
THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAMS .TO A LEVEL OF LAST FISCAL
YEAR'S EXPENDITURES; FURTHER DETAILING ALL AFFECTED
EMPLOYEES INVOLVED WITH THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM
TO AN APPROPRIATE CITY DEPARTMENT/ OFFICE FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EXCLUSIVELY WORKING ON A PLAN
CONCERNING THE SISTER CITIES PROGRAM, SAID PLAN TO BE
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR AND SUBMITTED TO THE CITY
COMMISSION FOR RATIFICATION OF SAME.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: On the issue that Mr. Regalado has raised and Commissioner Sanchez has quoted
widely in the press on, I would like to understand, right here and right now - and we need to not be petty but
we need to be serious. Mr. Attorney, I need your attention.
34 October 12, 1999
Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir.
JJ
Commissioner Teele: The Mayor's Conference continues to come up in the press. One recommendation
has been that the Mayor should donate the money to the Save Our Seniors. Are there any funds that have
been collected, under the guise of the Mayor's Conference, that are funds of the City of Miami or are they
not -for -profit?
Mr. Vilarello: I'm not aware of any funds received by the City of Miami on behalf of the Conference. I
don't know if the Manager is.
Commissioner Teele: Is there a not -for -profit or an entity that has been designated that uses or works off of
the City of Miami and under a Mayor's Conference or International Mayor's Conference?
Mr. Vilarello: Not that I'm aware of. However, Commissioner...
Vice Chairman Gort: Yes.
Mr. Vilarello: I'm sorry.
Vice Chairman Gort: The Downtown Development Authority was working on this long time ago.
Commissioner Teele: The Downtown what?
Vice Chairman Gort: Development Authority.
Commissioner Teele: Is doing what?
Vice Chairman Gort: It was utilizing the non-profit organization to receive all the funds. I don't know if
they did or not. I have not been aware of that.
Commissioner Teele: For a Mayor's Conference?
Vice Chairman Gort: Right.
Commissioner Teele: I have read and I have heard, repeatedly, that large sums of money are being raised.
In fact, I'm going to put it on the record, Mr. Clerk, and I want you to send it to the Mayor. If City —
allegedly, a sports promoter, who shall remain nameless, but who desires to build a stadium, has contributed
over or approximately seventy-five to a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for some activity related to the
City of Miami or in the City of Miami for a Mayor's Conference, and he is under the opinion that that
seventy-five or a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) will give him the right to -build a stadium in the
Bicentennial Park. I want to be very, very clear that I am not going to get rolled over on the Bicentennial
Park issue, that there will be no stadium built, Mayors Conference or no Mayor's Conference, in the
Bicentennial Park. And, Commissioner Plummer, I mean, I know you have views on this. We all will have
one.
Chairman Plummer: Sir, my view is the same as yours. When I met with Mr...
Commissioner Teele: We all will have one vote on this issue, but I will tell you right here and right now, I
will be on a picket line. I will do whatever I've got to do to stop this City from building a stadium, Mayor's
Conference or no Mayor's Conference, in the Bicentennial Park. We have built more waterfront land in the
35 October 12, 1999
last 10 years than the founders of this City built in the last one hundred. We have built the Bayfront, which
is a wonderful thing. I don't regret it. But we took away land from future generations, to be able to walk on
the water, for commercial purposes. We have built the American Airlines Stadium on waterfront land. I
voted for it at the County Commission. It was a mistake then, as I said when I voted for it. It was a mistake.
It's a mistake now. We have just allowed the people at the Commodore or wherever that was here in the
Grove to do something, since I've been here. 1 mean, we've got to basically stop the development. We've all
agreed to Watson Island Development. We need to leave something for future generations in this City to
develop along the waterfront or not develop, but we certainly have an obligation to children, and children
unborn, to let them see the Biscayne Bay without having to look around a building. And I just want to be
very clear. Mayor's Conference or no Mayor's Conference, we should not be on record as saying that
somebody's going to give money and then that's going to happen. And I want to be on record as saying that.
Mr. Attorney, I would like for you to pull the articles of incorporation of this entity that is receiving money,
that is very close to...
Vice Chairman Gort: It's not the DDA (Downtown Development Authority).
Commissioner Teele: Well, if its the DDA, so be it.
Vice Chairman Gort: It's not. It's not.
Commissioner Teele: But whoever it is that's receiving money, under the guise of a Conference for Mayors
that is coming here — and I would like you to prepare a resolution that, first of all, requires that,
prospectively, starting today, that no City employee may work for or be a part of, during duty hours or, for
that matter, off -duty hours, including Police, to support any not -for -profit organization that does not make
public its books, in accordance with the Public Records Laws and the Sunshine Law. I believe that,
whatever meetings are being held, whatever checks are being written, if you're going to use City employees,
if you're going to — you cannot let the City do, through a not -for -profit, what it can't do. All Commissioners
have the right to raise funds, privately, through the Dade County Foundation. Those books are public.
Those books are open. The media can go and determine who contributed; how much they contributed;
where every dollar goes, and the same thing should be true of any other organization that we're involved in.
And I would ask that there be a resolution that requires that, in the future, starting today, that any
organization that is associated with or engaged in activities in relationship with the City of Miami and its
employees during duty hours, during the 9 to 5, 8 to 5 period, must be subject to the Sunshine Law and must
be subject to the Florida Records Law or the City Commission — City employee shall not be authorized to
work during duty hours pro bono or on assignment or whatever, unless and until that has been complied
with. And I would ask that that resolution be prepared because I think we should not have some
organization that's raising money using the City of Miami as a name; going to have police officers detailed
to it; going to have Sister Cities people detailed to it, lawyers detailed to it and, then, it's not subject to any
records keeping. We don't know what commitments are being made. I got a call from Spain. From Spain,
from one of my clients that was being approached by someone on behalf of the City of Miami to host a fifty
thousand dollar ($50,000) reception in Miami, for the Miami City Commission, and I promptly assured my
client that this was not something the City of Miami is involved in, -but it's being done in the name of the
City of Miami and we can't stop that, nor do we want to stop that. But, if funds are raised and the City of
Miami is directly, or approximately involved, it should be public record, and even "The Miami Herald"
should not oppose that.
Chairman Plummer: You're asking a resolution be brought back at a later time?
Commissioner Teele: Today. Yes, sir.
36 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Today. OK. You know, let's discuss this a little further. My major concern is just
exactdy what you said. Is the portrayal that this is a City event. And if this thing fails, you know who's
going to get the blame? The City, not just us. But I am concerned that we are having an event, which is just
about a month from today, and this thing — I really don't know that much about it, except I was asked to
reserve Bayfront Park for three days for one of the events. Where is the money coming from? And if
people are out soliciting money in the name of the City — I'm just — I'm concerned that we, the City
Commission, could get embarrassed.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: You know, I have been accused of writing the Governor and, basically, asking the
Governor that if any State money or any money being used by taxpayers should basically go towards the
financial recovery of our City. Because we are the fourth poorest City in the nation, and I feel that any
money coming in should really go towards the many crisis that we're going through, and one of them is Save
Our Seniors. Through the whole process, all the articles that have come out and stuff, supporting or not
supporting the Mayor's Summit, is one of great concern is that we need to look into the facts. And
Commissioner Teele is right, when we need to start basing our opinion on facts, on knowledge, on
experience. March of this year, the County had a Mayor's Summit and for us to have one four, five, six
months later, seven months later, is really sending the wrong message to our constituents because of the
financial situation that we're in, that we're ready to bring in these Mayors. And now I — I don't oppose the
idea. I just oppose the timing of the idea. Where we're going to bring in close to about two hundred or three
hundred Mayors from all over Central, South America and the United States, to come down here and put
them up at the Intercontinental, give them shrimp cocktail, take their wives out shopping, and have a good
time, and, on the way out, they're probably going to ask the Mayor to donate spare cars, spare computers,
and other facts. So, that is the biggest concern that I have. And the people that I talk to tell me, you know,
it's — I just cannot see how all the emphasis that's being put on this Conference or this Mayor's Summit, I
think that the energy and all the other hype should be put forth on ideas to bring a much more brighter or
broader economical development, more financial stability to our City, and that's where I think that it should
be focused on. So, that the concept of it is — and I think the people are looking at it and saying, "Wait a
minute. You know, the County just had one several month ago. Why are we having one now?" Why are
we having to put all this effort and time into preparing this event when, you know, we got people in my
community. We've got people in your district that go to bed at night hungry, and have one pair of shoes to
go to school. And their families are struggling every day to provide a better living for their families. So,
that's the thing that I can fathom, is that we're going to spend close to two million dollars ($2,000,000),
when I think that the two million dollars ($2,000,000) is much, much needed into the poor communities and
to Save Our Seniors and other ideas that the money should go forth. So, that's just where I stand on that
issue. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez, I couldn't agree with you more, and I agree with Commissioner Teele,
when a full accountability has to be demonstrated to the people. My only concern still remains the same.
This thing is being done in the name of the City of Miami. If this thing fails, we are going to have egg on
our face. And I'm just saying that we don't know what's going on and, yet, it's being done in the name of the
City. Now, Mr. Manager, you know, I guess I've got to turn to you because you're the only one that can
speak to the Mayor and come back and report to this Commission. And somebody's got to do something
because this stalemate — if this thing fails because of lack of funds or whatever else, I think you've got a
major problem, and the major problem is that we all look bad. So, I'll leave it at that. OK? Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: I mean, we all know that this probably is going to go forward. The Mayor has
37 October 12, 1999
been working on this for several months. I don't know anything about it. I only know what I read in the
papers about this conference. My problem — I mean, I think that maybe a lot of people will come because
who can reject a free trip to Miami and bring your — you know, your family and go to Vizcava and have a
night out and all that? My concern is the hidden costs that the City is going to have. I mean, we all know
what went on Saturday night. And, by the way, when the City Attorney returns, I would like to address that
issue. And we know that these events have costs and what we don't know is what is going to be the cost for
the City of Miami in terms of in -kind services, Police, Fire, personnel, whatever permits are necessary. So,
there is a lot of hidden costs that we are not being told. And the problem is that, if the organizers will come
clean and say, you know, this is a City of Miami sponsored event. I mean, you guys in the City Commission
will support it. Probably, we will, if we know what is going on. But to say in the paper that the City is not
paying a single dollar, that is a lie. And the people of Miami, again, are being manipulated and lied to about
this conference. So, I would just request to get some information on it.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: I want to be on the record. This conference is probably going to go forward.
Apparently, I'm hearing that a half a million dollars ($500,000) or so has been raised. At least, one person
has put up close to a hundred thousand — seventy-five to a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000). I think it's
in our best interest to be on record as wanting to support this and supporting it because, ultimately, its going
to reflect on the City of Miami, and I share your concerns, Commissioner Plummer. We need to ensure that
this conference does not fail or, stated another way, is a success. The only thing that I want to establish this
afternoon, with a resolution, is that number 1, in order to support it — and rm willing to ask that — the
Oversight Board that funds be expended to make it a success, if the majority of the Commission will go
along, but I don't think we should be on record as supporting something, providing fee waivers, Madam
Attorney, in that resolution — no fee waivers, none of this stuff — if they're not going to come clean on the
records of this thing because I don't want to be a part of something that we don't know who's giving and
what commitments are being made or what impressions are being had. And I certainly am not suggesting
that the Mayor has made any commitments, but I am suggesting to you that there is a new feeling out there
that, all of a sudden, there's going to be a use for Bicentennial Park and, you know, maybe it's a coincidence.
Maybe it's not even true. But the best way to determine the truthfulness, as to whether or not one person,
who has an interest in building a facility, has contributed that sum of money or sum amount of money, is for
there to be a public records. And I don't think that the City of Miami should have City employees working
either pro bono or in their official positions and capacities on any organization that will not go — from this
day forward, that will not make the books of that organization public and that will not open the ray of
sunshine into all of the activities of that organization, and that's why I think we need to get this on record.
We need to get this issue out of the way so it's official City policy, so we don't revisit anything that has
already been going on. But going from this point on, we need to have a policy.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Point of clarification.
38 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Gort: Over six months ago, a presentation was made to the Board of Directors then, DDA,
with the idea of bringing the Summit here. The presentation that was made to us, the DDA Board approved
the — to do some of the press releases and the material for the -- to be taken and send it to the different
Mayors throughout the south and Central America. At the same time, it was stated from the beginning that
no City funds would be utilized to .do this conference, that the only funds that would be utilized for this
conference will be from the private sector. The reason being is, if you had an opportunity — and we have to
look at the bigger scope. We're an international city. We need to bring individuals and people from the
South and Central America. And when you have a concentration on so many people, there's plenty of
vendors that do business with South and Central America and the Caribbean. They would love to have all
these individuals here and make a presentation to them, and that was the idea, originally. There was — but I
agree with you all. I think the presentation should have been made to the City Commission. We should
have been made aware of what's going on and what's happening. I was under the impression that one of the
Board of Directors was going to come to each one of you and talk to you and to me. I haven't had a chance
to have the meeting. I think this is going to take place and we've got to make sure that it becomes — that it
does happen. It becomes successful. But I agree with all of you. We should — have to have the records real
clear, especially when we let them know there's no City funds being utilized.
S.. AMEND CHAPTER .56 OF:;:THE: CODE " TAXATI0N'"1-T0 PROVIDE -FOR ADDITIONAL
.HOMESTEAD.EXEMPTION.FOR SENIOR='CTIIZENS -`'; `"'
Chairman Plummer: OK. We're running about an hour and 10 minutes late and we've got five more items
on the supplemental. And just for everybody's information, I have to leave here today between five and
5:15, which I thought would be no problem when I first looked at the agenda, and it still might not be a
problem. We're now on Item C, the Senior Citizens. Mr. City Manager. I'll be right back.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll move.
Vice Chairman Gort: My understanding is that we can pass this first reading, then second reading. And my
understanding, ,we have a whole six months to look for the funds, am I correct in my interpretations?
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): If you pass this on first reading today, second reading will be...
Vice Chairman Gort: The 28th.
Mr. Warshaw: ... the 28th. And that would be for implementation on the first of December.
Vice Chairman Gort: I'm sorry. It'll be on the 26th, right?
Mr. Warshaw: Twenty-sixth.
Vice Chairman Gort: Right. OK.
Commissioner Regalado: I'll make a motion to approve this but, Mr. Chairman, before we do this, I have a
question for the Manager.
Commissioner Teele: Before you ask that, I just want to ask a question. Do we have the documents or the
background on what this cost? What are the — do we have the first year and the five-year implications for
39 October 12, 1999
this? It is not a part of the packet.
Mr. 'Warshaw: We do.
Commissioner Teele: The Mayor has continued to say this is two point two million dollar ($2,200,000)
impact this year. "The Herald" has reported that it's a two point two million dollar ($2,200,000) impact this
year. You all have said, repeatedly, it's not a two point two million dollar ($2,200,000) impact this year.
Now, what's the truth? And let's get this out on the table. But we need something in writing on this
because, otherwise, everybody's going to be an expert on this.
Ms. Bertha Henry: Bertha Henry, Assistant City Manager, Finance and Administration. The program is
currently in effect. The County has issued the forms and the applicants are being gathered. They're
gathering the information. And the deadline for filing is March 1 st. Commissioners, this program, if the
City Commission approves, will affect the FY-2001 budget.
Commissioner Teele: State it this way. Does it affect the FY-2000 budget?
Mr. Warshaw: No.
Ms. Henry: No, it does not.
Commissioner Teele: The Mayor's memo says that it affects the 2000 budget. Has anybody explained to
the Mayor that it does not? -
Ms. Henry: I think the issue there, Commissioner, is that the Financial Oversight Board has made it
perfectly clear that it affects the 5-year forecast and the budget is part of the forecast.
Commissioner Teele: Well, I understand the 5-Year forecast. I didn't — you know, I'm not — does it affect
the FY-2000 budget?
Mr. Warshaw: No, sir, it does not.
Commissioner'Teele: Then why can't you put it in writing and say that it doesn't affect the FY-2000
budget?
Mr. Warshaw: And I've done...
Commissioner Teele: The Mayor has put it in writing saying that it does affect the 2000 budget. "The
Miami Herald' continues to print that it has a two million dollar ($2,000,000) implication and it doesn't.
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, I've gone on the record. I'll go on the record again.
Commissioner Teele: Could you go on the record in writing?
Mr. Warshaw: Sure.
Commissioner Teele: Please.
Mr. Warshaw: Absolutely. It does not affect the fiscal year 2000 budget.
Commissioner Teele: What does Dade County — and I have a copy of this somewhere. What does Dade
40 October 12, 1999
County estimate that the Save Our Seniors will be in FY-2001? I realize there is a difference between what
Dade. County is saying and the State. I believe that this Commission should adopt the Dade County
numbers, which are higher numbers.
Ms. Henry: Yes. The Dade County estimate for Save Our Seniors for the City of Miami is about two point
nine million.
Commissioner Teele: Two point nine?
Ms. Henry: Just shy of three million dollars ($3,000,000).
Commissioner Teele: And the State's number is what?
Ms. Henry: Two million. In the two million dollar ($2,000,000) range. Two point two.
Commissioner Teele: And what's the — but we're going to draw our numbers from the Dade County rolls,
right?
Ms. Henry: Yes, we are. Commissioner, the County acknowledges that these numbers are on — at this
point, they are pretty much in the same position we were in with respect to the Parking Surcharge where,
without the history and without being able to determine how many people would actually qualify and go
through the process, they were estimating, as well as the State.
Commissioner Teele: I'm going to yield back to — thank you for yielding to me, Commissioner Regalado. 1
want to be very clear that I think this City needs to operate at' a different level. We need to operate more
conservatively. We don't need to look for the easy way out at every turn. The County has the number. The
County's collecting the money. And, as far as I'm concerned, this Commission should adopt the Dade
County estimate until we have something to the contrary. Otherwise, we're going to be right back where we
are. We wind up always not having enough money and, then, having to rob Peter and save Paul. And, so,
the number at this point is two point nine million beginning in FY-90...
Mr. Warshaw: "Two thousand and one.
Commissioner Teele: Two thousand and one
Ms. Henry: Two thousand and one.
Commissioner Teele: What's the FY-2002 number?
Ms. Henry: Commissioner, the impact would basically be the same, unless the millage rate changes.
Commissioner Teele:' So, it's a straight line, for all practical purposes?
Ms. Henry: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Roughly, a three million dollars ($3,000,000) for purposes, but you all believe that
the number could go as low as two point five?
Ms. Henry: Two point two.
41 October 12, - 1999
Mr. Warshaw: Two point two.
..
Commissioner Teele: Two point two.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Is there a motion?
Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Regalado has the floor.
Vice Chairman Gort: I second.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, I have a motion and...
Chairman Plummer: And Commissioner Gort seconded it.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Chairman Plummer: Is there further discussion?
Commissioner Sanchez: I have discussion.
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. I have a question. Since we need to look for funds, can you — Bertha, can
you tell us what — how much do you think that the City will be spending on collecting the Parking
Surcharge?
Ms. Henry: Commissioner, at this point, the ordinance limits our ability to spend more than around three
hundred and fifty thousand is the maximum, which is about five percent.
Mr. Warshaw: It's in the ordinance.
Commissioner Regalado: Two hundred and fifty thousand?
Ms. Henry: Three hundred and fifty thousand.
Commissioner Teele: Is the ordinance based on a percentage or a dollar?
Ms. Henry: It's five percent. Up to five percent.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Teele: So, it's five percent?
Ms. Henry: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: Five percent of whatever — so, yesterday, I received a letter from Lucia
Dougherty regarding a proposal from Revenue Recovery Services to collect the Parking Surcharge and 1
would like the administration to get more information, to see if this will be cheaper for the City instead of
doing it within our departments. Do you have any information on this proposal, at all?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado, how does this address Item C?
42 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Regalado: It's about funds. It's about saving funds. Saving funds to subsidize Item C.
Chairman Plummer: All right. So, in other words, what you're saying is, that those monies that would be
derived by that proposal would go into this amount?
Commissioner Regalado: Exactly.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Chairman Plummer: All right, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, do you have any idea if that proposal — I don't know exactly.
Mr. Warshaw: The only thing I know is that they were late in their submissions. They were not part of the
evaluation we did, so I'm not completely familiar with it. But maybe Ms. Dougherty can shed some light on
that.
Commissioner Regalado: So, what we need to do — should we start again this process? Is it a...
Ms. Henry: Commissioner — this is, once again, Bertha Henry. There was an Evaluation Committee
appointed to review the proposals. Ms. Wiley is here to speak to the specifics of the process but, at this
point, we are in the second phase of the process, where we are — where the committee has made a
recommendation. No decisions have been — are final and have not been brought back to you. But the
negotiation process will then begin and, at this point, we can't tell you, ultimately, what the proposal would
be, how much they would charge and the likes. So, this is ahead of where we are at this point.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, you know, the Governor made it very clear when he said we have
two choices. "One is, we reduce expenditures or we increase recurring revenue. Now, you know, the
Parking Surcharge, the Oversight Board said that, you know, on a conservative and basically we had no
history to come up with five point seven million to use. Now, I know that possibility exists that more
money would come in now. Bertha, I am a visionary. I look at all the projects that are set forth to come into
his City. All the construction and cranes are up. You see the Four Seasons going up, the W 3 Marriott or
whatever — what is it?
Mr. Warshaw: JW.
Commissioner Sanchez: JW Marriott. And so many other constructions going on, like the Ritz Carlton.
Now, we focus on what we could do. We have — it's very simple. We have two options. One is, one, we
reduce our expenditure or we bring in recurring revenues. Now, I know, for a fact, with all developments
going on, I know that the County is very, very interested, from what I've gathered, in that Watson Island
before the Seaport, for the ship that they want to bring there. And I know that, for a fact, that I think they're
willing to sit down with you today before five or tomorrow and come up with a good chunk of money to pay
for that land. And I know that there is some discussion going on between the administration and the County
on that process. But once we look at all this — and I think that it's tough for the administration, as well as
the Commission, to see a lot of things that are going on. The slip next to the arena that we talked about
filling it up, but that property there — and I'm just throwing numbers out. And I think I'm right by ballpark
43 October 12, 1999
figure. And, you know, once again, if you think that I'm off the ballpark figure, bring the number out. 1
think -that alone generates close to sixty to seventy million dollars, if we're able to fill it up, you know, and
put it out there. And just by — and this is just a number — that we're able to lease that property out at six
percent, that's four million dollars ($4,000,000) that would come in. They built something on that land.
hotel or whatever they will, that's addition — probably one more million. So, there's a lot of revenue that's
come in and we are counting on that revenue for the fiscal year of 2000 and 2004. Now, I know what the
administration is doing and it's wise move, to do everything they can to save for out -years because that's the
only way that we're going to get back to running an efficient government and have money surplus to show
that we're back financially fit, saving money. So, that's the concern that I have here. I think that, through
the process and all the recurring revenue that's coming into the City, I think, you know, the money is there
for Save Our Seniors. Mr. Manager?
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: I'm sorry. Are you finished?
Commissioner Sanchez: I want a response, I mean, from the City administration.
Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, I realize, you know, how very important this issue is and I'm going to do
everything I can, you know, to find the money. And I hear exactly what you're saying in terms of the
out -years. Now, I have spoken to Robert Beatty of the Oversight Board and, if necessary, I'll go with you,
individually, to see Robert Beatty, to see the members of the Oversight Board. Iunderstand, for example,
that the conservative side of the collection on the Parking Surcharge could be several million dollars less
than potentially what it could be able to collect. I understand, on our ad valorem taxes, that our estimates
are on the conservative side and there is potentially more money to collect. I certainly understand the issue
of the Port of Miami and Watson Island because we've been engaged in active negotiations with Mr. Talsly
and Merritt Steirheim, which also has the potential to give us several million dollars of additional recurring
revenue. So, I understand what's out there. Now, we need to take that and translate it into something that
would be saleable, acceptable to the Oversight Board. And I understand what it is everybody wants and all I
can tell you is, we worked all last week, around the clock. We were working this past weekend. We're
looking for these dollars and we will find them somehow, some way. And, you know, we'll continue to
keep you updated as to what we're doing. But I think it's important that we go to the Oversight prior to that
meeting. They're not scheduled to meet until December, so that we know., So we don't have to get into a
confrontation with the Oversight Board and then be right back here doing this again. And I'm prepared to do
that.
Chairman Plummer: OK. On first reading, read the ordinance. Thank you. Call the roll.
44 October 12, 1999
An Ordinance Entitled -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AMENDING CHAPTER 56 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "TAXATION," TO
PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR
CERTAIN QUALIFYING SENIOR CITIZENS TO BE. APPLIED TO
MILLAGE RATES LEVIED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI; PROVIDING
FOR REQUIREMENT OF ANNUAL APPLICATION AND
SUBMISSION OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION; PROVIDING
FOR WAIVER OF EXEMPTION, AND PROVIDING FOR AN
ANNUAL INCREASE IN THE INCOME LIMITATION; MORE
PARTICULARLY BY ADDING NEW ARTICLE IV, ENTITLED
"HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION FOR SENIOR CITIZENS" TO
CHAPTER 56 OF SAID CODE; DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO
TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE MIAMI-DADS
COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER PRIOR TO DECEMBER 1, 1999;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE; PROVIDING FRO AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND
PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE.
was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, and was passed
on first reading, by title only, by the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
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:]
Vice Chairman Gort: The reason I'm going to vote yes for it — and if you all recall — and I want the press to
really make sure they get this because it's been reported incorrectly. I'm glad Commissioner Teele brought
this up. This does not affect the funding for the Year 2000 and if you all recall, when we voted on this, we
asked the Attorney what was the deadline for us to take a position and it was plenty of time to implement
this program and still get the funds for it. Yes.
Note for the Record: At this point, the Special Meeting was tabled and the Commission opened the regular
meeting.
45 October 12, 1999
[COMMENTS MADE AFTER ROLL CALL:]
Chairman Plummer: We're now — I'm stopping the supplemental agenda, which we'll take up later, if we
have the time. I am now going to the Regular Commission Meeting agenda. For the record, the Manager
has withdrawn Item 32. You are here on 32 — did you pull 13? Mr. Manager, you wanted to pull 13, if you
would do that, sir. All right. Now, Mr. — Madam City Attorney, you've given me a long spiel here about
the Mayor's veto. Should I read this into the record? All right. For the record, my colleagues on the
Commission, do you have a copy of the Mayor's veto, which I'll read into the record: Pursuant to 4(G)(5) of
this City Charter, the City Clerk, the deadline for possible Mayoral veto for the Commission meeting
September 21, '99, which was rescheduled September, 14 of '99 was Friday, October 1 of '99, on or before
4:30 p.m. The deadline for possible Mayoral veto action for the Commission meeting of September 28, '99
was Friday, October 8, '99, and/or before 4:30. This office did not receive any items to be vetoed from said
meetings, except for the veto of Ordinance 11839, which was vetoed upon and subsequently overwritten by
the Commission, notwithstanding the Mayoral vote Resolution 99-739.
Note for the Record: The Minutes of August 11, 1998 were approved.
Chairman Plummer: All right. I need a motion to approve the minutes of August the 11 of'98. Moved by
Sanchez. Seconded by Gort. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Show unanimous.
6. (A) CONSENT AGENDA
(B) DEFERRAL OF PROPOSED ACCEPTANCE OF BID: EDFM CORPORATION, FOR
"ENTRADA GUARDHOUSE"
Chairman Plummer: We're now on the supplemental agenda. Supplemental agenda is Items 1 through 6.
CA-1 through 6.
Ms. Maria Chiaro (Assistant City Attorney): Consent Agenda.
Chairman Plummer: Consent.
Vice Chairman Gort: Consent Agenda.
Chairman Plummer: What did I say?
Vice Chairman Gort: Supplement.
Chairman Plummer: Still on the supplemental.
Mr. Steve Helfinan: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: All right. You wish to speak on one of the consent items?
Mr. Helfman: I do. CA-2.
46 October 12, 1999
Chairman Plummer: All right. CA-2. CA-2 is the Entrada Guard House. For the record, state your name
and -your mailing address and who you represent.
Mr. Helf ran: Absolutely. Thank you. My name is Steve Helfman. My offices are at 2665 South
Bayshore Drive: I represent three property owners within the neighborhood that is affected by this guard
house. This matter — Mr. Chairman, may I proceed? I don't know if there's other items in the consent
agenda that you wanted to take out. Do you want me to go forward now on this item?
Chairman Plummer: You can go ahead, sir, and speak to this particular item.
Mr. Helfman: OK. Thank you. Thank you. Only this one. About a year and a half ago, you all approved a
Special Taxing District. Actually, consented to the County's creation of that district. At that time, there
were three lawsuits filed. One against the City of Miami. One against the Homeowner's Association that's
involved and one against Dade County in connection with the creation of that Special Taxing District. All
of these lawsuits are now currently pending in circuit court. I'd like to provide a copy of those to the Clerk.
In the face of those lawsuits, there are a number of people within the community who continue to push the
City of Miami to build a guardhouse for them. Notwithstanding the 13 different counts contained in those
various suits, the neighbors want you to spend your money and build this guardhouse. The Manager wrote a
letter in February of this year to the community telling them — other than the fact that he was going to try to
accommodate them and continue with the design work — he told them the following: "Before any City
project may be advertised for formal bids" — advertised. We're in an award state now — "authorization from
the City's Purchasing Department, the Capital Improvements Program Administrator and myself must be
secured. This review process will include opinions of the City and County Attorneys concerning the status
and exposure of the City to the pending lawsuits. If no further action has been taken on these lawsuits, the
guard house, west drive and the street closure barricade will immediately be advertised for bids and the
highest priority will be placed on the construction of these improvements." Needless to say, there's a
number of those items on that list that haven't occurred. I am not aware and, as late as this morning, have
confirmed that the County Attorney's Office has not looked at this, at all. The reason that that is so
important and the Manager wanted to do that is because the County creates the district. If this district is set
aside, the City will be exposed for the entire indebtedness. What's more, these other departments...
Chairman Plurirmer: Excuse me. There is a rule. There are to be no beepers and no cellular phones inside
of these chambers.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Also, I want to invoke the rule, unless the Manager's objecting.
Vice Chairman Gort: Just pull it out.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, you know, we have a rule that this is a consent item. If it's not agreed to,
then, it comes up at the next meeting and you all ought to work it out. But if it's time urgent, I won't invoke
the rule. Is this time urgent?
Mr. Jim Kay (Director, Public Works Department): No. No, it's not.
Commissioner Teele: Then, I would invoke the rule...
47 October 12, 1999
Mr. Helfman: Thank you.
r
Commissioner Teele: And ask that the matter — and ask that you meet with the Attorney and the
Management before coming back to the meeting.
Mr. Helfman: I'll be happy to do that.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Then, it will come back as a regular item on the agenda, Mr. Manager.
Because this thing has been delayed and delayed and delayed and, you know, we've got to fish or cut bait,
whichever way we're going to go, and that's what I thought. All right.
Mr. Helfman: Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Is there any other items? Mr. Boom -Boom, you wish to speak to a consent agenda
item?
Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: Well, as usual, I must admit that because of lack of sufficient information
and enlightment on CA-2, I am totally lost...
Chairman Plummer: Sir?
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: And I wonder if the Commissioners...
Chairman Plummer: Whoa, whoa.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: ... are fully aware of what going on?
Chairman Plummer: Sir, CA-2 has been withdrawn from this meeting. No further discussion on that item.
Now, you wish to discuss any other item on the consent agenda, please feel free to do so.
Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: No, not yet.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. All right. Is there a motion to accept the consent agenda, with the
exception of CA-2, which will be rescheduled as an agenda item at the next meeting?
Commissioner Sanchez: So moved.
Chairman Plummer: Moved by Sanchez. Seconded by?
Commissioner Teele: Teele.
Chairman Plummer: Teele. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show unanimous.
48 October 12, 1999
y THEREUPON MOTION DULY MADE BY COMMISSIONER
SANCHEZ AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER TEELE, THE
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WERE PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
NOTF. FOR THE. RF.( ORD: Pursuant to City Code Sec. 2-33(i), Consent Agenda items that are removed
from the agenda prior to City Commission consideration shall automatically be scheduled as a regular
agenda item at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the City Commission, unless, by an unanimous vote
of all Commissioners present, the City Commission considers such consent item as a regular item at the
same meeting.
6.1 ACCEPT BID OF COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALIST, INC., FOR POOL CHEMICALS
AND SUPPLIES, FOR DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, ($47,266.75); ALLOCATE
FUNDS FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
OPERATING BUDGET.
RESOLUTION NO.99-745
A RESOLUTION OF THE NIIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING
THE BID OF COMMERCIAL ENERGY SPECIALIST, INC., FOR
THE PROVISION OF POOL CHEMICALS AND SUPPLIES, FOR
THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $47,266.75; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 PARKS AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT OPERATING BUDGET, ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 00 1000.5 83 01.6.704.
49 October 12, 1999
27 MANAGER TO REPORT ON IWACT OF PROPOSED ESTABLISHING SIXTY-FOUR (64)
HOURS PER :PAY ' PERIOD AS .FULL TEUE EMPLOYMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF
COMPUTING _HEALTH, PENSION .AND :EMPLOYEE BENEFITS — PLAN FOR FOUR -DAY
WORK WEEK.
Chairman Plummer: A matter of courtesy, Representative...
Vice Chairman Gort: Senator.
Chairman Plummer: Senator Ron Silver is here and before we break for lunch, Senator, I'm told you're here
on an Item G of the supplemental. I think this was brought to the agenda by Commissioner Teele.
Commissioner Teele, I'll — a matter of courtesy to the Senator, I'll allow you to bring this item up and, then,
we'll break for lunch. Excuse me. Anything else will be taken up after the lunch break. We will be
returning at 2:30 for the afternoon agenda. After 2:30. Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, the more we get into this issue, the more concerned I become. This is
an issue that would allow persons who work at least 64 hours a pay period or...
Chairman Plummer: All ,right, all right. Excuse me. Please. Courtesy to the speaker.
Commissioner Teele: ...thirty-two hours a week to be classified as full-time for the purpose of receiving
benefits, et cetera. I realize this has an economic implication. What really bothers me or would bother me
is that we have been hiring people and — that have been with the City for four or five or six years and they're
working 30 hours so that we don't have to pay them benefits, so — or 32 hours or so. So, I guess, Mr. Silver,
who's the counsel — the distinguished counsel to the pension and — what do you call it?
Senator Ron Silver: Miami City General Employees Retirement Fund.
Commissioner Teele: Yeah, you tried to do this because Commissioner Regalado's not here, I bet. Because
he had some issues with you all the last time that I...
Senator Silver: Yeah, we've met with Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Teele: Your testimony would be that this is going to cost money?
Senator Silver: Right. As an extra — as an added benefit and if you do add benefits, the Constitution
requires that the City fund it or the state fund it or whoever does it, fund it.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Teele: And to the Finance Director or the Personnel Director. Approximately, how many
people do we have with the City now that are working 64 hours a pay period?
Ms. Angela Bellamy: Commissioner, Angela Bellamy, Director of the Department of Human Resources.
We have 126 employees who are between the hours — who work between the hours. of 32 hours and 39
hours, part-time.
Commissioner Teele: And how. many of those people have been with the City for more than a year or two
93 October 12, 1999 -
years or three years?
Ms. Bellamy: I can tell you that we have some particularly in the Parks Department, who have been with us
even 15 years. Eleven years, 15 years.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I must tell you this. You know, we laugh about Burger King and
Wendy's and, you know — but I — this is why unions were created. It's wrong. It is wrong for a government
to hire people on a — literally, a permanent basis and not give them benefits. I wouldn't want my son or
daughter, if I had one, to be working, essentially, a full-time and not get benefits and none of us would. I
mean, there is a fundamental issue here and I would like to get this in writing. But I must tell you, 1 think
we should move toward a policy where people that work 32 hours are given the same benefits as anyone
else, which is essentially a four -day workweek. But we certainly should not be hiring people at 39 hours for
-- I mean, it's one thing to do this for like a summer job or...
Commissioner Sanchez: Part-time.
Commissioner Teele: Or some — or part-time. But when the person's working for four or five years and
they're working 39 hours, that's almost Apartheid kind of circumstance. And it has nothing to do with race.
It has to do with just the way you treat working people and the way government acts responsibly. I realize
that we're not responsible for health care issues. I realize that's a County issue. But how can we ask
companies to be good corporate citizens if we're not? And I just want to raise it — and I'd like for the...
Chairman Plummer: What do you want to do with the...
Commissioner Teele: ...management to come up with a plan or to initiate a plan...
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman?
Commissioner Teele: I yield.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez.
Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, I agree with some of the issues brought forward by Commissioner
Teele on the item. We do have a lot of people that have worked for many years and they're still under a 32
hour or part-time basis. But, you know, the financial impact that this would bring to the City is almost close
to three million dollars ($3,000,000), two point eight million dollars ($2,800,000). And due to the situation
that we're in, the City now, I don't think that this City could be — afford to be generous at this time. I think
that, as we recover from the financial situation that we're in, I think it's a good discussion item to bring up
but now I'm very concerned with two point eight million dollars ($2,800,000) that we would have to come
up to implement this.
Chairman Plummer: Well, I think, in all fairness, what we should do is to have a full report by the Manager
as to what the impact would be, not talk about it. But let's look at it and bring it back at another
Commission meeting. I think that that's without a doubt. You know, I can argue both ways. I guess I'm a
typical politician, you know. But we had PSA (Public Service Aides) and the Manager came and gave a
very strong argument. The reason why we couldn't get more PSAs in the Police Department was that they
were not getting a benefit package. Well, guess what? We increased them by what, ten thousand dollars
($10,000)? And now we have less PSAs than we had when he came and convinced me. You know, I mean
— so, the number went down. I mean...
94 October 12, 1999
Ms. Angela Bellamy (Director, Human Resources): Well, Commissioner...
Chairman Plummer: That's pure and simple. We have less PSAs now than when we were paying without
any benefits.
Ms. Bellamy: If I can.
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): The numbers went down so we...
Ms. Bellamy: We just...
Mr. Warshaw: ... could compensate for the additional...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Ms. Bellamy: We just...
Chairman Plummer: We're supposed to have a hundred.
Commissioner Teele: On the issue that's before us — and I would like to discuss that — I would move that
the Manager present a full report...
Chairman Plummer: So be it.
Commissioner Teele: ... and a plan, within 120 days, as to — if any; as to how we can rationalize this issue.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Is there a second?
Vice Chairman Gort: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Seconded by Commissioner Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: And seconded. I'd like..
Chairman Plummer: He has the floor. 011
Commissioner Teele: But on — Commissioner Gort, just one point. I agree with Commissioner Sanchez on
everything he said, except one thing. He's used the word "generous." .I think the word is fair. You know,
doing the right thing — being fair is not being generous, and it's really a hard pill for me to swallow.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Commissioner Teele: And I agree with his economic analysis.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort.
Vice Chairman Gort: I also would like to see, that whenever there's and opening within the City of Miami,
the first right of refusal should be given to those people that are right now under those hours.
Chairman Plummer: Senator...
95 October 12, 1999
r ' �
Commissioner Teele: Second. Well, hold it. I second the motion that Commissioner Gortjust made.
Chairman Plummer: There is a motion made that any part-timer be given the first option and priority on any
openings...
Commissioner Teele: Qualified. Any qualified.
Chairman Plummer: ... in that field. And qualified, of course. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: All opposed? Show unanimous. -
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO.99-760
A motion authorizing and directing the City Manager to present a full
report and plan, within 120 days, on how we can rationalize the issue of
establishing a 64 hours per pay period, full-time employment policy for
purposes of computing health, pension and employee benefits; further
stipulating that any part-time employee, who is" duly qualified, be given
first opportunity for employment to fill any existing vacancies.
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
Y,
ABSENT: Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Chairman Plummer: Senator Silver, you shall have the closing remarks.
Senator Silver: Mr. Chairman, just a pleasure to be before you. And I just want to make sure you
understand that my only purpose here was informational and not to discuss the policy issue.
Chairman Plummer: You're always argumentative. We'll be back at 2:30, sir.
THEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 12:09 PM AND RECONVENED
AT 2:31 PM, WITH CHAIRMAN PLUMMER FOUND TO BE PRESENT.
Chairman Plummer: Deal with Item 23 and we will be starting with Item 24. We did not finish the
supplemental agenda and we have, at the conclusion of the day, one zoning application, PZ-1, which is 2235
Southwest 8th Street. Mostly involved with parking. There was one item pulled by the administration, Item
96 October 12, 1999
Number 32. If you're here on Item 32, you can come back at the next Commission meeting. Mr. City Clerk.
do we have any colleagues in the house, especially Regalado, whose district this NET (Neighborhood
Enhancement Team) Office is in? Is Mr. Regalado in the house? Is Mr. Gort in the house? Is Mr. Sanchez
in the house? Due to the lack of interest, today has been canceled. Is Regalado in the house?
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): No, he's not here yet.
28::PRESENTATION BY F.LAGANH.NETSERVICE CENTER.
Chairman Plummer: All right. We've got to go, all right? It's a presentation by the NET Office. All right.
You're on. Wait a minute. Just to make sure, the TV is on? OK. So, if Mr. Regalado comes in late, he can
get a copy of the video. All right. Proceed. Give us your name and where you represent.
Mr. Fausto Callava: Good afternoon, Commissioner. My name is Fausto Callava. I'm the NET
Administrator for Flagami. I have been...
Chairman Plummer: Go ahead, sir. Proceed.
Mr. Callava: I have been at Flagami for 21 months. When I first arrived at Flagami, the police in the NET
Office were located at different sites. 1, in conjunction with the NET Lieutenant, brought our offices
together to better serve the community. Combining our efforts together, we were able to close six
businesses that were posing as retail stores, but they were being used for prostitution purposes. We
conducted, at least, two clean-ups per month. We have over six thousand calls and over twelve hundred
citizens visit our offices for numerous services rendered this year.. The NET Lieutenant and I have attended
over seventy community meetings and, due to our standard graffiti detail, at no cost to the City of Miami,
we have virtually eliminated the graffiti in the Flagami area. We have kept our overgrown lots to a
minimum. We have also identified several illegal dumping sites and, of course, we could have not
accomplished this task without my staff, which I'd like to introduce now. My NET Representative, Conrad
Salazar.
[COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ ENTERED THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 2:33 P.M.]
Chairman Plummer: Smile, you're on Candid Camera.
Mr. Callava: My Code Enforcement Trainee, Michelle Frazier, my Code Enforcement Inspector, Enrique
Fortun. I'd also like to introduce NET Lieutenant, Manny Orosa, NRO (Neighborhood Resource Officer),
Oscar Sigler and Gus Rabasa, and we have a community leader, Jack Mejuto, and Baron De Parre. And,
without delay, I'd like to:..
Chairman Plummer: If you've got that policemen, you must have some bad people out there.
Commissioner Sanchez: Hey, that's a fine group you've got there.
Chairman Plummer: That's a fine group.
Lieutenant Manuel Orosa: Thank you, Commissioner. Good after...
Commissioner Sanchez: The best...
97
October 12, 1999
58. f3UPPORT, COMMITMENT FOR ADDITIONAL HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION TO SAVE OUR
.SENIORS RAISE SHORTFALLS FROM AD VALOREM _TAX REVENUE BASE, IF REQUIRED.
(See section # 5)
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele..
Commissioner Teele: I would move that this Commission go on record as — Mr. Attorney, please correct
me — but goes on record as committing to the Save...
Commissioner Regalado: I have it here.
Commissioner Teele: No.
Commissioner Regalado: I have the ordinance here, that the City Attorney draft.
Commissioner Teele: Well, let me do this. I would ask Commissioner Regalado to make the motion, then,
regarding the Commission's supporting the Save Our Seniors; and further committing to raise any necessary
shortfalls, the two point one to two point nine million dollars from the ad valorem tax base, if -required.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Teele: I would ask" that Commissioner...
Chairman Plummer: Made by Regalado. Seconded by Gort. - Is there any further discussion?,
Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Mr. City Attorney, do.we need this ordinance? It's the one that you draft
for... - -
Mr. Vilarello: My understanding, it was adopted this morning.
Chairman Plummer: That's correct.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, I know. But — I know. I know it was, but...
Chairman Plummer: We've already done it.
Commissioner Regalado: We need to reiterate that.
Chairman Plummer: No, you don't need to reiterate. "
Commissioner Regalado: All right.
Chairman Plummer: All right. All...
Commissioner Teele: Could we have the Clerk to reread the — Ms. Dougherty, could you let the Clerk read
this into the record? Because I think this is very important, as it relates to out years. Mr. Clerk, would you
173 October 12, 1999
read the motion, please? This is the one that Commissioner Regalado just made.
JI
Mr. Walter Foeman (City Clerk): OK. I'm sorry.
Commissioner Teele: The motion relating to a commitment by the Commission...
Mr. Foeman: The one that throw out all the bids?
Commissioner Teele: No.
Mr. Foeman: OK.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Attorney, could you read it?
Mr. Vilarello: It would be a resolution of the City Commission that, in the event that there was a shortfall of
funds based on the adoption of the Save Our Seniors Ordinance, that the City Commission would be
committed to raise those ad valorem taxes, if necessary.
Commissioner Teele: Over the next five years.
Mr. Vilarello: Over the next five years.
Chairman Plummer: All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: Opposition?. Show it unanimous.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption:
MOTION NO.99-782
A MOTION GOING ON RECORD AS AN EXPRESSION OF
SUPPORT AND COMMITMENT FOR ADDITIONAL HOMESTEAD
EXEMPTION TO SAVE OUR SENIORS; FURTHER COMMITTING
TO RAISE ANY NECESSARY SHORTFALLS ($2.1 MILLION TO
$2.9 MILLION) FROM THE AD VALOREM TAX REVENUE BASE,
IF REQUIRED.
174 October 12, 1999
,
Upon being seconded by Vice Chairman Gort, the motion was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez -
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado, you have some other items you wish to...
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I want to just ask this of the Clerk — of the Manager. Mr. Manager,
it's my understanding that, based upon the resolutions and the motion by Commissioner Regalado and
Commissioner Gort, that this Commission is now legally committed and has come up with the revenue
source that's necessary for the Save Our Seniors. Would you make sure that the Oversight Board gets a full
picture as to this, so that there is no question going back and forth. Now, of course, this is subject to a veto
by the Mayor. But, would you confer with the Mayor to see if this is going to be acceptable to him? And if
it's not, you know, communicate it to our -Chairman so that we can address it? Because I think it's very _
important that the public be aware that this Commission, on today, at 4:42, adopted the necessary
resolutions and motions to put into effect the Save Our Seniors, subject to the Mayor's veto and the
Oversight Board's approval.
Mr. Warshaw: I'll do that.
.AT THIS POINT, THE COMMISSION TABLES CONSIDERATION OF THE SPECL4L MEETING
AGENDA IN ORDER TO CONSIDER ITEMS ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.
.59. ` DISCUSS PROPOSED, AFFORDABLE HOUSING:PROJECT AT :.CMC :CENTER SITE NEAR
JACKSON HOSPITAL.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, several times we had an issue here.
It's development of a proposed multifamily building on the Civic Center side and we deferred this, so the
administration would meet with the members of this group. They're here now, so...
Chairman Plummer: But wait, wait, wait. What item is this?
Commissioner Regalado: It's not on the...
Chairman Plummer: Is this on your blue copies?
Commissioner Regalado: No, it isn't. Because I'm deferring all of the blue.
175 October 12, 1999
back and forth, back and forth.
r
Chairman Plummer: Sir, the City Attorney has said to you, he is not prepared to speak to the issue today.
So, I don't think anybody up here is going to go against that thought, that he's not prepared. And until he is
-- and, hopefully, it will be at the next meeting — that's where the Commission is.
Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner, can I ask what it is that you're interested in how you're interested in
proceeding through an RFP process?
Commissioner Regalado: Basically, that project be started and that the City would not lose any money.
And it seems to me that, you know, these people are very respectable. They say that they will commit to a
timeline for the construction. If not, they lose everything. So — I mean, it's a win -win situation. So, next
meeting, you just tell us what to do.
Chairman Plummer: That will be fine, sir. OK. Thank you very much.
AT THIS POINT, THE COMMISSION TABLES CONSIDERATION OF THE REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA IN. ORDER TO CONSIDER ITEMS ON THE SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA.
60. DISCUSSION: STORMWATER UTILITY TRUST
Chairman Plummer: We're -now back to the few items left on the supplemental agenda. I think we took care
of "F," if I'm not mistaken?
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, what time are you leaving?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele; I would like to leave somewhere between five and 5:15.
Commissioner Teele: OK.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Item -- we took up "G," which is the 64 hours. Did we take up the Storm
Water Sewer?
Vice Chairman Gort: No.
Chairman Plummer: We did not. All right. Mr. City Manager, Item "F" of the Storm Water Sewer for the
fees, charges and collection and the interest accrued. Who's going to speak to that? Mr. Kay.
Mr. Jim Kay (Director, Public Works): This year, recently, you passed a balanced budget, which included
certain activities that had to be covered because we have a permit with'UPA with regard to storm sewers.
We have what we call a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit with the Federal
Government. In that permit we have to do several activities.
Chairman Plummer: Are we doing it?
Mr. Kay: We are doing them, yes, sir. Now, I think one of the issues here is that this is the way it is in our
budget. These activities have been earmarked with Storm Water Utility funds. These include such things
that's monitoring the control of illicit discharges and a capital improvement program...
Chairman Plummer: Street sweeping.
177 October 12, 1999
Mr. Kay: Street sweeping.
Chairman Plummer: Right.
Mr. Kay: And so on. And I think that this — I believe this is really Commissioner Teele's item. I just want
to point out that, if we are not going to fund these activities with Storm Water Utility funds, then they would
have to be funded with some other identified source of funding.
Chairman Plummer: All right, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele.
Commissioner Teele: I placed this item on the agenda because I think it's important that we adopt a capital
program or a maintenance program for Storm Water Utility. How many Storm Water Utilities have we
cleaned and do we clean or, you know, inspect and clean annually?
Mr. Kay: We, actually, inspect-- over a two-year period, we inspect all of our systems. Normally, we will
clean...
Commissioner Teele: Now, John. Mr. Kay?
Mr. Kay: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: You and J.L. — you and Chairman Plummer and I were together there right off —
when Commissioner Diaz De la Portia and Commissioner Carrie, when they went down and...
Chairman Plummer: Fifth Avenue.
Commissioner Teele: On 5th Avenue. They were cleaning up there and they came up with God knows how
many — at least, fifty, seventy-five, a hundred...
Chairman Plummer: Parking meters.
Mr. Kay: Meter heads.
Commissioner Teele: ...parking meter heads that had been just stuck down there and — I mean, you know,
the reason that these streets are flooded has something to do with the fact that we're really not doing that
maintenance program. And my question is this: This is something that lends itself to having a contractor to
do nothing but just clean Storm Water Utilities. How much money do we get a year for Storm Water Utility
clean? How much money do we get a year from the Storm Water Utility fee?
Mr. Kay: We get about nine million dollars ($9,000,000) a year, total.
Commissioner Teele: Nine million. How much of that is consumed in administrative costs and how much
is consumed in personnel and fringe benefit costs?
Mr. Kay: 1 did not break it down into that.
178 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele' Well, give it to us anyway you'd like to, please.
Mr. Warshaw: Roughly.
Mr. Kay: Just a second here. I would say that, roughly, we're looking at about — in administrative costs,
about five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). Just in administrative costs. And then labor costs, about
four million dollars ($4,000,000).
Chairman Plummer: About half.
Commissioner Teele: Four million dollars ($4,000,000)?
Mr. Kay: In administrative and labor costs, about half. The rest of it is capital improvement and equipment.
Mr. Warshaw: Administrative is only half a million.
Mr. Kay: Yeah.
Commissioner Sanchez: Is it twelve or four million?
Mr. Kay: Pardon?
Commissioner Sanchez: Is it twelve or four million?
Mr. Kay: What we collect annually is nine million.
Commissioner Sanchez: For the cost?
Mr. Warshaw: Four million in labor and five hundred in administrative... _ ..
Commissioner 'Teele: I think it would be very helpful if the Labor Union — I don't know if Mr. Cox is here,
but — I mean, you know, I want to talk about contracting out and I don't want to do this behind your back.
But what I don't want to do is displace anybody that is working. But what we need is somebody who is
doing nothing but unstopping these storm water utilities. When it rains around here, the whole City is under
water. I mean, you know, you've got areas that have three, four, five inches of water that have the utilities
all plugged up. So, the question is this: If there's four million.dollars ($4,000,000) in employment — in
wages and benefits, et cetera — is that wages or wages and benefits?
Mr. Kay: Would be pretty much wages right now. I don't think that's...
Commissioner Teele: So, that'll be plus another 40 percent?
Mr. Kay: Right.
Commissioner Teele: So, forty percent of four million is another million — million five, million six. So, its
closer to five and a half of the nine million. And, then, a half.a million for — so, how much is available —
what is the rest of it available for?
Mr. Kay: Capital improvements mostly
179 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: So, we have a capital improvement of about three million dollars ($3,000,000) a
year?
Mr. Kay: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Have we looked at going out with a bid for a company to do nothing but clean Storm
Water Utilities? Just go in...
Mr. Kay: No. No, we have not.
Commissioner Teele: I mean, you know, they don't have any other
job; they don't have to worry about Bayfront Park or the Empowerment Zone or — I mean, just strictly a
storm water utility issue. Is there a Storm Water Utility crew now that does nothing but that?
Mr. Kay: We have — yes, sir, we have four vactor units.
Commissioner Teele: They do nothing but that?
Mr. Kay: They do nothing but clean sewer drains.
Commissioner Teele: And they're operational seven days a week...
Mr. Kay: Well, they're here five...
Commissioner Teele: ...five days a week?
Mr. Kay: Five days a week. There is equipment breakdowns every now and then and...
Commissioner Teele: How many manholes or storm water utilities do we clean a year, then?
Mr. Kay: We probably clean out, at least, between five and six thousand catch basins per year. But we
have twenty-five in the whole city. Twenty-five...
Commissioner Teele: Five or six thousand?
Mr. Kay: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Well, Mr. Cox, did you want to weigh in on this?
Mr. Charlie Cox: I just don't understand, if we have four vactors working full-time, two men per vactor,
that's eight men, at an average salary of thirty thousand a year, that equals four million dollars ($4,000,000).
Mr. Kay: No. I'm talking about the entire...
Mr. Cox: But I mean -- and if you're going to go out to the private...
Commissioner Teele: Yeah. But, see, that's the point.
Mr. Charlie Cox: If you're going to go out to privates, then you need to start doing some fair comparisons
180 October 12, 1999
around here, because that's all...
.11
Commissioner Teele: Charlie, that's the point.
Mr. Cox: That's all we have doing it.
Commissioner Teele: See -- I mean, until now — until you got.up and spoke, I assumed we were spending
four million dollars ($4,000,000) for people doing the five — actually, it's closer to five point six.
Mr. Cox: We only have two men per vactor truck, and they can correct me if I'm wrong. And I guarantee
you, their average salary is not thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) because more than half of those men...
Commissioner Teele: So, then, what is that, eight people?
Mr. Cox: More than half of those men are on salary Schedule II.
Commissioner Teele: Is that eight people?
Mr. Cox: That's eight people. Five days a week.
Commissioner Teele: Times thirty is two hundred and forty thousand dollars ($240,000) a year. So, where
is the other four million? I mean...
Mr. Kay: Well, we have other people in that storm sewer section, as well, that operates vactors.
Commissioner Teele: You mean, we've got that kind of management?
Mr. Kay: No, sir. But there are activities, such as street sweeping, and also neighborhood clean-ups and
also Has -Matt (phonetic). These are other labor charges.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele,
Commissioner Teele: 1 apologize. Mr. Attorney.
Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): I think one issue — and Mr. Kay touched on the issue earlier.
There is EPA requirements for monitoring storm water outfall, which is also vitally important. And one of
the basis is for the creation of the Storm Water Utility charge. So, there are other appropriate expenditures
of the funds, other than just cleaning French drains.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I realize that, you know, this whole issue of us looking at budgets as it
relates to how we respond to citizens is something that makes a lot of people uncomfortable. It apparently
makes even, you know, the media uncomfortable. But I've got to tell you something. I think we abrogate
our responsibility, as Commissioners, if we don't get to the bottom of this and figure out how we can get the
storm water utilities cleaned and get the water to move from off the streets. Now, there may need to be
some capital work. There may be some low-lying areas that need retro-fitting or even need new lines. I
mean, I don't know. But what 1 would, respectfully, request — and I don't want to make it a motion — is that
the Manager develop a detailed analysis and plan — and I think the Union should be a part of that plan. I
think Mr. Cox has as much to offer in this discussion as anyone. Because I've got to tell you something. If
we've got four crews, you know, operating and — out of a nine million dollar ($9,000,000) budget and those
181 October 12, 1999
four people are making an average of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000), something's wrong.
Chairman Plummer: Well, you've got a lot more than that.
Commissioner Teele: And, see. J.L., this is the problem with the City that has not — with all due respect to
the Oversight Board -- they have not looked at the structural problems. You know and I know that, in the
period when the budget was tight, everybody was just grabbing whatever dollars they could and paying for
whatever they could, and we need to rationalize this. We need to go back and say, "OK, Mr. Public Works
Director. Without penalty, without punishment, give us the right way to structure this and if it means, we've
got to come up with another two million dollars ($2,000,000)" — because what it means is, we've been
robbing Peter to pay Paul and it's very clear to me, Mr. Kay — and I certainly don't mean to, in any way,
insult you or your department. But it's very clear to me that, if we're getting nine million dollars
($9,000,000) for storm water utility — and you can talk about all the street sweeping and all that you want to,
that ain't going to add up to a million dollars ($1,000,000) or so a year. The fact of the matter is, we've got
four hundred — we've got three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) worth of people directly committed on
the front line to clean the storm water utilities out of nine million dollars ($9,000,000) and something's
wrong with that picture.
Chairman Plummer: So, what are you asking? You want the City Manager to come back...
Commissioner Teele: I'm asking the Manager and the Audit Department and the Management Department
and the Assistant Managers to sit down and try -to figure out what's right. It's probably going to mean, Mr.
Manager — I'll be the first guy to say it. It's probably going to mean that we need to put another two million
dollars ($2,000,000) or some amount of money into Public Works and get everybody that's in Public Works
that's on storm water utility, that's doing park designs, that's doing street designs, that's doing sidewalk
designs and everything else, other than storm water utility, get them off of that budget line because you
know that's what's happening and I know that's what's happening. You don't have to admit it, but I'm going
to say it. And that's the way this government — I mean, that's the way any government works. If you've got
the money, you put the people against that. And Mr. Cox has been very helpful because he said it's only
eight people cleaning out the Storm Water Utilities and that's why they're so clogged up.
Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Manager, you understand what he's asking for?
Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir.
61. -.INSTRUCT MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, WITH THE
.CLERK OF: THE COURTS TO USE THE MANAGEMENT . RESOURCES OF NIIANH-DADE
COUNTY TO REVIEW LEGISLATIVE OPTIONS FOR THE MERGER OF THE CITY OF
MM II FIR&RESCUE DEPARTMENT WITH THE'" NIIANII-DADE COUNTY FIRE
DEPARTMENT, WITH THE ASSOCIATED COSTS TO BE.WRALLY-ALLOCATED FROM
BUDGET ' RESERVES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI WITH APPROVAL- OF -GOVERNOR'S
EMERGENCY OVERSIGHT BOARD.
Chainnan Plummer: All right. Item D. A merge of the City of Miami Fire Rescue
Department/Miami-Dade County Fire Department. I think, Commissioner Teele, this is yours also.
Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I would note the presence of distinguished, members of the
Fire Board and I would ask that they be allowed to give us any advice or input that they would like to make,
if they would like to.
182 October 12, 1999
Chaisman Plummer: This is the County's Fire Board?
Commissioner Teele: Yes.. I think there's a misnomer. The County's — Miami -Dade County. The Miami
Commission, under Gwen Margolis and the other 12 members and under the distinguished Mayor, Mayor
Penelas, do not control the Fire Board any longer, except as it relates to budget approval. The same way we
don't run the Off -Street Parking. And I think there is a whole misnomer because we continue to call this the
County's Fire Department, which it is,- but it's really the unincorporated County and a few municipalities.
How many municipalities are...
Dr. Roberto Del Cristo: We serve a total of 27, sir.
Commissioner Teele: Twenty-seven municipalities. But Miami Beach has its own Fire Department.
Dr. Del Cristo: Yes, they do.
Commissioner Teele: Hialeah has its own Fire Department.
Dr. Del Cristo: Yes.
Commissioner Teele: Key Biscayne has a contract relationship.
Dr. Del Cristo: With you; sir, not with us.
Commissioner Teele: With us. And on and on and on. So, the point is this. This all has occurred within
the last two years, that the Fire Board has been relatively emancipated from the County. In other words, the
Fire Board Commissioners are elected from within the fire district, the. unincorporated, plus the 26 cities
that they represent. And I would just like to put it on the record because all that I'm asking for is a study.
Because there are a series of macro issues that go well -beyond the jurisdiction of the City of Miami, if you
want to=talk about what the option is. And I really would if you all object to the study, I'll — I mean, I'll be
the first guy to withdraw, it.
Dr. Del Cristo: Commissioners, my name is Dr. Robert Del Cristo. I'm Commissioner for District 2 of the
Fire Board. -
Commissioner Teele: What is District 2?
Dr. Del Cristo: District 2 basically encompasses all the way from the DadeBroward line, west of the
expressway of the Palmetto, all the way down to Homestead. Commissioner Godoy's district is District 4,
which encompasses basically Sweet Water, parts of Kendall, Westchester, South Miami area.
Commissioner Teele: And how many Commissioners are there?
Dr. Del Cristo: There's five Commissioners. The board is pretty much set up the same as your board is.
We have been existence for over twelve years and we, basically, are, a, separate taxing district from the
County. We, basically, run a millage of about two point seven to two point eight right now, at this point.
The first thing 1 want to do, though-...
Commissioner Teele: Are you constitutionally capped at three mills?
183 October 12, 1999
Dr. Del Cristo: Yes, we are, we're constitutionally capped at three mills at this point, out of the total ten
mills.ihat the County is supposed to have. The first thing I want to do, though, is I want to express my thank
you for having me here today and also to tell you that you guys have a very fine Fire Department. I am also
a member of the Fire Department myself, in the capacity, I'm the Medical Manager for the .OFDA and
FEMA team, that has gone all over the world, Oklahoma, Turkey and all that, and I have been able to view
your Fire Department in the past and you have a very good Fire Department. As a member of the district
and the board, I will assure you one thing, that we are constitutionally bound by our own Charter to provide
the same level of service to all citizens within the County or the district, as you may have it. That service —
at least, I may be prejudiced but I considered it to be one of the best in the nation. We are not only
recognized as one of the finest departments in the United States but also the world. We pretty much serve at
the will of the Federal Government, as well as other countries. And I am very interested in the kind of study
that you guys are going to do. We did a study a couple of years ago, which I have given to some of your
members, which pretty much give an idea of exactly how much money you're going to. be spending if we do
bring you into the district, and it's somewhere around fifty to fifty-two million dollars, which may be a
significant savings to you guys. Also, remember, that you would take that out from under your millage that
you are spending under the Fire Department. Lastly, I do want to say that, whenever you do this, also
consider the firefighters themselves. It's very important that you do have consensus among.your firefighters
about what's going on and be very sensitive to their needs, as well as to the Union and put everything else
aside. Thank you.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Chief, do you wish to comment?
Fire Chief Carlos Gimenez: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The only comment I would make is that, on
this resolution, is that we have no problem with conducting a study; however, we would like for it to be a
joint study and not one just done by the County. Would like for the City to be involved in the study also.
Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Gabriel.
Mr. Tom Gabriel: Tom Gabriel, Miami Association of Firefighters. I've got tell you. I don't know exactly
if this is coming from a political payback, like those other items that were up there that got deferred, but I
can tell you that, if it is, we're very disappointed. And, you know, it's obvious that these actions over here,
that you're going to look at it differently, but I'm going to tell you that the firefighters will continue to serve
for the City as long as you want us.
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. All right. Mr. Teele, this is your item.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman?
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. This,is not a public discussion.
Commissioner Regalado: Would you yield a minute, please?
Commissioner Teele: I'll be happy to.
Commissioner Regalado: I think that the comments made by Tom were really unfair, Tom, because I heard
and you have heard, Commissioner Teele, many, many months ago talking about this issue and I think that
to say that this is political payback is something that is unfair to the Commission. Because — I mean, were
all going to participate on this. And, you know, I just wanted to say that. And I know that you are a
professional and that you understand...
184 October 12, 1999
Mr. Gabriel: No. I -- if I just -- kind of a quick clarification. That was political payback.
Commissioner Teele: What's that?
Mr. Gabriel: And what I'm saying is, if this item is for that. I'm disappointed, is what I said.
Commissioner Teele: What was political payback?
Mr. Gabriel: All of the items that were here for the Fire Department today, with the exception of one, was
deferred or stopped.
Commissioner Teele: I moved those items.
Mr. Gabriel: Well, at least, from up there, they've been deferred, so...
Commissioner Teele: No. Only one or two got deferred. The one relating to kitchen — I mean...
Chairman Plummer: Kitchen cabinets were deferred.
Commissioner Teele: ...the only reason — in fact, Commissioner Regalado — the reason that I didn't go
forward, Mr. Gabriel, Tom, really, is because there were only four Commissioners here at the time and it
required a four/fifths vote. And if Commissioner Regalado or Commissioner Gort or someone would move
it, I'll be happy to second it. But Commissioner Regalado was not on the dais. Commissioner Plummer has
expressed a long-standing objection to this, and I respect him and you respect him, and he is not going to
just look the other way while we do this. I asked questions this morning about the tires. He answered the
question. Said, you know, "You've got two Good Year and they don't want to have two Uniroyal" which,
you know, may make some sense. So, I said, I'll move the item. Did I not do that?
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: So, I mean, there hasn't been any political payback. But I want to put this on the
record. On March 2nd of ' 1998, in the context of the Fire Assessment Fee, this matter was thoroughly
discussed. I want to read from the record just very briefly, Mr. Chairman, the comments of the Manager.
The Manager -- I'm trying to find out -- Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa and the time this occurred was about 10:38.
Now, he spoke for seven pages, uninterrupted, and I'm going to go to page 21. "The next item is the transfer
of the Fire Department to Miami -Dade County. This is a subject that was raised in your last meeting. I,
personally, do not support it. But we were asked to and we will review it and bring it back to you, with
recommendations." We've not gotten any recommendations. That was on March 2, 1998, OK? And, then,
he goes on to say, "I, personally, don't support it but we, as you know, we have what I think is the finest Fire
Department in the area. The response time of a minute to a minute and a half faster than the County. Any
of you that have dealt with a tragedy know what a minute or a minute and a half can make as a significance
in — determinative difference" -- he spoke well, didn't he — "between life and death and the gravity" _ this is
kind of poetic -= "between the gravity of an injury to an individual. We want to comply with your directions
and mandates, that we can explore this and we will."
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Commissioner Teele: And then it goes on. But, personally, — et cetera.
Chairman Plummer: No, this is not a public...
185 October 12, 1999
Commissioner Teele: I just want to put on — Mr. Chairman, this is very important because this is not
political payback. All that we're asking is that the Clerk of the board, which oversees the Audit and
Management Division of the County, along with the Mayor, as the constitutional officer, which is
responsible for audit and management under the Florida Constitution but, you know, the people around
town have a problem with constitutional duties being carried out by elected officials. But all over the State
of Florida the Clerk of the County of every sixty-seven counties, including Dade County, is the audit officer
for this County. And the Clerk is responsible for basically providing the audit and management
responsibilities in the County. There is a question as to whether or not the County — the City could join that
and I would have no objections if the Manager designated the Audit Department of the City to work with
the Clerk's Audit Department in coming up with this recommendation. And I would amend the motion to
include the Manager providing for, at his discretion, the Audit Department of the City of Miami to work
with the Audit and Management of the County in formulating the recommendations, as well as working
with the Fire Department and the Fire Board of the County and everybody and anybody, at all. But I want
to mention this: The County does not provide rescue service. The City provides rescue service. And I
think it's very important to make a distinction between and compare fire to fire and, then, make a separate
sub -study as it relates to rescue, fire and rescue.
Chairman Plummer: is there a second to the motion? Is there a second to the motion?
Commissioner Sanchez: To study, second.
Chairman Plummer: A11 right. Now, Chief, I don't know what else you have to say
Chief Gimenez: Well, 1 think that the City's Fire Department and the County's Fire Department work very
well together. I would like to see the City's Fire Department and the County's Fire Department work
together and put up the study and then have an independent — somebody independent to take a look at it to
make sure that what we came up with was, you know, the facts and then lay those facts before this board
and then you can make the determination, whatever way you want to go.
Chairman Plummer: OK.
Mr. Gabriel: But in order for that to happen, I think, you know, the experts in the field need to get together,
you know, to put those things together and...
Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Call the roll.
[COMMENTS MADE DURING ROLL CALL]
Chairman Plummer: I'm voting no. Let me tell you. In my 29 years of being around here, I've got the finest
department there is. You can't improve on a number one and, as far as I'm concerned, Metropolitan Dade
County has got their. department, God bless them. But I'm going to keep mine and I'm going to keep it
in-house. Due to respect that they need, I have to vote no. Thank you. But it does pass four to one.
186 October ' 12, 1999
The•following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-783
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
INSTRUCTING .THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE
CITY ATTORNEY, WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURTS TO USE
THE MANAGEMENT RESOURCES OF MIAMI-DADS COUNTY
TO REVIEW THE LEGISLATIVE OPTIONS FOR THE MERGER OF
SERVICES, EXCEPT FOR RESCUE SERVICES, PROVIDED BY
THE CITY OF MIAMI FIRE -RESCUE DEPARTMENT WITH THE
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT; ALLOCATING
ASSOCIATED INITIAL COSTS THEREFOR FROM BUDGET
RESERVES OF THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR SAID PURPOSE,
SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE GOVERNOR'S EMERGENCY
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT BOARD.
(Here follows body'of resolution, omitted here and on -file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Sanchez, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. .
NAYS: Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr
ABSENT: INone.
Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Chairman, with that great accolade...
Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Teele: ...I would move the items relating to the Fire Department's budget. I mean, the Fire
Department contracts that have been deferred because I do think we need -to go ahead and deal with those
issues.
Chairman Plummer: Can I put something on the record? You know how I found out about this, Tom, just
for your own edification? I was at the Boy's Club theother night and one of the Metro Fire Departments
came up and said "Welcome aboard." I said, welcome aboard what? He said, "Your Fire Department's
coming over to our Fire Department." I said, in hell's little acre. And that was how I found out that this item
was on a supplemental agenda. I'd never seen it. OK.
187 October 12, 1999
62. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A TASK ORDER TO PROVIDE ANALYSIS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF NOT LESS THAN THREE OPTIONS TO REDUCE AND
STREAMLINE DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY AND TO CONSULT WITH THE FLORIDA
-LEAGUE OF CITIES IN FORMULATING A REORGANIZATION STRUCTURE OF THE 25
TO 30 . DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY, INCLUDING "THE CITY CLERK AND RISK
MANAGEMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE .CITY ATTORNEY MANAGER TO WORK WITH
EXTERNAL AUDITOR AND CONSULT WITH LEAGUE.
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, the last item on the agenda is Item E. Item E is to Streamline the
Departments, asking the health of the Florida League of Cities.
Commissioner Teele: No.
Chairman Plummer: I'm sorry?
Commissioner Teele: No. It's asking for an External Auditor.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Teele: It's asking for the management — the Manager to work with External Auditor.
Chairman Plummer: All right.
Commissioner Teele: And to consult with the Florida League of Cities, including the City Clerk, the City
Attorney and Risk Management as it relates to three or four options — not less than three options on
streamlining the City. And I've discussed it with the Manager and he doesn't have a problem with it.
Chairman Plummer: Is there a second? Is there a second?
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman. 4ort: _Second.
Chairman Plummer: All right. All in favor say "aye."
Mr. Vilarello: Resolution, as amended by Commissioner Teele.
Chairman Plummer: It's a resolution, yes. All in favor say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Plummer: All opposition? Show it unanimous.
188 October 12, 1999
Thefollowing resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-784
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE CITY OF MIAMI
EXTERNAL AUDITOR TO ENTER INTO A TASK ORDER TO
PROVIDE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF NOT LESS
THAN THREE OPTIONS TO REDUCE AND STREAMLINE THE
DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI AND TO CONSULT
WITH THE FLORIDA LEAGUE OF CITIES IN FORMULATING A
REORGANIZATION STRUCTURE OF THE 25 TO 30
DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, INCLUDING THE CITY
CLERK AND RISK MANAGEMENT, AS IT RELATES TO THE
CITY ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairman Wifredo Gort
Commissioner Tomas Regalado
Commissioner Joe Sanchez
Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr.
Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: None.
AT THIS POINT, THE COMMISSION ADJOURNS THE SPECIAL MEETING AND
RECONVENES ON REGULAR SESSION.
�:63: `RATIFY, APPROVE, CONFIRM MANAGER'S 'FINDING''OF`.,EMERGENCY, WAIVE
REQUIREMENTS FOR -COMPETITIVE SEALED BIDS APPROVE` PROCUREMENT AND
INSTALLATION 'OF KITCHEN CABINETS.AND APPLIANCES -FROM VARIOUS VENDORS
FOR.RENOVATION OF EIGHT FIRE STATIONS, FOR THE DEPARTMENT. OF FIRE -RESCUE.
.,.($172,233.84); ALLOCATE .FUNDS FROM CAPITAL 110PROVEIVIENT>PROGRAM (CIP);."FIRE
rSTATION .AND BUILDING RENOVATIONS;' FUNDED :`BY, :':THE:;.FIRE °ASSESSMENTS: (See
Section #25) —
Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, is there anything else to come before this board?
Mr. Donald Warshaw (City Manager): No.
Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chainnan?
189 October 12, 1999