The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 1998-03-31 MinutesCITY MIAMI 11 1 �' ': INCORN ORATEU I o••�6 COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON March 31, 1998 (Special) PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING March 31, 1998 ITEM SUBJECT LEGISLATION NO. 1. (A) CITY MANAGER GARCIA PEDROSA GIVES M 98-323 OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED BUDGET M 98-324 SOLUTIONS FOR REVISED FISCAL YEAR ORDINANCE 1997-1998 BUDGET -- MANAGER FURTHER 11631 EXPLAINS REVENUE MATRIX LISTING R 98-325 RECURRING AND NON -RECURRING ORDINANCE SOURCES OF REVENUE. 11632 (B) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ANNUAL SOLID ORDINANCE WASTE FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. 11633 (C) PROPOSED, MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE ORDINANCE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE WHICH 11634 EXCLUDES TAX EXEMPT ENTITIES AND M 98-326 PUBLIC HOUSING. M 98-327 (D) PRESENTATION OF CHART AND M 98-328 EXPLANATION OF APPORTIONMENT OF 3/31/98 PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL SOLID WASTE FEES ASSESSED UPON COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS FOR ILLEGAL DUMPING. (E) PROPOSED INCREASE TO REQUIRED FEE TO COVER ENFORCEMENT OF SOUTH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. (F) PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS REMOVAL FEE. (G) PROPOSED INCREASE TO SOLID WASTE REGULATORY PERMIT FEE FOR COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS FROM 15 PER CENT TO 20 PER CENT. (H) PROPOSED INCREASE OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORT ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT BILLING TO MEDICARE. (1) CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED BUILDING AND ZONING FEE INCREASES -- PROPOSE AMNESTY PERIOD AS INCENTIVE FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. PAGE NO. 2-93 (J) DISCUSSION OF NON -RECURRING REVENUE SOURCES: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS AND SAINT HUGH OAKS VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM SALES PROCEEDS -- SEE LABEL 1 M. (K) CITY MANAGER PRESENTS PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS APPROVED BY USHUD -- COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONER TEELE REGARDING EXCLUSION OF FLAGLER MARKET PLACE FROM SAID ALLOCATIONS AS INELIGIBLE PROJECT -- FURTHER DISCUSSION REGARDING REALLOCATION OF SAINT HUGH OAKS PROCEEDS TO GENERAL FUND. (L) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO DRAFT RECYCLING ORDINANCE -- FURTHER DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ENFORCE ILLEGAL DUMPING LAWS AT NO COST TO HOMEOWNERS AND TO EXPLORE INCLUDING SAID ISSUE IN FUTURE POLICE LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. (M) CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF RECURRING AND NON -RECURRING REVENUES -- CITY MANAGER PROPOSES INCREASING COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS PERMIT FEES FROM 15 PER CENT TO 20 PER CENT -- FURTHER PROPOSES TO STUDY FRANCHISE FEE FOR COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS -- SEE LABEL 1 L. (N) DISCUSSION REGARDING CONVERSION OF OFF STREET PARKING AS A CITY DEPARTMENT. (0) DISCUSSION RELATED TO STATE LEGISLATURE FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998 -- COMMENTS REGARDING FUNDING SOUGHT BY SENATOR AL GUTMAN, CHAIRMAN OF DADE DELEGATION, TOTALLING $1,050,000: PARK IMPROVEMENTS / YOUTH AT RISK / POLICE EQUIPMENT/ MIAMI RIVER INITIATIVES. (P) DISCUSS ASSESSED VALUES OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN CITY AND SPECIFICALLY IN DOWNTOWN (MIAMI CENTER AND FIRST UNION). (Q) DISCUSS ALTERNATIVES TO CREATING AN OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE SANITATION IMPACT FEE -- DISCUSS FEASIBILITY OF PRIVATIZING SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT AND / OR INCREASING SOLID WASTE FEE. (R) PUBLIC HEARING. (S) (1) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY CITY MANAGER ON ACCOMPLISHED COST CUTTING MEASURES -- FURTHER INPUT FROM CITY COMMISSIONERS ON REVENUES. (2) COMMENTS RELATED TO PENSION FOR FORMER CITY MANAGER ODIO. (T) CITY MANAGER CLARIFIES RECOMMENDATIONS FROM USHUD ON RECOVERY OF DEFAULT PAYMENTS AND NOW PAYMENTS. (U) COMMENTS RELATED TO TIPPING FEES. (V) (1) COMMISSIONER TEELE INQUIRIES AS TO MAYOR'S PROFESSIONAL VIEWS ON PROPOSED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE. (2) MAYOR HAS UNTIL APRIL 6, 1998 TO PROVIDE COMMISSIONNERS' WITH HIS VIEWS. (W) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO APPLY FEES FAIRLY -- FURTHER REQUEST LEGAL OPINION FROM OUTSIDE LAW FIRM ON EXEMPTION OF PUBLIC HOUSING FROM DOCUMENTABLE FEES GIVEN EXISTING AGREEMENTS WITH MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. (X) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO LOOK AT WAYS TO PREVENT ILLEGAL DUMPING AT NO COST TO HOMEOWNERS -- FURTHER REQUESTING AN EXPLANATION OF METHODOLOGY USED TO ARRIVE AT COST OF SOLID WASTE PICKUP PER HOMEOWNER. (Y) DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMERCIAL HAULING INCREASES TO BE HELD IN ABEYANCE UNTIL OCTOBER 1, 1998 -- FURTHER REQUESTING THAT GENERATED FUNDS FROM FIRE FEE PROPOSAL AND REDUCTIONS BE USED FOR CAPITAL NEEDS. (Z) CONTINUE CITY COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS. (1) APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES -- FOR APPROXIMATELY $1 PER MONTH PER PROPERTY OWNER. (2) APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND SOLID WASTE FEE OF TOTAL COMBINED OF $1 PER MONTH PER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNER. (3) EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 22-12 OF CODE -- INCREASE SOLID WASTE FEE TO $188 ANNUALLY -- DELETE REFERENCE TO SCALE FEES. (4) APPROVE METHOD TO ASSESS COSTS AGAINST ASSESSED PROPERTY IN CITY -- DIRECT PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL -- AUTHORIZE PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS. (5) EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND CHAPTER 22, SECTION I, SECTION 22-12 OF CODE:WASTE FEES -- SET FORTH SUPPLEMENTAL WASTE FEES UPON COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS. (6) EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 5 OF ORDINANCE 6145: BUILDING PERMIT FEES -- INCREASE FEES TO COVER COST OF CODE ENFORCEMENT -- FURTHER PROVIDE FOR CODIFICATION OF SAID BUILDING PERMIT FEES AS SECTION 10-4. (7) EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 22-56 OF CODE -- INCREASE REGULATORY PERMIT FEE FOR COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS FROM 15 PER CENT TO 20 PER CENT -- FURTHER DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO JOIN EFFORTS WITH PRIVATE SOLID WASTE HAULERS IN ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE TO MONITOR ILLEGAL DUMPING AND TO EXPEDITE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PRIVATE HAULERS. (8) AUTHORIZE / DIRECT TO INCREASE BILLING TO MEDICARE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL ADVANCE LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES. (9) DIRECT LAW DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE AN EMERGENCY RELATED TO COMMERCIAL RECYCLING FOR NEXT COMMISSION MEETING IF IN CASE OF INDUSTRY NON-COMPLIANCE -- SEE LABEL Z11. (10) REALLOCATE PROCEEDS FROM SAINT HUGH OAKS' SALES TO GENERAL FUND. (11) CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON NEED TO PREPARE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE REGARDING COMMERCIAL RECYCLING -- SEE LABELZ9. (12) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS IN ORDER TO SELECT EXPERT TO EVALUATE THE ACCURACY OF THE AD VALOREM TAXATION ASSESSMENT ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISSER'S OFFICE. 2. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE R 98-329 94 CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT WITH SEVERAL 3/31/98 ENTITIES -- FOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES -- FOR ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, ET AL. 3. VICE CHAIRMAN PLUMMER SCHEDULES DISCUSSION 95 TENTATIVE MEETING FOR APRIL 7, 1998 AT 3/31/98 10 a.m. 4. COMMISSIONER TEELE COMMENDS CITY DISCUSSION 95-96 COMMISSION FOR DELIBERATION EFFORTS 3/31/98 REGARDING RECURRING REVENUES -- COMMISSIONER GORT COMMENDS STAFF. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 31st day of March, 1998, 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 1:07 p.m. by Presiding Officer/Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr., (hereinafter referred to as Vice Chairman Plummer), with the following members of the Commission found to be present: ALSO PRESENT: Commissioner Wifredo Gort (District 1) Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. (District 2) Commissioner Hernandez (District 3) Commissioner Tomas Regalado (District 4) Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5) Jose Garcia -Pedrosa, City Manager Joel E. Maxwell, Interim City Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk An invocation was delivered by Reverend Father Timothy A. Hopkins who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. 1 March 31, 1998 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. (A) CITY MANAGER GARCIA PEDROSA GIVES OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED BUDGET SOLUTIONS FOR REVISED FISCAL YEAR 1997- 1998 BUDGET -- MANAGER FURTHER EXPLAINS REVENUE MATRIX LISTING RECURRING AND NONRECURRING SOURCES OF REVENUE. (B) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ANNUAL SOLID WASTE FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. (C) PROPOSED MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE WHICH EXCLUDES TAX EXEMPT ENTITIES AND PUBLIC HOUSING. (D) PRESENTATION OF CHART AND EXPLANATION OF APPORTIONMENT OF PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL SOLID WASTE FEES ASSESSED UPON COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS FOR ILLEGAL DUMPING. (E) PROPOSED INCREASE TO REQUIRED FEE TO COVER ENFORCEMENT OF SOUTH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. (F) PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS REMOVAL FEE. (G) PROPOSED INCREASE TO SOLID WASTE REGULATORY PERMIT FEE FOR COMMERCIAL ACCOUNTS FROM 15 PERCENT TO 20 PERCENT. (H) PROPOSED INCREASE OF EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORT ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT BILLING TO MEDICARE. (I) CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED BUILDING AND ZONING FEE INCREASES -- PROPOSE AMNESTY PERIOD AS INCENTIVE FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. (J) DISCUSSION OF NONRECURRING REVENUE SOURCES: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS AND SAINT HUGH OAKS VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM SALES PROCEEDS -- SEE LABEL 1M. (K) CITY MANAGER PRESENTS PROPOSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ALLOCATIONS APPROVED BY USHUD -- COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONER TEELE REGARDING EXCLUSION OF FLAGLER MARKET PLACE FROM SAID ALLOCATIONS AS INELIGIBLE PROJECT -- FURTHER DISCUSSION REGARDING REALLOCATION OF SAINT HUGH OAKS PROCEEDS TO GENERAL FUND. (L) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO DRAFT RECYCLING ORDINANCE -- FURTHER DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO ENFORCE ILLEGAL DUMPING LAWS AT NO COST TO HOMEOWNERS AND TO EXPLORE INCLUDING SAID ISSUE IN FUTURE POLICE LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. (M) CONTINUE DISCUSSION OF RECURRING AND NONRECURRING REVENUES -- CITY MANAGER PROPOSES INCREASING COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS PERMIT FEES FROM 15 PER CENT TO 20 PERCENT -- FURTHER PROPOSES TO STUDY FRANCHISE FEE FOR COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS -- SEE LABEL 1L. (N) DISCUSSION REGARDING CONVERSION OF OFF STREET PARKING AS A CITY DEPARTMENT. (0) DISCUSSION RELATED TO STATE LEGISLATURE FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998 -- COMMENTS REGARDING FUNDING SOUGHT BY SENATOR AL GUTMAN, CHAIRMAN OF DADE DELEGATION, TOTALLING $1,050,000: PARK IMPROVEMENTS / YOUTH AT RISK / POLICE EQUIPMENT/MIAMI RIVER INITIATIVES. 2 March 31, 1998 (P) DISCUSS ASSESSED VALUES OF REAL PROPERTY WITHIN CITY AND SPECIFICALLY IN DOWNTOWN (MIAMI CENTER AND FIRST UNION). (Q) DISCUSS ALTERNATIVES TO CREATING AN OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE SANITATION IMPACT FEE -- DISCUSS FEASIBILITY OF PRIVATIZING SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT AND/OR INCREASING SOLID WASTE FEE. (R) PUBLIC HEARING. (S) (1) ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY CITY MANAGER ON ACCOMPLISHED COST CUTTING MEASURES -- FURTHER INPUT FROM CITY COMMISSIONERS ON REVENUES. (2). COMMENTS RELATED TO PENSION FOR FORMER CITY MANAGER ODIO. (T) CITY MANAGER CLARIFIES RECOMMENDATIONS FROM USHUD ON RECOVERY OF DEFAULT PAYMENTS AND NON -PAYMENTS. (U) COMMENTS RELATED TO TIPPING FEES. (V) (1) COMMISSIONER TEELE INQUIRIES AS TO MAYOR'S PROFESSIONAL VIEWS ON PROPOSED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE. (2) MAYOR HAS UNTIL APRIL 6, 1998 TO PROVIDE COMMISSIONERS WITH HIS VIEWS. (W) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO APPLY FEES FAIRLY -- FURTHER REQUEST LEGAL OPINION FROM OUTSIDE LAW FIRM ON EXEMPTION OF PUBLIC HOUSING FROM DOCUMENTABLE FEES GIVEN EXISTING AGREEMENTS WITH MIAMI-DADE COUNTY. (X) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO LOOK AT WAYS TO PREVENT ILLEGAL DUMPING AT NO COST TO HOMEOWNERS - FURTHER REQUESTING AN EXPLANATION OF METHODOLOGY USED TO ARRIVE AT COST OF SOLID WASTE PICKUP PER HOMEOWNER. (Y) DISCUSSION REGARDING COMMERCIAL HAULING INCREASES TO BE HELD IN ABEYANCE UNTIL OCTOBER 1, 1998 -- FURTHER REQUESTING THAT GENERATED FUNDS FROM FIRE FEE PROPOSAL AND REDUCTIONS BE USED FOR CAPITAL NEEDS. (Z) CONTINUE CITY COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS. (1). APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FEE FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES -- FOR APPROXIMATELY $1 PER MONTH PER PROPERTY OWNER. (2) APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE MODIFIED FIRE -RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND SOLID WASTE FEE OF TOTAL COMBINED OF $1 PER MONTH PER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNER. (3) PROPOSED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 22-12 OF CODE -- INCREASE SOLID WASTE FEE TO $188 ANNUALLY -- DELETE REFERENCE TO SCALE FEES. (4) APPROVE METHOD TO ASSESS COSTS AGAINST ASSESSED PROPERTY IN CITY -- DIRECT PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL -- AUTHORIZE PUBLIC HEARING IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS. (5) PROPOSED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND CHAPTER 22, SECTION I, SECTION 22-12 OF CODE: WASTE FEES -- SET FORTH SUPPLEMENTAL WASTE FEES UPON COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS. (6) PROPOSED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 5 OF ORDINANCE 6145: BUILDING PERMIT FEES -- INCREASE FEES TO COVER COST OF CODE ENFORCEMENT -- FURTHER PROVIDE FOR CODIFICATION OF SAID BUILDING PERMIT FEES AS SECTION 10-4. 3 March 31, 1998 (7) PROPOSED EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 22-56 OF CODE -- INCREASE REGULATORY PERMIT FEE FOR COMMERCIAL WASTE HAULERS FROM 15 PER CENT TO 20 PER CENT -- FURTHER DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO JOIN EFFORTS WITH PRIVATE SOLID WASTE HAULERS IN ESTABLISHING A COMMITTEE TO MONITOR ILLEGAL DUMPING AND TO EXPEDITE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PRIVATE HAULERS. (8) AUTHORIZE / DIRECT TO INCREASE BILLING TO MEDICARE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL ADVANCE LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES. (9). DIRECT LAW DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE AN EMERGENCY RELATED TO COMMERCIAL RECYCLING FOR NEXT COMMISSION MEETING IF IN CASE OF INDUSTRY NONCOMPLIANCE -- SEE LABEL Z11. (10) REALLOCATE PROCEEDS FROM SAINT HUGH OAKS SALES TO GENERAL FUND. (11) CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON NEED TO PREPARE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE REGARDING COMMERCIAL RECYCLING -- SEE LABEL Z9. (12) DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS OR REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS IN ORDER TO SELECT EXPERT TO EVALUATE THE ACCURACY OF THE AD VALOREM TAXATION ASSESSMENT ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE. Vice Chairman Plummer: The purpose of today's meeting was to try and find additional sources of revenue. To try and console the Oversight Board who are demanding, even though we are already in black ink, that they would like to see us swimming in black ink. We asked the Manager to come back with some different sources of potential revenue both recurring and other otherwise, and at this particular time, I will turn the meeting over to the Manager to give us a presentation. Mr. Manager. Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. I would, first of all remind the Commission briefly of the posture in which the matter is at the moment. You approved on March the 2nd, a budget for fiscal year '97-'98, which is the current fiscal year. That budget was presented to the Oversight Board the next day on March 3rd, and thereafter reviewed by the Estimating Conference of the March... of the Oversight Board including the consultants, the financial consultants, Public Financial Management, Inc., who are well versed in these matters, having among other things, dealt with the bankruptcy, or the... I should say, the insolvency of the City of Philadelphia. Public Finance Management, Inc., rendered a report to the Oversight Board finding that, as you have indicated, Mr. Plummer, that the budget that we had presented, and you had approved, after you modified it was a balanced budget. In fact, it had an operating surplus projection of somewhat over three million dollars ($3,000,000), and the recurring revenues exceeded the recurring expenditures, allbeit in the words in the words of the consultant, "by a razor thin margin." Since the Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement does not require that there be any margin, it simply requires that operating... that recurring revenues be equal to or greater than recurring expenditures, and because it was a balanced budget, the consultant, although with misgivings about our ability to comply with it, recommended that the Oversight Board approve the budget. That, however, was not forthcoming, and the Oversight Board at its meeting of March 18th, rejected the City's budget, and I think your description, Commissioner Plummer is apt, is an apt one. They wanted substantial additional revenues in the budget, so there would be comfort and margin, and I think the word, cushion was utilized. Now, 4 March 31, 1998 this puts us in a difficult position, because the year is almost exactly half over, the fiscal year. And, so we had to identify recurring revenues of some magnitude that could be realized in some magnitude in six months. What we have prepared, and presented to you, and are presenting to you, this afternoon, builds on your March 2nd, decisions. That is to say, the measures that you took on March 2nd, we are taking as the baseline and building up from that. We need to bring back to you, after today, a revised budget ordinance which memorializes what you did on March 2nd, plus what you will do here, today. The reason we don't want to present that to you today is because what you did on March 2nd will necessarily change as a result of what you'll do today. And, so, it's simply easier and clearer, if the budget is revised once. If I may ask you, respectfully to turn to the Revenue Matrix, and... Where is Joe Pinon? Let me put up the Revenue Matrix in poster form. You have it in your books following, first of all, my letter or my memorandum of yesterday, and the March 20th letter from the Chair of the Oversight Board to me memorializing the rejection of the prior budget. Next to that, right after that is a revenue matrix which is about to be put up in front of you, and that revenue matrix identifies ten sources of revenue, eight of which, numbers one through eight... Vice Chairman Plummer: Hold it. Santiago, would you turn that so that we can see it, and the audience likewise can hopefully see it, all at the same time? We don't have enough books to go around. Anyone over there on that side, I would ask all the documents be put up on this side. So, if you want to move over so that you can follow through the document, please feel free to move at this time. All right, sir, go ahead, proceed. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The revenue matrix identifies ten sources of revenue, eight of which are recurring revenues, two of which are not. This is the matrix before. Tab one. This is the document immediately following my cover memo, and Chairman rejection letter. And beyond that, and I'll refer to that at the end of my presentation, we have identified some additional sources of revenue which we are not proposing that you consider today, but which are also worthy of consideration. In the category of recurring revenue, we have listed eight items, and the Commission really has latitude. Commissioner Teele remembering some of the comments that you made, which we wanted to be respectful of. The Commission can really pick and choose as you wish amongst these sources, both as to the source of revenue itself, and as to the level at which you may wish to use the... each source in the cases in which there is a sliding scale. What I would like to do briefly, is to present these sources, and at the same time, in the interest of time, present our recommendation as to each source. Source number one, is a residential Solid Waste fee increase. If you look in your books, just in front of tab two. That is to say, the last document on tab one, you will find a chart that lists the revenues to be generated from different amounts of increase in the Solid Waste fee. The first is, if you increase it by twenty-five dollars ($25) per unit, thirty-five dollars ($35) per unit, fifty dollars ($50) per unit, and eighty dollars ($80) per unit. As you have it now, the amount of the Solid Waste fee that we have charged residents in the City of Miami we are charging, is one hundred and sixty dollars ($160) per unit. We are recommending that you increase that by thirty-five dollars ($35) to one hundred and ninety-five dollars ($195) per unit, and let me put that in context. In the memorandum, the first page under tab one, we have surveyed the other jurisdictions, or a number of other jurisdictions to see what they charge. Mind you, it costs the City of Miami, three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323) in the average to pick garbage at a particular unit. We are now charging 160, for that which costs 323, and we are proposing that you increase that to 195. By contrast, the County charges three hundred and eighty dollars ($380) a year, including recycling, South Miami charges 300. Miami Springs, 365. North Miami 360. Opa Locka, 321.36. Hialeah, 324. Coral Gables, 498. Ft. Lauderdale, three hundred and forty dollars ($340), and the City of Hollywood is the only one survey that charges less than three hundred dollars ($300). Two hundred and seventy dollars and eighty-four cents ($270.84). So, the first revenue source, which is a recurring revenue source, is the increase of the Solid Waste fee. Again, our recommendation is thirty-five dollars ($35) per unit. You have the chart that gives you other levels and other amounts if you wish to use them instead. If you follow our 5 March 31, 1998 recommendation and increase to 195 from 160, that will give us, two million one hundred eighty-seven thousand five hundred dollars ($2,187,500) more in the current fiscal year. The second source is a modified fire fee. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: What is the cost of collecting residential garbage? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323). The second source is a modified fire fee. And, I say modified, because it is vastly different from the proposal that was presented to you at an earlier date. It is different in the following respects. I am sorry, Commissioner, yes, sir. Yes. Commissioner Teele: I am just having some trouble making the numbers work. Three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323) equals how much, for the City? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: You mean, if we charge what it costs? Twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000). Are you back there, Joe? I can't see you. OK. The total cost of picking up garbage is about twenty-two million dollars (22,000,000). Commissioner Teele: Twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000). Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's correct, Vice Chairman Plummer: How could you miss him? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Because, he's behind the chart. Vice Chairman Plummer: Go ahead. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, does the twenty-two million include illegal dumping? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. Commissioner Teele: Well... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: We pick that up. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, I understand that. Does that include the twenty-two million? Is the illegal dumping... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. No, wait a minute. We don't charge for the illegal dumping. So, the twenty-two million that we would derive as revenue were we to charge for that, would not include that. That's correct, sir. Now, if you asking us, whether we now pick up illegal dumping free of charge, the answer is, yes, and we propose to remedy that. Commissioner Teele: And, how much is the illegal dumping that you pick up free of charge? Mr. Pinon: Well, I can tell you that the tonnage for illegal dumping is equal to the garbage. So, at twenty-two million. We pick up 64,000 tons of garbage a year. We pick up 65,000 tons of illegal dumping. 6 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: But, we are still paying, how much per ton for tipping tees? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Fifty-four, Adrienne? Mr. Pinon: Forty-five at the County. Vice Chairman Plummer: So, we are paying the tipping fees, whether it's legal or illegal, and whether we are getting paid or not paid? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele, are you finished for the time being? Commissioner Teele: I am. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Teele: The 320... The 323 represent the actual cost... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Per household. Commissioner Teele: ... per household, including tipping fees, but excluding illegal dumping? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: Including the tipping fees for the tonnage that's picked up there? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's correct, sir. Commissioner Teele: Thank you. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: May I proceed, sir? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort, had a question. No. Proceed. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The second revenue source that we have identified, is a modified fire fee. I say modified, because it is a vastly different proposal than the one presented to you , before. And, it's different in three ways. First of all, it is limited to, or earmarked. Two-thirds of it is earmarked for the capital needs of the Fire Department. Specifically, for the purchase of equipment, including fire trucks and fire rescue vehicles, and that would be a specifically set aside amount to make sure that those needs of the Fire Department are taken care of. It is different also, because it is limited to five years. And, we will propose that you include an automatic Sunset provision, so no additional legislative action is needed in order to Sunset the legislation. And, by the way in five years, given the numbers that we had given you previously, as to the capital needs of the Fire Department, we will have met those needs fully. And, third... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, well, wait. Explain to me in this document that you have given us, and I am sure it's on the board, the difference between 34 SF and 41 MF? What is...? I don't understand that. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK. Mr. Jose Pinon (Assistant City Manager): Single-family and multifamily, I believe. 7 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The chart that you are referring... Vice Chairman Plummer: Single Family and Multi -Family? Thank you. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, the third reason that it is different from our prior proposal, is that it excludes the tax exempts. And, I want to add, and it's a modification that needs to be made from what is on your book, because we are told know that it might not... it might generate some legal challenges that we are trying to avoid. We also want to exclude Public Housing. So, by excluding the tax exempts, the governments, the churches, and so on, and the Public Housing. Look with me, please at your matrix in the book, because the modification would be as follows: Instead of six million five hundred sixty-seven thousands dollars ($6,567,000) as shown in your books, the exclusion of Public Housing would bring that number down by almost... by a half million dollars ($500,000) to six million fifty-two thousand two hundred and sixty dollars ($6,052,260). In the chart, Commissioner Plummer that you just referred to, which lists single family and multifamily, the next line says Public Housing, and that line would be deleted. So, we are proposing, in short, a modified fire fee earmarked two-thirds for capital needs of the Fire Department, one-third for other needs of the Fire Department. Limited to five years with a Sunset provision. Excluding tax exempts and public housing at the level of thirty-four dollars ($34) for single family homes, and 41 for multifamily homes, producing six million fifty-two thousand two hundred and sixty dollars ($6,052,260) a year. The third source of revenue is a supplemental waste fee on commercial Certificates of Use. Let me add two more, and then ask Mr. Pinon to explain three of them together, because he's got a chart that will do that, I think rather easily. The fourth is, the construction debris removal fee, and well, I guess you have three and four together, right, Joe. OK, if I may ask you to... If I may turn for a moment to, Assistant City Manager, Joe Pinon. He's got a chart which might be... A little farther, Joe. You might want to put it on top of the... Mr. Pinon: We will put it up... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yeah. To explain further, both the residential Solid Waste fee increase, which I just mentioned, which is item one. The Supplemental Waste Fee on Commercial and Certificates of Use, which is item three. And, the Construction Debris Removal Fee which is item four. Mr. Pinon: [Inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, you can use a hand mike, and come to the front. Mr. Pinon: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, why don't you do that, Joe, so we can... you can also point to the particular parts on the chart. Mr. Pinon: Good afternoon, Joseph Pinon, Assistant City Manager, for the record. Vice Chairman Plummer: Joe, come and sit beside me, please. [phonetic] Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Oh, oh, oh. Don't do that. We are self -insured here. Vice Chairman Plummer: Most of the time. Mr. Pinon: Commissioners at the March loth agenda. One of the directions that we received was to spread out the issue of the collection of the garbage throughout the City. And, not only to charge residents, but also commercial and any other that may be involved in the illegal dumping. 8 March 31, 1998 In this chart that I have here, and I think I mentioned that before. I would like to just point out to you, that we collect 64,721 tons of garbage per year, and 61,000 tons per year of trash. If you look down here, in the illegally dumped material, we collect a little bit over that, 65,052 tons, and 299 tons, specifically of tires. What we did was, we looked at the illegal dumping. We talked to the NETs (Neighborhood Enhancement Team), the NET Directors, the inspectors, police officers. And, we know that illegal dumping and litter comes across all the different parts of the community. It involves the individual who lives in a residence, and doesn't want to wait a week to have his grass picked up or his trees to be cut. So, he cuts them, and he goes to the next property or he goes to City property, and dumps it there. That counts as illegal dumping, as the City has to have a special crew to pick it up. Or it is placed in some one else's residence. That person gets cited, and then we have to deal with our problem. It also involves individuals who do construction. Construction not meaning a huge 20-story building, but some of it being remodeling of their homes or apartments, whereby they do the remodeling, not waiting for the four pickups a year that we have, where we pick it up free of charge. But, they do it on a given weekend, and they put all their windows and all their things that they... all the tiles, put in pickup truck, go to the nearest park, nearest alley, sidewalk or somebody else's property, and dump it there. We either cite, if it's a private property owner, or we pick it up. Then you have the commercial establishments. People who go to the regular stores purchase sandwiches, Cuban coffee, cans of sodas and drink, walk out and drop the litter on the streets. We pick that... And, then there are people who are actually in the business of picking up debris in construction. And, rather than taking it over to the County and paying the fees, dump it on our City property or in someone else's residence. And, we end up picking up the bill. What I am trying to say is, that it cuts across all levels of this community. And, so, what we are trying to do is establish a format based on your own direction, that would spread the cost of picking up illegal dumping across all those parts of the community. And, so we established a thirty-five dollar ($35) increase in the Solid Waste fee, which as has been mentioned, it is, the cost of residential pickup is much less than the cost it is for us to pick it up. We also have established a supplemental waste fee which is based on Certificates of Use. And, it can vary from... I have a chart here. This chart here, tells you, in the second item, what it would cost the residents or the commercial establishments to pickup, to pay for the service. An apartment of two units wouldn't pay anything. An apartment of 12 units would pay one hundred and two dollars ($102) a year. And, apartments between 12 units and 50, would one hundred and two a year. Between 50 units and, the 99,000 would pay one hundred and forty-four dollars ($144) a year, for the entire unit. Not per person. Not per apartment. NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Commissioner Hernandez entered the City Commission am ers at 1:21 p.m. Commissioner Hernandez Joe. Mr. Pinon: For the entire building. This is based on Certificates of Use. Yes, sir. Commissioner Hernandez: Joe, on the 12-unit apartment, as an example. How are you justifying this one hundred and two dollars ($102)? Explain that to me. Mr. Pinon: Well, the justification is the... There is a Certificate of Use, already. Commissioner Hernandez Right. Mr. Pinon: The formula is there. 9 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Hernandez Right. Mr. Pinon: We are simply applying it. The same one. Commissioner Hernandez How did you come up with one hundred and two dollars ($102)? Mr. Pinon: Well, we come up with a certain amount of money. When we add up the three... the cost of three fees, you realize that we don't cover the entire cost of picking up illegal dumping. So, what we tried to do, is do it as fair as we could, is a thirty-five dollar ($35) on a residential home, and on apartment units it would be... We could not apply a flat rate fee to everyone, because obviously, the Certificates of Use are based not only on the number of units, but also based on square footage and different components. So, it is not that we tried to weigh one with the other. We just simply tried to put it, so that not one particular segment of the community would bear the burden of paying for illegal dumping in the City. Commissioner Hernandez: At one point in time, I remember almost a year ago, I passed an amendment to the ordinance that exists on... And, really what it was, was to pickup on illegal dumping in the commercial properties. And, we changed, I believe from square footage to linear footage, but it was very controversial on the frontage of these buildings. These fees that you have come up with, these base rates. I mean, we have to have some kind of relation to whatever it would cost the City to pick this up. Have you done that in these numbers, or...? That's what I am trying... Mr. Pinon: No, those were already established. Those were fees for Certificates of Use. When you get Certificate of Use, you pay that. What we simply did was... Commissioner Hernandez: So, you are just... Mr. Pinon: ... use the same formula. Commissioner Hernandez: So you just going to, whatever they paid for their Certificate of Use, you are going to charge for Solid Waste Impact fee? Mr. Pinon: That's correct. So that an apartment, if someone lives in apartment would pay, if you have 10 units then it's one hundred and two dollars ($102) divided by 12. Commissioner Hernandez: And, is that just issuable? I mean, is that something that we can...? I mean, is there correlation between what somebody is paying for a Certificate of Use and what it would cost us to pick up whatever...? Mr. Pinon: Well, there was a fee study that was done to apply the Certificates of Use fees that tried to make it so that it's fair to everyone. We simply used the standard formula that was already in existence. Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): And, then, I might add, Commissioner Hernandez, that the Certificates of Use also go by size which has something to the generation of trash and garbage. Yes, sir. Commissioner Hernandez Thank you. Commissioner Gort: Let me finish that. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. 10 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Gort: The information that we here, it comes out to about seventy cents ($0.70) a month per unit. Does that apply across the board to all the units? I think that's a question... Mr. Pinon: No, I believe that's an average. Are we talking about...? You see, there are different fees for each one of the... Commissioner Gort: Using the sample of 12... Mr. Pinon: Right. Commissioner Gort: ... I came up with seventy cents ($0.70) a month per unit. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Oh, yes. For that category, yes. Mr. Pinon: Yes, for that category. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: For example, a two -unit apartment don't pay anything. Mr. Pinon: Right. Correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is our soundman, here? Either that or it's thunder outside. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, the total revenue on that supplemental waste fee... Commissioner Regalado: The thunder are here. Mr. Pinon: Not out there. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... would be two million two hundred thousand this year, two million four hundred fifty-one thousand nine fifty-one for a full year of revenue. And, then you got the construction debris, Joe. Mr. Pinon: Yes, sir. The construction debris, since we found a lot of illegally dumped materials that are put on our City properties, are construction debris. We are charging two percent of the cost of that... when they come to pull a permit. Two percent minimum of twenty dollars ($20). If you are doing some remodeling in the home, and you... and you are... the cost is over two hundred dollars ($200), you pay a minimum of twenty dollars ($20), the maximum is twenty-five hundred dollars ($2,500) in the event someone is building a 20-story building, the most they would pay is twenty-five hundred dollars ($2,500). As you can see, what we tried to do, in response to Commissioner Hernandez' point, we tried to equalize... Ms. Eva Nagymihaly: Excuse me. Do you mind, if...? Vice Chairman Plummer: Ma'am, the public will be heard from. Let us get finished with the demonstration here, by the administration. Ms. Nagymihaly: But, even it it's fallacious. It's doesn't say the correct items. Vice Chairman Plummer: You will have your time to say, a fallacious, as soon as the presentation is finished. Ms. Nagymihaly: You're sure now? Vice Chairman Plummer: I bet you. 11 March 31, 1998 Ms. Nagymihaly: I hope so. Vice Chairman Plummer: Might be nine o'clock, but we'll hear from you. Go ahead, Mr. Pinon. Mr. Pinon: And, what we found out is that... If you can see here is, the revenues are pretty close, of the residential. And, the supplemental waste fee which is on all the apartments and all the other properties. And, less for the construction debris because it's based on how much construction there is. We have no way of knowing what that will be. But, based on our previous history, we estimate that it would be one point five million. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, that's for the recovery of debris that falls off on the streets and sidewalks as it is removed from a construction site. Vice Chairman Plummer: Let me try to understand. Going back to Commissioner Teele's question. When you come up with a total fee of three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323), does that include the tonnage we pay on the illegal dumping as well as the legal dumping? Or, is it a separate amount? In other words, is the homeowner today, paying for the illegal dumping if he paid three twenty-three. Mr. Pinon: The homeowner today, meaning the revenues derived from ad valorem tax, yes. If you say, the homeowner from what they pay as far as the waste fee... no. Vice Chairman Plummer: Let me ask it another way. If the charge today was three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323) which the Manager says is the cost to the City, does that fee include the legal as well as the illegal cost in that one fee? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's only the... one. Mr. Pinon: Right. Yeah. That would cover everything except what it would... what it will cost for us to pick up City properties. Obviously, that would not cover that. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, and much of that is, illegal dumping. Vice Chairman Plummer: So, it's the sixty-five and the 61,000 tons of garbage... Mr. Pinon: That's correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... is what constitutes the three twenty-three? Mr. Pinon: That's correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK. Mr. Pinon: Sixty-five meaning the garbage... Commissioner Teele: Wait, wait. Mr. Pinon: ... and sixty-one meaning the trash. Commissioner Teele: No. That's a different answer than you gave me. It... Does someone have a budget for the Solid Waste Department here? 12 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yeah. Adrienne, has the numbers there. Commissioner Teele: What is the total budget of the Solid Waste Department, today? Ms. Adrienne Macbeth (Deputy Director/Solid Waste Department): Twenty-three million. Twenty-three million six hundred and seventy-six one thirty-eight. Commissioner Teele: Twenty-three million? Ms. Macbeth: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Well, before I asked the question, did... what did three twenty-three represent? You said twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000), which is the cost of collecting from the homeowners. Ms. Macbeth: The twenty-two million... Commissioner Teele: I said does that also include the cost of the illegal? Ms. Macbeth: Yes, sir. The twenty-two million is minus the cost of what it costs us to service City facilities. Our total budget is twenty... Commissioner Teele: No, no, no. That's not the question, City facilities. Ms. Macbeth: Sir, I am just saying, the total budget is twenty-three, when you extract out the cost of servicing City facilities, it comes to the twenty million. And, that's what the three twenty-four - excuse me -- is based on. Commissioner Teele: That's a totally different answer. Maybe, Vice Chairman Plummer, I am learning that seniority has some rights. Because, what is in this budget as it relates to the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant), is not only offensive, it's criminal, in my judgment. But, before we get to that, I want an answer to my question. And, the question is, how much does it cost? A simple question. What is the cost to collect from the homeowners that we collect each year in... from their Solid Waste Department, excluding illegal? Ms. Macbeth: If we exclude illegal, if we include only the garbage, trash, bulky waste and recycling service, that comes to twenty-one point two million. If that's divided by the 70,000 residencies that we served, that comes to three hundred and four dollars ($304) per year. Commissioner Teele: That's a new number now. Ms. Macbeth: The cover memo... Commissioner Teele: Three hundred and four dollars ($304). Ms. Macbeth: Well, sir, the cover memorandum that you have, the three twenty-four is explained as I just explained it to you. And, that's what it was based on. Ms. Pinon: Commissioner, let me add one more problem to this. Is that, the number that we come to 70,000, we have used in different ways. As you know, 62,000 is the figure that we used in some ways, because that's the number of bills that actually come back. People sometimes don't pay their bills, and sometimes people are in transition and don't have garbage service. And, that's why it varies from 62,000 to 70,000. 13 March 31, 1998 Ms. Macbeth: Mr. Teele, it might help that the illegal dumping represents about 11 percent of our budget. The service to City facilities represents about four percent, and the... Commissioner Teele: What is 11 percent? Eleven percent of 22 or 11...? Ms. Macbeth: Of the total twenty-three million which is two million two point seven million. Our City services is approximately four percent of our budget, and then at night we sweep... we do mechanical street sweeping. Commissioner Teele: I am just slow. I don't get it. Mr. Pinon: Commissioner, perhaps... I know it's very, very difficult to understand. But, we are using the same individuals that are picking up garbage, are going out and picking illegal dumping. Commissioner Teele: I understand... Mr. Pinon: That's why... Commissioner Teele: I understand that. Mr. Pinon: But, that's why it's ten... Commissioner Teele: But, you can't charge the homeowner for illegal dumping. You can't charge that against the budget. You see, that's my question. What is the budget... Ms. Macbeth: The budget is... Commissioner Teele: ... the total budget to collect from the legal homeowner, excluding illegal dumping. Now, obviously, if you have got one man, or one woman, who is spending 70 percent of their time collecting from... Vice Chairman Plummer: I don't think we can answer that question. Commissioner Teele: ... homeowners, and 30 percent of the time collecting illegal, you allocate 70 percent against that person's cost, and come up with a number. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: We don't. Mr. Pinon: The answer to that is, we don't. When she tells you the ten percent, is based on the cost of the tipping fees that the County... Commissioner Gort: Right. Mr. Pinon: ... for that illegal dumping. We are not charging the cost of the individuals or the equipment or anything else. Commissioner Gort: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but see, this is the problem. And, I mean, I think you all are doing... I think you are moving in the right direction, I don't want to... But, I think there is a lot of misinformation, and I don't want to agree with you, ma'am, because I don't know where you are going. 14 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: What are your total tipping fee? Commissioner Teele: But, I think there are some misinformation that's very important to homeowners. Vice Chairman Plummer: On or near 11? Commissioner Teele: Because, we keep saying... The Manager started out by saying, "it cost." We read all these numbers into the record. Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, City of Miami, Miami Beach, all of... Coral Gables, is the highest. And, it said it cost three hundred and twenty-three dollars ($323), to collect garbage from a homeowner. Now, if you are allocating the full cost of illegal into that... Commissioner Gort: You are. Commissioner Teele: ... which is the apparently what you are doing. I mean, even though I have asked the question... Vice Chairman Plummer: You have to. Commissioner Teele: ... three times to illicit. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. No. Commissioner Gort: No. Mr. Pinon: No. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, no, no. Mr. Pinon: Minus ten percent. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: If you look at the memorandum that's right behind... The first document in tab one. You will see, first of all, the answer to your question, Commissioner Teele, as to what the budget is for the Solid Waste Department for this fiscal year, excluding the cost of providing services to City properties and offices. You see that number as twenty-two million seven hundred and five thousand dollars ($22,705,000). You see that? Now, if you take... Commissioner Teele: What number is that in your Revenue Matrix? Are you referring to your Revenue Matrix? Vice Chairman Plummer: It's in the memo. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. If you look at tab one... Commissioner Teele: All right. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... the first page... Vice Chairman Plummer: It's in the memo. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... on the background, the first sentence... The first paragraph of background. 15 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: The three twenty -tour? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, just above that, it says "the Solid Waste Department's budget for fiscal year '98, twenty-two million seven zero five four sixty. What Adrienne just explained to us is, if you take three hundred and twenty-four dollars ($324) and you multiply it by 62,000 accounts, I think you will come up with twenty million, just over twenty million dollars ($20,000,00). She also told you that there is another two point seven million... Commissioner Teele: But, Mr. Manager, just stop right there. What is the illegal garbage cost? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I'm getting there. Commissioner Teele: Is that number in this number, twenty-two seven? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. She told you that there is a two point seven million dollar ($2,700,000) cost for illegal dumping, and when you add the twenty million and the two million seven that she told you about, you come up with the number that is in your book as to the department's budget net of, or exclusive of, City services and offices. Twenty-two point seven million dollars ($22,700,000). Commissioner Teele: I am having some difficulty. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I am sorry, sir. Let me come out of this. Commissioner Teele: But, but, but listen, it's not important. The only important number for me is that the homeowners' cost not be burdened with other costs, and the one thing that I think we have really got to do is, we need an outside independent. Someone to come in and do the same thing we are talking about with CDBG, and allocate those costs. Because, you know, people are licking their chops around here, talking about privatization, which I am going to be directly opposed to. But, part of the problem is, is that we don't have... I am not confident that we have a very clear picture as to how much the cost of collecting from homeowners is. And, how we allocate other costs to that. That's my only issue. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: All right. Commissioner Teele: I'll accept your number as three hundred and twenty... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Four. Commissioner Teele:... four dollars ($324), as stated in this memo. Three hundred and four as she stated. But, somewhere in there... Commissioner Gort: J.L. Commissioner Teele: ... it's around three hundred dollars ($300). Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: Follow-up questions. And, maybe I am getting confused also with the... My understanding is, your total budget is twenty-two seven zero five as it's addressed in here... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. 16 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Gort: ... for collections and disposal of all trash and garbage. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Except City properties and offices. Commissioner Gort: Except City properties. Yes, correct. But, the cost according to the tonnage used, it's stated in there, to do away with the... This is without counting labor costs. Just the selling or doing away with the illegal trash, is about two point some million dollars. So, the actual cost to the homeowners will be twenty million, minus the labor used in that too. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's correct. Commissioner Gort: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: What is your total tipping fees? Commissioner Teele: Well, see, that's what I am saying. They are adding the labor costs against the homeowner. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, no, they... Let me explain it a different way. If you... If you... Ms. Macbeth: We have seven point two million budgeted for tipping fees. Commissioner Teele: Huh? Ms. Macbeth: We have seven point two budgeted for tipping fees. Seven point two million for this year. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's total, both legal and illegal? Ms. Macbeth: That's all tipping fees, yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, let me see if I can... with my colleagues. I think most of the people are here to talk about either the residents, I don't think there is really that much here about, concerned about the commercial, solid waste or the... Commissioner Gort: Yes, they are. Commissioner Regalado: Yes, they are. There are people here. Vice Chairman Plummer: You think they are? Commissioner Regalado: There are people here. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, I was going to try to cut through it here to see if we could save some time for the public. But, if we can't, then we will proceed. Mr. Pinon. Mr. Pinon: Sir. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, let me pick it up from here, because he's done with respect to items three and four. Item four which is a construction debris removal fee that he mentioned to you, would produce five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) in the current fiscal year. In the balance of the current fiscal year. 17 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Mr. Manager. J.L. How are we basing, halt a million dollars in construction debris removal tee? In what criteria? Because, I have here a memo that was given to the Mayor and, of course, the members of the Commission regarding only major, major constructions on the way, and being planned. And, this is a lot of constructions. Are we basing this figure on this list or do we just figure that...? Because, if we follow this list, we are going to see that we are having in the next two years, the biggest construction boom in the history, in the recent history of Miami. And, I just wanted to know if we are following this list or the other years projections in the past, in terms of construction for this debris? Vice Chairman Plummer: Is the future predicated on the past or does it take into consideration what we are looking at for the next five years? Commissioner Regalado: That's right. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Joe, you want to address that? This has to do with permits, you know, this is a surcharge on permits. But, if you are asking whether we are looking at the current number of permits... Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. But, that's what I am saying. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Right. Mr. Pinon: What is the question again, sir? Commissioner Regalado: The question is, how do we project the construction debris removal fee? Mr. Pinon: Well, we have only used what was in the past. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Pinon: We did not go into the future construction. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, I also might add, Commissioner that because construction permits are taken out throughout the year, our yearly estimate is one million four, you see it on the second column, which is annualized? But, we have conservatively projected only half a million, which is a little bit more than a third for the balance of the fiscal year on the theory that we may not get as many permits applied for over the Summer months. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, Mr. Pinon, are you finished with three and four? Mr. Pinon: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, let's go to five. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Five is an increase in what the commercial Solid Waste haulers pay the City. As you know, they are currently paying us 15 percent of their collections. We propose to increase that to 20 percent. Vice Chairman Plummer: Stop. What about... ? As I went by without mentioning on Mary Street. I am sorry, Virginia. And, they are using Broward County haulers, and I only can assume they are doing that to circumvent the fee paid to the City of Miami. Now, do we have anyway that we can control that if, building of construction in the City of Miami or is in Dade 18 March 31, 1998 County that comes into the City, can we charge the Broward County companies that come into the City, that 20 percent or even the 15. Because, my opinion is, they are doing it to get around paying the City. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I think you are right, Commissioner. Not only that, but we have found that a number of our local haulers have not been paying. And, that effort is ongoing now. We are, as a matter of fact, Mr. Pinon met a number of them. And, in at least two cases that I recall the fees that were outstanding were in hundred thousand range, and they are being paid in the next 30 days. The answer to your question is, yes, we can certainly, and will look to control the out of town haulers to make sure that they also pay. But, in addition to that, there is now an ongoing audit process to make sure that we collect what we are supposed to collect from the people who are here already, and whom we know about, but we just haven't been collecting. Vice Chairman Plummer: Item number six. Commissioner Regalado: Wait... Vice Chairman Plummer: I am sorry. Commissioner Regalado: ... J. L. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: In Miami Beach, Mr. Manager, you implemented a measure that brought more money into the City in terms of the commercial and solid waste haulers. And, this is that the City will help the private haulers to build or to get paid for the services that they render. Because, I have talked to several haulers and some of their clients are behind 90, even 120 days. And, some are in default. So, if they get more, we get paid more, of course. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, I will tell you that, what Miami Beach did, is along the lines of what Commissioner Teele mentioned at the last meeting which we have under item "D", which is a franchise fee for commercial haulers. We think that's a revenue measure that you ought to consider. We just don't think that's going to be something that we can implement immediately, and it's something that we need come back to you on in the near future. But, what Miami Beach did is, it passed an ordinance limiting to, I think, what was it Joe, six, six or seven franchises. It was a competitive process, which as you know, takes some time. An evaluation committee is an elective process, and eventually these six, five or six franchises were selected and they have to pay a heftier fee than these 20 something odd that we have now, have to pay. Vice Chairman Plummer: That answer your question? Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but that, it's in the future. What I am saying is, if we have the ability through the Occupational Licenses help the haulers and their clients' payment. If they were... If they were to request help from the City... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: What do you mean, can we finance their payment in some way? Commissioner Regalado: Yeah. No, no, no. What I am saying is, can we, can the City officially tell those commercials that they will be in some kind of violation if they do not pay their commercial garbage fee? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: We can tell that to the haulers, yes. We can't tell that to the people that they haul from, because there is no privity between the City and those people. 19 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah, but you can stop them picking up in the City, if they have a franchise fee. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The haulers we can do... Vice Chairman Plummer: Of course. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The haulers we can go... Absolutely. Vice Chairman Plummer: I wonder why we haven't done it already. OK, item six. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, item six is affording the subsequent year for rebuilding, recertification fee. Metropolitan Dade County charges two hundred and fifty dollars ($250). We have been charging one hundred. We have determined that that doesn't really cover our costs, and so we propose to increase that one hundred dollar ($100) fee, to two hundred and fifty dollars ($250), just like the County charges. And, that would bring in forty-two thousand one hundred and seventy-five dollars ($42,175) this year, sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) on an annualized basis. Vice Chairman Plummer: Item seven. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Item seven results from the discovery that for emergency medical services, for advanced life support, we are able to build and receive payment from Medicare on the advanced life support schedule of fees which is higher than basic life support. Heretofore we have been billing for basic life support even when we give advanced life support. So, if we do it, if we make the billing meet, if you will, match the service, that should bring in three hundred thousand dollars ($300,00)) a year or one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) in the remaining six months of this fiscal year. Vice Chairman Plummer: Item eight. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Item eight is a grouping of Building and Zoning fee increases, and in one case it's a fee for expediting plan renewal... review and approval. This is something that a number of developers have actually asked for. Obviously, it helps them to get their projects started, if they can get their plans approved quickly, instead of having them, you know, pay interest on loans and so forth. Vice Chairman Plummer: Instead of four weeks, it will be three? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, I think that the fee is intended to give them a very quick... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, let me ask this question, because it's always been something to me. What we charge today for variance hearings, zoning hearings, do we break even? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, we... No, no, no. We don't cover the costs, as I understand it, from those services. Vice Chairman Plummer: In other words, you know, a developer that comes in here and he buys a piece of property for R-1, and we turn around and rezone it for him to R-4, we have life multifold seven times the value of his property. And, I often wondered why we help him make a small fortune, and he doesn't even cover the cost of what it costs the City to put on that hearing. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, that's why we are trying to adjust these fees to cover costs. As you know, fees are not intended to, and are not revenue generators, per se. 20 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: I said break even. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Right. We should be... You are absolutely right, Commissioner, we should recover 100 percent of our cost and in many of these cases, we have not been. And, I think the most, perhaps the most glaring situation is the one that you pointed out where not only did we not cover our costs fully, but we provide a huge benefit to the developer who rezones property, for example. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. The only other question in recurring, I guess it's not really in recurring. As you know, my bugaboo [phonetic] around here is Code Enforcement. Now, you are not showing anything here in recurring or nonrecurring when we go boast about the fact that we have sixty, sixty-five million, hundred million, two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) in fines that haven't been collected. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Let me make two comments about that. One is... Vice Chairman Plummer: Tell me how we are going to. That's only one comment. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Sir. OK, no. I think first of all, our effort, as you know is, it should be really more in the nature of Code Compliance than Code Enforcement. That is to say, the ideal thing is to get people to comply so we have a clean and attractive, a safe City, rather than be hitting people with fines. But, the deceptive thing about the figures, Vice Chairman Plummer is that a lot of those figures represent, not just the base fine, but the accumulated per diem charges which are totally illusory in my judgment because you wind up with a five hundred dollar ($500), and half a year later, it exceeds the equity and not the value of the property, and it's really uncollectible. Plus... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, you see, the problem there, and I am not going to go into it, because it's not part of today's hearing. The problem there is, they laugh at you. They laugh at you. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's right. That's right. Vice Chairman Plummer: Once it goes and exceeds the value of the property, they know you are not going to move on it, and you are not going to do anything. And, if that is clout that you are going to use, I didn't say a thing about making revenues. It's going to happen whether we like it or not. But, let met tell you something, the people out there today are laughing at us. They don't give a tinkers bahoot [phonetic] about the fact that it's five hundred thousand, or one million dollars ($1,000,000) or what. But, let me tell you, the day has got to come, when we are going to actually enforce that scenario. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, I think that's the key. The early enforcement makes it more collectible. And, frankly, also achieves the result of compliance a lot better. Vice Chairman Plummer: For your edification there is a standing policy of this Commission on the fourth month that it's not paid, there is foreclosure. And, we are not even doing that. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yeah, but, Commissioner the problem with that is, is that these liens are junior to the mortgage liens. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, obviously... It's not on today's agenda, so I am not going to deal... I'll deal with it at a later date. Mr. Hernandez has a question. Commissioner Hernandez Yeah, on this topic. Mr. Manager, there is something I have been working on, and looking at for a while, and I still haven't finished the numbers. There are things 21 March 31, 1998 that we can do with going outside the Code Enforcement process we are in, and would create recurring revenue, millions of dollars in recurring revenues. Is, if in fact, those people that are in violation and running fines or those people that are in violation, but we have not caught them yet. Provide and create an ordinance where we create an amnesty period. Allow these people, a year time, six month time period. I would say a year would be more reasonable. Give them a year to bring their properties into compliance. Waive the entire fines. Now, these properties are now in compliance, there is more square footage added to the property, because now they are legalized, and therefore they go into the tax assessment and we have now, more taxable property, higher tax base for the City of Miami, and that is recurring in nature. And, it gives a break to those people that are in violation that will never, as you said, comply for the simple reason that the fines already are way beyond the value of the property. And, I think, not only we attain several things. Number one, we have a cleaner City like you said. We have people that are in compliance. When properties are in compliance, neighborhoods that are happy, and at the same time, we have a much larger tax base, because now we have properties that are really cheating the City of Miami of their due taxes because there is an addition that has not been accounted for, that we don't even know for... about. And, I have been looking at this ordinance for a while, of creating the ordinance and creating an amnesty period. And, I think really, in the overall perspective, everybody is going to be happy and it's going to bring a lot of money, in the long term for the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: On the question. What is the issue, Mr. Manager, that we are talking about under nine, number eight. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Number eight. Commissioner Teele: Was that the zoning expediting? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's one of them. There is... Mr. Pinon: There are several. One of them, one of the others is, glazing which is not being enforced at this time. And, that is a all exterior material used for buildings have to be reinspected. Commissioner Teele: All right. I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Commissioner Hernandez as it relates to providing for an amnesty period for people. We shouldn't be engaged in "gotcha." I mean, Bert, I am not sure that we ought to do a 100 percent, you know, maybe... Commissioner Hernandez A wavier. Commissioner Teele: Seventy-five percent or eighty percent. But, substantially all of it. But, I do think that we should provide an incentive for compliance, and not really spend our energy trying to enforce something that really is, unenforceable. But, on the basic issue that you have raised under this subject matter, which is the zoning, expediting? I am... Again, I commend you for looking at everything. I don't think we should take anything off the table. But, I do think that this almost looks like paying for what government ought to do anyway. And, I think if we can expedite, we should engage ourselves in expediting. And, I certainly want to commend you for looking for ways to get money. But, let me tell you, that's a very slippery, narrow slope. And, in some countries you pay tips to expedite documents through, or you know, this is, this is... To me, this is borderline, not what we do in America. It really doesn't rub me that we should pay someone to do their job, and to do it expeditiously. So, I think that's a very sharp sword that has two edges on it, and I think we ought to be careful when we talk about this. 22 March 31, 1998 Obviously, I think it's a prudent measure, and particularly when we are looking for money. But, the issue that you had just discussed when Vice Chairman Plummer made referenced to some other issues that were bothering him, was the expediting of zoning, Building and Zoning applications. Was that...? Did I understand that correctly? And, I just think that's something we need to be very careful about. Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Commissioner let me just make sure that it's clear that we would propose to add personnel to do that. Two reviewers for each of the following disciplines. Structural, building, electrical, mechanical and plumbing. So, while I certainly, you know, realize what you are saying, we would be incurring additional expense and this would be the net revenue from that. Commissioner Gort: J.L. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, I think that my good friend, Mr. Hernandez needs to go to the back page. Where did he go? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: He's right behind you. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, you know, I think one of the things about getting in compliance, is great. But, when I look here in your last page, I guess of your document, and we talk about increasing revenues. When I look at a building downtown, last year was assessed for seventy- nine million dollars ($79,000,000). And, this year it sold for one hundred and thirty-one million dollars ($131,000,000). There, I think is a tremendous inequity. I think if we also look at the fact, that one-third of our assessable tax base is tax exempt. If we could get those kind of dollars, we would be rolling in clover. The problem is, the state legislature refuses to take out the terminology, "public purpose" and it is also not the fact that 83 percent is... I think it's high, which you claim 83 percent is the average assessment in the City. I don't agree with that. I was told it's 68. So, I think that what you need to do... And, the other thing, Bert, is the fact, we did go to a... We tried an amnesty program about two years ago. And, I think that the reason that it fell apart at that particular time, just for your information, there are many people that are in violation who cannot come in compliance. Not only they can't afford it, they would have to chop half of the building because they are sitting into the setback and it would cost them more to come into compliance, than it would be to tear the damn place down. Anyhow, do you have anything else on recurring revenues? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Just an update on the foot, on the totals. If you exclude as I think in light of counsel's advice, we would recommend that you consider excluding public housing from item two. And, I gave you the revised number for item two. Then, the bottom number, the bottom line, if you will, for a total recurring revenue is as follows. In the current fiscal year, it would be eleven million six hundred and ninety-seven thousand nine hundred and thirty-five dollars ($11,697,935). Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, in the annualized... On an annualized basis, it would thirteen million five hundred eighty-three thousand seven hundred and eleven dollars ($13,583,711). Vice Chairman Plummer: That's for 12 months. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. 23 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, now, for the general public, that is the area the Manager has shown as recurring revenue. I will now ask him to speak to nonrecurring. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Briefly, sir, we have identified two things. One is, CDBG, Community Development Block Grant reallocations, and the other one is St. Hugh Oaks contribution to the general fund. Let me first go back to your earlier meeting on allocation of the 24th year of Community Development Grand Funds, Block Grants. And, you may remember that, it happens to be page 13 or 15, but we had a total of some thirteen point seven million dollars ($13,700,000) broken up into Public Services, Economic Development, Housing, Public Facilities and Administration. When we first discussed this with you, you made clear to us that we should not touch the two point three million dollars ($2,300,.000) in public services. But, obviously, we had to look at the possibility that we might have other expenditures that are eligible for CDBG funding that would be able to utilize some of the other dollars. Vice Chairman Plummer: Uh-huh. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: What we have done instead, and you have a meeting on the 14th of April, and you set a special time at six p.m., to finalize your allocation of Community Development Block Grants. But, what we have done instead is, we have not touched any of these numbers with one exception, and instead, we have tapped into or reallocated prior year allocations and revenues that have not been used. So, the year 24 allocations as you have them before you, and will have them agin on April 14th, at seven or at six p.m., remain in tact with one exception. That one exception is, the five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) that was supposed to be a part matched for an Economic Development Grant for the Flagler Street project which, the grant for which has not been forthcoming, and we are told will not be forthcoming in this year. So, with that single exception of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), the CDBG monies... Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait, a minute. Are you leaving that in? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. We are utilizing that money. Vice Chairman Plummer: Out of... That's the only thing you are utilizing out of the coming year? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Out of the year 24 CDBG monies. That's correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: You are wasting your time doing that, because I'll vote against it. But, go ahead. I mean, I... how can we promise the people in the Flagler Market Place... Commissioner Gort: That was last year's funding. Vice Chairman Plummer: It was last year's funding. And, you know, we were talking at one time about going out to a bond issue, and we said, no, let's don't go out to a bond issue. We can get the money from other sources. Hey, I am giving you one person's opinion. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Let me address that, because there are two ways of handling that. First of all, as I understand it, and as you know, I wasn't here. That was predicated upon getting a grant that's not forthcoming. And, so, you may want to give that match at such time as the grant is forthcoming. Secondly... Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, why don't you just tell him the whole truth. The federal government said that it's an illegible grant. That's, that's the answer. It's an ineligible grant. It was an illegal promise made by this Commission. It's an ineligible grant, Commissioner, and the whole problem with this CDBG process, is you got more ineligible stuff in here. And, I am 24 March 31, 1998 going to tell you right up front. I am going to fight you, J.L., I am going to fight the Manager, I am going to fight this Commission until we all come to some understanding that we are going to use CDBG funds to deal with poverty. And, we are not going to use it for political gain. We are not going to use it for everybody's pet project. And, using one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) for fire equipment. Using... After we specifically said, we weren't going to do that. After we specifically sat up here and you had this sidebar conversation with the Manager, that you wanted two million dollars ($2,000,000) of money. The Manager committed on the record, two million dollars ($2,000,000) of Community Block Grant Development money which is designed to help poor people. And, it's designed to alleviate poverty. And, you are going to put money in Bayfront Park, which I said I would not object to, seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,0000) of Community Block Grant Development money. Vice Chairman Plummer: No. Commissioner Teele: Now, what kind of poverty does that alleviate? Vice Chairman Plummer: That has been changed based on your comment. Commissioner Teele: Oh, it's just a dollar ($1) in one pocket and a dollar ($1) out of another pocket. You are going to use St. Hugh Oaks as a way of trying to make it look clean. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, sir. Commissioner Teele: That's what this says. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, that might be what you are reading, and you might be right, but that's not what's happening. Commissioner Teele: What's happening is, is that this Commission, based upon what this Manager is proposing is to put one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) in a Fire Department which should not receive any of the money, if this Commission would do what's right by the Fire Department. You are the main one voting against the Fire Department. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's right. Commissioner Teele: You are the main one voting against the fire fee. And, yet, we have got trucks broken down all over the place. We have got equipment that doesn't work in the Fire Department, and now you want to take the money from the poor people and try to divert into the Fire Department. Why pit the poor people of this community against the Fire Department. That's not right. It's absolutely not right. And, it is the kind of stuff that this Commission has sat up here and done. What the Manager will not tell you, is that the reason we will not be funding the Market Place, the Bayfront... the Flagler Market Place, is not because we don't want to do it. There were five votes to do it. I wasn't here. HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) said you can't use the money that way. And, I don't care what it says about this one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) of fire equipment, it is the wrong thing to do. And, what we are going to wind up doing is, is undoing this whole budget, because throughout this budget, I have winked and nodded and looked the other way. You have got people being paid out of CDBG money to basic do... do basic jobs in the poor community, but we are paying for them out of the general fund in the affluent communities. And, that's illegal. And, that's not right. Now, I have asked the Manager, politely. I asked you privately. I asked you publicly, do not propose one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) for fire equipment. Especially, when this Commission just voted not to have a fire fee which would pay for this. What you are using the CDBG money to do, is basically to provide political courage for this Commission to keep this City running. And, it is the wrong way to it. The federal monies that are based solely on 25 March 31, 1998 poverty. It is based solely on poverty and density of poverty and public... and people in public housing. It is not based upon the number of trees in Bayfront Park. It is not based upon the number of fire trucks that you pay... It is... These dollars are generated and not one of these dollars are going into the Black community. Not, one of the dollars. Three million, three point seven million dollars ($3,700,000). And, I called you on Saturday, at your home, Mr. Manager, and said, please don't do this. You know, and I am going to do everything I can on April 14th. If it means massive demonstrations, if it means we are going to have to start bringing and confronting these issues. We got all these people down here that are willing to confront the issues of the fire fee. Well, you know, it's time that the poor community begin to speak up and say, we are not going to let you do that to us anymore. We got streets all over this town that are Third World condition streets. We have got trash and debris all over the poor parts of this community. And, nobody gives a darn. And, for you to propose taking one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) and paying for fire equipment out of Community Block Grant Development money, is wrong. Three point seven million dollars ($3,700,000) is what you are proposing. And, every dollar of it is going into affluent communities or for general government use. Bayfront Park improvement - seven hundred thousand; Workforce Development Facility - two hundred and thirty thousand; fire equipment - one point seven five; Senendale - three hundred and forty. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Wait a minute... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, let him finish, please. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The Workforce is... Vice Chairman Plummer: Let him finish. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Sorry. Commissioner Teele: Senendale - ninety thousand; fifteen thousand for an Allapattah study; forty-five thousand for business enhancement workshops which would be in the targeted CD (Community Development) area, forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000). One hundred and ten thousand dollars ($110,000) for cemeteries; five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for home... Housing Loan Recovery. A total of three point seven million dollars ($3,700,000). Now, the people who are generating this money, with the exception of the cemeteries, which no one is going to attack the cemeteries, are commitments that we have got, are not getting this money. And, the problem here is over half of the money is going for fire equipment. And, the only reason is because this Commission doesn't... has not done the right thing by the Fire Department. Now, don't push... If we don't do that. Look, if we are not going to do the right thing, if five people, four people, three people are not going to support it, that's fine. I am not opposed to that. But, don't come in and start raiding the money for poor people, when you have got streets in the districts that I represent, and streets in the district that Commissioner Gort represents that are worst than any street in Manauga, Nicaragua. Vice Chairman Plummer: Are you finished? Commissioner Teele: No, I am not finished. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. Commissioner Teele: This is wrong. This is wrong. This is wrong. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: My question... 26 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: J.L., Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Teele: It's wrong. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: I just wanted to say that I am also voting for the poor people. But, I have to say that I disagree a little with my colleague whom I really admire, Commissioner Teele. Because, we keep coming back to the same thing. I mean, we have not yet understand that this fire fee is going to hit the poor people. We do not understand that the apartment owners buildings are going to go and raise the tenant's monthly payment. We do not understand that the people that live in those apartment buildings are the people that are really poor. I mean, they probably don't have a sidewalk to walk in, but they won't have a roof to sit in. I, I just don't understand about how can we defend the poor people, and how can we impose a fire fee on the poor people. I am all for it, you know, if we are going to go after the millionaires, hey, I am a worker, I don't mind. But, I just do not understand this rationale. And, I hope that this Commission would like, Commissioner Teele say, do the right thing. I just hope so, too. [APPLAUSE] Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, if I may regain Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: I am adamantly opposed to raiding Community Development money. I didn't say get it from fire fee, Commissioner Regalado, that's your own interpretation. What I am saying is, is that once, once this thing works its way all the way down... I have sat here in this City for 15 years, and I see how it works. I know who is going to get victimized when you run out of money. It's going to be the poor people. They don't have the lawyers, they don't have the lobbyists. They don't make the campaign contributions. They are the people who are not heard. The money, the Community Development money, the six, the twelve, the fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) we get, is for poverty. It's to alleviate poverty. This is the fourth poorest City in America. How in the world can you justify in your conscience? How can you justify spending two million dollars ($2,000,000) for a Fire Department? That doesn't alleviate poverty. The problem is, is that government is supposed to run this City. We are supposed to appropriate sufficient funds to operate this City. And, just because we haven't appropriated sufficient funds to operate this City, I am not saying, raise the fire fee. All that I am saying is, don't take the money from the poor community. That's all that I am saying. You don't have to be for the fire fee. I respect that. But, you cannot, in good conscience, ever take money from poor people to run basic government services. And, that's not what this program is designed to do. That's not what the Community Development funds are for. And, just like, we have spent these monies inappropriately in the past, at the rate we are going now, we are going spend... The Oversight Board is going to be the least of our problems, because when they start hitting us, it's going to affect the public service money. I don't know if you know it or not, but the audit just came down. The Manager says, it's a great audit. It was a positive thing. I mean, I don't how having to pay back potentially a few million dollars is a positive thing, but I won't quarrel with that. The point is, the reason we are in trouble, is not as much what the Manager has done, and what the staff has done, it's what the Commission has done. We can't blame the CD Director or the Manager if we appropriate one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000). Because, I can tell you right now, I will appeal it. I will contest it. I am serving notice. I don't mind doing that, because it's not right. It is not right to take money from poor people to run government. This money comes down as a matter of rights to the poor people of this community. And, I don't see how a City that has the fourth poorest City in the nation, can justify, and we can look ourselves in the face, and say, we are going to take one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) from them. I just don't understand it. 27 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: There are several things I want to bring up. Number one, my understanding is, and correct me if I am wrong. We do have a balanced budget with a surplus one point six million dollars ($1,600,000)? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, three point one million dollars ($3,100,000). That surplus of one point six was the recurring revenues over recurring expenditures. Commissioner Gort: In other words, we have a balanced budget... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Absolutely. Commissioner Gort: ... and we have a surplus of one point three million dollars ($1,300,000)? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Absolutely. Commissioner Gort: So, my understanding is, in the letter that we received from the Oversight Board, that they would like to see some reoccurring revenues, not one shot, one time deal? I agree with Commissioner Teele, we should not use CDBG funds to do this. Now, let me tell you, one of the reasons we got in trouble, two years ago, we went to the public, the fire fighters and they had a bond issue, and they needed that money for the capital improvement. At that time, I think the cost would have been one dollar ($1) or something. It was a minimum cost of about twelve dollars ($12) a year to redo the whole Fire Department. People voted against it. So, that's why we... Vice Chairman Plummer: Turned it down. Commissioner Gort: ... have got one of the problems we have in the capital project today. Number two is, I requested it, because I want to make sure, you know, I have been sitting here for four years now, and I have been taking decisions according to recommendations the staff gives me, and some of the support from some of the Commissioners for the different... Although it was not districts, we had represented just about of all the tri-ethnic community we had here. And, we listened to the recommendation according to them. I would like, and what I would like in the future, Mr. Manager, if possible. These documents you put together here, if you can make it, so we can put it in the projection slides and we could project it, I think it would be a lot better for people to understand it. I would like to make sure that we get the information of how we get the funding from CDBG's, from the target areas. What percentage should be allocated to each of those target areas. How much has been allocated in the past. I want to make sure they put it there, I know... Vice Chairman Plummer: Already been done. Commissioner Gort: ... and they should. I want to make sure it's placed in there so everybody can see it, how the funds and the money has been spent in the past. I would also like to see, which is a question that I have. We have cap on the 108 section loan, and only very few applications. Why a lot of the small businesses are not being able to apply for it. My understanding, some people told me that it was a lot easier to go to Miami Capital than to go to the 108 section. I would like to get that input from all of you. But, I agree with Commissioner Teele, I think those funding from CDBG's should be used in target areas to help the merchants in those areas, and the residents in those areas to come in compliance. We had a lot of requests that came in front of us from different neighborhoods. People do not have the money to comply with Code Enforcement. We promised assistance to those neighborhoods. They would have funding available so they can comply with it. Thank you. 28 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Vice Chairman Plummer... Vice Chairman Plummer: Go ahead. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... if I might just make a couple of statements. Obviously, the allocation of CDBG monies is ultimately a legislative function for the Commission to make. I just want to make sure that it is clear on the record, that... Well, you know, that we received a very generous offer of assistance from HUD, so that we would comply with the legal requirements attendant to these reallocations. I have confirmed with my staff that, although there were some questions raised and answered, that the allocations that we are proposing were signed off on by HUD. And, that's important because I want you to know that apart from whatever decision you all make as is your right to make on all these issues, the allocations that are before you, have been deemed to be legal allocations. And, maybe we shouldn't spend one million seven on fire equipment, and maybe we shouldn't spend money on Bayfront Park. Those are legislative decisions that you need to make, but at least, we have in this instance, the comfort that this has been reviewed by HUD, and after their questions were answered, as I understand it, they have signed off on it. The other thing I want to say is, these are all funded... unfunded projects. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, wait. Let me understand that now, OK? What you are saying is, in contrary to what Commissioner Teele has said. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, no, don't get me in that line of fire. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Let's lay it on top of the table. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, no, no. Commissioner Teele: I said Flagler Market Place was an illegal expenditure. That's all that I said. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's not here, sir. Commissioner Teele: Is it an illegal expenditure? Vice Chairman Plummer: That's what I would like to know. Commissioner Teele: Is it...? That's what I said. I stand by what I said. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's what I would like to know. Commissioner Teele: Is it an illegal expenditure... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, we are going to ask... Commissioner Teele: ... because you were the one that keep pushing it? Vice Chairman Plummer: I am asking the question, because we were not told at the time, that we put this and made a commitment. But, this was... Commissioner Teele: Well, you have been here for 25 years, J.L... 29 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Twenty-eight. Commissioner Teele: ... the rules have not changed, OK. It's an illegal expenditure, trust me. Vice Chairman Plummer: If it is, then I asked the question, why we were not told at the time that we were allowed to vote on it? And, that's why I am asking the question. Is it legal or illegal? I mean, this is a simple "yes" or "no" answer. Ms. Christina Cuervo (Assistant City Manager): Vice Chairman Plummer, we... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I think they used words like "eligible" and "ineligible." Ms. Cuervo: Ineligible. Vice Chairman Plummer: But, is it "illegible" or "ineligible"? Ms. Cuervo: It was constituted as being "ineligible" when we applied for a Section 108 loan for that project. And, it was... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. So, then, Commissioner Teele is correct. Ms. Cuervo: As it being an "ineligible" project. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Then, whoever told us at the time when we made that allocation... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Right, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... told us an error, that it was "eligible." Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That is correct. Ms. Cuervo: And, it was constituted to be "ineligible" because it was deemed that it was... Vice Chairman Plummer: You know I have said up here before, and I am going to say it, again. My votes up here are predicated on information that is supplied to me. If I get bad information, obviously, I am going to make bad decisions. But, I have to depend as a part-time employee, I am not a full-time employee. I am not an auditor. I am not a lawyer. And, I depend on the people who are the staff of this City, and no one here now, because that goes back months or years... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Years. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... that in fact, my vote was predicated on the information which was supplied to me at the time. Now, let me go and address another issue. And, that is, Mr. Teele, without question, I voted against the fire fee as proposed as did four of my... three of my other colleagues on this Commission, who felt, I assume the reason they voted against it, it was inequitable. It was an unjust fee. It was not across the board. It was across only the people of the affluent, and did not address the other issues. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The poorest. [phonetic] Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, the poorest didn't, because the people who were coming out the best, the homeowner, thirty-four dollars ($34) better, that they were going to he paid. Not one 30 March 31, 1998 homeowner came before these microphones to say, thank you, Commission, you did us a favor, OK? Not a one. I am saying to you, that it might surprise you today, that I might vote for this fire fee here today, because I.... hello, are you there? Are you calling collect? Unidentified Speaker: Calling Collect. Vice Chairman Plummer: I might vote for this fire fee here today, because it goes across the board. It doesn't hit any one segment that is a desirable thing for the fire fee, or the garbage fee or whatever fee that might be involved. As, I have said to people who have called me, and you know, I never learned how to lie. I have tried for 61 years, and have been a complete failure. I tell it, like I see it. And, that is, we have got to do something. We have got to come up with an answer before the 20th of April and really before that. Now, if it's not this fire fee, and it's not this garbage fee, then who has got a magic wand. I don't. Let me tell you something, I live in this City, and I don't want to pay any other fees. Like the woman who called me yesterday from Coral Gables, who chooses to live outside of the City, but happens to own a lot of property here, and she is not going to collect as much rent. You think I like to take out of my pocket? Thank God, that I can afford an increase. And, I realize there is a lot of people it will be a burden to. But, you cannot continue to operate a business that says that you are providing a service for one hundred and sixty-six dollars ($166) that cost you three hundred and twenty-four dollars ($324). It's like the guy that was selling watermelons for a dollar ($1) when it cost him one dollar and a half. He was going to go back to Georgia and get another truck load, because the more he sold, the better off he was. That don't make any sense to me, it doesn't now. All I am saying to you, I could possibly vote for this today. And, there are people out there who are upset with that, that don't like it. But, I say to them, as I say to my colleagues, if it is not this, what is it? It's going to have to be something. Don't kid yourself. I still don't understand how we are operating in a vacuum and a void when the Oversight Board who does not meet with us in joint meetings, pays a company to do their research and recommend to them, and that recommendation to them was, yes, accept their budget, and they said "no." And, then they come back to us and said, "you don't have enough black ink, we want you swimming in black ink." Everybody would love to have in business a buffer and a contingency fund. But, it's not possible. So, all I am saying to you is, you are opposed to this fee, tell me where we are going to make up and to equate. Because, Mr. City Attorney, I think you need to tell some people something. That if the Oversight Board says, "no" they have the authority to take over this City. Am I correct? And, as long as I am sitting here, they are not going to take over this City. So, I just take that for what it's worth. Mr. City Manager, continue please with whatever you have. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I am almost done, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, by the way, for my colleagues, my staff has done an analysis of all the CDBG money, and how much is going to each district, and I'll be glad to share it with you. And, that's from Social Services, Housing, Economic Development, and the entire breakdown. I'll be glad to share anybody that wants a copy of it. Mr. Manager, proceed. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Thank you, sir. I think it's important, particularly since you will be meeting on the 14th at six p.m., to finish your, or to do your reallocation of CDBG funds, that it be restated that the year 24 funds as proposed, are not being touched at all, except for that one five hundred thousand dollar ($500,000) that we discussed. The reallocation is from prior year allocations and program income that have not been spent. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, for the record, all of those that you are indicating from prior years have been deemed acceptable by HUD? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The unfunded projects that appear under tab nine... 31 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: To divert the money over to what you are recommending have been found acceptable by HUD. Since you used the terminology "acceptable" or not "acceptable." Ms. Cuervo: They are considered CDB, "eligible" projects. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: "Eligible." Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. With the exception of one... Now, explain to me, because Teele got me upset. The five hundred thousand that you are talking about, are you talking about taking that from this year? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir. Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Be careful, we were talking about two different things. Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Reallocation... Vice Chairman Plummer: Is one thing. That's from previous years. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... is one thing. And, that's from... that where we are taking... Vice Chairman Plummer: That's previous years. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: From year 24, we are taking the five hundred thousand. Vice Chairman Plummer: The only one is the forward year? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: From year 24. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Now... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The allocation... Vice Chairman Plummer: ... let me play my ball game. Is there, and Commissioner Teele, for your information, what you have in your book is wrong, as far as CDBG, is not going to Bayfront Park. I have relinquished with the Manager that amount of money of one million four hundred and sixty-six thousand, and I will be getting whatever I can from impact fees, and not from this item here. My question happens to be, Mr. Manager, is it not possible, so that we might live up to our commitment, that we could take five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) from the St. Hugh Oaks money which is not CDBG, and dedicate that to the commitment that this Commission has for Flagler Street Marketplace. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The answer is, yes, sir. The problem is, that we don't have the grant. So, we would have to find additional monies to... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, I would like at least to put it into reserve. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's fine, we could do that. 32 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, and you know, that's... Take it from there. Mr. Manager, proceed. Mr. Goenaga, please have a seat, sir. I will open up the public hearing at such time as the Commission has had their opportunity to explore everything they want to. Mr. Manager. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The total of... Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: I am sorry. If you give me the opportunity, you will save a lot of time. Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, thank you. Mr. Gonzalez-Goenaga: No problem. I'll wait. I have the patience of Job with you. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Everybody has got to have their cross to bear. Proceed, sir. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The nonrecurring revenues in the current fiscal year resulting from the discussion we have had about the reallocation of CDBG funds, and the St. Hugh Oaks contribution to the General Fund without taking into account the possibility you just mentioned of reserving five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) from St. Hugh Oaks, which is possible would diminish this number. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, my question happens to be, and I am sorry to interrupt you, sir. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yeah. Vice Chairman Plummer: The total escrow account in St. Hughs is one million nine. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Right. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, you are only showing one million four, what are doing with the other halt? Ms. Cuervo: We are setting aside half a million dollars ($500,000) to address some of the issues in the HUD audit, specifically to establish a housing loan recovery fund, that we would be using... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, all right. So, you have designated somewhere, but you are not telling me at this time. Ms. Cuervo: Right here. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir, that's on the first page on under Tab nine, that you were just looking at. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, for the public's information, each one of these Commissioners received this document, yesterday. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's right. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, we had a town hall meeting that took us all night long. And, so, we are not as fully versed in this book as we should be, I guess. At least, I'll admit that I read it, but I have not digested it. 33 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's one of our efforts to do some of the things that HUD indicated that we should be doing as a result of their audit. I want to go back, Vice Chairman Plummer, because I don't want to misstate HUD's position. HUD is not, has not given us an intractable seal of approval. What we have done is, we have engaged them in dialogue. We have presented these unfunded projects to them, and our proposed allocation of monies from CDBG for these projects. They had some questions of staff. And, as I understand it, they have indicated that they believe that we are correct in using monies for these purposes and they are eligible. Vice Chairman Plummer: Just for the record, can I have the comfort in, Commissioner Teele, that if they do come back, and say they are "ineligible" that you will come back to this Commission and tell us so we can operate differently. Ms. Cuervo: Definitely,. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Absolutely. I am just saying, they always reserve the right to audit. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: I want to hear from the public on some of this. But, what really concerns me, is that these projects are here. They are here because the Manager has brought them forward. No, Commissioner apparently has brought them forward. And, I just... I want the record to be very clear. I accept from even bringing forward borderline gray areas, because this is clearly a gray area. It is clearly, I think, given the City of Miami's record. Given the City of Miami's finances. Given the statements that have been made by the Oversight Board, the Manager and the Commission, I think they are going to be "ineligible." And, I am prepared to work, to litigate to make them "ineligible" because I think, given the fact, that we have financial obligations and options that we have not discharged, to use these monies at this point in time that way, I think draws unnecessary heat on us. We have, and I assure... I assume that you have gotten the letter dated March 31st, a HUD audit. That is not a new news. No new news on this. It broke in December in the front pages of the Herald, but it's a serious audit. We don't need to be flying this close to the fire, to the flame right now. We need to take ten steps back, and we need to make sure that every thing that we are doing is fully "eligible." And, Mr. Manager, my question of you is, there are a lot of other things that we have asked you to look at. The committee asked you to look at a real micro loan program in trying to help people move from welfare to work. We heard from people from all over the United States that came here and testified about what micro loan programs have done. We need over one million dollars ($1,000,000) to seed that, if we want to help people move from welfare to work. There are a lot of projects that we need to be involved in to help the citizens of this community move from welfare to work. To move from poverty to the mainstream. And, I don't think these recommendations reflect... Respectfully, I don't think they reflect that kind of national policy, or this type of approach that we should take. On the other hand, Mr. Manager, let me just say this, because you have sort of jumped around. I want to commend you and Mr. Pinon, Joe Pinon, in working in the Solid Waste area. I have got some questions and concerns. But, I think one of the things that speaks in volume is, that we are all concerned about helping the trash, the haulers, and I respect that. But, the fact of the matter is, does anybody care that over one quarter of one million dollars ($250,000) is on the table now, that people haven't collected? I mean, and I have got to tell you, Commissioner, it's probably closer to a half a million more dollars of money that people have been stealing from the City of Miami, putting in their pockets. And, what really bothers me about where we are in this, is that we need to consider, and I asked, Mr. Pinon this. We need to consider at the time we take up these ordinances, a plan to deal with the diversion as 34 March 31, 1998 it relates recycling. The recycling diversion is going to be a gray market we are going to create if we do this. And, we need to come in with a recycling ordinance right now, at the same time, because more and more of what will happen is, when the fees go up, there are borderline cases now of people who are sort of complying, but not complying. They are the people, for example that Commissioner Regalado mentioned that aren't paying their bills to the haulers. They are going to drop out of the system and go illegal. And, we need to make sure that we deal with that issue as well. So, I again, I commend you... Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: ... you all have come up with about a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000) of money that has been diverted, that's a big step. I am not comfortable moving forward with a hike on commercial until we can do more to really get... quantify what the commercial business is out there, but I'll defer to the Commission. And, I really think the part that's missing is that Chief Warshaw and the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) offices really need to be brought in on a comprehensive program that's the opposite of an amnesty. We really need to go out here and enforce this thing for 30 days. We need to have, if necessary, regulators and inspectors, Building and Zoning and Public Works, and Fire and Police at every basic commercial account. Because, we all know the industry leaders recognize that as much as 20 to 25 percent of the trash that's being collected are being collected off books, as it relates to us. And, we need to stop that. That's one of the ways that we can help the apartment owners to keep the fees lower. Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner, how far are you willing to go? You know, that's the real question. Ft. Lauderdale, if they catch you illegally dumping in Ft. Lauderdale, you go to jail. OK. Unidentified Speaker: Absolutely. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Okay. Now, it's just a matter of how far do you want to go. Mr. City Attorney... Commissioner Gort: [inaudible] Vice Chairman Plummer: ... right now, if in fact, we catch somebody illegal dumping, what the... besides spanking them on the behind and don't tell them don't do it, again... Commissioner Gort: Five hundred dollars ($500). Vice Chairman Plummer: Huh? Commissioner Gort: Five hundred dollars ($500). Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): Five hundred dollar ($500) fine. Vice Chairman Plummer: Five hundred dollars ($500). Mr. Maxwell: It is also... Vice Chairman Plummer: And, if they don't have the money? Mr. Maxwell: It's also six months in jail, possibly as well. 35 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Gort: Yeah. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, let me tell you something. I think that we need to ask the Police Department to say that this is not a crime of murder or robbery, but it's a crime against the people of this City, and we need to take and get the Police Department because we don't have inspectors out at night, and on Saturday and Sunday, but we got policemen out there,. And, I think that we ought to ask the Police Department that this is revenue that they are going to want to talk about in their upcoming union contracts. Commissioner Gort: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: For the last two years, I have been requesting, I have asking, police car, they can see it. They are not going to dump in front of a police car. We all know where the illegal dumping is taking place. I mean, all the NETs can tell you specific places where they take place, because it's on the same spot. All we need to do, and I have asked. Let's get some inspectors, put them there on the weekends, put them there at nights and pay them with the fees that you were going to charge. We need to start doing that. I don't think it's fair for everybody here to pay for illegal dumping. Vice Chairman Plummer: After you put about three or four of them in jail, and the word goes out, it will slow down. All right, Mr. Manager, I have asked you conclude on the final item of your page here, called "Additional Sources of Revenue. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Let me first, foot the recurring and non -recurring revenues. And, let me just say this, first too, if I may, Commissioner Plummer for one moment? In all fairness, a lot of these are waste initiatives, and it really was Commissioner Teele who guided us in this direction, and he needs to be recognized for that. The exception is Commissioner Regalado's proposal, and I meant to point that out at the time I covered it. The proposed increase from 15 to 20 percent, is one that Commissioner Regalado had brought to our attention. The foot of the whole thing, that is to say, the recurring and nonrecurring revenues combined, as revised to exclude Public Housing for the fire fee, is fifteen million nine hundred forty-three thousand eighteen dollars ($15,943,018) in the current fiscal year. And, in subsequent years which do not include, of course, CDBG allocations or anything else, it's thirteen million five eighty-three seven eleven. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. The final area. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The final box is the additional sources of revenue. I will very brief. There is a proposal that's been out there for some time, we need to come back to you shortly on it because it is already a part of the five year beginning in the year 2000 to have the Department of Off-street Parking become a City department, and restructure the finances of it. That would produce and we booked in the five-year plan beginning in the year 2000, three million dollars ($3,000,000) a year, but we need to return to you with that. State legislative funding, we have heard many different numbers this year, from three hundred thousand to one million dollars ($1,000,000). And, we put the latest figure we got, which is one million fifty, but frankly, that's not something that we are able to pinpoint right now. There is a possibility of an additional Solid Waste fee... Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. J.L. Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Regalado. 36 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: On the state legislature. One of the requests made by the City and the Mayor and to some members of the legislature, especially Senator Gutman, was three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for the cleanup of the Miami River. Senator Gutman was able to bring it in the senate budget, but apparently, he is having difficulty with the Governor's Office. It seems that the Governor is inclined to veto that fund, and I believe that the senator will be fighting for... It would be prudent now to call our lobbyists, I guess that we have one now, and, even the Oversight Board. I don't know if we can tell them or ask him to lobby for... Vice Chairman Plummer: Walter. Commissioner Regalado: ... us in the legislature. Is that possible, Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Maxwell: I don't know if that, lobbying the legislature will be in the purview of the Oversight Board, sir. I would have to look into that to see if that would be one of their responsibilities. Commissioner Regalado: Well, because, I think that this is part of what we are entitled. But, I know that this three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for the cleanup of the Miami River, they are in trouble with this. Vice Chairman Plummer: Continue, Mr. Manager. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: All right, sir. The last couple items are a franchise fee for commercial waste haulers. This is what we talked about a moment ago, a little while earlier with respect to doing as Miami Beach did, which is to restrict the number of commercial franchises and charge them a substantial fee. We need to study that and come back to you on that. Revision of property evaluations. Commissioner Teele asked us to conduct a preliminary study, we have done that. It's item "E" in your books. We can argue about the numbers. The reality of it is, that it's not at 90 or 95 percent or whatever it should be, it is below that. This is something that shows promise. Again, we need to develop it and come back to you on it. And, finally, the possibility of privatizing Solid Waste. Vice Chairman Plummer: Forget that one. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I am glad, Commissioner Teele is coming back, because I want to make sure that it's understood, that this is already a part of the five-year plan. At least in so far as the booking of one point one million dollars ($1,100,000) in savings. And, as I understand it, this Commission determined that that saving should be realized and if not, then we should come back to you, and at least present to you a privatization opportunity. Vice Chairman Plummer: We are going to take a five-minute break. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, we just need to do that, remembering that the five-year plan already has this money built-in, and if we don't realize it, then that's a shortfall that needs to be made up for. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: So, in summary, and the things that really are before you are ten possibilities, eight of which are non... are recurring. The numbers that you are looking at, I think are correct numbers, in so far as what the Oversight Board would be looking for. I should add that there was never a number given to us, as to how much additional revenue had to be raised. But, frankly, judging from the comments of the board, we have presented to you these initiatives in the sincere belief that this captures what I at least, and my staff, who were present believe the board will require of us in order not to have the City be turned over to someone else. 37 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, Mr. Pinon, would you please have this page photostated, and make available to the public. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Certainly,. Vice Chairman Plummer: I would appreciate. I am going to take a five minute break, that at least two books of this book that we have, be made on each side of the dais available to the public who would like to look at them. And, finally, I am going to ask anybody who wishes to speak, for two minutes, to sign up with the Clerk, giving him your name, and we will be back in five minutes to start the public hearing. THEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO RECESS AT 2:50 P.M., AND RECONVENED AT 2:50 P.M, WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION EXCEPT COMMISSIONER GORT AND COMMISSIONER REGALADO FOUND TO BE PRESENT. Vice Chairman Plummer: We now have three. Mr. Teele is listening. Mr. Joseph, you have two minutes, the clock is running. Mr. Fred Joseph: Fred Joseph, 1717 North Bayshore Drive, The Grand Condominium. I am... Vice Chairman Plummer- Excuse me. Ladies and entlemen, common courtesy I ask prevail. The speaker will give that courtesy to you, I am asking the same be given to each and every speaker, please. Mr. Joseph, proceed. Mr. Joseph: I see that the fire tax is getting a lot better. I am very happy to see that you have gone back in to spreading this expense out. The thing that bothers me, is that you still got a lot of exempts that do use the services. If they use the services, why should they not be incorporated. The other item that I am extremely opposed to, is any type of restriction on garbage haulers. If you start getting into the business of what kind of negotiation I can make with a private garbage hauler who I pay in excess of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) a year, that you do not supply me a service with, then now you are going into my pocket, because I won't be able to make my best deal with the 20 or 30 of them out in the market place. And, the item that really bothers me, is when you say a garbage hauler comes into this County, and you don't know about them. All you have got to do is ask, we'll tell you. Our books are open. So, if you have got a company coming in to some business in Dade County, or, I am sorry, in the City of Miami, demand that they show their books, that's simple. You can put that on an user on them. I don't think it's proper to limit franchises. I think it's wrong. I think it will cost you in the long run, because people will be sneaking. I think you should leave it. Let me bid my best. If I get one hundred thousand for seventy, that's my business. That's how we get to pay our taxes. Don't get in our business, we are going to fight you hard on that one. That's antitrust, as far as we are concerned. Thank you, for the opportunity. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, Mr. Joseph. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, just so... Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: ... that I may help move the debate. I had suggested we should look at it. We have looked at it. I am withdrawing the franchise concept for this discussion. And, I appreciate your remarks. 38 March 31, 1998 Mr. Joseph: I, I... Vice Chairman Plummer: You are an instant, temporary winner. Mr. Joseph: Oh, they always say, when you have got that, turn around and leave. Thank you, Commissioner. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manuel Goenaga, Gonzalez-Goenaga. Mr. Manuel Gonzalez-Goenaga: Very simple to keep it simple. We have heard that this is a poor City. I see all Commissioners, all employees, all policemen very well dressed with Christian Dior's and Versacye suits. And, from Mareno, also. I am the poor one that feel dirty. I am supposed to be white. [phonetic] Let's face it babies, when we have a City that gives a pension to a crook, don't be concerned. We are in the right track in Miami. And, I wish that if these things continue, let the Governor take over the City. Let me tell you. [APPLAUSE] OK, thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: The next speaker, and I apologize if I don't call your name absolutely correct. I have Elizabeth Cimadevilla. Ms. Elizabeth Cimadevilla: Cimadevilla. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm close. Ms. Cimadevilla: Close. Vice Chairman Plummer: You have two minutes, ma'am. Ms. Cimadevilla: I just wanted to say that... Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me, we would ask you please, anyone speaking to give your mailing address. Ms. Cimadevilla: OK, it's 1305 Southwest 30th Avenue, Miami, Florida. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Ms. Cimadevilla: I would like to say that the Fire -Rescue fee, it's gotten better, and I appreciate that. And, I believe that maybe it should be on a sliding kind of scale. I mean, if you live... if you have apartments in Brickell, it's one thing if you're forty-one dollars ($41). But, if you are in Little Havana or in Little Haiti, you are paying three hundred, forty-one dollars ($141) is still a big chunk. So, if they could like, you know, regular... I mean, adjusted to, according to the area or how much, you know, the area is making as far as money, I think it would be a little bit fairer. And, I wouldn't be against it, and I also think that the five-year, I don't know what you call it, a clause that kills it in five years, is good also. Because, that way it gives... it makes us feel like, OK, we are giving up something, but it's only for a certain time till we do better. And, then we will be alleviated of the problem. And, I think as far as zoning, I think it's very important because in Miami you have a million houses that have five and ten cars parked in front of each house, because they all have additions that are being rented out as apartments. And, I think that's totally unfair to all the people that are doing business correctly and legally and own apartments and are paying all their licenses and their fees, and it's not right. And, it makes, it actually makes the environment, the neighborhood, cheapen because the properties are not worth what they are. You have all this traffic, all this dirt. You have trash that isn't being collected because, of course, they don't care. So, that's basically, what I have to say. 39 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Ms. Cimadevilla: Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Herschel Haynes: For the record, your name and mailing address, please. Mr. Herschel Haynes: OK. My name is Herschel Haynes, and my address is 4601 Northwest 15th Avenue, 33142. Good evening, Honorable Commissioners. I am here to convey the sentiments of the Hadley Park Homeowners Residents Association and the community in which we live. And, they are... is that, we know that you must pass a tax, you know, a garbage tax or a fire tax and our hopes are that you will pass the fire tax. We feel that it is a far more equitable tax and it can be seen as spreading across the board, that everyone pay their fair share. And, also, I would ask of you that, from what we have heard here today, is that you would, please use the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) money for which it was provided for from the federal government. That it would go to the areas that are most in need, and so that we can cleanup the areas and bring them up to standard, as opposed to the money being used to go some other direction. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Moise Latmus. Your name and mailing address, please. Mr. Moise Latmus: My name is Moise Latmus, and my mailing address, 14610 Northwest 11th Court, 33168. We hear everything, and I think everybody agree that the City need money. But, we don't see why the City need money because the City's running our business, almost. The reason for, and if look over how many houses and apartment buildings closed, and what the City got from it, nothing. Because, those people had no money to pay the rent, and the City keep on putting pressure on them. Apartment building, they make them pay too much. We can't pay, we can't afford to pay, and what happened? They are closing. When those apartment buildings and house close, foreclose, nobody won't buy, what the City get? Nothing. And, that's the reason for most of the people in the City of Miami, they say they won't buy houses in the City of Miami. They don't buy no business in the City of Miami, they moving to Broward County. And, the City of Miami going down, Broward County going up. So, only one thing, I think we have to do, not only looking for money in the City of Miami, we have to try to release the pressure on the businessmen, in the apartment building, and the homeowners of the City of Miami to ease the pressure on them for they can coming back and build a business in the City of Miami and for the money coming back. If you are putting pressure like this on apartment building, on homeowner, putting more tax and more money, we are going to lose everything one day. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Bob Flanders. Mr. Flanders, your name, mailing address, and you have two minutes, sir. Mr. Robert Flanders: Right. My name is Robert Flanders, and I am in my fourth term as president of the Palm Bay Towers, at 720 Northeast 69th Street. I have lived in Miami since 1967, and at Palm Bay since 1981. I represent the almost 800 homeowners who live in the three condominiums. We strongly continue to object to a fire rescue fee or any such intangible service 40 March 31, 1998 fee which seeks to make an end run around the ad valorem property tax cap in Dade County. We feel that it is wholly unfair and without color of law. The proposed fees add more fuel to the twin engines of bloat and waste that have existed in Miami for many years. Where are the cuts? Through patronage, Miami has assumed the role of a caretaker government and the employee of a last resort. Like many Cubans and Haitians who have arrived in Miami by water, we who live in Miami are all in the same boat. And, Miami is a City in crisis. Some departments like Solid Waste, reportedly are a disaster. I personally know of many good people who work for the City of Miami who are totally demoralized because of Miami's refusal to address reform. If Miami is to survive, this must change. We must embrace the fundamental spirit of reform. For years, the fiscal irresponsibility of Miami has all but dared people to move out of the City. Today, the penalties for living in Miami are so high, that much of the middle class, both Black and White, now live elsewhere. Vice Chairman Plummer: You have 30 seconds. Mr. Flanders: Where are the incentives to stay. Higher property taxes, the highest in Dade County. Higher property and auto insurance rates. The lack of Code Enforcement. Deteriorated neighborhoods. Higher crime than elsewhere and inferior services. It's hard to run a business anywhere, but Miami's inefficient building and business permit regulations are an impediment rather than an encouragement to business. Gentlemen of the Commission, we must change the world's perception that business as usual in Miami, and that starts right here, right now with you. The City of Miami's future must start with rebuilding Miami's City government from the top down. Stop the fiscal fooling around now, or you will end up serving as the chief undertakers at the City's funeral. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oooh. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: I think, I just became a conflict of interest. Colonel Charles Meigs. Col. Charles Meigs: Meigs. Vice Chairman Plummer: Meigs. Colonel, give us your address. Col. Meigs: Scrambled eggs. Vice Chairman Plummer: When you hear that first beep, to all of you, that means you have 30 seconds left. Colonel, your mailing address, please. Col. Meigs: Honorable Mayor and Commissioners. I am a little bit surprised listening to the discussion because you seem to be very much concerned about what are relatively small dispositions of available money. I thought that the Commission would be discussing new sources of revenue. And, that's what I am here to suggest for you. I believe that each of you has received the copy which is a summary of my suggestions of alternate taxes that you might consider, and try for size. The first one I mentioned, I think is a shu-in, because the criteria that I give is, that these be discretionable monies. And, people who telephone on these 900 numbers for various sex talk and what not, nobody has to do that. They can phone longer or shorter calls. But, at two dollars ($2), a minute, and I understand the average calls run up as much as ten dollars ($10) or more per call on the telephoner's bill. If you had a ten percent tax on 900 numbers, I think you'd collect quite a large amount of money. Now, I have also suggested a tax on publicity. The Miami Herald is going to like me for suggesting this. But, there is no tax on classified advertising. In fact, I don't think there is any tax on the display advertising. All those huge Brandsmart and Sears Roebuck and Macy's pages that fill giant editions of the newspaper... 41 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Colonel, would you wrap it up, please. Your time is up. Col. Meigs: Millions of dollars. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir. We have your sheet here on the gambling and the sex, and the Hall of Fame. Most of this sir, I would have to tell you that as far as the sex lines are concerned, I am sure that's the Federal Communications, we don't have any opportunity there. The gambling is the State of Florida I guess, if we had casino gambling, we'd be out of debt. And, probably with a lot of problems. Col. Meigs: Well, there is lotto going in various private places. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, sir, I didn't support lotto, because it wasn't guaranteed that all 100 percent go to education. But, that's beside the point. It's now part_. Sir, I'll give you another 15 seconds to wrap up, if you wish. Col. Meigs: Well, I hope that among these suggestions, you might think of some imaginary ideas of your own. An entertainment tax would cover a lot. People that could afford to pay twenty-five, thirty-five dollars ($35) to see the opera on the tickets, ought to be able to pay an extra dollar or two dollars ($2) tax on those tickets. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Only the ladies applauded on the sex talk line. Mr. Jack Stupp: Good idea. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Stupp. Mr. Stupp: My name is Jack Stupp, I am a life long resident of the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, your address, please. Mr. Stupp: I live at 2161 North Meridian Avenue, Miami Beach. I work for a property management company that operates in the City of Miami. I have operated in Mr. Gort's district. I operate in Mr. Regalado's district. I used to operate in Mr. Teele's district, but I got tired of getting robbed, armed robbed, car jacked and pistol whipped. But, that's besides the point. The City of Miami has cosmetically deteriorated. A house that used to cost two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) is now selling for fifty to eight -five thousand dollars ($85,000). And, the root cause is the South Florida Building Code. The South Florida Building Code allows people to remove tiled roofs and replace them with shingle roofs, and it makes their neighborhoods look, totally cosmetically deteriorated. Ten percent, Mr. Teele, mentioned. Ten percent of the people that live in the City of Miami, work for the City of Miami, and those are his employees in the Solid Waste Management. Every police officer has a car to take home. There are three times as many cars now. Years ago, there used to be one car that was used 24 hours a day. Now, the expenses are three times as high, and your revenue is one quarter. When a house used to sell for two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000), and is selling for fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), you are not going to collect two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) worth of tax on the house. The neighborhoods look so bad, the employees don't want to live in the City. There should be a law, everybody that works for the City, should live in the City. The people in NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) don't have any money invested in the City, and they have no interest in this 42 March 31, 1998 City. The signs you are allowing in a City, are worst than the graffiti. You have prostitution signs all along Eight Street with "Go -GO" joints, big billboards. It's like the whole City is a complete eyesore. No matter, no wonder, Moody's doesn't want to loan you any money. Mister, your former Mayor, went up to New York to talk to Moody, but the City is just completely cosmetically deteriorated. You have to get rid of the South Florida Building Code, and that will be the first step to rectifying the City's ailments. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. [APPLAUSE] Commissioner Gort: Sir, I have a question. First, of all, South Florida Building Code is the County's, so I suggest, they are still meeting over there, you talk to them. Number two, can you give me the address of the two hundred and fifty thousand dollar ($250,000) home that's selling for fifty thousand? Mr. Stupp: Yeah, Mr. Teele's district. All along Bayside there. Commissioner Gort: No, no. Could you give me the address, because I would love to buy 'em? Mr. Stupp: Oh, like the whole of the Northwest section is completely shot.. Commissioner Gort: I'll buy them all. Mr. Stupp: Like your area, Mr. Regalado's area... Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. Do you have the address? Do you have the address of the two hundred thousand dollar ($200,000) home for fifty? Mr. Stupp: Yeah, there is a lot of them near 54th Street. Vice Chairman Plummer: You have the address, sir? Mr. Stupp: Not exactly. But... Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, OK. The next speaker is Robert Crisonino. Am I close, Robert? Mr. Richard Crisonino: Yes, sir. It's Richard Crisonino, and that's pretty close. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Sir, if you would give us your address and proceed, sir. Mr. Crisonino: 2534 Southwest 6th Street. I think after listening to you all today, I think the approach is somewhat wrong. The County Manager says we have a surplus of one point something million dollars. Vice Chairman Plummer: The City Manager. Mr. Crisonino: The City Manager, I apologize. So, why are we here? Why do we have this Revenue Matrix? The reason is to placate the Oversight Board, so that you all can rule the City. By definition then, we are only going to have to placate the Oversight Board for a minimum number of years, perhaps, less than that. Once we get rid of the Oversight Board, and we have a surplus, we are not going to need all of these additional taxes, correct? So, this is really, it's called a reoccurring revenue. But, in actuality, in practicality, it's not going to be reoccurring, it's only until we get rid of the Oversight Board. Now, how do we do that in the easiest and 43 March 31, 1998 cheapest way. It's not to enact a Fire -Rescue tee, which is going to be challenged in the courts. It's going to cost a fortune to litigate. It may not raise money. We have already heard that the School Board is going to fight it, that the apartment owners are going to litigate, that the condo owners are going to litigate it. All we are doing is raising more money for lawyers which this Commission has done legal and criminal and otherwise over the years. It's not necessary. And, the Fire -Rescue fee, of course, you have heard that item is a regressive fee, a poor tenant paying three hundred dollars ($300) a month, is going to bear the same brunt as the somebody paying twenty-five hundred dollars ($2,500) a month. So, we feel that the... the best approach would really, to just be, to raise an existing revenue which would be to increase the waste fee to three hundred and four dollars ($304). That would solve all of your problems. It would be on a temporary basis. Once the Oversight Board is out of the picture, you can revert back to one hundred and sixty-two dollars ($162). We will have no legal battles. It will be simple, it will be easy, and we don't have to go through all of these hearings and all this litigation. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen. Applause is really not necessary. We are not running a popularity contest, and all we are really doing is, helping the TV cameras make the six o'clock deadline. Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: I just wanted to ask the gentleman, if his bottom recommendation was to raise the Solid Waste fee to three hundred and four thousand dollars, ($304,000). I mean, three hundred and four dollars ($304) per household? Is that..? Would you...? Mr. Coarsening: Are you...? Commissioner Teele: Would you also include the commercial on that, as well? Mr. Crisonino: I used that number of three hundred and four, because that was what was bannered about as the fair market cost. Commissioner Teele: Sure. Right. Mr. Crisonino: And, I think... I don't think people would generally have an objection on a limited time basis to pay the fair market value of removing their trash. Commissioner Teele: And, on the commercial side, would you recommend a similar approach? Mr. Crisonino: Well, on the commercial side, then we have private haulers... Unidentified Speaker: We are paying it, already. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. You will have your time. Commissioner Teele: I am only trying to inquire as to whether or not... When you said... I'll take it then, that your approach would be to raise it on the residential side and leave... and that would be it? Mr. Crisonino: Not necessarily. Not necessarily. Once again, I believe that this is really going to be on a temporary basis. So, I don't think even commercial properties would be unwilling to participate in helping the City get rid of the Oversight Board, which is really what we are here about today. Otherwise, we won't be here, and there wouldn't be this list of additional fees and charges. 44 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: Thank you, for your presentation. Mr. Crisonino: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Eva Naga... Ms. Eva Nagymihaly: Nagymihaly. Very easy. Vice Chairman Plummer: Boy, thanks for your help. Your address, please. Ms. Nagymihaly: Thank you. 3110 South Miami Avenue in Miami, Florida. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that she have enough time, particularly if she has some ambiguities that need to be clarified. Vice Chairman Plummer: Your request is without a doubt granted, sir. Ms. Nagymihaly: All right. The one question I did have on the item where I wasn't sure on, was with the Certificate of Use. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Manager, I think... Oh, I am sorry, Mr. Pinon, is here. Go ahead, ma'am. I am sorry. Ms. Nagymihaly: OK. The question there was, they were saying that this was the illegal dumping, and we therefore, needed to get additional revenues, and one way to do it was through the Certificate of Use in charging the apartment owners or unit owners per amount since they already knew through the system. But, I think he forgot to realize that, we already pay private haulers. So, if somebody dumps tires on my property, I have to pay my private hauler to remove it. So, we are already taking care of that, so I was a little confused when he brought that issue up. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Clerk, turn the clock off. Mr. Pinon, answer the question please? Mr. Joseph Pinon (Assistant City Manager): Sure. Yes, sir. I don't know many homeowners that call the haulers to come in and pick up their tires and batteries and the extra furniture without paying for it. And, that's exactly what comes up in City properties and in other people's properties. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Proceed. Ms. Nagymihaly: Was that an answer? Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, that's his answer. Now, you might not agree with it. Ms. Nagymihaly: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: I can tell you, that just for the record. I have a very good friend of mine on 79th Street. He operates a bar. And, about once a month, somebody comes behind the alleyway and dumps a whole thing full of tires in his yard, and then we go up and write him a Notice of Violation, and he had nothing to do with putting the tires there. So, you know, where is the equity there? There is none. There is none. We have people that are renting warehouse space, up around 59th Street, in the Little Haiti area, up there. Fifty thousand square feet of warehouse space, they fill it up with tires, and then they are gone, and the poor guy that owns the 45 March 31, 1998 place opens the door one day, and he's got enough tires there to start Goodyear. I mean, these are the problems that exists, and let's don't kid ourselves, it happens. Go ahead. Ms. Nagymihaly: OK. But, one comment on that. And, often when I get frustrated, when people don't pay their rent, when things happen, when I get fees, when I get code violations. People look at me and say, "don't be upset, that's the cost of doing business." So, I would like to put that in the City's court, that's the cost of doing business. I would like everybody to do the right thing, but it's not being done. So, it has to be filtered into the system, and not given back to the person who is already trying to do their best. That's it. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Ms. Nagymihaly: OK, but I definitely wanted to talk about... Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, your two minutes start. Ms. Nagymihaly: All right, this has to do with the Fire -Rescue fee, and I want to explain that it is not equitable, and it is not across the board. It sounds good, but, please remember when this all started, because I have come to every one of the meetings, and I was told at that time, and I have got the Herald articles that show it, it was implemented because Public Housing wasn't paying it's fair share. Institutions were not paying their fair share. Government buildings were not paying their fair share. OK, everybody is still excluded. It is not across the board. The only people that are paying it have already been paying it. So, the Fire -Rescue fee is definitely going to raise issues. It will be in the court system. It cannot be put in. It's a way of circumventing the ad valorem taxes. So, please keep that in mind, it will end up in the court system and it will cost a lot of money. Why not go back to garbage. Remember, we used to talk about Fire -Rescue fee, alias "garbage fee"? That's where it all started. Remember, we did away with it? Well, let's get back to what garbage costs. It costs a certain amount to pick it up, by God, charge them for it. I mean, there is no single person in this City that wouldn't be willing to pay for what garbage costs to pick up. So, if we could do that, then go back and look at the things that we talked about. We said that we were going to have cuts across the board in City salaries, right? We were going to do that. We were going to privatize. Maybe, it doesn't good, but if it saves money, maybe we should do it. What happened to the issue of merging the City Fire Department with Dade County? That's supposed to save eleven and twelve million. It's not been brought up. Vice Chairman Plummer: You keep that up, I am going to cut your time off. Ms. Nagymihaly: Aye, aye, aye. But, I heard the hell, I know it's important. We need to raise money, there are many ways to raise money. But, leave the fire fee out, please. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, thank you. Carol... Commissioner Gort: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: I am sorry, Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: I would like for the City Manager at the end of the presentation by the public, to please, give us some information on all the cost cutting that we have done. All the measures we have taken that have shown savings to the City. Like, in the Health and Workmen Compensation, and so on. I think it is important to know how much we have been able to reduce. I think you should share that. 46 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, I think it's also important to note, that he has appointed a committee of five, that they are to bring about 350 vacancies by October the 1st, and 540 by March of next year. That represents a great deal of cuts in the operating budget. I wish him well. I feel sorry for the five members of that committee who are going to have to make some tough decisions, but they have got to be made. Commissioner Gort: We have to make some tough decisions. Vice Chairman Plummer: We have got to do it for them also. All right, the next speaker is Carol Gardner. Is Carol Gardner...? Here she is. If you can give us mailing address please, and you have two minutes. Ms. Carol Parker: OK, my name is Carol Parker, I represent Tacolcy Economic Development Corporation. We are located at 645 Northwest 62nd Street, Suite 300. We own 300 units. We are a non-profit organization, let me first state that. We own 300 units, and those 300 units are located in Liberty City, it's a part of Commissioner Teele's district. And, those units are already in financial distress. This fire tax will cost us, an additional fifty-four thousand dollars ($54,000). We offer several programs to those residents, and because of this fire tax, those programs will have to be, those social services programs that we offer to our residents will have to be cut. Now, we can't increase the residents taxes, because this is a tax credit project and we have restrictions by the state on what we can charge our tenants. Regardless of that, the tenants can't afford an increase in rent. Now, the medium income in this area is very low. Like I said, this is low income apartment complex. And, someone made a suggestion earlier that the Fire - Rescue fee should be spread across medium income areas. I agree with that. I think that's a fair decision than to tax those areas that are low income areas with a Fire -Rescue fee. And, I think the residents in those areas, more than likely, you still will have a large uncollectible in those areas. I don't think you are going to collect the fees, because the people are still not going to pay them. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, ma'am. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Jacobs, you represent thousands, do you want to speak last, as you normally do, or you want to speak now? Mr. Tory Jacobs: Whenever... Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, your mailing address, please. Mr. Tory Jacobs: Tory Jacobs. I live at 145 Southeast 25th Road. Vice Chairman Plummer, Commissioners. I am here representing the Brickell Homeowners Association, that's the cast of thousands that was referred to. We are opposed to the Fire -Rescue fee. We appreciate the fact that in a fairness issue, it's been spread a little bit further, and reduced. But, it isn't really the dollars. It's the concept. We, our counsel tells us that a fee for service across the board is viable, is legal. But, they tell us that a fee for the availability of service is not legal. That a fee for equipment that enables delivery of service is not legal. And, we would hate to see the City attempt to raise revenue by doing something that will tie them up in court, legal fees, embarrassment, possibly having to return the funds. We support the concept of increasing the garbage fee towards what the actual cost is. Perhaps, on a gradual basis over a period of years. I saw the Oversight Board meeting when this budget, this last budget was presented and their request for additional recurring revenue, inspite of the fact, as was pointed out, that the budget is balanced. The budget presented is balanced, they wanted a little cushion. That would give them 47 March 31, 1998 a cushion and I think would tend to be acceptable to them. We recognize the pressure that the Oversight Board has put on the... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, sir, that's, that's... Mr. Jacobs: I'm turning it off. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's not you. That's the clock telling you, you have run over your two minutes. Mr. Jacobs: OK. No, I have a vibrator, it... Vice Chairman Plummer: Feel good. Mr. Jacobs: Absolutely. And, I change it from pocket to pocket. Fairness. Fairness issue. Anyway... Vice Chairman Plummer: Equal opportunity. Mr. Jacobs: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele asked the question do I... do we feel that the garbage fee should be raised in commercial or in condominiums? We pay the full market cost. We pay maybe three hundred dollars ($300) a unit in our building, plus 15 percent that goes to the City, which you are now talking about raising to... from 15 to 20 percent which is within the purview, and is certainly legal. And, we also, have just had an assessment of over 3,000 unit to upgrade the fire safety to be in compliance with the code with the City. We also have a fire inspection fee. It seems like this fire is a key buzz word for extracting funds. Anyway, we hope that you will kill this Fire -Rescue fee for once and for all. We thought we had killed it. And, I learned just now from Chief Gimenez that the ordinance is still on the table. We only killed the resolution. And, we hope we can kill the resolution, both readings and also, if you will, get rid of that ordinance. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Hector Caraza. Am I close? Mr. Hector Caraza: So, so. Vice Chairman Plummer: "Mas o menos." Mr. Caraza: Pretty bad. Vice Chairman Plummer: Your address, sir. Mr. Caraza: Hector Caraza. 1021 Southwest 3rd Avenue. If you would indulge me, any of you, gentlemen who would be able to explain what is the difference between a fee and a tax? Vice Chairman Plummer: A tax is deductible, a fee is not. Mr. Caraza: Are you saying that you are not taxing us, when you are saying that you are feeing us? Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, I am telling you, that ad valorem taxation is deductible from your income tax. A fee of any sort imposed upon you, is not deductible. 48 March 31, 1998 Mr. Caraza: Well, why don't you tax us? Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, we can't because we are at the top of our limit of nine point... Mr. Joseph Pinon (Assistant City Manager): Nine. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... nine, five, five nine. And, the state limits us to a ten mil cap. So, it's impossible to do. Mr. Caraza: It appears to me that you gentlemen, with all due respect, are playing a game, semantics, and you are just using one word for another. You are charging us a tax, and calling it a fee. And, I would very much... Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, sir, what you are asking is, is in the legal sense of the word. I have given you the legal interpretation. It's a tax, either way you look at it. Mr. Caraza: Obviously. Vice Chairman Plummer: It's you paying more money, whether you call it a fee or a tax. It's the same thing, it dollars out of your pocket. So, we are not playing games with each other. We fully understand, it's money out of your pocket that you are not paying today. Mr. Caraza: It seems very regrettable that you, gentlemen, even though you... it seems like you are trying to do a job which may or may not be accomplishable, don't see that it's a matter of spending less. You guys spend far too much money, and you call it a fee, you call it whatever, it's a tax. You guys are taxing us to death, each and every one of us. It seems that businesses cannot operate because there is too many fees or taxes or whatever you want to call it. You have so many fees and taxes, people are just going to pack up and go. Myself included. I am a small operator. I have a small apartment building. And, it seems to me, it's about time to sell and get out of the City of Miami. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Caesar Phillips. Mr. Phillips, if you will give your mailing address please, and you have two minutes. Mr. Caesar Phillips: Caesar Phillips, I represent Miami Capital Development. My address is 300 Biscayne Boulevard Way, Suite 614. 1 am here in reference to the staff's proposal to assist in balancing their budget by redirecting some of the funds that we have available. I would just like to point out to the City, that while we have total funds available of two million seventy- seven thousand dollars ($2,077,000), that we have committed two hundred and ninety-eight thousand and we have pending applications for one million three hundred and ninety-six thousand, which actually will leave us, three hundred and eighty-three thousand. And, this does not include some requests that comes through the staff in which we take care of issues in an expeditious manner for the City. I strongly urge that the Manager do not go through with this proposal to redirect our funds. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Harold Cornett. Mr. Cornett... Mr. Harold Cornett: Yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... your mailing address please, and you have two minutes, sir. 49 March 31, 1998 Mr. Cornett: OK. My name is Harold Cornett. I live at 6325 Southwest 89th Court. I have residential property in the Grove and I have apartments up in the north end of town. First of all, I want to tell you, I think, Commissioner Teele is right. I don't think you should take money that intended to bring up the level of poor people and redistribute it. That being said, let me say this. I feel very sorry for you all for the situation you are in. I sort of blame your predecessors who didn't increase the tax or the garbage fee back when it went up, they should have increased it, you wouldn't have the problem today, if you were charging what it was worth. There is a misconception that the fire tax is going to be absorbed by the property owners. This is not true. I have apartments. I am going to pass it through. Now, I am not going to pass through at what you guys levied, because it costs me money to administrate and do everything. I have vacant apartments and things like that. So, I have got to raise it up higher than you guys do. Now, the apartments that I rent are not the high income, they are the low income. And, we work hard to keep them nice, keep them painted. Every time we rent an apartment, it's something that you or I could live in. I don't rent junk. So, what this means is, that I am going to raise my rents. Now, when this fire tax goes off in five years, do you think that everybody is going to lower their rents or they are going to keep them the same? What do you think? And, you know, timing is everything in life, sometimes. And, what better time to go ahead and adjust the garbage fee, to adjust... than when you have an emergency like this, that you can blame it on. Because, if you wait 'till next year, what are you going to tell them? Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. George Agramonte. Your mailing address, sir. Mr. George Agramonte: 4300 Ravenswood Road, Dania. I would like to expand on a question that Mr. Regalado asked the City Manager in regards to when private haulers puts a commercial account on stop service. We are not looking for the City to be a collection agency for us. What we want is for the City to enforce it's own rules and send Code Enforcement, and force that customer to have garbage service from somebody. Whether it be, the company that's servicing it, or a competitor. These customers go four and five months without paying anybody, and they take the garbage and they take it home. They put it on the swale, and the City picks it up. It's just as illegal as dumping it in the river. The City pays for it, anyway. That's what we are asking for. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Sir. Mr. Agramonte: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: I agreed with what the Manager said in his response to you, because it really does get down to a contractual issue, the way the question was framed. But, what you have raised is another area that really, my instinct tells me is a bigger problem than even you have described today. Are you suggesting that there are companies or people that you have contracts with who, for whatever reason, failed to pay you, and then they basically have no one providing the service? 50 March 31, 1998 Mr. Agramonte: I can provide you a list with customers that haven't had service from me, and if you drive by there, there are no other containers, and they haven't paid me in six and seven months, and some of them even tell our supervisor, "I take the garbage home." Period. Commissioner Teele: See, that's the... That's the illegal, that's a part of the illegal dumping. A lot of the illegal dumping has to do with people who just aren't playing by the rules. Mr. Pinon, could you just tell me, what is it we are doing that will address that situation? Is there some mechanism we can create to work with the haulers, not to help them collect, but to force the system to ensure that everybody has garbage service? Because, that's really what we are saying, and you will get a percentage of it, if they have to have it, and the next guy and next woman, and whatever. Is there anything that we can do to...? Mr. Pinon: Yes, sir. Of course. This is one item that we have discussed with the haulers. Actually, several meetings that we had. And, this is something that is also very prominent in the City of Miami Beach. And, what we did was, we have more inspectors to do that and required the haulers to let us know when people had these stop payments. Because, let me tell you the game they play. The game meaning, the customers. They don't pay them for a month, or two, or three and dispose of this garbage on the City's right-of-ways. Then, they go to another company while they take them to litigation, and hold them also ransom for two or three more months, and now it's six months that we are picking up the tab. And, we require there, that they notify us. However, understand this, we had 42 inspectors there. Here, I have two inspectors per NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) and some NETs don't have two inspectors. And, I have three inspectors in the Solid Waste Department. That's a total, maybe of 26. The City is 35 miles, square miles. And, the complaints are tremendous. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Pinon, but the question and the concern that he is raising is, do we have a system or is there something that we can put in place. Mr. Pinon: Yes, sir,. Commissioner Teele: ... that would allow them to provide us with an information copy so that we get routed through the NET office, so that the NET office can help to ensure... Mr. Pinon: Can it be done? Yes. The answer is, it can be done, sir. It's not done right now. Mr. Agramonte: All I have to... Vice Chairman Plummer: Then... Mr. Agramonte: Last month, or a month and a half ago, the City decided that anybody that had a one yard container needed to have a two yard container. And, the City found the inspectors to send out them out there every day, because we got calls everyday. Fining these people seventy- five dollars ($75) a day to get a two yard container. So, if they have the personnel to do that, I am... If they take that personnel off that pet project and put this, what really counts, the City could make some money from it. Commissioner Teele: I will ask the Manager to take it under advisement. Mr. Agramonte: Thank you. Mr. Pinon: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Sheila Anderson. Your mailing address, and you have two minutes. 51 March 31, 1998 Ms. Sheila Anderson: Thank you, Commissioner. Mailing address, 901 Northeast 2nd Avenue, Park West section of Miami, full of illegal dumping, full of people on the street, never cleaned up by the police or anybody else. But, it's a good location and with a little work, a little help, it could become a centerpiece for the City, for the location is so good. I adamantly oppose a Special Assessment of any kind for standard services of a City or any government, any place. That's not a fair way to pay for government services. It is an in run around the constitution. It's sets a precedent that is dangerous to everybody's property rights, and it's totally unacceptable. What I don't hear today, is discussions about strategies that would create revenue streams for the City, recapture equity and do some things that have business base. Mr. Teele, is nodding at me. Why can't the City look at its assets, its hard assets that it uses in the way of real estate. Sell them and lease them back for 100 years with the right to reacquire them if necessary. Private sector does it all the time. That will give the City millions and millions and millions of dollars. It could pay off bonds, it could restructure some things, and it could invest money and work off the income. Why isn't the City talking about leasing equipment, not buying equipment? Particularly, equipment that has a short life span and may become obsolete. Why isn't the City investigating all kinds of financial strategies that would save money and make money for the City? I keep hearing the same things, over and over and over again. I also hear it at the few Oversight Board meetings we have been able to find out about. A certain amount of repetition of the same things over again. We are not getting, I don't believe you are getting a fair shake from the Oversight Board. I think that there is a lot of playing to the press, and a lot of posturing going on. I don't think you are getting the kind of help that they could give you, if they were asked to investigate strategies in other communities and come back in with alternatives. This business of good guy, bad guy, and we are going to beat you up doesn't serve anybody's purpose. The closed meetings, the private office space, the lack of public input into their agendas. The fact that nobody knows how they were selected. The notices going to the press in Tallahassee, which was supposed to tell this community what's going on, or is much business as usual, is anything you have accused of in. And, I think the standard needs to be set that this government is for the people of the City and that there are things that need to happen correctively that we could all work on together. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, ma'am. [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. David Perkins. Your mailing address, sir, and you have two minutes. Mr. David L. Perkins: My name, David L. Perkins. I live at 220 Northwest 15th Street, Apt. 4. I am begging you all, please do not raise up on these taxes because it is getting outrageous as it is. Because, we have got too many peoples out here that is unable to constantly pay taxes, taxes, taxes. We have got people that is on Welfare and AFDC and Social Security. The budget has been turned the opposite direction, and they cannot pay these bills as it is. So, I am asking you, please do not raise no taxes for the poor people. And, also make sure that the water and sewage do not get another increase, and that the Florida Power and Light do not get no increase. And, that the Fire Department do not get no more increase. Because, all through every meeting that is going on here, you have got the Water and Sewage, you got the Fire Department, Police Department, and everybody begging for grants all through the months. Where are those grants already going? They don't need no more grants when it comes for this budget time, you all it's time to help the public, the proper way and help to keep crimes and stuff out of society. Thank you. [APPLAUSE] 52 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. The last... The last registered speaker, hello, Judy. Ms. Judy Clark: Well, I just forgot to sign up. Vice Chairman Plummer: Give 'em hell, Harry. Your mailing address. Ms. Clark: Judy Clark, 5930 North Bayshore Drive. Vice Chairman Plummer: Hold on everybody. Ms. Clark: First of all, I just want to say that your citizens. The people that live, especially make up the bulk of the citizenry... Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Ms. Clark: ... in the City of Miami. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is the clock broken? Ms. Clark: Oh, good. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. believe, you have all severely underestimated the people that have single family homes that Ms. Clark: And, I think, were it put to them, in a more eloquent fashion than has so far been addressed, that they would agree to a choice. You have given nobody a choice on this. You are making a decision about whether a fire fee or whether a garbage fee? There's been no real discussion, there's been no real advertisement. There's been no real... There's a few editorials, but the Herald seems to have its own agenda about it. My feeling is that there should be something that should be openly discussed with the single family homeowners. Given a choice, given a choice, of thirty-five dollars ($35) for this, or thirty-five dollars ($35) for that, don't you think that a single family homeowner that knows it costs three hundred and four dollars ($304) to pick up their garbage, that honorable, intelligent individual is going to say, if you are going to charge me one or the other, I would rather pay for something I get than have you implement a whole new system of taxation, no limits, no caps, for sure litigation. Not deductible from my taxes, you won't be able to collect it. Why would I even begin to think that this was the right way to go. You pick up my garbage, I get a big break. I have been getting it for years and years, and years. I am willing now to pay some of the difference in that. So, you are going to charge me thirty-five dollars ($35) for this and thirty-five dollars ($35) for that. Richard was right. Charge me the 304, let me pay it, let me pay for what I get. I am an honorable person, I want to pay for what I receive. I do not want you to find some new tax to give to me. Lastly, let me just say this. This last week in the paper, came the Pension Board's decision to pay a pension to someone who is part, who posed part of the problem for this City. Today, you are ready to invent some new tax for the poor beleaguered citizens of this City to pay for some bad, bad, mismanagement over all the years. My feeling is, that you can't have all these things. You have to stop it some place and charge for what you get. The people of this town would understand that, explain it to them. They will understand it, and they will reject a fire fee. They will say, "I will pay for what I get." Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. And... [APPLAUSE] Vice Chairman Plummer: To my colleagues, I stand corrected. I made a mistake, there was another registered. Luciano Isla. Am I close? 53 March 31, 1998 Mr. Luciano Isla: You are perfect, Mr. Vice Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, great. Your mailing address, sir. Mr. Isla: My name is Luciano Isla. I am an attorney -at -law, with offices at 1790 West 49th Street, Hialeah, Florida. Thank you, very much for the opportunity to address you. I am legal counsel to the Dade Waste Haulers Council. We have 19 private waste collecting companies, small to medium sized firms. We have minority owned firms, we have women owned firms. We have about 19 associated members, industry related. And, I am very proud to say that many of them are duly licensed private waste haulers here, in the City of Miami. I feel very proud to be addressing you this afternoon, and I congratulate each of you for the courage of your convictions. You have run for office, and been elected in a City that has tremendous financial problems and your appointed officials have come over to join you to get this thing and the City turned around. I am very proud to be part of the Dade Waste Haulers and to be part of your system. All that we ask is that we part of the system, just as three years ago, in Dade County when Chairman Teele presided over the County Commission and the County's Solid Waste Department was in dire straights, we came to the forefront and we worked together with Chairman Teele and we brought it around without having to go to franchises. We request that we be part of your system. We will be here during good times and even bad times, recognizing that we have a private... We are private haulers, but that we have a public license, and that is a privilege, to work in the City of Miami, it is not a right. We commit to the Commission. We commit to the City Manager and we commit to Mayor Carollo that we will be here during good times and bad, and we ask that we be allowed to work with you all so we can go forward together. Again, congratulations to all you elected officials, and to your appointed officials. We look forward to working with you now in the City of Miami, Mr. Manager. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, may the garbage be yours. OK, at this particular time, I will close the public hearing. And, I will ask the Manager if he has any further words of wisdom that he would like to impale us with. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): Just that I am prepared to respond to Commissioner Gort's request, if he wish. Vice Chairman Plummer: Please do. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Commissioner Gort asked that I reiterate the actions taken by this Commission on March the 2nd which included, or particularly the ones that represented cuts and those in serial form if you will are, we cut forty-six thousand six hundred and thirty-five dollars ($46,635) out of the Mayor's and Commissioners budgets; eighty thousand six hundred and eighty-two dollars ($80,682) out of the City Manager's budget; twenty-one thousand ninety-five dollars ($21,095) out of the City Clerk's Office. We eliminated all vacancies in the City of Miami with the exception of a handful that were designated as Special Assistant, the Finance Director, and I think it was like four or five. We reduced salaries to I believe it was 19 employees and took a total of about 31 or 41 personnel actions. The total financial impact of which was a reduction of five hundred four thousand nine hundred and ten dollars ($504,910). We tapped into undesignated reserves to the tune of two million dollars ($2,000,000). We increased our permit fee booking by one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). Our net interest income by two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000), and our administrative fees by twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). We reduced operating expenditures by seven million three hundred seven thousand five hundred and twenty-one dollars ($7,307,521). Much of that, if you recall were reductions that were able to be realized as a result of going to a managed care 54 March 31, 1998 program for health insurance. And, also the reductions that we... the experience that we have had in reducing Workers' Compensation claims. We realigned capital, general fund capital projects by three million dollars ($3,000,000), and we booked the sale of the Municipal Justice site by five million seven hundred and ten thousand dollars ($5,710,000). Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort, does that answer your question, sir? Commissioner Gort: No, I just wanted that to state, since a lot of the statements made by the public that we have not done anything to reduce expenses. I just want to put that on the record. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, you have any other comments? Hello? Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Let me try to get him finished, if I may? Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I am just prepared to outline for the Commission depending on your actions on the various items there are specific legislative steps that you need to take. Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand that. Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Before we go on to the issue that we are discussing. A question that has been in my mind for several days, and I have been asked that question a lot of times. Mr. City Attorney, can we somehow stop Cesar Odio from getting his pension? Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): That's an issue that was before the Pension Board, and the Pension Board makes the decision on who gets pensions and who doesn't get pensions. Commissioner Regalado: I understand that. Mr. Maxwell: We are reviewing that issue more in our office at this time. Commissioner Regalado: But, I just want to be clear on the record. Mr. Maxwell: That is a Pension Board decision, not a decision of the City Commission. Commissioner Regalado: Not the administration? Mr. Maxwell: That's correct. Commissioner Regalado: Not the City Commission? Mr. Maxwell: The Pension Board. And, we are reviewing it further to see if there is any recourse on our part. But, it is a Pension Board decision. Unidentified Speaker: Can you remove 'em? [phonetic] Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, time to fish or cut bait? I'll tell you what, in the interest of fairness, if I can, I am going to start with Commissioner Regalado to make any statement, and we'll just come right down the line. You are not limited by time. Commissioner Regalado. 55 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: No, I don't have any statement other than some questions for the Manager. I know that the fire fee, if you were to divide what business or an apartment unit or a house will be paying into 30 days, will be probably pennies. But, I would tell you, Mr. Manager, that I still think that the fire fee, it's something that will be hurting a lot of people throughout the City. And, I would ask you, some figures. If we were to cut the fire fee, less than what you presented to us, what would this mean for the budget? Because, the first question is, we don't know how many millions is the desire of the members of the Oversight Board. You said that, you believe from what you heard that eleven million, more or less, it's the numbers that they would be inclined to approve, but we don't know how many millions they believe that we should come up with. And, and by the way, I would like to congratulate the State Legislature and the Governor, for the fifth year in a row, they have been able to approve a budget without new taxes. And, the Governor is spending a lot of money in different programs using a nonrecurring revenue from the money that he got from the tobacco industry. So, I guess that is, do what I say, not what I do. But, anyway, if we were to reduce the fire fee, Mr. Manager, say that we would reduce the fire fee ten dollars ($10) for a unit, for residential, ten dollars ($10) for unit a year, what would this mean for your budget? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I think the problem with that, Commissioner Regalado, is what our consultants have explained to us in the past. In order to be legal in their view, the fire fee has to do constitute a special benefit to property owners, number one. And, number two, it has to be properly allocated. Were you to eliminate or diminish the allocation to one group of beneficiaries... Commissioner Regalado: No, no, I am talking, you said thirty-four to forty-one. So, I am telling you about what would twenty to thirty means to you? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, what about the rest? In other words, the difference, the big difference, Commissioner between diminishing the fire fee, which is a thirty... Our proposal is a thirty-four dollar ($34) single family fee. And, the increase in the waste collection fee, our proposal is thirty-five dollars ($35) almost the same. The difference is, that you don't, in the case of the fire fee, you also affect all of the nonresidential property categories. So, the impact financially is huge, whereas the impact on the homeowner will be the same. If I might, if the difference that you are seeking to achieve with the result that you are seeking to achieve is a reduction on what the single family property owner pays. Then, the safer way, I would think legally for the reason I just stated, but more importantly the one that has the least overall impact, would be to reduce the waste collection fee by ten dollars ($10). That means that, instead of thirty-four plus thirty-five is sixty-nine, you would have fifty-nine, but you would preserve the integrity of the allocation of the fire fee and it's nonresidential impact as well. Commissioner Regalado: All right, I understand what you are saying, and I agree with you. But, what I am seeing here is that we are also going to be discussing, probably, if the Commission desires, approve a raise to the commercial haulers from 15 to 20 percent. That would mean that the customers and not the haulers will be paying that five percent, because they are going to pass on. They are going to do exactly what the owners of apartment buildings are going to do, is pass on to the tenants. The haulers are going to pass on the raise to the buildings. And, this is why, this is why I am talking about reducing the fire fee, and not... Because, when you reduce the fire fee, you are evening the hit on a lot of people. That's what I am asking. And, I understand what you are saying, that we... If we were to reduce the fire fee, you won't have several million dollars to work with. But, that was my question. And, I agree with you, in the Solid Waste fee increase. I... But, I am just asking you, how big the impact of a reduction across the board of the fire fee will be for the budget? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, I suppose the easiest way to handle that would be, if you were to cut half of the fire fee across the board instead of six point five million dollars ($6,500,000) in 56 March 31, 1998 revenues, we would have three point two five million dollars ($3,250,000) in revenues. If you were to cut one quarter, we would have three quarters of six point five million which is two point, a reduction of two point one seven or thereabouts, or a net of maybe... Oh, wait a minute, we were excluding the public housing piece. So, the base is six. If you were to cut a third, we will collect four instead of six, if were to cut a half across the board, we will collect three instead of six. Commissioner Regalado: Let me ask, because you deal with the Oversight Board, which is why we are here now. If this Commission were to reduce the fire fee by half, would you think that the Oversight Board would consider this budget? Would you think that their consultants would think that this is a budget that is a little better than the one that you brought before? Vice Chairman Plummer: Are you saying...? Let me understand, if I may? Commissioner Regalado: What I am saying is, if we were to cut the fire fee in half, across the board, the Manager would only have, I guess three million... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Three million instead of six. Commissioner Regalado: Three million instead of six. Plus the increase on the other increases. So, the Manager would come before the Oversight Board with about, I guess, eight million instead of, or seven million instead of eleven million. My question is, my question is, do you think that the Oversight Board would agree that this is a budget that they can live with, or we need to have a really, really, huge cushion to sleep on? Vice Chairman Plummer: My question to you, if I may? Are you saying reduce the fire fee from thirty-four dollars ($34) to seventeen? Commissioner Regalado: Yes, that's what I am saying. Commissioner Gort: And, from 41 to 21. Commissioner Regalado: Half, across the board, that's what I am asking. Half across the board. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, I guess what I am trying... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: You would have to do it across the board to maintain the integrity of the fee. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah. I am asking across the board. If you were getting six million, you will get three million. Vice Chairman Plummer: But, you are talking about for the homeowner. Commissioner Teele: No. Commissioner Regalado: No, I am talking for everybody. Commissioner Gort: for commercial. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, even the home... Let's start with the homeowner, that's the lowest end of the line. 57 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's right. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Regalado: But, I am talking to everybody. Vice Chairman Plummer: You are talking about a buck and a halt a month. Commissioner Regalado: J.L., I'm talking across the board, residential... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, I'm... Commissioner Regalado: ... commercial... Vice Chairman Plummer: ... trying to understand where you are coming from, OK. Commissioner Regalado: No, I'm coming from... I'm just saying, the Manager wants, the Manager needs six million dollars ($6,000,000). Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand that, sir. Commissioner Regalado: I am saying to you... Vice Chairman Plummer: We think that's what he needs. Commissioner Regalado: ... is... Vice Chairman Plummer: We don't know. Commissioner Regalado: Well's that what he... You know the Oversight... I am saying to you, if we were to reduce the fire fee, half across the board, residential and commercial, and apartment buildings, and whatever, the Manager will get three million dollars ($3,000,000). I am asking him if he feels that with three million dollars ($3,000,000) less, he will be able to come before the Oversight Board? That's basically what I am asking. It's... Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, can you answer the question? Hello. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I hear you. I will be honest with you, Commissioner. I have the same concern that Commissioner Plummer raises. We are really talking about one dollar and a half or so a month. But, putting that aside, there were no numbers given, as I mentioned earlier at the Oversight Board meeting. I will tell you that, and we have heard since the... in the last few hours, as a result of the HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development) audit, some additional concerns of the Oversight Board. Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait, woe. What are your additional concerns from this vacuum? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well... Vice Chairman Plummer: Tell us. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Just before I came to this meeting, a newspaper reporter told me that she had been talking to HUD, to the Oversight Board, and so on. And, by the way, I hope she doesn't print the misinformation that she has given me. And, when she talked to the Oversight Board... 58 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Could she possibly still be in the Chambers? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, it's not the ones in the Chambers, unfortunately, or I would be, you know, talking with her outside. Vice Chairman Plummer: Can we have the information that you maybe have? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, she was telling me that HUD was going to require us to repay, instead of just over one million dollars ($1,000,000) which is what the HUD audit report states. Three point one million dollars ($3,100,000). We have checked since with the Inspector General, I might tell you, and some of her information is, at best shaky. For example, there is one million and a half dollars ($1,500,000) that she was ready to print in tomorrow's newspaper, and I hope she's responsible and does not, that the City would have to repay. The recommendation is, that the City go out and recover those non -payments, those defaulted payments. And, then, at some point, in the future, if and when the City is unable to recover those defaulted payments, and to the extent that may be the case, the recommendation is, that we repay whatever portion of that million and a half dollars ($1,500,000) might be. So, I have a lot of problems with the headline that will read "City being told to repay three point one million dollars ($3,100,000)." But, that's just my frustration with the soundbite system of news reporting. The result of that, on the Oversight Board, to go back to the point was, that apparently they talked to some Oversight Board member who told her, you see that's why we want the City to have all this money and all this cushion and all this recurring revenue. That only makes it tougher, Commissioner Regalado, to tell you that there is a lot of give here in terms of the eleven point seven million dollars ($11,700,000) of recurring revenues that we have presented to you. Can I tell you categorically, that if you take three million dollars ($3,000,000) of that out, the board will reject it? No, I can't say that, because I don't have the magic ball. But, I will tell you that I would be concerned with that large a downward revision. That's almost 25 percent of the recurring revenues in this budget. That's a lot of money. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is...? May I ask a question? Is Adrienne here? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Adrienne, one of the things we haven't addressed that I think we should address. Someone told me, and I hope I that I am wrong in what I heard. That by the year 2000, that the tipping fees were going to be going from fifty dollars ($50) to almost ninety dollars ($90). Have you got any idea or any vibrations what that's going to do in the next three years? Ms. Adrienne M. Macbeth (Deputy Director/Solid Waste): No, sir. That was Dade County's fees. But, as you recall, we have our contract with Bedminster that would lock us into a fee that will be no more than ten dollars ($10) over Dade County's fee or fifty-two dollars ($52), I think it is a ton. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's maximum. Ms. Macbeth: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. I'll sleep a little better. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Excuse me, Commissioner Regalado, are you finished, sir? 59 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: He is not available. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: To the point. I think it's four o'clock now, I mean, we haven't heard a whole lot new today. You know, and at some point we need to move on. Now... Vice Chairman Plummer: As soon as all of the Commissioners have had the opportunity to speak, sir, we are going to fish or cut bait. Commissioner Teele: Well, to the point. I don't think that the Manager is in a position to speak to what the Oversight Board is going to do. He said that repeatedly. He has given us, I think, his best recommendation. I have a number of concerns about some of the recommendations, but I generally commend the Manager and think that we are moving in the right direction as opposed to wringing our hands and coming up with magic numbers. My first question, Mr. Manager, and I will be happy to yield to -- OK. -- is, have we received any direction or any guidance or any statement or policy or....? Do we have a statement from the Mayor regarding what the Mayor would like to see us do, or what the Mayor's personal views are, his professional views are, on this basic issue? I mean, I realize he's been very busy and has got a lot of catching up to do, but do we at least have the benefit of his direction in this matter? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Not beyond the statements that he made that were publicly reported at the Oversight Board meeting of... Commissioner Teele: And, what are those statements? I want to support what Mayor Carollo... Let me be very candid. I would like very much to be in cooperation, in sync with what the Mayor would like to do. So, if... do you have any guidance or direction on what the Mayor wants us to do? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The statements he made at the Oversight Board meeting on March the 3rd, and I am doing this from memory, included (a) the notion that there should be a fire fee, although there was no specific discussion as to what the scope of it should be; (b) that the City should have more revenues and should not operate with the kind of austere budget that you had passed on the previous day. Let me see if my staff has a different... Commissioner Teele: Well, would you, through the Chairman, would you consider it appropriate or inappropriate to call the Mayor and ask the Mayor if he would like to give us his views or his...? Vice Chairman Plummer: I have no problem with that, Commissioner Teele. I was going to ask that the Manager inform the Mayor, if possible, to give us an answer. As you know, he has ten days in which to veto any action of this board. And, I was going to ask that the Mayor give us his decision by the 6th, and if in fact, he does veto, I would go ahead and set a meeting for the 7th. If we could get an answer today... Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but, why we would even want to talk about veto. I mean, we want to work together here. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, I understand that, sir. But, the Mayor is not here, I don't even know if he is in the building or whether he wishes the opportunity to come down and speak as to his thoughts. Surely, he at any time has that right to do so. Commissioner Teele: All right. I wanted to just query the Manager on that, not to... 60 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Sure. Commissioner Teele: ... get into an executive privilege, if you will. The second point, Mr. Manager is, the overall issue that these fees should be fair. Now, we have gone around Robin Hood's barn, as my grandmother Swazy [phonetic] used to say, and not dealt with one issue. I would very much like for the Commission to consider today, or in the next meeting, a resolution asking that a law firm, outside law firm give us a legal opinion on this whole issue of Public Housing. A lot of the public housing is in my district, the district that I represent. It is unfair, it is grossly unfair for the City to be burdened with six, seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000) in documentable fees, Fire -Rescue fees and others, and us not to be able to collect that. And, we have an agreement, there is a series of questions about the legality of that agreement, in terms of changing condition, whether or not the agreement, in fact, has a definitive time period. But, I think the only way to deal with that thing is to get a firm to look at that issue, and to prepare to litigate that issue or to ask that the County withdraw that issue. Independent... Independent of the fire fee, not the fire fee, it is a serious problem, and I think it really has a chilling effect on things as we move forward. It really limits this Commission's authority. Mr. Manager, I would like to... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yeah, Commissioner, I just want to share with you something that I am being told by my staff. And, apparently, it's something I was not familiar with, perhaps you are not either, because we are both sort of new here. I am told that there is an Interlocal Agreement that limits the charges that could be made in the Public Housing area. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but that Interlocal Agreement has several deficiencies, and several lawyers that I represent, that I have great respect for, have said that agreement is probably voidable. And, I think there is no reason for us to continue as a City that doesn't have money to pick up literally a million dollars ($1,000,000) in fees for no legitimate reason, other than the fact that we had an agreement. It doesn't do us any harm to have that opinion reviewed. And, I would certainly ask you and the attorney to look at it. And, I think, at least one or two law firms that have had a lot of experience in this say, that if it doesn't have a date on it, an ending date on it, in terms of time, it may be subject to one of the UCC exemptions or something of that... I mean, restatement. I apologize. One of the restatement exemptions that provide for the voidability of that issue. Thirdly, I am very concerned, I want to commend the haulers, the commercial haulers that have come down. I think they have given us some food for thought. I think they have given us some revenue streams, to be very honest. Not withstanding the fact that apparently several have come with about one hundred thousand each, so, we have two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000), and yes, I was very privileged to work with the Dade County Haulers, and they were very, very cooperative in the kind of spirit that their counsel so eloquently stated today. It is very clear that there are some things we can do to reduce the amount of illegal dumping. Illegal dumping, Mr. Manager, is a serious problem. And, it is a problem that everybody is paying for. I mean, this is something, I don't think there is any disagreement, homeowner, apartment condo business. And, what we need to really look at is ways to stem the illegal dumping. And, I would ask the Manager to really take to heart the recommendations that have come forth. However, on the issue of the illegal dumping and the homeowner collection. I am not confident, Mr. Manager, with all due respect, to the department and Budget and the Finance Departments that we have a very good and solid methodology in which we have allocated cost for... And, I would very much like for you to report back to us in a week or so, the methodology and the worksheets on how we are allocating the homeowner cost. I want to say on the record, I think that we should do as several of the apartment owners have suggested, we should develop a phased in approach to move the cost of homeowner collection to the cost, the full cost that it bears. I think it should not be done overnight. I don't think it should be done in one year or two years. But, we should adopt a plan, and I would hope that if we take this matter up again, that we can have a plan to move this over a three, four, five year period of 61 March 31, 1998 time. That we move it up, incrementally, so that it is the full cost. No one should subsidize the other. But, I do believe, I really do believe that we need to be sure that our methodology is correct and we are not using man-hours that are being used to collect illegal dumping and charging them to the homeowners. And, I am very grateful, Mr. Chairman, that the Hadley Park Homeowners Association, I know they were very supportive of Commissioner Dawkins in the past, and they represent the largest homeowner association in the district that I am pleased to represent is here. Because, I do think it's important that homeowners know that the Commission wants to be fair. And, I think that's sort of the message that I have heard, is that they don't mind paying their share, they just want whatever this immediate financial impact to be spread across. There does not appear to be any disagreement on the issue of commercial. I would hope that any fee increase would be held up from 15 percent to 20 percent would be held up 'till October 1, because I really do think we need to get a better system of accounting before we start increasing fees. And, let me tell you what my concern is, Mr. Manager. Without a companion ordinance related to recycling, you are going to push this entire commercial hauling business into the gray market. And, right now, if you go out there and look, there are a bunch of people that are "recycling" and I use that in quotes. I am sure some are, but I am sure a lot aren't. And, a lot of your illegal garbage, illegal dumping is recycling, OK. And, we need to have a system whereby everyone who is in recycling gets a permit. Everyone that is in recycling gives us where the debris of the trash is being separated so that we have a system of checks and balance. Otherwise, that recycling is going to wound up on the streets, and you know what I am talking about. So, I think, one of the fundamental areas that we really got to close the door when we move with this, is a recycling ordinance that basically takes away the gray market before we create the gray market of people who are quote "haulers" now moving into recycling because, just so that it doesn't escape anybody, recyclers aren't paying the 15 percent fee. Is that right? Ms. Macbeth: Commissioner, to the extent to which they are a permanent hauler in the City, they are required to do that to cover everything, including recycling, yes. The problem is, that a lot of the private hauler contracts do not have recycling as a part of their basic service. And, we are proposing to amend the ordinance to make sure that that is included. Commissioner Teele: No. OK, I don't want to get into requiring government, I mean... And, I need some definition from the industry. Are you all paying a fee now for recycling? Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): On the record. On the record. Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, will you come to the microphone, please? State your name for the record. Mr. Francis Pasquale: My name is Francis Pasquale, Pasquale Waste Service. You have... like Pembroke Pines has an ordinance on recycling, you are paying eight percent fee if you do recycle. It's supposedly a state or federal law, I think, I am not positive. Commissioner Teele: But, do you pay a 15 percent fee of the recycling? Mr. Pasquale: Of recycling, you haven't got it. In the City of Miami, hasn't got an ordinance. Commissioner Teele: That's the point. That's the point. And, that's the point I want to be very clear on, Mr. Manager. Mr. Pasquala: And, you haven't really defined your recycling. Commissioner Teele: We have not defined it, and what I am telling you is this, the gray market that you are getting ready to create, when you start raising rates, because I have been through this, you know, as I have said in a previous life. The gray market that you are going to create is 62 March 31, 1998 everybody that's on the low end that's not as honorable as this gentleman is, who has just come up and given his name, that's out there a recycling, much of the recycling goes directly to landfills, it goes directly to the spot market. Mr. Pasquale: Well, they go to recycling facilities. Commissioner Teele: Some of it doesn't. Mr. Pasquale: Most of... Most of... Commissioner Teele: We have no way of knowing. Mr. Pasquale: Well, it goes to the recycling facilities. What they do with it, that's their business. But, they are likely to recycle it. Commissioner Teele: Well, we don't disagree. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, all I am telling you is, you are about... You know, this is a very important issue as it relates to how we can deal with the illegal. The way we have got to do this, is look at this on a comprehensive basis, and I think we are at 75 to 80 percent there. And, I would commend that discussion, and the confusion, if you will, for you... for your review within the next week. Because, we do need an ordinance. This was created in Broward County, in Ft. Lauderdale. When they raised the fees, everybody stopped collecting garbage then and then they said, the Teele recycling company. And, then Broward, of course, has a unique situation where you have a huge spot market up there, where it's actually cheaper on the spot market to take things to the incinerator than it is under the flow control that they have up here. So, we may be bumping into that, and that's a very real concern that I have. But, I generally agree with you. I would support what... If Commissioner Regalado is in support of doing something, and I guess he is not here... Vice Chairman Plummer: He is conveying all of his comments to the Herald. Commissioner Teele: I would support what Commissioner Regalado is saying, and I will say this. I have a real concern, Mr. Manager in the first year using any of a proposed fire fee for operations. I don't have that concern in October, but I think, for a number of reasons. Number one, we have got one Commissioner who is trying to get his itchy hands on any money to buy fire trucks, et cetera, and I commend him for that. The fact of the matter is, whether it's seven million or three million, or four million, the need out there is eighteen to twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) of capital equipment right now. And, if there is going to be a challenge, and if there is going to be a controversy, I think it would be much more prudent, I am taking deference in recognizing, taking note of the fact that you prefer... you proposed that two-thirds of this go for capital, and one-third for operating. I am saying, that I would support Commissioner Regalado on reducing, say by one-third or... I will prefer one-third, the fire fee, provided all of it goes to capital. Because, the fact of the matter is, everybody out here is complaining about the fire fee, but there is not one person who is not going to really want to have a first class Fire Department. And, what is not being said, that needs to be said, is that while our Fire Department is one of the best trained Fire Departments in the United States, and we have traditionally had one of the highest ratings of Fire Departments in the United States, the capital equipment of this department is going down. And, it is very, very important that we have... We don't have trucks to respond and equipment to respond from time to time, at least in the district that I represent, we went for 24 hours with no coverage. And, that is something that should befall no citizen, no community. Fires, emergencies are very real, and I think we need to let you know that the 63 March 31, 1998 condition of our equipment is deteriorating. So, if the tee were to be used solely for capital, with the Sunset clause, I think there would be less concerns that the money is going into... up into this issue that you made reference, sir, about you know, the waste and the abuse and all that. Because, the fire truck can only be used, hopefully, as a piece of fire equipment. And, so, I would support as a short gap that picking up perhaps, number four going to a fifty dollar ($50) fee on the residential side to make the numbers blend together a little bit more. If that moves us off of a dime, I only offer that as... Commissioner Plummer: All right, sir. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Let me make a point, if I might, very briefly. Vice Chairman Plummer: Go ahead. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The only concern I would have, Commissioner Teele with that is, remember that while it does take care of our capital needs, we would have a difficulty with recurring revenues. Commissioner Plummer: But, you are not listening to him, Mr. Manager. He's saying, and I like now, the way he is starting to talk, that increase... Commissioner Teele: I am wrong then. Commissioner Teele: ... increase the garbage fee from 34 to 50, to offset... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's the paint. It would not offset. Vice Chairman Plummer: Why? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Because, by decreasing the fire fee by one-third... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Not decreasing the fire fee by anything. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: That's what I thought I heard him say. Vice Chairman Plummer: All of the fire fee go solely for capital improvements at the 35, thirty- four dollar ($34) level, if I understood it correctly. And, increasing the garbage fee to fifty dollars ($50). Commissioner Teele: Well, Mr. Manager, I didn't say that exactly. But, Mr. Manager, I don't understand, these are all recurring revenues. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, sir, to the extent that... That's what I wanted to alert you to. Because, I kind of agree with you, they are. But, the reality of it is the Oversight Board is not going to let us count as recurring revenues anything that we put in the capital account. That's a fact. Vice Chairman Plummer: Where are my itchy fingers going to buy fire equipment from? I mean, you tell those people sitting down there in that ivory tower that we need fire equipment. You're not... Art is not going to let me buy it from CDBG (Community Development Block Grant), and I don't necessarily disagree. You are telling me, I can't buy it from a fire fee. Now, let me tell you something, Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): No, you can. You can. But it's not recurring revenue from the standpoint of the Oversight Board. 64 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, let me tell you, we have got to do it, in my estimation. Itchy fingers or not, this is not going to pass if I have got anything to it, to allow us to continue with a Fire Department less than first class. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me. Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, whatever that's going to take, that's what I am going to fight for. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, let me ask you a question. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no. Excuse me. Mr. Teele has the floor. I am sorry I interrupted, let me... Commissioner Teele: I'll yield to Commissioner Gort. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: Question. Can't you say, the three point or whatever is derived from the fire fee goes into the General Funds, but that's going to be targeted to buy trucks, and so on. I mean, come on guys, it's all... Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Teele, we will ask you to wrap up, please. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, thank you. Mr. Manager, I respectfully would suggest, number one, that the underlying ordinance that exists, allows us to use this for operating or capital. How we use this money, you know, I think you need to read the... I think the ordinance should take precedence. How we spend the money is a policy decision, but the fact of the matter is, this is not capital money. It is money that by board policy... Now, there is a lot of ways to, you know, play the game, and several people suggested it. I think one lady suggested selling the... City Hall. But, the fact of the matter is, Mr. Manager, it would be very simple for us to enter into a long-term lease with a lease back operation where someone goes out and buys this equipment and leases it to us. I mean, we shouldn't have to engage in that kind of mental gymnastics when in fact, this is reoccurring revenue. I mean, I would respectfully suggest that the ordinance makes it reoccurring, not how we spend the money, and the fact is that we can spend it for capital or operating and we are not restricted. We are only saying to the voters, to let us get this Fire Department back up to a Class A Fire Department, which is what Commissioner Plummer has been saying, and which I want to support him on. So, those are the thoughts that I have, and again, I would work with you to ensure that that is reoccurring revenue because it is recurring revenue. Vice Chairman Plummer: Commissioner Hernandez. Commissioner Hernandez: I'll yield to Willy Gort. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: I have been saying all along, my understanding is, we have a balanced budget with a surplus of one point three. I think you can have something all across. I don't think we need to raise twelve, fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). 1 think if we raise, and I have got some figures here, which I will discuss later on, we can raise without affecting immensely everyone. But, everybody will participate in. We can raise six point one million dollars ($6,100,000) plus the one point three gives you seven point million dollars of a cushion 65 March 31, 1998 that you can add to it. And, you can do so, my understanding, by looking at the numbers and you correct me, if I am wrong. You can... Sanitation fee to twenty-five dollars ($25); 50 percent of the fire fee. Eliminate number four, I don't... I mean, number three. I think is number three, you are just really putting a burden on the commercials, on the apartment building owners, because those are additional things that they would pay. If you add all that, I will attach CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, because I think that one of the problems that we had in the past, that we never knew how much we had in CDBG. I mean, we have asked that question all the time. We have even... Never knew what it was. I think the CDBG funds can be utilized back into the neighborhoods, bring the neighborhoods back to the way it should be, and that in itself will bring taxes up in the future. That's how I feel about this, and I don't think we need to show ten, fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). I think we can show a seven million dollar ($7,000,000) cushion and that's more than sufficient. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Hernandez. Commissioner Gort: I think there will be other sources of revenues that we can provide. Commissioner Hernandez: Mr. Chairman, to continue the argument and the comments of Commissioner Willy Gort. I, number one, I would like to thank the Manager for giving us this new binder of information alternatives and options, it makes it a lot easier on all of us to make decisions around here. But, in continuing the argument that Commissioner Gort made. Number one, we did approve a balanced budget. The Manager brought us a balanced budget, met all the requirements required by the State Oversight Board. They just want more recurring revenues. 1, and I always bring and add to my arguments, Commissioner Teele and Commissioner Gort, because we are the poorest three districts in the City of Miami. Thirty-seven percent of my district is over the age of 70 years of age, live on a fixed income. Twelve percent is over 80 years of age. My people can't pay more fees. It's as simple as that. I have maintained myself firm. I know we are looking for more recurring revenues. I can live with certain things. I can live with increase in regulatory fees for the commercial waste haulers, the market and competition will level -off and I am sure that will work out. The increase in the fees to expedite permits in the Zoning Department. I think you also mentioned, we talked about the takeover of the Department of Off-street Parking, I can also live with that. But, right now, and I told the Chairman that I would be leaving early, and I am ready to fish. And, I could tell you this. I don't know how we are going to vote. Are we going to vote on certain issues, on certain parts of this binder? Vice Chairman Plummer: Whatever the Commission desires, is what we are going to do, and I am going to lock the doors and nobody gets out until we come with a conclusion. Commissioner Hernandez: OK. Well, I am going to tell you this much, I am not going to vote for the fire assessment fee, and I am not going to vote at this point in time for any increase in Solid Waste fee. I am in favor of three of the nine things or ten things, you have listed here. I am ready to vote in favor of those three. But, the high profile items which is Solid Waste and fire assessment, I am against. And, I base my argument, number one, on my specific district, which I represent, which is also 49 percent either in the poverty or below poverty level. And, bottom line is, we have a balanced budget. We need more recurring revenues, but this is not the time to put the gun to our heads and ask us to increase fees to the people of the City of Miami. And, the bottom line is, Mr. Chairman, you have my vote on three of these things that are in this binder. You do not have my vote for the fire assessment fee or an increase in Solid Waste fee. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. I guess it's my turn to fish or cut bait. Mr. Manager... Commissioner Hernandez: And, for the record, Mr. Chairman. 66 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir. Go ahead. Commissioner Hernandez: I would be willing to argue and fight with the solid waste haulers on the recycling issue. I drafted the mandatory recycling ordinance. I have passed several amendments including construction and demolition debris, biohazardous material, hazardous material to be included in the regulatory permit fees that they have to pay us on a monthly basis. And, when you read certain of the definitions, I can tell you that recycling falls within these definitions, even though the word "recycling" does not appear on the definitions under the City of Miami code. This is what led me to file a lawsuit against Waste Management, and we ended up settling because they agreed that the construction and demolition debris was part of the fees that they should have been paying to begin with. So, it shocks me that the recycling people aren't paying their fees, and I think we should look into that. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Mr. Manager, as to my comments. The only way I can vote at all on a fire fee is that any amount would solely be dedicated for capital improvements to the Fire Department, none for operation. I can agree with you on items three through eight of all of those items of increases without any question whatsoever. I can agree with you on item ten. I have great reservations without question about nine. The additional services "A" through "F", I think are all areas that we need to explore, that possibly or possibly not, could be in fact, taken under consideration. I am ready to go with the garbage fee. I understand without question that you just can't provide a service for half of what it costs you to provide and not understand that the fee has got to go up. We are looking at the next five years that fee is going to cost us, cost more than 324. Every year, everything is going up. Labor is going up, the cost of trucks are going up, and as far as I am concerned, you know, I think that it is only fair that we all have to do our fair share. The condos, when you stop and you think about the fire fee, one of my main objections is, that they pay their percentage for the fire protection as does the homeowner. They both pay for that now in their ad valorem taxation, OK. Now, the problem is, is that the condominiums and such don't use our collection agency. And, I guess the man, that at the Brickell Homeowners who asked me the question, impressed me more than anything. And, that is, OK, if you are going to charge a fire fee, are you going to come pick up my garbage? And, of course, the answer was "no." We didn't intend to pick up vertical garbage, it's hard enough on horizontal. So, my basic bottom premise is very simple. I don't want to vote for a fire fee, but if it means my so called "itchy hands" are going to put this department back into a Class 1 department, I could go for a limited fee. I think that we have got to raise the garbage fee. Someone made the recommendation that we should do it in increments. You are only talking about, according to my figure in five years, thirty-four dollars ($34) a year would be the increase to bring it up to what it cost us. And, I don't think that's out of line. So, those are my thoughts on the matter. I don't know how we can down to a bottom line. We have got to do it today, and I'll only conclude again, by saying to my colleagues, that whatever we come out with in a meeting here now, that I would ask the Mayor, please to study over the weekend and if he is in concurrence, then of course, it's a matter of the Manager taking it to the Oversight. But, if for whatever reason he were to find it reason to veto, I would automatically call a meeting for next Tuesday at one o'clock in the afternoon, if my colleagues have no objections. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman: Vice Chairman Plummer: But... Commissioner Regalado. Excuse me, I am sorry. I have to be in Tallahassee on Tuesday. Well, I'll... this is more important. Go ahead, sir. Commissioner Regalado: Tallahassee can wait. The reason that I said that I would like to see a reduction by half on the fire fee is, twofold. One, because if you add thirty-five dollars ($35) from the residential, solid waste fee increase, and you have seventeen dollars ($17) from the fire fee, a residential house, residential will be paying one dollar ($1) a week. Just one dollar ($1) a week. Now, I think, I think that the people... I do believe, first of all, that there are people who 67 March 31, 1998 cannot pay ten dollars ($10) a week, they just can't. Even if they own a home, they can't. And, I would tell you that I would take with me the members of the Oversight Board, I have invited them twice to go visit some areas, and they have not responded. I hope that when they have some time, I am ready. I finish my work on the radio at 10:00 a.m., because I start early. So, I am ready to take them to visit those areas. I will tell you, that there are many residential owners that do not have the money to pay ten dollars ($10) a week, or twenty dollars ($20) a week. I will tell you though, that I am sure that most, most of the residential owners could and would be able to pay one dollar ($1) a week in this combined garbage and fire fee. I think that the apartment buildings, if they were to pay twenty dollars ($20) a year, half of what they were supposed to pay in the original plan of the Manager. And, if they were to, have to pay a raise by the commercial haulers, because the commercial haulers are going to raise the fee to the property owners. That, I mean, we know that. And, it's impossible for us, if we were to approve raising from 15 to 20 percent, say to the hauler, you can't, you have to have a moratorium. You can't raise because that will be unfair to those people who are making a living and working here in the City of Miami. So, I will tell you, I will tell you that, I think that the apartment buildings would probably, would probably have to raise one or two dollars ($2) monthly, the rent, to the tenants. I think, I believe, I am trying to do numbers here, I am not that good at that, but, I think that that would be tops that they would have to raise. Maybe, two or three dollars ($3) a month. Which I think it would be something that a lot of people will be able to pay. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Commissioner Regalado: This is why, this is why, I came up... Vice Chairman Plummer: Let's try something on for size. The floor is open for a motion. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I don't know if the Chairman wants to, there have... There is a resolution... Vice Chairman Plummer: The Vice Chairman has opened the floor. It's opened for a motion. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I am willing to introduce a motion to reduce by half the fire fee across the board, and leave the thirty-five dollars ($35). Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Are you going to do this in sequence? Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): One at a time. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, wait a minute. Vice Chairman Plummer: One... Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Let's... Commissioner Teele: All we can do today is do a statement of intent on this because you need a public... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, but, wait a minute. There is some legislation that they want to... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: We can do that later. Vice Chairman Plummer: You want to do it in segments? 68 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I don't want to do it in segments. I think, Commissioner Teele's point... If we get a sense of what the Commission wants to do, then we can deal with the specific legislative pieces. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. The first... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: So, otherwise, we are not going to... Vice Chairman Plummer: The first motion on the floor or the first resolution, the first test. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Motion. Motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: First motion on the floor, is to reduce the fire fee by 50 percent? Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Across the board? Commissioner Regalado: Across the board. Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, is there a second? Hello? Commissioner Teele: I second the motion, Mr. Chairman. But, let's just be very clear. All we are doing now is a statement of, a sense of the board? Vice Chairman Plummer: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. A straw vote. Commissioner Teele: Straw vote sense of the board. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Now, I have to have... ask a question. Is all of that money dedicated for capital improvements? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, before he answers the question. There is some legal issues. The underlying ordinance allows it for capital or operating. I will... I think to limit it legally to capital is going to create the problem that he's talking about with the Oversight Board. I will stipulate that I for one, it will come to the Commission for how we vote. And, I will pledge to you and the people that are here and the public that I will not vote for any of the funds except to go for the capital. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, you now, it's very simple in my vote. If it's for other than capital, I have to vote for against it. You know, there is no one can convince me, and... Mr. Carollo is here. That we can't afford, they can't afford a dollar and a half a month. You know, I just... I don't want... Commissioner Teele: J. L., but you are not listening to the issue. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, I am listening, very much to the issue. And, the issue is, it's got to be for my positive vote that it is for capital buying equipment and whatever else is necessary. If it is not for that, then I vote negatively. It's just that simple. So, I am asking the... 69 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: Well, I think if all of us agree here informally to you, that we would vote to appropriate this money for capital, it preserves the fact that the funds are reoccurring. If you limited the capital by the resolution... Vice Chairman Plummer: If that is the... Commissioner Teele: ... then... Vice Chairman Plummer: Is that binding? Mr. Maxwell: You are just doing the intent now. Commissioner Teele: J.L., five of us are going to commit, even Bert who is not going to vote for it would stipulate, I assume, that he would only let it go out for capital. So, you would have five of us saying that. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, but before you vote on that motion. Let me make sure that you bear this in mind, Commissioner Regalado. The capital equipment needs of the Fire Department are in the range of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). I think it's an important part of this legislation that you have a five year automatic Sunset provision. If you cut it in half, you are not going to make the capital needs of the Fire Department. Commissioner Regalado: Well, but at the same time, Mr. Manager, at the same time, I am going back to the list that we have here. In five years, you will have at least, well, 13 to 14 major projects. Five... That, within the next five years, will be bringing to the General Fund of the City's ad valorem taxes more than ten to twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). More. That's in five years. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, there is a motion on the floor. I just... Go ahead, call the roll. Mr. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call, Commissioner Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I believe that if one dollar ($1) a week save the City of Miami, it's worth. So, I am voting for, "yes." Commissioner Gort: "Yes." Commissioner Hernandez: "No." Commissioner Teele: I would prefer it be two-thirds. But, I'll vote "yes." Vice Chairman Plummer: I got to vote "no." I just... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. 70 March 31, 1998 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-323 A MOTION APPROVING, IN PRINCIPLE, A MODIFIED FIRE RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF APPROXIMATELY $35 FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES (REDUCING BY APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF ORIGINAL PROPOSAL BY THE CITY MANAGER FROM $2.83 PER MONTH TO APPROXIMATELY $1 PER MONTH PER PROPERTY OWNER). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's it. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, that's it. Wait a minute. Commissioner Regalado: No, you got... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I think there are three votes for two-thirds, which is what preserves the integrity of the capital account, the needs of the Fire Department. Because, five times three is fifteen. Five times four is twenty. Commissioner Teele: Look, I can tell you this. Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait a minute, you are losing me. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, if you cut the six million dollars ($6,000,000) by half... Vice Chairman Plummer: yeah. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... that will produce three million dollars ($3,000,000). In five years, that produces fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) Vice Chairman Plummer: Fifteen. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: If you cut instead by one-third, that produces four million dollars ($4,000,000) a year. Correct? Vice Chairman Plummer: Right. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Meaning in five years, you will have the twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) that we need properly to equip the Fire Department. 71 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: Let me announce, let me announce this. I voted "yes" in the spirit of collegiality. I don't think it solves the problem. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: It doesn't solve the problem. Commissioner Teele: I think it... I think the fact that the money is only going for capital gets us two or three years down the road. But, I can tell you right now, if there are not four votes here for this, I am not going to do something half way. That's what this City has done too long. Now, we need to come together and not play games with each other. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Teele, I have to you, and I'll continue to say to you. Sir, I can pretty much vote for anything in the fire fee that is solely dedicated to equipment. Now, if that is, you know, thirty-five dollars ($35), that's thirty-five dollars ($35). Commissioner Teele: But, you know, J.L., you know what I don't understand. You want to help the Fire Department. Vice Chairman Plummer: I am going to. Commissioner Teele: You want to solve the budget, but... But, your requirement that you are... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, sir. You see, my side of the coin, and I took the heat already, and Commissioner Gort. I was ready and voted to double the garbage fee. Was the amount popular? You bet your bippy it was. But, I took the heat in an election year, and I am ready to do it again. But, it isn't going to fly here at this City Commission table. Everyone of us have our right to think as they want to think. I still continue to say to you sir, that to me, you can't provide a service for 50 percent of what it cost you. Now, you know, I am desperate to do for my Fire Department. And, I will go to extremes. You know, the condo owners don't like it, and I understand that. And, I think it's more the fact that it's sets a precedent, because you will not convince me without any question, that they can't afford two dollars ($2) a month. No way, that you will ever convince me. But, let me tell you something, when I go to that condo owner and I say to him, sir, you are on the 14th floor and if I don't have that two dollars ($2) a month, I am not going to be able to have equipment to get you off of it, you think he is going to argue with me, no way, Jose. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: Since this is a straw vote... Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: ... if you would yield the gavel... Vice Chairman Plummer: You... Commissioner Teele: ... to Commissioner Gort, you make whatever motion you want, and I'll second that motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, I will yield the gavel to, Mr. Gort at this particular time. I will instigate the fire fee as much as it hurts, OK. The equivalent of two dollars ($2). Is it two dollars ($2) or three dollars ($3)? What is it... 72 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Thirty -tour dollars ($34) a year. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, that will raise how much? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Six million dollars ($6,000,000). Vice Chairman Plummer: No, cut it to tour million. Well, how much is that a year? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: It's two thirds of thirty-two. Vice Chairman Plummer: I will instigate for two-thirds, that costs, my homeowners and my condo owners, two dollars ($2) a month? Is that correct? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Roughly. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Almost right, yeah. Vice Chairman Plummer: And, instigate the increase, you ready for this one? The garbage fee by this year of thirty-four dollars ($34) and every succeeding year by the same amount to the fifth year being equivalent to what it cost us to produce. That's my motion. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Commissioner Gort: There is motion, is there a second? Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. I got the screaming society out here. Commissioner Gort: Is there a second? Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Unidentified Speaker: ... increase the fire fee... [inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: The fire fee sunsets in, five years. Unidentified Speaker: ... garbage fee raises, is the fire fee going to decline? Commissioner Gort: Excuse me. Excuse me. Vice Chairman Plummer: No. Two dollars ($2) a month. Commissioner Gort: J.L. Unidentified Speaker: [inaudible -- off microphone] Commissioner Gort: You got a motion, you got a second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, I made the motion. Commissioner Gort: Discussion on the motion. Discussion on the motion. 73 March 31, 1998 Unidentified Speaker: Second the motion. Commissioner Hernandez: There is a second. Commissioner Teele: I second. Vice Chairman Plummer: It's a straw vote, of course. Commissioner Gort: OK. Commissioner Teele: I second the motion. Commissioner Gort: Call the question. Mr. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Vice Chairman Plummer: It's my motion. Commissioner Regalado: No. Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Commissioner Hernandez: No. Commissioner Gort: No. By motion by Vice Chairman Plummer, and seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion stated above failed by the following vote: AYES: Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Next item on the agenda. Commissioner Teele: But, wait now, this is straw vote. Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand that, sir. Commissioner Teele: We are almost there. Vice Chairman Plummer: I don't need that gavel. Commissioner Teele: We are almost there, let's see... Vice Chairman Plummer: Remember„ I am an undertaker. All right, wait a minute. Commissioner Teele: So... 74 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Hold on. You make a motion. Try one on? Go ahead, you be the bad guy. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, I... Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait a minute, let's listen to the words of wisdom here. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: No, but, maybe because we do have a five year cycle here, maybe what the thing could be is... Your same motion without the accretion... Commissioner Teele: Solid Waste. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... in the Solid Waste fee. Vice Chairman Plummer: all right. I'll do that. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Without the increases... Vice Chairman Plummer: You got the gavel again, all right? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... in the waste fees. Vice Chairman Plummer: My motion is, that the fire fee be imposed at the level of two dollars ($2) a month per homeowner, and that thirty-four dollars ($34)... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Thirty-five. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... thirty-five dollars ($35) increase in the garbage fee. I so move. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, no increase in the... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, increase. Well, you know, I'll say that just to make a motion, but I think it's got to increase. We can't kid ourselves. Unidentified Speaker: [inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: Shuh-shuh-shuh. Don't play our game. Commissioner Regalado: Could, could...? Vice Chairman Plummer: I gave you all the time to talk. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The motion is... Commissioner Gort: ... repeat the motion. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... two-thirds of the fire fee and the... Commissioner Regalado: I am sorry, Mr. Manager, you said two dollars ($2)? Commissioner Teele: Two-thirds. 75 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Two-thirds, yes, two dollars ($2), right. Vice Chairman Plummer: Two dollars ($2) a month is what it would cost the homeowner. Two dollars ($2) a month is at the two-thirds level would raise twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in the fire years. That will cover my fire trucks, OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, the garbage fee is... Vice Chairman Plummer: And, the garbage fee by... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... thirty-five... Vice Chairman Plummer: ... thirty-five dollars ($35). Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... without increasing in two, three, four years, as... Vice Chairman Plummer: Right. You are talking about what? You are talking about less than one dollar ($1) week. Unidentified Speaker: What about the apartment unit owner who owns ten or twenty units... [inaudible -- off microphone] Unidentified Speaker: Yeah... [inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: For each unit... Excuse me. Excuse me, we operate here on a... Mr. Chairman, give 'em hell. What we are talking about... Commissioner Gort: But, J.L., you are the one who is talking back and forth. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... as I understand it. No, I am trying to get them quiet, so I can talk. What I am talking about is, is that you who own apartments would be charging two dollars ($2) a month more per apartment. That's... Unidentified Speaker: [inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: Two dollars ($2) a month? Unidentified Speakers: [inaudible -- off microphone] Commissioner Gort: OK. The difference from the original proposal that you had in this proposal is eight dollars ($8) a month. Commissioner Teele: Does that meet...? Commissioner Gort: I am talking about to, Commissioner the ... Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: The difference is ten dollars ($10) a year. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: Ten dollars ($10) a year. 76 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Basically, what I am saying is two-thirds of the fire tee would be tour million dollars ($4,000,000) a year, that's with the raises. And, the garbage fee at thirty-five million. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Thirty-five dollars ($35). Vice Chairman Plummer: Thirty-five dollars ($35). I would like to think thirty-five million. Unidentified Speaker: If you charge an alternate budget... Vice Chairman Plummer: You can't talk ma'am. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me, you are out of order, ma'am. Vice Chairman Plummer: I closed the public hearing. Unidentified Speaker: If you are charging for the garbage, you have the General Fund for that. [phonetic -- inaudible -- off microphone] Commissioner Regalado: OK. Unidentified Speaker: [inaudible -- off microphone] Vice Chairman Plummer: Try that on for size. I am just trying to find something that will work. Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager. Unidentified Speaker: [inaudible -- off microphone] Commissioner Gort: You are talking about an increase of fifty-nine... Excuse me, ma'am. You are out of order, please. You are talking about an increase of fifty-nine dollars ($59) a year. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: And, that's pretty close to the fifty dollar ($50) figure that I heard before. Commissioner Regalado: Fifty. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, the next motion... Commissioner Gort: Excuse me. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... I am going to make is going to floor all of you, so go ahead. Commissioner Teele: Well... Well, listen gentlemen, now it's getting late and, I mean, I think we are all within the... We are now arguing about one dollar ($1) or ten dollars ($10) a year. Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: So, let's try to have a spirit here of collegiality about this. If you recall, the Manager's proposal that we left here with was to increase the Solid Waste for the residential only, by eighty-five dollars ($85). Commissioner Regalado: Uh-huh. Commissioner Teele: Now, and we have come a long way in terms of making this thing fair. Now, right now, you are at 50, roughly, sixty -dollars ($60)? 77 March 31, 1998 Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Fifty-nine. Commissioner Teele: Fifty-nine dollars ($59) for the residential, and you have a very, very blended as it relates to the commercial. So, Commissioner Gort, is this? I just need to know, is this something you can support at this point, now? Commissioner Regalado: If you ask me, Commissioner Teele. Commissioner Teele: Please. Commissioner Regalado: I will tell you that I will support a measure that will make one dollar ($1) a week. The whole combination of increases for residential. And, that... Vice Chairman Plummer: Then, make that motion. I'll withdraw mine. Commissioner Gort: You are talking about... Commissioner Regalado: That's what I am... Vice Chairman Plummer: As long as... Commissioner Regalado: I keep saying. Well, Mr. Manager, then you take it off the garbage fee. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well, wait a minute. If what you are saying is that the combined total for the single property owner... Commissioner Regalado: Fifty-two. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... cannot exceed... Commissioner Regalado: Cannot exceed fifty-two dollars ($52). Commissioner Teele: So, you are seven dollars ($7) over? Commissioner Regalado: You are seven dollars ($7) over. That's what I am saying. Vice Chairman Plummer: He's a mean man who won't compromise. Commissioner Teele: So, instead of it being thirty-five residential increase....? Commissioner Plummer: Twenty-eight. Commissioner Regalado: Twenty-eight. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, but what does that get my itchy fingers? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: But, wait a minute, now. I am sorry. Commissioner Regalado: No, J.L., it doesn't have to do anything with the... Commissioner Teele: Fire. 78 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: ... fire. It's just about the... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: It's just the two-thirds fire fee plus twenty... Vice Chairman Plummer: I want my four million a year. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: It's got that. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. I could vote. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: My concern is... Commissioner Gort: Teele, that's... OK, what is the motion? Commissioner Regalado: The motion is... Commissioner Gort: Do you take the motion, J.L.? Do you withdraw your motion? Vice Chairman Plummer: No, I go along with his thing of one dollar ($1) a week. Commissioner Gort: You withdraw your motion? Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes, sir. Commissioner Gort: Is there a second? Withdraw the second. Vice Chairman Plummer: But, now excuse me, you are talking about all of the rest of these items in here, items... Commissioner Regalado: Of course. Vice Chairman Plummer: Items three through eight which doesn't affect single family homeowners as... Commissioner Regalado: Of course. No do they affect the general... Vice Chairman Plummer: You only are speaking the dollar a week to items one and two? Commissioner Regalado: I am speaking on item one... Commissioner Regalado: ... one and two. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. Commissioner Regalado: That's one dollar ($1) a week. Vice Chairman Plummer: A dollar ($1) a week. Commissioner Regalado: Because, I believe that that would be also the same amount of money that will be paid by apartment tenants. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. But, items three through eight will still be implemented? Commissioner Regalado: I, I don't have any problem with that. 79 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah, OK. Commissioner Gort: Is there a motion? [phonetic] Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: So, what this does, it reduces about halt a million dollars ($500,000). Commissioner Gort: Is there a motion, is there a second? Commissioner Teele: So moved. Commissioner Gort: Is there a second to that motion? Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, call the question. Mr. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Roll call. Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Yes, sir. Commissioner Hernandez: No. Commissioner Gort: Yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-324 A MOTION APPROVING, IN PRINCIPLE, A MODIFIED FIRE RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND SOLID WASTE FEE OF A TOTAL COMBINED AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $1 PER MONTH PER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNER. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Humberto Hernandez ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Now, where are we? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, then you need to pass an emergency ordinance as to item one, but we need to modify it. So, instead of thirty-five dollars ($35), it's twenty-eight dollars ($28) per unit. And, I would also ask that for this year, since January 1st has already come and gone, you add a proviso that the difference between the current fee and what you are adding, which is twenty- eight dollars ($28) be added to the July 1st, bill. 80 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, I only have one question of clarification. For the condo owners who do not pay a garbage tax, what is it going to cost them? Are they... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Two-thirds of thirty-four. Vice Chairman Plummer: That would be...? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The fire fee. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. That's the equivalent of the two dollars ($2) a month? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Roughly. Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. All right. So, you need an emergency ordinance? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I would like... I would suggest you pass the emergency ordinance. It's in the book. Vice Chairman Plummer: What page? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: It's under tab one. Except... Vice Chairman Plummer: Under tab one. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Then, but, with two changes. One, you want to... Instead of thirty-five dollars ($35), you make it twenty-eight dollars ($28). So, the adding maybe... Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Mr. Manager, it doesn't say... It says one hundred and ninety-five dollars ($195) annually. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: You need to say, it's one hundred and eighty-eight. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa : But, wait a minute. And, the other change is, because of the fact that January 1st has already come and gone for 1998 only, that the fee that is... that the bill that goes out July 1st, will be for, eighty plus twenty-eight. One hundred and eight. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney read the ordinance as amended. Mr. Maxwell: An emergency ordinance of... That was a straw vote before, can we have a...? Vice Chairman Plummer: We are now on an emergency ordinance. That's what the Manager has asked for, unless somebody objects. Mr. Maxwell: You have a motion? We need a motion on that. Mr. Foeman: We need a mover and a... Vice Chairman Plummer: Motion made by, that was Regalado and seconded by Teele. If I am not mistaken, OK. Mr. Maxwell: OK. 81 March 31, 1998 [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: It takes four -fifths, two reads. Mr. Maxwell: Yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: Four -fifths vote, two readings. Mr. Clerk, call the roll. An Ordinance entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22-12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, THEREBY INCREASING THE SOLID WASTE FEE TO $188.00 ANNUALLY AND BY DELETING ALL REFERENCE TO SCALE FEES; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Regalado and seconded by Commissioner Teele, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Humberto Hernandez ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Regalado and seconded by Commissioner Teele, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Humberto Hernandez ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11631. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, what's next? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: You need a resolution which is under tab two, for the fire fee, but you need to make three changes to it. 82 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Where is that in the, in the... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Tab two. Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand tab two. How far back? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I would say, about ten pages. Let's see, one, two, three, four, five... Commissioner Teele: Can we do this without a public hearing? I mean, without a notice? Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, we did notice. This meeting has been noticed according to the Clerk. Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): This meeting has been noticed, and there will be... You will have to have... This item will come back to you, again, no later than the 28th. So, you will have this item before you again. This is the preliminary assessment. There has to be a final assessment. There is a 20-day notice requirement under state law for that, so it will be back to you. Commissioner Teele: OK. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: The three changes... It's ten pages into tab two, sir. The three changes are as follows. First of all, you are reducing across the board, the fire fee that we have proposed by... in reducing it by one-third, thereby enacting it by two-thirds. The second change is, I think you wanted to delete the public housing piece altogether... Commissioner Teele: Yes. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... for now. And, third, I would strongly suggest that you add a Sunset provision automatic in five years. Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. All right, Commissioner Regalado, you moved. Teele second. Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Any further discussion? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Is this to set a date for the second reading? Mr. Maxwell: The second reading, I suggest would be on the 28th. Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait a minute. How do you have a second reading on a resolution? Mr. Maxwell: No, because as I just explained, this has to come back to you. This is preliminary. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me, please. There is a meeting going on, I would like the courtesy. Mr. Maxwell: This is your preliminary approval. It has to come back for final approval under state law. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. 83 March 31, 1998 Mr. Maxwell: So, you are set the date for April 28th in the motion? Vice Chairman Plummer: April 28th is the date certain. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: At ten o'clock. Vice Chairman Plummer: At 10:00 a.m. All right, call the roll. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-325 A RESOLUTION WITH ATTACHMENTS, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF FIRE RESCUE SERVICES, FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; DESCRIBING THE METHOD OF ASSESSING FIRE RESCUE ASSESSED COSTS AGAINST ASSESSED PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI; DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL; AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING THE PROVISION OF NOTICE THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Humberto Hernandez ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: What else do you need, sir? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: On item number three, you need to pass the emergency ordinance. It's in the book. That's unchanged. Vice Chairman Plummer: Read the ordinance, Mr. City Attorney. Mr. Maxwell: This is the one amending Section 22-56, Mr. Manager? An emergency... Mr. Walter J. Foeman (City Clerk): Excuse me, I need a motion. Commissioner Plummer: Which one are you speaking of? Mr. Maxwell: That's the one they just did. Commissioner Teele: I will move it. Commissioner Hernandez, now this is the one you don't have a problem with, right? Commissioner Hernandez: Right. 84 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: All right. I would move it. Unidentified Speaker: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, read the ordinance. Mr. Foeman: I need a seconder. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Commissioner Hernandez seconded it. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: Two roll calls. The first roll call, Mr. Clerk. An Ordinance entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 22-12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "WASTE FEE." BY SETTING FORTH SUPPLEMENTAL WASTE FEES TO BE ASSESSED UPON COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS AS SPECIFIED HEREIN; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11632. 85 March 31, 1998 The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, anything else? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. As to item four, you need to pass the emergency ordinance. It's in the book. Commissioner Gort: Which item four? Vice Chairman Plummer: Item four. Mister... Is there a motion? Commissioner Gort: What's item four? Vice Chairman Plummer: This is increasing Commissioner Teele: So moved. Vice Chairman Plummer: ... all of the fees. Commissioner Teele: This is the commercial... construction debris. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's correct. Commissioner Gort: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved by Teele, seconded by Gort. Read the ordinance. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: Call the roll. It's an emergency ordinance, two readings. An Ordinance entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5 OF ORDINANCE NO. 6145, ADOPTED MARCH 19, 1958, AS AMENDED, WHICH ESTABLISHED FEES FOR BUILDING, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, INCLUDING BOILER AND ELEVATOR, INSPECTION PERMIT AND CERTIFICATE FEES (THE "BUILDING PERMIT FEES"), THEREBY ADDING AND INCREASING REQUIRED FEES TO COVER COSTS FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE; FURTHER AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION OF SAID BUILDING PERMIT FEES AS SECTION 10-4 OF SAID CODE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY CODE. 86 March 31, 1998 was introduced by Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Gort, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Teele and seconded by Commissioner Gort, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11633. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. Vice Chairman Plummer: Item... Mr. Manager. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Item five, you need to pass the emergency ordinance. It's in the book. Vice Chairman Plummer: Motion made by Regalado, seconded by Teele. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me, what's... Vice Chairman Plummer: I am sorry. Commissioner Gort: What's item five. Vice Chairman Plummer: Item five, an emergency ordinance relating to increasing the regulatory permit fee to 20 percent on the commercial haulers. Is there a motion. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, I would like to introduce a motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, hold on. Is there a second? Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: If not, there is no discussion. Is there a second for the... 87 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Gort: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Eh? Commissioner Gort: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Seconded for discussion by Gort. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: On this motion, first of all we need to say that the private haulers are willing to create a committee that would receive any and all complaints, and will meet with the administration, and the administration has to work... I mean, throughout the afternoon we have said that we need to help them, and that we need to help us, because there are many people not paying their... Many people with illegal dump... dumping. So, I would add to this motion the creation of a committee formed by them and the administration to monitor the whole system to... and expedite any recommendations that they might have in terms of functioning with the City. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Maxwell: If I may? Instead of making that part, may I suggest to you that instead of making it part of the ordinance, that those be directions, separate and apart from the ordinance to the administration. Commissioner Gort: We already stated that, yeah. Commissioner Regalado: All right. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, read the ordinance. Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: It's an emergency reading, two readings. Second reading. 88 March 31, 1998 An Ordinance entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22-56 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, THEREBY INCREASING THE REGULATORY PERMIT FEE FROM 15 PERCENT (15%) TO 20 PERCENT (20%) OF GROSS RECEIPTS GENERATED ANNUALLY BY PRIVATE SOLID WASTE HAULERS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Regalado and seconded by Commissioner Gort, for adoption as an emergency measure, and dispensing with the requirement of reading same on two separate days, was agreed to by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Regalado and seconded by Commissioner Gort, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11634. The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the public. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, we are about to lose, Commissioner Hernandez. You better hurry. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Yes, sir, we need... The need your directive, and the City Attorney tells number seven, which is to bill ALS (Advanced they just have... That could be done as quickly.. Commissioner Gort: Motion on seven. items six and eight are included in four. So, we me that can be done by a way of a motion for Life Support Services) for ALS services. And, Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: But, I would like to get the Commission's approval, so we can the Oversight Board. 89 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Gort: Move it. Vice Chairman Plummer: A motion made, to do what? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: To direct the administration to bill... Commissioner Gort: To bill to Medicare. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: ... ALS (Advance Life Support Services) for their services. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, motion by Gort, seconded by Teele. Any further discussion? All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Plummer: Opposed? Show it unanimous. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-326 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO BILL MEDICARE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL TRANSPORT ADVANCE LIFE SUPPORT SERVICES. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mister... Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): Finally, as to nine and ten, that would be also, a directive, I suppose. Vice Chairman Plummer: A motion. Commissioner Teele: No, no, no, no. Those are not reoccurring Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: But, be careful, now. Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): No, we will show it... We will show it as separate resolutions on each one. Your directions to the administration. 90 March 31, 1998 Commissioner Teele: No, no. Let's just take nine and ten over. Let's understand, let's get a guidance and have a written approval from HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development). Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Maxwell: Yeah. Commissioner Teele: I would move, Mr. Chairman, that the Law Department present an emergency ordinance, not withstanding what Commissioner Hernandez said, what I agree with. But, it's very clear that the industry does not comply... That an emergency ordinance relating to recycling be presented at the next meeting, which is a companion to this. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK, but what I would like is to have the Commission on nine and ten, so that we can report to the Oversight Board... Vice Chairman Plummer: Sir, item is dead. Nine is a dead item. Commissioner Teele: Nine and ten... Commissioner Gort: Nine, we... Yeah. Vice Chairman Plummer: Speak to ten. Commissioner Gort: Yeah. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort says it's dead. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: Speak to ten. You don't have four -fifths vote. Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: We only need three. Commissioner Teele: You know, I really think, Mr. Manager... I mean, with all due respect, if you want... Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: Well... Commissioner Teele: You know, you don't need any votes. Vice Chairman Plummer: You don't need what? Mr. Garcia -Pedrosa: I am sorry, I am just trying to make sure that when we report... Commissioner Teele: I mean, you know, that is so political. END OF DISCUSSION -- NO ACTION TAKEN Vice Chairman Plummer: Item ten, Mr. Manager. Mr. Jose Garcia -Pedrosa (City Manager): OK. This is the St. Hugh Oaks reallocation of the General Fund. 91 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. Any problem with ten? Is there a motion? Commissioner Teele: So moved, Mr. Chairman Commissioner Gort: Move it. Commissioner Hernandez: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a second? Commissioner Hernandez: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: It's a resolution? Mr. Joel E. Maxwell, Esq. (Interim City Attorney): Treat it as a motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show unanimous. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-327 A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REALLOCATE $1,466,175 FROM PROCEEDS OF SAINT HIGH OAKS VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM SALES TO THE GENERAL FUND. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would move that the attorney present an emergency ordinance related to commercial recycling at the next meeting. Vice Chairman Plummer: Motion is made, is it seconded? Commissioner Hernandez: Second. Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: All in favor, say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 92 March 31, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Show it unanimous. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-328 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO SCHEDULE FOR THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE RELATED TO COMMERCIAL RECYCLING. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Hernandez, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would also request that the Manager give us a report on a plan to get by competitive process, an RFQ (Request for Qualifications) or an RFP (Request for Proposal) for an expert to do an evaluation of our ad valorem taxes in commercial downtown. Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: And, I am not going to make it a motion, but I got to tell you, this is the biggest revenue generator... Commissioner Hernandez: Uh-huh. Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: .. we are going to deal with, and the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) has a similar concern, and you know, Mr. Manager, I think we shouldn't argue about it. I don't think we ought to debate it. It's a mandate of state law, and all we have got to do is, go out and do the evaluation, do the methodology, and it will speak for itself. I don't think it's an argument between us and the County, it's just being able to provide the right evidence at the right time, before the value adjustment board. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, if it's in the purview of the Chair, you are so ordered. END OF DISCUSSION -- NO ACTION TAKEN 93 March 31, 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO EXECUTE CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT WITH SEVERAL ENTITIES -- FOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES -- FOR ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, ET AL. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Vice Chairman Plummer: Anything else, to come before this board? I have one pocket that I have to do. [AT THIS POINT, THE VICE-CHAIRMAN PLUMMER READ THE RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: I so moved. Commissioner Hernandez: Second. Commissioner Teele: Second the motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Any? All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Plummer: Opposition? Unanimous. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-329 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM AND SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, MONROE COUNTY, THE CITY OF HIALEAH, AND THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH REGARDING EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, UNEMPLOYED, UNDEREMPLOYED, ET AL. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Humberto Hernandez Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 94 March 31, 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. VICE CHAIRMAN PLUMMER SCHEDULES TENTATIVE MEETING FOR APRIL 7, 1998 AT 10 A.M. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there any other matters to come before this board? All right, hold on. Is it conurrence with this board, which I hope it doesn't happen. But, if for any reason that the Mayor were to turn this down by Monday, I think that gives him adequate time, that in fact, we could have a meeting on Tuesday morning? Is there any problem with that? Commissioner Teele: No. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. COMMISSIONER TEELE COMMENDS CITY COMMISSION FOR DELIBERATION EFFORTS REGARDING RECURRING REVENUES -- COMMISSIONER GORT COMMENDS STAFF. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman, I would like to personally commend you, and my colleagues. I think, you know, we have clearly acted in a way that shows that we do intend to remain as Commissioners. We don't need the Oversight Board's involvement. And, I would only hope that the Mayor and the Manager, and the staff, the consultants will work behind the scenes to get the Oversight Board fully briefed as to what this, Commission has done in terms of really providing reoccurring revenue. And, I just want to commend all of you, especially my colleagues that have been... Vice Chairman Plummer: Tuesday, would be ten o'clock in the morning, if that's agreeable with my colleagues. Hopefully, we are not going to have to meet. But, I just want to layout a format, that much in advance in case it does happen. Commissioner Gort: Commissioner Teele, I want to extend that to also to congratulations to your staff. I think they put a lot of work into it, and that's what it is going to take. All of working together to get it done. Commissioner Teele: All of us working... Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, Mr. Hernandez. You are out of here before five thirty, sir. END OF DISCUSSION -- NO ACTION TAKEN 95 March 31, 1998 THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 5:20 P.M. ATTEST: Walter Foeman CITY CLERK Maria J. Argudin ASSISTANT CITY CLERK COMMISSIONER HUMBERTO HERNANDEZ PRESIDING OFFICER/CHAIRMAN 96 March 31, 1998