Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1998-08-14 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON August 14, 1998 (Special Meeting) PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK/CITY HALL Walter J. Foeman/City Clerk INDEX MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING August 14,1998 ITEM NO. SUBJECT LEGISLATION 1. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEY TO AMEND EXISTING 8/14/98 LEGISLATION TO EXCLUDE LANDLORDS FROM DISCUSSION CULPABILITY FOR ACTS OF TENANTS. 1-3 2. COMMENTS BY COMMISSIONERS CONCERNING 8/14/98 PROPOSAL FROM OFF STREET DISCUSSION PARKING/ASTRONOMICAL PROJECTIONS IN 3-13 DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS — DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE REPORT OUTLINING DEPARTMENTS WHICH ARE OVER BUDGET — FURTHER DIRECTING CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE BY SEPTEMBER 8, 1998 ADDRESSING PROCESS TO AUTHORIZE DEPARTMENTS TO EXCEED THEIR BUDGET. 3. (A) RESCHEDULE SECOND REGULAR CITY 8/14/98 COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 22 TO R 98-812 SEPTEMBER 28, 1998, AT 2 PM — SET PUBLIC HEARING 13-16 TO DISCUSS BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-1999 TO BEGIN AT 5:05 PM. (B) DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS BUDGET FOR SEPTEMBER 28, 1998, BEGINNING AT 5:05 PM. (C) FURTHER COMMENTS CONCERNING PROPOSED BUDGET. 4. (A) DISCUSS/AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE 8/14/98 AGREEMENT CONCERNING REFINANCING OF BONDS R 98-813 RELATING TO OFF STREET PARKING DEPARTMENT - R 98-814 DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO CONDUCT MANAGEMENT R 98-815 ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW OF OFF STREET PARKING. ORDINANCE (B) APPROVE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING 11693 ISSUANCE OF CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE 17-23 BONDS (NOT TO EXCEED $14.5 MILLION) - FOR REFUNDING CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS SERIES 1992 (A). (C) APPROVE ISSUANCE OF CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS (NOT TO EXCEED $14.5 MILLION) - FOR REFUNDING CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS SERIES 1992 (A) - DELEGATE TO CHAIRPERSON OF OFF STREET PARKING BOARD AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE TERMS. (D) APPROVE ISSUANCE OF BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES OF CITY FOR $4 MILLION - FOR REFUNDING ALL CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS SERIES 1992 (A). 5. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ CLARIFIES INTENT OF 8/14/98 COMMENT ABOUT NON -WORKING CITY EMPLOYEES. DISCUSSION 23 6. COMMISSIONER GORT COMMENTS ON EFFICIENCY OF 8/14/98 OFF STREET PARKING DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS ON DISCUSSION NEED TO EVALUATE EFFICIENCY OF ALL CITY 23-25 DEPARTMENTS - FURTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS ON NEED TO VOTE ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET. 7. COMMISSIONER REGALADO QUESTIONS STATUS OF 8/14/98 CONTRACTS PENDING CITY MANAGER'S AND DISCUSSION OVERSIGHT BOARD'S APPROVAL. 25 8. COMMISSIONER TEELE COMMENTS ON NEED TO 8/14/98 REVISIT MILLAGE AND TO UNDERSTAND BENEFITS OF DISCUSSION PROPOSED OPTIONS - DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO 25-33 INCLUDE SEVERAL MANAGEMENT INITIATIVES IN PROPOSED BUDGET - FURTHER INSTRUCTING MANAGER TO: (I) CONSIDER REDUCTIONS THAT MAY REDUCE MILLAGE RATE; (II) CONSIDER LEGISLATION SHIFTING COST BURDEN TO NON -CITY RESIDENTS; (III) ENSURE THAT CITY RECEIVES SHARE OF REVENUES FROM WATER AND SEWER; (IV) ALLOW BUDGET OFFICE TO GIVE IMPACT OVERVIEW OF VARIOUS OPTIONS SUBMITTED TODAY. 9. APPROVE MATRIX B, OPTION 1 OF FIVE YEAR PLAN 8/14/98 SUMMARY REVISED, WITH OFF STREET PARKING R 98-816 CONTRIBUTION. 33-50 10. APPROVE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING 8/14/98 SECTION 22-12 OF CODE INCREASING ANNUAL SOLID ORDINANCE WASTE FEE. 11694 50-51 11. AMEND RESOLUTION 98-773 RELATING TO PROVISION 8/14/98 OF FIRE -RESCUE SERVICES/FACILITIES/PROGRAMS IN R 98-817 CITY - RESCIND PORTION OF SECTION 11 (B) - 52 AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO MAIL COMBINED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - RESCIND APPENDIX A OF RESOLUTION 98-773 AND INCORPORATE A NEW RATE SCHEDULE AS APPENDIX A. 12. SCHEDULE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING FOR 8/14/98 SEPTEMBER 14, 1998, AT 5 PM - FOR PUBLIC HEARING R 98-818 TO IMPOSE AND PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF FIRE- 53-55 RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-1999 - DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE BACKUP DOCUMENTATION PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 - FURTHER INSTRUCTING MANAGER TO COMMIT TO FINDING ADDITIONAL SAVINGS BY SEPTEMBER 28, 1998. 13. DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE WITH UNIONS 8/14/98 WHOSE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS R 98-819 EXPIRE IN SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 IN ORDER TO OBTAIN 55-56 SAVINGS - FURTHER DIRECTING MANAGER TO BRING BACK PROPOSED AGREEMENT ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 - FURTHER STIPULATING THAT ANY SAVINGS WOULD BE USED TO REDUCE MILLAGE RATE. 14. RESCIND RESOLUTION 98-754 - SUBSTITUTE IN LIEU 8/14/98 THEREOF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE R 98-820 OF CITY -OWNED REAL PROPERTY FOR USE AS 56-57 RIGHT-OF-WAY IN CONNECTION WITH SOUTHWEST 2ND AVENUE BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION AT SALE PRICE OF $682,000 WITH CONDITIONS. 15. SANITATION DEPARTMENT'S PLAN OF ACTION AND 8/14/98 RECURRING REVENUE IDEAS. DISCUSSION 57-62 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA On the 14th day of August, 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 10:07 a.m. by Vice Chairman/Commissioner J.L. Plummer, Jr. (hereinafter referred to as Vice Chairman Plummer), with the following members of the Commission found to be present: Commissioner J.L. Plummer, Jr. (District 2) Commissioner Joe Sanchez (District 3) Commissioner Tomas Regalado ( District 4) Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. (District 5) ALSO PRESENT: Donald Warshaw, Acting City Manager Alejandro Vilarello, City Attorney Walter J. Foeman, City Clerk Maria J. Argudin, Assistant City Clerk ABSENT: Commissioner Wifredo Gort An invocation was delivered by Mayor Joe Carollo, who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. (PRIOR TO COMMISSION MEETING OPENING): 1. DIRECT CITY ATTORNEYTO AMEND EXISTING LEGISLATION' TO EXCLUDE LANDLORDS FROM CULPABILITY FOR ACTS OF TENANTS. Vice Chairman Plummer: If I may? I have received a complaint from an apartment house owner. Here's the scenario and I want you to explain to him, which I can't. He has 42 units of apartment houses. He has the largest bin that you can have for a ... what do I want to call it, a dumpster, OK? One of his tenants in apartment two, he said, moved out and threw everything out. Instead of throwing it in the dumpster, threw it across the street. We come along with our inspector and we are fining him five hundred dollars ($500). He said, I didn't throw it there. I am not guilty. I did not do anything other than what was right and, that is, to put the dumpster there, which that person could have just as easy put the stuff in the dumpster I provided and, for whatever reason, I don't know because I don't go there. I have a manager. He threw it in a lot. Inspector says they put on their gloves. They went there and they found mail addressed to apartment two and because of that, they are going to fine him five hundred dollars ($500). Something is radically wrong with that. That man is not guilty. He did not do anything wrong. He did what was right and we're going to fine him? Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Alejandro Vilarello (City Attorney): Commissioner... Vice Chairman Plummer: Something's got to be done about it. 1 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Something's got to be done about it. Mr. Vilarello: The owner of that building has a contractual relationship with each of his tenants and he is responsible for the acts of his tenants. Vice Chairman Plummer: You know, that doesn't even make sense to me. How can he be ... I mean, are we... Mr. Vilarello: He earns revenue... Vice Chairman Plummer: Are we making the owner of an apartment house a priest? I mean, really. Mr. City Attorney, I got to tell you something, whatever it takes to right that wrong, I'm ready to vote on it. Because that is not proper, that a man who has done everything right is going to be fined five hundred dollars ($500). It is absolutely and ... I mean, it is wrong. Now, if I've got to go before the Code Enforcement Board or whatever it's going to take, I'm not going to see a person who is innocent be prosecuted and that's what it is. That's what it is. Are you telling me, you're expecting that apartment house owner to stay there 24 hours a day? I'm sure that's what ... you know, that's what you're saying, he's responsible. Mr. Vilarello: The apartment owner is also the individual who can require a deposit that's left sufficient to make sure that his tenants comply with the law. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney, I'm asking you to draft whatever is necessary for this Commission to say that a person who has lived by the law and done what he has supposed to do will not be charged with a crime he did not commit and this Commission can deal with it accordingly. Nester, what do I do? Commissioner Sanchez: Start it. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm ready to start. This is ... I'm ready to go. I mean ... let me ask, Joe, the stuff you have is questions that you're asking for answers? Is it just for you or is it for the Commission's benefit or... Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Vice Chair, I'm going to need approximately about 10 to 15 minutes with questions concerning the budget and some other items. Vice Chairman Plummer: Okay. Do you want the rest of the Commission here or is it for your ears ... I'm trying to utilize time. Commissioner Regalado: If I can just... Vice Chairman Plummer: What are you telling me? No. I'm getting hieroglyphics. Five minutes. Commissioner Regalado: I need a question. Vice Chairman Plummer: The Mayor will be five minutes. Commissioner Regalado: OK. I can ask a question to the City Attorney meanwhile. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, ask the question. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. City Attorney, can we... Vice Chairman Plummer: Wait, wait, wait. Can we do this without starting the meeting officially? Mr. Vilarello: The meeting was to start at 10:00. Vice Chairman Plummer: But we've not officially opened it. Mr. Vilarello: What is it that you're trying to do? 2 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm trying to conserve time. Mr. Vilarello: You ask me questions at every meeting before the meeting starts. Mr. Vilarello: All right then, proceed. He said it's fine. Commissioner Regalado: OK. So, we are on the record, now? OK. Mr. Vilarello: If we're going into the subject matter of the meeting, my suggestion to you is that you start the meeting and proceed. Vice Chairman Plummer: Everybody please stand. I will ask Mr. Regalado to give the prayer and Trooper Joe to give the pledge of allegiance. [AT THIS POINT, COMMISSIONER TEELE EXITS THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 10:08 A.M.] Vice Chairman Plummer: To me colleagues, we can get your questions on the record. We will not make any decisions whatsoever until the Mayor arrives. We're trying to conserve time. You can ask whatever questions you want. Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: Question. Mr. City Attorney, can we discuss and vote on any item related to the Off -Street Parking this morning, especially the offer from the Of€Street Parking for the budget? Vice Chairman Plummer: I can answer that you're not going to have to vote on it because I can tell you there is good news, which I was going to announce when the Mayor got here, that they have concurred and they will acquiesce to the wishes of this City Commission. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but the Oversight Board tells us that we have to legislate. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, it'll be incorporated and a motion will be in order at the time, yes. Commissioner Regalado: Oh, OK. So, it's now official that we can use two point three million dollars ($2,300,000) in this budget. Mr. Vilarello: Assuming that the City Commission accepts the conditions, yes. So, we'll have the legislation prepared. No, the conditions as you outlined them yesterday is what they're... Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, OK. Commissioner Regalado: What would happen if the Mayor were to say that he would veto that, would that in any way create any problems with the Oversight Board or the budget? [AT THIS POINT, COMMISSIONER GORT ENTERS THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT APPROXIMATELY 10:09 A.M.] Mr. Vilarello: That is the Mayor's right to veto those kinds of items. Will it create a problem with the Oversight Board, I don't know. The City Commission does have additional rights in the event that the Mayor does veto an item. It may override the Mayor's veto. Commissioner Regalado: If we were to override, we need to call a special meeting or can we wait until ... within 10 days, right? Mr. Vilarello: The Mayor has 10 days to consider whether or not to veto an item. 3 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Today is the 14th. Twenty-fourth. Yes. We'd have to call a special meeting. Commissioner Regalado: OK. That's the question. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Mr. Gort, do you have a question because Joe needs 10 to 15 minutes? You don't have any questions at this time? OK. Mr. Sanchez, I would ask you to please limit your questions to questions and not editorial so that we don't slight the Mayor in any way of not, his opportunity to be here. You can go ahead and proceed, sir, with your questions. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, my questions are simple and its concerning the budget. Now, you know, I'm not going to question the budget itself but I will question the astronomical increases in some of the items so, therefore, I ask that the City Manager and the Finance Director get the podium so they could answer some of my questions. The Commissioners and the Mayor ... excuse me. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no, go ahead, sir. Proceed. Commissioner Sanchez: The Commissioners and the Mayor made a sacrifice... not a sacrifice but a reduction in their budget of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000), which was in good faith, to rebuild this City back again and after reviewing this budget and asking yesterday that each department would be present to answer a simple question of why, if the City ... if the constituents are going to make a sacrifice, this City will have to make a sacrifice. And I have two simple demands for the City Manager. One, is that I respectfully request that an operation review of all departments be conducted by an outside agency. If it costs us a million dollars ($1,000,000), it will save us a million dollars ($1,000,000) in six months. Vice Chairman Plummer: Who gave you my memo? Commissioner Sanchez: Huh? Vice Chairman Plummer: I put that exact wording in four days ago. Commissioner Sanchez: You could second it, J.L. J.L., I need... Vice Chairman Plummer: Go, go. [AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONER TEELE ENTERS THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 10:12 A.M.] Commissioner Sanchez: I need 15 minutes. Now, these are simple things that, after reviewing the budget, that not only must I ask but every citizen in this community must ask. Let's start with the reviewing of the budget. My calculation is, Mr. City Manager ... maybe you didn't have anything to do with this. Whoever prepared this budget in the past. We're going with a 17 percent increase Just on salaries. That's from our budget. That's a concern that I have. I'm going to review each department... and, Mr. City Clerk, you can go ahead and call the departments, if you want to call them or I could do it. How do you want to do it? You want me to go ahead and do it? Mr. Foeman: Yes. Let me get a copy of the list and I can call them out. Commissioner Sanchez: Well, you want me to go ahead and just start? I'll go ahead. Mr. Foeman: I can get a copy of the list, if you like, listing of all those departments. Commissioner Sanchez: That's all right. I'll go ahead with the first department. The first department is yours, and I really don't have much questions with yours, to be honest with you. The Law Department. Alex, I do have a lot of questions on this, Alex. And the reason why I want ... I bring these questions are, is because these are some astronomical increases in some of the things here and there needs to be an explanation. Salary, on a full-time, there was an increase of two hundred and forty-one thousand dollars ($241,000). If we're not hiring any people, how could there be an increase in salary on that? 4 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Vilarello: There are three paralegal positions that were approved with regard to this position. Those three paralegal positions were an attempt to use, other than attorneys, to accomplish a lot of the work that the attorneys in the office were doing. Those are cost-cutting type measures. The City Attorney's Office has, historically, been over the last six or seven years had no pay increases for any of the lawyers. There's been no staff increases for any lawyer with regard to attorneys. If you review the Gort Report or the one directed to ... at the request of Commissioner Gort and requested at the request of the Oversight Board, it indicated a strong problem in the office with regard to the ability of the office to continue on an annual basis to continue to provide essential services to the City without any pay increases, for some lawyers, as much as eight years ago. Commissioner Sanchez: Alex, between salaries, full-time and unclassified salaries, you went up 40 percent... approximately, 40 percent in just alone in salary increase. [AT THIS POINT, MAYOR CAROLLO ENTERS THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS AT 10:12 A.M.] Mr. Vilarello: There's two new attorney positions in the budget. Those are two attorney positions that are in at fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) a year each. Those are not advances that are astronomical in the context of the services that the City Attorney's Office provides. Commissioner Sanchez: Now, correct me if I'm wrong. You have 45 positions. How many are filled in your department? Mr. Vilarello: Pardon me? Commissioner Sanchez: You have 45 total positions in your department. How many are filled? Mr. Vilarello: I have one vacancy in the litigation attorney. Two for next year's budget and three paralegal positions have not yet been filled. Commissioner Sanchez: Alex... Mr. Vilarello: And one legal assistant position. Commissioner Sanchez: We, who labor here ... or work here, seek the truth. Can your department sacrifice five percent? Because, you know... Mr. Vilarello: If -Commissioner? Commissioner Sanchez: Excuse me. Just a minute. You know what's going to happen? It reminds me of Steve Clark. Everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. And we got to start somewhere because, you know what, we have employers in this City who, the biggest decision that they make is, where they're going to go to lunch, and that's what's killing this city. Mr. Vilarello: Pardon me? Commissioner Sanchez: We have employers in this City ... and I'm not referring to your department. But we have employers in this city that have been here and the biggest decision that they make in a day is where are they going to go to lunch and that's what's hurting this city. Mr. Vilarello: Well, Commissioner, I can make this commitment to you. That the individuals within my office have not and will not in the future have that as the largest decision they have to make in a day. The services provided by my office are essential. Frankly, the more difficult the conditions the City get, the more... Commissioner Sanchez: Alex? I'm not disputing that, Alex. I realize that you are ... your department is a critical entity or part of this government. But I'm telling you, I look at this and look at the people out there that are probably going to get ... at the end of the day are going to get taxed and, you know what, they're going, a 40 percent increase. I look at some of these expense allowance. You went from two thousand five hundred and ten dollars ($2,510) to six thousand dollars ($6,000). AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Vilarello: Historically, it has been six thousand dollars ($6,000) that's been spent and what I tried to do is to make it reflect what has actually been spent in the past. The two positions and the paralegal, Commissioner. Let me, please, if I may, are intended specifically to address the concerns that this Commission has expressed over and over again about the cost of outside counsel. One of those litigation positions is going to save this City hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation expense. The paralegals are designed specifically for that. The other position is in the general government position, which is for the intended purpose of assisting in revenue generating goals that the City has and to assist the City Manager in reaching those goals. So, each of those positions are designed not to be a drain but to be an assistance to the City in reducing the outside counsel expenses and the costs and help in revenue generating. Commissioner Sanchez: Alex and City Manager, the goal here and our responsibility and your responsibility is to hold everybody accountable for their departments. If they have somebody in their department that's not being productive... if this City, today, was a private sector, we would have been belly up a long time ago. Belly up a long time ago. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look through here and see the hidden agendas, the numbers that I don't know where they got them from, to be exact, but I don't think that it's justified in us saying seven hundred eighteen thousand dollars ($718,000) increase in FY'99. I mean, there's a lot of increases. Mr. Donald Warshaw (Acting City Manager): And, Commissioner, I Commissioner Sanchez: I'll get to your department next. Yours next and I have a lot of questions for your department too. OK? So, the only thing that I do is, you know, let's make some reductions, not only in salaries but in other items. Like there are items that could be cut. If I put every department head up here and I asked them, can your department be cut, I'll guarantee everybody will say no. But the Commissioners and the Mayor did. Hey. We'll give you twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) off our budget. OK. Let's go on because I have a couple of items now on the City Manager's Office. Vice Chairman Plummer: Can I stop you for one second, Joe, please. Commissioner Sanchez: No, please, I'd rather you not interrupt me, J.L., please. Vice Chairman Plummer: Nothing to do with what you're speaking of. Just for the public purpose, there are people who have requested as to whether or not there will be any public heard here today. The answer is no. This is not a public hearing. The public hearings will be in September. There will be two of them at 5:05 in the afternoon. Thank you. I thank you for yielding. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. Mr. City Manager, an increase of two hundred and twenty-six thousand dollars ($226,000), 18 percent on salary. Why? Commissioner Teele: Commissioner, would you yield before you go to that, please? I realize... Commissioner Sanchez: I would. Commissioner Teele: I want you to keep your line of thought. But are you through with the City Attorney? He got off real light. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm not done with him. Commissioner Teele: Because I wanted to ask just two questions for the record. Mr. Manager, I have asked three times, fourth time is now, for a list of those departments that are over budget, in writing. I would like to get that today, please. If you've provided it and I've not ... ifs not been brought to my attention, I apologize. Mr. Warshaw: I'll make sure you have it. Commissioner Teele: Has it been put out yet? Mr. Warshaw: We've got it. I'll make sure you get a copy during this meeting 6 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Vilarello: Commissioner? Commissioner Teele: On that point, Mr. Commissioner, it's my understanding that the City Attorney's Office is one of the offices that's over budget, is that correct? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Would you offer a brief explanation as to why you're over budget this year? And let me just put on the record that I take note of the fact that this Commission instructed, legislatively, certain actions that probably cost your budget about forty thousand dollar ($40,000) or so, fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), relating to the severance of the three previous Commissioner ... previous attorney? Mr. Vilarello: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Are there any other reasons? Is that the full amount of your overage? Mr. Vilarello: No, no. The full amount of the overage, I think is, approximately a hundred and ten, a hundred and twenty thousand. Hundred and twenty thousand dollars ($120,000). Approximately, fift)Lfour thousand dollars ($54,000) is with regard to the matter that you referred to and the other is with regard to two positions that I filled this year. At the middle of the year, when we went... Commissioner Teele: Alex, I want to understand one thing. And I don't want to...I'm on the yield of now Mr. Sanchez and I'm grateful for the Commissioner allowing me. I don't want to get into it. I want to understand how your department or any department can be given the authority by Budget, Finance and Personnel... every time I sign for something, I have to have a Budget approval. I have to have a Finance approval and I have to have a Personnel approval. Where is the system breaking down? How can you hire people and not have the budget to pay for it? Mr. Vilarello: It was our intention to come back before the City Commission before the end of the fiscal year. Instead of doing it at that specific time, it was our intention to come back at the last part of the year in a housekeeping matter and clear up those issues. Commissioner Teele: All right. Well, Commissioner Sanchez has the floor. I would only again ask that you prepare a legislation for the first budget hearing, first reading, an ordinance that would prevent that from happening. That the legislation, in the form of a resolution, must be made by the Commission. Once this budget is done, there will be no changes or going over the budget by any department, any department. Police, Fire, City Attorney, City Clerk. None of the departments will be authorized to go over budget under this ordinance, unless there is a resolution passed by the Commission doing that, subject to a budget amendment. Because I don't understand it. I thank you for allowing me, Commissioner. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, another item that really just ... I can't explain it. It's the expense allowance from three thousand to eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000). That's almost 600 percent increase. I know it's pennies but, you know what, pennies add up. Mr. Warshaw: The expense allowance of which office? I'm sorry. Commissioner Sanchez: For your office. Went from three thousand to eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000). That's an increase of just about 600 percent. Mr. Warshaw: All right. Well, let me talk about the City Manager's Office. Commissioner Sanchez: No, explain... please, explain that. Mr. Warshaw: I'm going to explain... Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, wait a minute. Excuse me. I'll lay the predicate. The predicate is, he's asking questions. You answer them. Now, you can editorialize later on, but right now he has the right to ask questions. 7 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Warshaw: OK. Commissioner, the answer to that question is, the City Commission authorized money for the former City Manager to have an expense allowance that was part of his contract. That was Mr. Garcia Pedrosa. And that's exactly what that money represents. That was subsequently eliminated and, of course, he's not here anymore so, it's a non -issue. And this is the issue of the entire budget in the City Manager's Office. In reality, it reflects a configuration from the previous Administration. Right now, the Manager's office today is being staffed with people whose cost centers are from other parts of City government, including my salary, which is still being paid by the Police Department. Raul Martinez, who was an Interim Assistant City Manager, whose salary is coming from the Police Department. Dena Bianchino, who is an Interim Assistant City Manager, and so on. So, what will probably have to happen is, we'll have to come back before the Commission with a new configuration, if and when all this becomes permanent, and present you with a new budget. So, you're really looking at the configuration of the previous Manager. Commissioner Sanchez: But what I'm trying to get across is, John C.Q. Citizen out there sees this and goes, wait a minute, for FY '98, FY '99, 600 percent increase. You know, and we're going to be asking them today, at the end of the say or whenever it gets to the 1 lth hour, the last inning, we're going to be making a tough decision here without a doubt. Vice Chairman Plummer: This is the last day. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Now, we'll go to the other departments. And, you know what, I'm going to cut it short I ... ifs just going to be over and over again because it's just unbelievable. Finance. An increase of salary in the full-time nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000). Unclassified, 161. The only thing that I know, we hired a Budget Director, which we so needed, because if she would have seen this, she would never approved it. Mr. Warshaw: The answer to the increase in Finance is that part of the two million dollar ($2,000,000) staged hiring that we're going to do next year includes large numbers of new positions that have been recommended and I support, particularly in the mid -level and upper management level of the Finance Department that are sadly lacking. So, the increase that you see there are the ones that we're going to save, in effect, in 1999 but eventually will be filled. And you're right, there is a significant increase but this is one of the reasons why we're in the trouble we're in, in that we don't have sufficient numbers of people in the finance world to be able to give you the checks and the balances and the things that the City needs to be able to run its finances with integrity and with checks and balances. Commissioner Sanchez: Salaries have gone up 17 percent on most of the departments. I'm not going to get into it. I know we have to touch on the Fire Department. An increase of three point seven million dollars ($3,700,000) in salary. I mean, those are contracted. I know we're under contract and a lot of the money goes to COLA (Cost of Living Increase) and stuff but, you know, if the City's going to make sacrifices, we're all going to have to make sacrifices, whether it be 10 percent, five percent, some percent. There has to be cuts. Mr. Dipak Parekh (Budget Director) Commissioner, one thing you'll see right throughout the budgets, in terms of salaries, there were add backs for this fiscal year, which were partially funded and when it comes to next fiscal year, it's fully funded. So, in that sense, you had five months worth of salaries for certain positions. Now you've got a budget for the full 12 months. In the case of the Fire Department, you also have an issue that the unions, during Merritt Stierheim's time, gave up 15 full-time positions for two fiscal years. Now, those positions have now been added back, per the contract. Commissioner Sanchez: Dipak? Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: In every department, the only thing that you've been able to do is cut positions but you increase the salaries. Mr. Parekh: There is a four percent COLA, cost of living increase, which is going to be given to the City employees in the last payroll period in September. That, obviously, annualizes the City's budget by AUGUST 14, 1998 approximately four point seven million dollars ($4,700,000). Plus, there is anniversary and longevity, which is approximately one point seven million dollars ($1,700,000) on top of that. Commissioner Sanchez: You know, we're clearly sending an SOS. A clear message that the City can no longer provide those services. I mean, can no longer afford those services. It's getting to a point where we're not even going to be able to afford Fire and Police. A clear message. On the Fire Department, the dental service, a hundred and sixty thousand and four hundred and twenty-eight. The Panthers don't even spend that much money on dental. Mr. Parekh: Sir... Commissioner Sanchez: It's not true? Well, its on paper. A hundred sixty thousand this year to four hundred and twenty thousand. That's a lot of dental work. The Florida Panthers don't spend that much money on dental work. Mr. Carlos Gimenez: It's dental and medical. And what that is, is that there are physicals that are done every year for firefighters. They're staggered. One year everybody that's under 30 gets them. The next year, everybody that's over 30 gets them. And this year, everybody that gets over 30, gets them. There are a lot more firefighters that are over 30 than are under 30, so we had put more money in there for their annual physicals. That's the reason why. Commissioner Sanchez: All right. We'll head over to Police now. Seven point seven four nine million dollars ($7,749,000). Does that include the eleven million dollar ($11,000,000) grant? Mr. Warshaw: Talking about salaries? Commissioner Sanchez: Salaries. That's just salaries in classifieds. I mean, in permanent. Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, the way the budget is structured, you have on the General Fund side the increase in these positions, which are, for the most part, grant positions. But, on the other side, you've got the revenue that's coming in to support those. So, what you see is an increase in these new positions but, on the other side of the ledger, there's revenues coming in that, in effect, are relieving the General Fund. So, the hiring of these police officers with grant positions, particularly with the lower base, in reality the Police Department's General Fund Budget is being decreased but it shows as an increase because the revenue comes on the other side. I'll let Dipak explain in a little more detail. Mr. Parekh: Sir, on the appropriation from last fiscal year, we budgeted 1,065 police officers. For next fiscal year, we are at 1,141, plus partial funding for the other six positions for half of the fiscal year. And you have annualized again some of the salaries which were given part of the 141 and you also have the COLA's, which have been built in for everybody in there. Commissioner Sanchez: Part-time went up nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000). They're not under union contract, part-time, are they? They're not? Mr. Parekh: No. Commissioner Sanchez: I don't think so. That's almost a million dollars ($1,000,000), in additional part-time. Mr. Warshaw: The increase in there, I believe, is the 40 positions that are also part of the staged hiring for 1999, which are the additional 40 Public Service Aides. Commissioner Sanchez: I'm just scratching the surface on a lot of these but we'll keep going. Parks, which they need money. That's the only department I think we should give them more money because they are ... they don't have any money. Public Works, an increase of 15 percent. Four hundred and twent)-two thousand dollars ($422,000). Mr. Warshaw: It's positions. 9 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Sanchez: Positions. Mr. Warshaw: There are substantial number of increased positions that are also part of the Blue Ribbon Initiatives, also part of staged delay of hiring for 1999. And, again, I point out that these are critical positions, if we're going to complete the over 30 active projects we have right now and those that are on the drawing board just to make our streets and the landscape of the City what it needs to be. Commissioner Sanchez: Solid Waste. You know, the position that they're in now, they deserve money because the trucks are in bad condition. They're not adequately staffed and that's one of the basic service we must provide the City. But when you look at things that I ... and I'm just scratching the surface. I look at tolls. They went from five thousand dollars ($5,000) to twenty thousand. That's a hell of an increase. Mr. Warshaw: And my understanding about that ... and I'll let Clarence answer ... is that now the trucks are taking a route that's taking them to a place where there are toll charges. And, Clarence, if you could explain the reason... Mr. Clarence Patterson: Yes. We were dumping at 20th Street, which is a transfer station, which charges nine dollars ($9.00) per ton more to dump it there than taking it to the Resource Recovery Facility on 97th Avenue and 58th Street. So, we are dumping at least two/thirds of our material out there now and, as such, we're sending, at the most, direct route there and they're using the expressways to do that. So, therefore, that's why that's gone up. Vice Chairman Plummer: What does the average trash truck carry intonage? Mr. Patterson: The average trash truck carry in tonage is about seven tons and the average garbage packer is twelve tons. Vice Chairman Plummer: So it costs us sixty-three dollars ($63) to take it out as opposed to nine dollars ($9) to use it here at the... is that a per ton? Mr. Patterson: That's a per ton cost. Vice Chairman Plummer: At 12th Avenue, it's nine dollars ($9) per ton? Mr. Patterson: Nine dollars ($9) per ton more. Vice Chairman Plummer: And it costs us how much to run that truck out to the onsite dump, in time? Because your time is worth something. You're paying a driver nineteen dollars ($19) an hour. That's 38. And then what are you paying out there to get rid of it? Mr. Patterson: Forty-five dollars ($45). Vice Chairman Plummer: Forty five. So, you're actually losing money? Mr. Patterson: Losing money by going to 97th Avenue? Vice Chairman Plummer: Yeah. You've got to be losing money. If over here is nine dollars ($9) a ton and it's seven tons on a truck, that's sixty-three dollars ($63). Now, if you take a driver out and a driver back, it's an hour each way, for whatever it's worth, that's $38 because he makes nineteen dollars ($19) an hour, plus perks, and I'm not even taking that. Plus 45. So, it's 38 and 45. How much is that? I mean, I don't have a... Mr. Patterson: You're about breaking even, as far as the trash is concerned but you're actually gaining on the garbage. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, you're not breaking even because of the mileage that you're putting on the trucks, of having them go all the way out there as opposed to right around the corner. So, it costs you eighty-three ($83) to run the truck out to the dump, correct? And it cost you sixty-three dollars ($63) here. So, to go out there, it's costing you $20 more. Maybe that makes sense to somebody but not me. 10 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Patterson: Well, you're actually gaining money, Commissioner, as far as garbage concern but you're not breaking even as far as trash is concerned. Commissioner Sanchez: Thank you. GSA (General Services Administration). GSA increased their budget by five point seven million dollars ($5,700,000). Five point seven million dollars ($5,700,000). Mr. Warshaw: And I'll let Dipak give you some details but the way the budget has been structured this year is that the internal service codes have been taken out of the departments' budgets and put into GSA. So, it's basically an accounting transfer but I'll let Dipak explain to you exactly what that is. Mr. Parekh: OK. Commissioner, I think you're looking at the Five -Year Plan book. If you look at page 44 of 83, under minor object 990, you see a three and a half million dollar ($3,500,000) credit, which was the internal service charge. That has... Commissioner Sanchez: Where's that at? Mr. Parekh: On page 44 of 83. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Where's the credit? Mr. Parekh: Minor object 990. Commissioner Sanchez: Nine nine zero. Mr. Parekh: You see a credit of three and a half million dollars ($3,500,000), which was an internal service charge for the police group health cost. In 1999, that is a positive half a million dollars ($500,000). In a net sense, what has happened is, there is a swing of four million dollars ($4,000,000), which is really just under pure accounting issues, so that's ... so, in a sense, you need to ... if you play it even, it's 44... fortyseven point five. You have about a swing of two point seven million dollars ($2,700,000) overall, in a net sense. And, primarily, again, you did not annualize all the positions which were given in this fiscal year, part of the 141. Furthermore, all the vacancies that they had for the first six months were removed when we did the revised budget. So, therefore, you see a swing of roughly nine hundred thousand dollars ($900,000) in terms of full-time salaries. Now, we have put, so there's an enhancement of service in terms of light fleet and heavy equipment, where mechanics are needed to repair the cranes, as well as the Solid Waste trucks, because we have a problem in that area. And secondly, the number of cars overall have increased within the City fleet and, obviously, there needs to be a relationship between number of cars and the number of people you have to repair those cars or maintain those cars. Commissioner Sanchez: OK. Workmen's comp. Now, that's a kick in the you know what. Workmen's comp. We're hiring more people to work and we're still paying those that are participating in workmen's comp and it's OK. If you justified in workmen's comp, so be it. If you got hurt on the job and it's justified. But, you know what, I guarantee it ... it's in the news. It's in the newspaper. There's a lot of fraud. There's a lot of abuse going on. We need to look into that because it's costing us a lot of money. Mr. Parekh: I agree with that. Mr. Warshaw: I agree with that. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, you know, being in the position that you're in, without a doubt, and I know that we can make the right sacrifices and cut the over ... the whole budget, I think that we could reduce it five percent? Making sacrifices, how we're going to have to do it. I don't know. That's your responsibility and your job to find a way to do. Now, I will make a motion, if I have this, on this and Commissioner Plummer might second me on it, which is ... and I make a motion. I put it on a motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me, sir. I asked you to ask your questions and we'll give everybody the same opportunity to do the same before we make any motions. I would appreciate we hold those until everybody has had the opportunity to speak. Commissioner Sanchez: Be advised that I will want to put out a motion 11 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. Are you finished now for your questions? Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, I'm done now. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: May I inquire? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: Before you leave, what will your motion be? Commissioner Sanchez: My motion? Commissioner Teele: Yes. Commissioner Sanchez: That the City of Miami operational... gets an operational review of all departments by an outside agency as quickly as possible. Vice Chairman Plummer: And I have no problem with that because I'm going to show you the memo of the wording that I surrendered three days ago on the same thing, so it's... Commissioner Sanchez: So, you make the motion. I'll second it. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, let's hold motions until we're ready. Mr. Regalado, you have questions. You have... whatever you wish. Some time to inquire. Commissioner Regalado: OK. So, we're back to the budget and I would like to just go back. I heard all the explanation that the Manager and Dipak offered Commissioner Sanchez but, you know, I ... today, we have to finalize the budget and there are those who keep saying, going to the editorial boards of papers and going to important people that this Commission does not have the political courage to act. I am ready to start listening to the Administration. Only before, I just want to make sure that, first of all, Mr. Manager, we can, today, include in this budget the Off -Street Parking offer. Is that a fact, that we can include it in thisbudget? Vice Chairman Plummer: As soon as a motion is made to accept it by this Commission, it is, in fact. Commissioner Regalado: I know. But I'm just asking. OK. So, that will be two point three million dollars ($2,300,000) this year? Mr. Warshaw: Two point two seven five, yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: Two point two seven five, OK. You have said on the record that you could cut or save two point ... is it seven in salaries? Mr. Warshaw: It's two million one-time, non -recurring for 1999. Commissioner Regalado: Right. Mr. Warshaw: And seven hundred and fifty thousand recurring for the entire five years. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Manager, in terms of expenses ... and, you know, we all know what Dipak said the other day, that we need to pay some old bills and new contracts and different services. But, on the contractual services, we have an increase of one point two million dollars (1,200,000) on ... this is line 340. I'm asking you, can we reduce some of this or it has to be like that? Mr. Parekh: Commissioner, I think the Administration is going to take a further look in that particular area. We have gone through that particular line item and there are contractual services where there are contracts, official contracts, which have been passed by City Commission, which is going to have an impact on next 12 AUGUST 14, 1998 fiscal year's budget and that is the right number, which we have projected, sir. Mr. Warshaw: And, Commissioner, also, there's a tie-in between contractual services and the hiring of full-time people. So, the staged hiring that we're going to delay for 1999 is impacted on by Code 340, depending upon how we stage that hiring. And this is basically our best projection of the kinds of things we need now for next year, especially in light of the fact if we're going to stage the hiring and save the two million on the other side. Commissioner Regalado: So, the possibility of reducing one point two million is out of the question? I just want to make sure that's what you're saying. Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: OK. On line 670, repair outside. Repair maintenance outside. An increase of one point two million. Is this the same scenario? Vice Chairman Plummer: That was basically automobiles. Mr. Warshaw: It's out sourcing, especially in light of the size of the increase in the fleet. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, that's not the case either. It was 114 cars a week wrecked and we had to go to the outside to get those cars fixed in a hurry. The last count that I had. Commissioner Regalado: OK. So, that's reduction on that line item, it's also out of the question? Mr. Parekh: Commissioner, one of the problems is the following. That, as we remove or reduce positions in departments, you'll see line items, like contractual services and repair and maintenance outside, go up. For example, in the light fleet, we had in 1985 a total of 64 positions. In 1995, you got basically 42 and 1998, you got 32 positions. If you look at the overall costs, we've gone from hundred and eighty-five thousand to one point three million dollars ($1,300,000). So, there is an issue. Number one, that if you have City employees do it, privatization in some issues does not work. The City work force is far more efficient. On another side, if you want to have these cars go outside, there's a profit motive and, obviously, the cost is going to increase. 3. (A) RESCHEDULE SECOND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 22 TO SEPTEMBER 28 1998 AT 2 PM —'SET PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS BUDGET FOR FISCAL' YEAR 1998-1999 TO BEGIN AT 5:05PM. (B) DIRECT CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS BUDGET FOR SEPTEMBER 28, 1998, BEGINNING AT 5:05 PM. (C) FURTHER COMMENTS CONCERNING PROPOSED BUDGET. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Your explanation is the same as yesterday but I just want to make sure of what you are recommending in terms of leaving as it is or reducing the budget. Mr. Manager, in terms of the overtime... Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado, if I may, I'd like to stop you for one second, please, because I made an announcement we've got to take ... make a change. Mr. Gort asked yesterday that the Commission consider that the second meeting in September be on the 29th. When calendars were checked, it becomes the eve of a Jewish holiday and so, I think ... so, that I can put on the record, before anybody leaves, that we consider the 28th of September, which is a Monday. Does anybody really have any idea as to whether or not you have an objection to that being the second meeting, which, in effect, is also the second hearing ... of public hearing for the budget? Does anybody have that? Mr. Gort, you're making... Commissioner Regalado: What time are you going to start? Vice Chairman Plummer: Ten a.m., as normal. Commissioner Regalado: Since we have hearings in the afternoon... 13 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: No, that's at 5:05. Commissioner Regalado: I know. Vice Chairman Plummer: But this is a regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Regalado: I know what you're saying, but do we have so many things on the agenda by that time? Vice Chairman Plummer: I can't... Commissioner Regalado: We have the TCI, which is a public hearing in the afternoon, is it? Vice Chairman Plummer: All I'm ... I have not asked that of the Administration. Commissioner Regalado: I have no problem. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Teele, are you... Commissioner Teele: I'm in accord with Commissioner Regalado. I would prefer that, if we're going to have the meeting on that day or the second meeting start at 2 p.m., as opposed to 10 a.m. Vice Chairman Plummer: As a Commission... total Commission meeting? Commissioner Teele: As a total Commission meeting. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's fine with me. All right. So, there's a motion in order then by Teele, seconded by Regalado that the second meeting in September be changed from the 22nd to the 28th, starting at 2 p.m. in the afternoon. Commissioner Teele: With the public hearing related to the budget, beginning at promptly at 5:05. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, the first one will be —September the 8th will be the first public hearing on the budget at 5:05 and now, by passage of this motion, the second hearing of the public hearing on the budget will be on September the 28th at 5:05. That's by law. But we will start the Commission meeting at 2 p.m. The motion is in order. Is there any further discussion? All in favor say "aye." The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Plummer: It is so ordained. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-812 A RESOLUTION RESCHEDULING THE SECOND REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER, TO TAKE PLACE ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1998 AT 2:00 P.M., AND SETTING 5:05 P.M. AS THE TIME CERTAIN AT WHICH THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE FISCAL YEAR 1998-1999 BUDGET SHALL COMMENCE. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 14 AUGUST 14, 1998 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Teele, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm sorry, Mr. Regalado. So that nobody gets confused and nobody leaves here hearing my first announcement, I wanted to get that in the record. Continue. Commissioner Teele: And, of course, Mr. Chairman, the Clerk is instructed to make the proper notices by ... as required by State law, particularly as it relates to the budget aspect of it. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm sure the C1erk...I'm sure that the high priced help will make sure the Clerk does what he's supposed to do. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Go ahead, Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Regalado: I'm back and I'll be brief. Mr. Manager, we all heard Commissioner Sanchez' questions and the different areas that he touched and you responded, so I'm not going to go on that. My question is, except from the salaries issue that you have already said, is there anything else that you can offer in terms of reduction of budget of departments and services, expenses, anything? Mr. Warshaw: No, sir. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Mr. Warshaw: And, Commissioner, if I can just have 30 seconds to give you background on the process. When the department directors originally submitted their budgets, the budgets, requests, were basically three hundred and twenty million dollars ($320,000,000) and after a series of budget hearings and budget workshops, those numbers were reduced back down to two hundred and seventy-three million. Then they were add backs to get it back into 285. So, I'm telling that I'm comfortable, having gone over this budget many times, that there has been a scrutiny, you know, by the prior Manager, by the budget people, by myself, and that this is as real and practical a budget as I've seen here in many years and I want you to know that I intend to live within its limits, but it is funded to be able to pay for what historically has been under funded operational areas and this time, this year, there is sufficient money to pay those bills, so there won't be a deficit come next September. Commissioner Regalado: OK, Mr. Manager. So, we are presented here with a situation of, at least, around five million dollars ($5,000,000) of the deficit that are already covered by the Off -Street and the salaries, is that correct? Mr. Warshaw: For'99, yes, sir. Commissioner Regalado: For'99. Mr. Warshaw: Ninety-nine. The two million is only for'99. Commissioner Regalado: Yes. I understand what you're saying but I'm talking about this budget. Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. 15 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: So, how much we need to legislate in terms of fees and taxes today? Mr. Warshaw: Well, with the exception of Off -Street Parking, the structural deficit is fourteen point two million. So, if you back out of that, the two million for the one-time recurring, the seven hundred and fifty thousand... Mr. Parekh: Two million seven hundred and fifty thousand, you get to... Mr. Warshaw: Eleven point five five. Commissioner Regalado: Eleven point five five. Mr. Warshaw: If you look on the ... if you look at the Five -Year Plan Summary, which is Appendix B, that says revised with Off -Street Parking, and you look at ... you have to start to look at what the options are and the options show a variety of millage and fire fee and solid waste. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, I understand but I just want to make sure about the amount. Mr. Warshaw: About the raw numbers. Commissioner Regalado: The raw number that we have to legislate on today. I ... so, we're talking of eleven million and a half that we have to legislate? Mr. Warshaw: Eleven point seven. Commissioner Regalado: OK. And I have a question now for the City Attorney and maybe for the Manager. These fees that are going to be discussed today in here or taxes or whatever is included in this eleven millions, close to twelve millions, when would the bills be sent? When would be the people start paying this or if there is any possibility for this Commission, whenever there is a confirmed source of income for the City, to reduce this amount of fees and taxes? Mr. Vilarello: The items being discussed today are a combination of fees, assessments and taxes. The tax...the millage rate is set and once that is set and approved by this Commission in its September public hearings, it will be in place for the full fiscal year. The fire assessment fee will also be set today and then, again... preliminarily today and then again finally in September. That would be in place for a year and will be on the tax bill. And, finally, the Solid Waste fee would be set today and would be first collected in January of 1999 and then again in July of 1999. And that one you...this Commission does have the discretion throughout the year to modify. The other two the Commission would set now and would be in place for the full fiscal year. Commissioner Regalado: If its approved in September? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Are you finished? Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, I am. 16 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: At this time, because Mr. Cook is paying this high priced help over here a lot of money, I'm going to ask Mr. Cook to get up and announce how gracious his board wanted cooperation to make a better city and then a motion would be in order to accept their kind offer and then they can go home. Mr. Cook. Mr. Clark Cook (Executive Director, Director of Off Street Parking): Commissioner Plummer, we will remove the request to have the issue there about not being —being left alone for five years. That has been removed from the contract. We're now ready to go forward if the Commission is ready. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you, sir. Is there a motion to accept it? Commissioner Gort: Move it Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved by Gort. Commissioner Regalado: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Seconded by Regalado. Is there any further discussion? Commissioner Regalado: I just wanted to say... Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Commissioner Regalado: ...on the record that I had the opportunity of talking to at least one member of the Board and I will tell you that, your Board understands the needs of the City of Miami and I want you to know ... and I'm saying this on the record ... that, for this Commissioner, this Board is working in a way that is helping, not only the City, but also the merchants of downtown Miami, the people of Miami and ... you know, you're doing a great job in that department. Mr. Cook: Thank you, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. It is a resolution. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask the maker of the motion to amend the resolution in two ways. First, I think it's important that we accept the proffer and further require that the proffer be executed by memorandum of agreement between the Manager and the Director of Off -Street Parking. Again, Mr. Manager, I know you may think sometimes I'm a little hard but these flowery words just don't somehow get transmitted in a document, unless you're going to take the transcript of the discussion... and we really got to reorient ourselves to get things in writing. So, I take your word, Mr. Cook, and I think it's important, not only that you're here, but your high priced financial advisors, etcetera, are here 17 AUGUST 14, 1998 and I would note that the City doesn't have one, you know. And if you don't ... if you're going to talk to financial advisors, one of the problems, I think, we've got with the Oversight Board is that they're being advised by a financial advisor and he doesn't have anybody to talk to in the City that's a financial advisor and you know how these country club things sort of work. Those cops talk to cops and firefighters talk to firefighters and sanitation people talk to sanitation. Vice Chairman Plummer: All have Gucci shoes. Commissioner Teele: And all have Gucci shoes. So, I think it's important, you know, to note that you all have been very diligent. You've come forward. You've been extremely professional. I would ask that you convey to your Board, since I was not here for the discussion yesterday, my strong support that the Off -Street Parking be maintained as an efficient organization. I support Mayor Carollo's notion that we should conduct a review of the best way to do that, consistent with what everyone else is saying here today. Commissioner Sanchez just said the same thing about the City Administration. Commissioner Plummer has been saying, every since I've sat here, that we need to have a management review or organizational review, etcetera, of the Police Department, which I support. And I see a note here from Commissioner Gort, which I guess we're going to get into. The point is this, I don't think you all should take this as a hostile act and I want you to know that I will be extremely objective and open in recognizing that, in Tallahassee, we always say, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it." I don't know that anything's broken but I'd like to know whafs...what did you say, J.L.? Vice Chairman Plummer: When the hell were you ever in Tallahassee? I know Washington and Daytona and down, but not in Tallahassee. Commissioner Teele: All my life. All my life. I grew up in Tallahassee. And I would also ask that the ... and I would hope that the maker of the motion would agree to allow that the two directors memorialize this agreement by memorandum of a record that is satisfactory to the City Attorney. Mr. Attorney, do you think that's helpful? Mr. Vilarello: Absolutely. And we have a resolution and the memorandum of agreement prepared and ready. There are four items that you need to consider in order to finalize this action today. You can do that later. Commissioner Teele: Oh, I thought that's what this motion was. Mr. Vilarello: Well, there's an emergency ordinance authorizing the bond issue. There's a resolution authorizing... Commissioner Teele: We have to do that today? Mr. Vilarello: That has to be done today. Vice Chairman Plummer: Of course. Mr. Vilarello: It doesn't have to be done right now. We can do that... Vice Chairman Plummer: What I'm trying to do is to get them out of here. They're paying Montalbano a tremendous fee on an hourly basis. Commissioner Teele: The second amendment that I would ask to the resolution then ... and maybe it's not necessary for the first that we do the other things ... is that we would continue to designate Commissioner Gort as the Commission liaison with Off -Street Parking. I think it's important that we maintain continuity and we maintain communication and I hope that you all find Commissioner Gort to be an acceptable representative from the Commission. Mr. Cook: We are honored, sir. Commissioner Gort hired me. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. That doesn't speak highly of you 18 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Cook: Well, that's why I would like... Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort, do you accept the amendments, friendly amendments from Commissioner Teele? Commissioner Gort: I accept. My understanding... Vice Chairman Plummer: All in favor say "aye." Show unanimous vote. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-813 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF- STREET PARKING ("DOSP"), CONCERNING THE REFINANCING OF CERTAIN BONDS AND SETTING FORTH TERMS AND CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE STRUCTURE, OPERATION AND REVENUE DISTRIBUTION OF SAID DEPARTMENT. Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: Next? Who's next? Unidentified Speaker: He's got to read... Commissioner Gort: He's got to read... Vice Chairman Plummer: You want to do the other four now? Commissioner Regalado: Yes, yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: Let's get them out of our hair. Read them. Vice Chairman Plummer: You know, there's got to be something illegal about what Teele's doing over there with four unions at one time. Huh, is that government in the shade? No. All right. Motion made by Gort, seconded by everybody else. Call the roll. 19 AUGUST 14, 1998 An Ordinance entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, INCLUDING THE ISSUANCE OF AN INITIAL SERIES OF BONDS IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING $14,500,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFUNDING THE OUTSTANDING PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1992A OF THE CITY AND PAYING THE COSTS OF THE ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI; AUTHORIZING THE USE OF DEPARTMENT FUNDS TO DEFEASE THE OUTSTANDING PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1993A; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS AND THE INTEREST THEREON FROM CERTAIN REVENUES DERIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET PARKING OF THE CITY FROM ITS PARKING SYSTEM AND OTHER AMOUNTS AS PROVIDED HEREIN; AUTHORIZING OTHER CLASSES OF INDEBTEDNESS TO BE SECURED AS HEREIN PROVIDED; SETTING FORTH THE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF THE HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS; MAKING CERTAIN COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 10115; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Gort and seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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 Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Gort and seconded by Commissioner Regalado, adopted said ordinance by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J. L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11693 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: All right, proceed. No, wait. We've got three others to do, right? Come on, get them out, get them out. 20 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Vilarello: This is a long one. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved ... is that the end of it? Mr. Vilarello: That's the end of that one. Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved by Gort. Seconded by everybody else. Call the roll. Mr. Foeman: Roll call. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is that an emergency? Mr. Vilarello: That's just a resolution. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-814 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, SUPPLEMENTING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY ENACTED ON THE DATE HEREOF, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF THE CITY'S PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING $14,500,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFUNDING ALL OF THE CITY'S OUTSTANDING PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1992A AND PAYING THE COSTS OF ACQUISITION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY; DELEGATING TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE OFF-STREET PARKING BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE TERMS AND AWARD THE SALE OF SAID BONDS ON A NEGOTIATED BASIS; APPROVING THE FORM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PLACEMENT AGREEMENT; APPROVING THE FORM OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND DELEGATING TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE OFF-STREET PARKING BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO DEEM SUCH PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT FINAL; APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN ESCROW DEPOSIT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE REFUNDING OF THE PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1992A AND AN ESCROW DEPOSIT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE DEFEASANCE OF THE PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1993A; APPROVING THE FORM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A CONTINUING DISCLOSURE CERTIFICATE; APPOINTING THE TRUSTEE, BOND REGISTRAR, PAYING AGENT AND ESCROW AGENT; DELEGATING TO THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE OFF-STREET PARKING BOARD THE AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE THE TERMS OF AND ACCEPT A COMMITMENT FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BOND INSURANCE POLICY AND/OR A RESERVE PRODUCT FOR THE BONDS AND TO EXECUTE ANY DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH; AUTHORIZING CERTAIN OFFICIALS OF THE CITY TO EXECUTE ANY DOCUMENTS AND TAKE ANY ACTIONS REQUIRED IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF SAID BONDS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR THIS RESOLUTION; AND PROVIDING CERTAIN OTHER DETAILS WITH RESPECT THERETO. 21 AUGUST 14, 1998 Clerk.) (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Mr. Vilarello: And, finally, another resolution. Vice Chairman Plummer: Ordinance or resolution? Mr. Vilarello: It's a resolution. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved ... wait a minute. Moved by Gort. Seconded by everyone else. All in favor say "aye." Any opposition? The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Vice Chairman Plummer: Show unanimous vote. OK. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-815 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES OF THE CITY IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $4,000,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFUNDING ALL OF THE CITY' S OUTSTANDING PARKING SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1992A; AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF PARKING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE LONG- TERM FINANCING FOR THE REFUNDING OF SAID SERIES 1992A BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE NOTES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS TO BE ISSUED AFTER THE DATE OF THE NOTES AND, IF SUCH BONDS ARE NOT TIMELY ISSUED, NON -AD VALOREM REVENUES LEGALLY AVAILABLE THEREFOR; PROVING FOR THE SALE OF THE NOTES TO SUN TRUST BANK ON A NEGOTIATED BASIS; APPROVING THE CONDITIONS OF SUCH SALE; PROVIDING CERTAIN OTHER DETAILS WITH RESPECT THERETO; DESIGNATING AN INITIAL REGISTRAR AND PAYING AGENT; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND MAKING CERTAIN OTHER COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) 22 AUGUST 14, 1998 Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 5. COMMISSIONER SANCHEZ CLARIFIES 'INTENT OF COMMENT ABOUT NON -WORKING CITY EMPLOYEES. Commissioner Sanchez: Mr. Plummer? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez: Yes. I made a statement that may have offended some of the City employees when I referred to that some City employees, their biggest decision is when they're going to take a lunch break. I did not mean that to the people that are hard working employees of the City. I mean that to those who are not pulling their weight and there's a couple of them out there that need to get on board. So, I apologize if I offended any City employee that's here today. 6. COMMISSIONER GORT COMMENTS ON EFFICIENCY OF OFF STREET PARKING' DEPARTMENT AS WELL AS ON NEED TO EVALUATE EFFICIENCY OF ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS - FURTHERCOMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS ON NEED TO VOTE ON THE PROPOSED BUDGET. Commissioner Gort: OK. One of the statements that I wanted to make is, one of the reasons we've got to be very careful with Off -Street Parking is, their bond rating is Triple A. We want to make sure that stay. At the same time, I think we made a few phone calls to the Board of Directors yesterday and we explain that we would like to continue to run it the way they had run it. Like I stated before, they got some very professional individual doing it. What a lot of people don't realize, a lot of times you see their negatives. We you get a ticket when you don't put the money in. But they have been able to provide parking in neighborhoods, which they're not being able to pay and, yet, the parking have remained there and we've been able to establish a lot of the parking with the City of Miami, especially certain areas like in Liberty City and Little Havana, where they were able to provide the parking there. So, that's why I'm glad we were able to work out those resolutions and we'll still be looking for other alternatives. And following up, I think it's very important ... I think Commissioner Sanchez had some real good questions. But I passed out a memorandum, which I wrote and I did the study before but it was presented to this City Commission on March 27, 1995. And it read as follows: "As you know, I've advocated the engagement of consultants to analyze and improve the efficiency of this City various nonuniform operation. As a result the Mayor, Commission... the Mayor and the Commission appointed me to interview consultants to analyze the efficiency of those operations. The Commission allocated a hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) to support that effort. That was done at that time. Ira, at the discussion with several major public accounting firms, it was determined that a comprehensive review of the City's operation would cost approximately five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) or more and it would require considerable time for completion. In that regard, at that time I wanted to acknowledge the effort of Richard Brickowitz, Sharon Brown, Roam Thompson and Karen Brody for their tireless effort in analyzing what we want to do. I think mainly that's what Commissioner Sanchez wanted to do and this is something I proposed back in 1995, March, the 23rd. And one of the things that I want to also add is, Dipak... and I want you to ... when I first got elected in November of '93 and '94, 1 was asked to work very closely with the different departments and my understanding, at that time, the crisis had not shown yet, but we wanted to reduce the budget by twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) and I believe we reduced it by thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) at that time. 23 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Parekh: Yeah, with the Retirement Program and some expenditure cuts, yes Vice Chairman Plummer: Early retirement. Commissioner Gort: Then the following year we continued to do so. And the reason I'm going to state this because I want to make sure that the public that are listening to this hearing and the press and those people that think that we have not done anything, we have worked and we've been working to reduce the City budget to make it as efficient as possible and when you do those things, sometimes you might underestimate and underpower some of the departments and I think that's what's taking place right now. But I agree, I think we should go into each department, analyze it and ... and, let's face it, Chief, I think you need to ask every director, that every individual that works for that department is efficient. Because if you have any one person who's drawing a salary and is not working, it's going to ruin the whole department. So, this is one thing that we've been advocating for a long time now. We've been asking all the directors to do so. I think you got Commissioners here that will back you up. We need to take those position. When somebody's not performing, somebody's not working ... and I think the unions, if you got the right people paperwork and the right documentation, the union will support the firing of anyone that's not producing. Thank you. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Teele, you have any ... I would assume, if Mr. Teele has no question, Mr. Sanchez is finished, it has now come time to fish or cut bait and I would assume the best way to handle this is that we try to put out on the table different areas and try, in fact, to come to some conclusion and we take it from there. For example, I think that the first motion really should be in order as to whether or not the millage, which we set the other day at 10, stays at 10 or it does not. Commissioner Gort: Excuse me. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: Why don't we discuss ... my understanding is, the Administration and the management had presented two different plans. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. Commissioner Gort: With the guide... Vice Chairman Plummer: I asked if anybody had anything else. Commissioner Gort: Oh, I'm sorry. My understanding is, one of the Commissioners yesterday expressed that he would like to see the ultimate plan with all fees and taxes and implement them once. I tend to disagree with him and I believe for the following reasons. I believe there's a lot of things in the negotiations that's taking place in the City of Miami where, in the years to come, six months, a year, you're going to see a lot of reoccurring revenues come into this City and, hopefully, with the work of us Commissioners working closer with the Manager and the department directors, some reductions might take place. I don't know. Might be possible. If that is the case, I think there's no reason to implement the highest of taxes or the highest of tariff right now. I, personally, will be in favor of Plan One and I don't know if anybody would like to do an integration of the two plans, but that's the one I would like to look at and the reason is, because I hope ... because people will tell you out there and it happened in the past, whenever you set a tariff, whenever you set a tax, it's never taken off. The commitment from this Commission and the rest of the Commission, they stated this, whatever tariff that we implement today because we need to, any time soon, if we can take it off, our commitment is, we'll take it off. Be it six months, a year, two years. And I don't want the press or the Governor's Commission to misunderstand this. I'll take the decision that needs to be taken to keep this City alive and let me tell you. I think we need to take a decision because if we don't take a decision, that decision is going to be taken by someone else and the burden ... if that decision is taken by someone else, might be worse for our residents than the decision taken by us, although it's not going to be very grateful. It's not going to be very nice. That's where I stand. Commissioner Regalado: It's very simple and, you know, Commissioner Gort is a hundred percent right. And we all heard that the Mayor support all the recommendations of the Committee that he impaneled and we know what the Oversight Board wants and it's very simple. For me, it's very simple. If we don't do whatever we have to do today, on Monday the Oversight Board, which, by the way, none of the members 24 AUGUST 14, 1998 live in the City of Miami, as we do, will decide on their pleasure and what they thought from the beginning, that they should do or we should do. What we're doing here today ... and I think that the people understand numbers, everybody ... is that we're taking around five million dollars ($5,000,000) off what the Oversight Board would have done if we don't do it. Is that, Mr. Manager, a correct assessment? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir, that is correct. 7. COMMISSIONER REGALADO QUESTIONS STATUS OF CONTRACTS PENDING CITY MANAGER'S AND OVERSIGHT BOARD'S APPROVAL. Commissioner Regalado: So, the only thing that I really want to say and following Commissioner Gort's line, is that 1, myself, I can make a commitment to you and ... but especially to the people of Miami, that I will be following each and every contract of the City of Miami and the way that those contracts are being held by the Administration and by the Oversight Board because, by the way, Mr. Beatty knows that I went to see him personally to talk about some contracts of the City of Miami that were being analyzed by his Board and I'm willing to go again. I've written the Governor, by the way, asking to expedite the social services contract from the Oversight Board because there are some agency that would run out of money next week. But, I said that I am willing to discuss the different plans that we have. And I will tell you, Mr. Manager, that I know of six contracts that we need to revise and those contracts are either due to expire in about 11 months or have already expired, and I would be sending you more memos than I send you daily about those contracts and will be bringing that to the City Commission. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Chairman? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. J Commissioner Teele: Before we enter into the discussion on the options, I want the same opportunity that my colleagues have had regarding the overall budget situation. But, before I do, I agree that the millage should be the last thing that's set because the only way to balance the budget is we would use the millage ... the elasticity in the millage, which is about five million dollars ($5,000,000) to... Vice Chairman Plummer: Four. Four point seven I'm told, Art. Commissioner Teele: About five million dollars ($5,000,000). Four point seven precisely to do that. So, I would much prefer to analyze the three or four options. I asked the Manager to present a fourth option or if he would consider one ... I don't know if he's going to do it or not... consistent with some of the early discussion. But, in any event, we have those options. I think it's important that we understand the benefit of each of the options before we vote on one and the disadvantages of each so that if one doesn't pass, we're not in a position where we're back to square one. But there are two or three things that I think are important from a five-year point of view, as opposed to the direct budget, but looking at this year. We're going to be in the same box next year if we don't do some things over the year that we haven't done over the past year. The issue relating to the defeasance of the off-street parking bonds and the Knight Center was a part of our Five -Year Plan last year. It was a part of the strategic analysis and the strategic reserve, is that right, Mr. Dipak? Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: So, one year later, we're still in the same box that we're in today. So, I need some assurance, Mr. Manager, that next year won't be the same as this year, as it relates to those items that we are identifying as priority items or the strategic items that ... I think they use the term management initiatives or management initiative and I would like to ensure that the off street parking, the Knight Center and the 25 AUGUST 14, 1998 parking garage associated with the Knight Center, which could yield approximately four to six million dollars ($6,000,000) in reoccurring income, will be addressed as a management initiative. Is that acceptable to you? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. You have my total assurance on that. Commissioner Teele: And we'll engage a financial advisor that will primarily focus in ... because these are bond issues. These are not finance or budget issues. These are arbitrage, bond counsel, financial advisor issues and we don't have a financial. So, we have your assurance that we'll get a finance advisor and will start that process in September? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Because that prevents us from having to raise taxes or raise fees next year. Secondly, as it relates to the management priorities for this year, do we have your commitment and is it acceptable to you that we will include, as one of our management priorities, a review and an aggressive action related to the Property Appraiser and the Value Adjustment Board? Commissioner Plummer has certainly been in the forefront of this. There's going to be a lot of resistance and a lot of drag on this. You're going to hear from property owners who are going to say, I don't want to pay the full value of the taxes. Coco Walk just sold today, I saw, for... Vice Chairman Plummer: Seventy million. Commissioner Teele: ...seventy million dollars ($70,000,000). Will some smart analyst go to a computer and figure out what they're on the tax rolls for before we leave today? I guarantee you, they're on the tax rolls for a lot less. Mr. Warshaw: I guarantee you. Commissioner Teele: And every time we put a property on the tax rolls for what its worth, we don't have to raise taxes and so, is that acceptable to you, Mr. Manager? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. As a matter of fact, I faxed you something early this morning on the property appraisal issue, so you have my hundred percent commitment on that. Commissioner Teele: And, Mr. Attorney, can we count on you in leading the charge and moving forward immediately, as a management initiative, to begin a process over the year where the only people in these Property Adjustment Board meetings will not be the property owner and his lawyers and his experts and that the City or the DDA or the CRA or whoever is representing those areas, that the government will begin to protect its pocketbook and tax base? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: Management initiative we can agree on. Also, we've talked all year... Commissioner Plummer, Commissioner Gort discussed it yesterday... the enhanced... enforcement of illegal dumping. Can we be assured that that is going to be a management initiative for next year and that we'll carry forth on it? Mr. Warshaw: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: The budget implications of this could very well be a million dollars ($1,000,000). It could be more. It could be less. But we know that there is a budget implication to this and, unfortunately, we're all in agreement that while we're going to do it, we cannot add dollars to that, to the... as a budget solution for FY'99. And, in that regard, I need to have some clarity as to how we justify the budget solution relating to the unclassified savings of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000). 1 need to understand that. And I need to make sure that this Commission focuses on that because the Oversight Board, apparently, wants to see the back up, so we should also want to see the back up on that. Commissioner Gort has laid out his memo. I am in agreement. Commissioner Sanchez has said it. Commissioner Plummer has been saying it. We need to understand what type of management review are we talking about. Commissioner Plummer has talked about the review of the Fire and Police or the Police. Commissioner Gort has talked about the overall. I'm in agreement with both of those. I'm in agreement with 26 AUGUST 14, 1998 what Commissioner Sanchez has said today. But I think this needs to be more than a wink and a nod review, Mr. Manager. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mine is to be done by an outside group. Commissioner Teele: Yeah, but ... you know, I agree. But, you know, an outside group is more subject to a wink and a nod sometimes because their ... the first recommendation of every outside group is further study. Vice Chairman Plummer: But answerable only to us. Commissioner Gort: Let me ask a question. Commissioner Teele: I yield. Commissioner Gort: We've had over fifty or sixty professionals from the private sector and the public sector, which is the Blue Ribbon Committee. They came out with certain proposals. I read through them and I think they had some very good recommendations. I was very specific in the one because I was given that task at the Attorney's Office and those suggestions, I think, ah commitment from Alex is, those are going to be implemented and once those implemented, my understanding is, we become more efficient, not only as performance but as cost. And let me ... this is just thinking out loud, Teele. Do you believe that we can get someone to go over that and to make sure, if we all agree that ... they had some real good recommendations in that Blue Ribbon Committee... that those recommendations are in agreement and that would improve ... the ones I had from the Legal Department, according to an outside source that I had, it was very good. And they're being implemented. Can we get someone to analyze those and make sure that each department implement those (inaudible)? Commissioner Teele: I think we can, but I think there's two caveats. I think the Legal was an exception. I think the Legal review was extraordinary and I think it was an exceptional one. The problem that I have with the Blue Ribbon Committee, which I basically support virtually all of their recommendations, virtually all, is two things. One, all of them cost ... most of them are going to cost money so, you know ... and while there will be savings in the out years but the first one or two years ... sort of like the issue of the seven fifty, which I don't accept. If you fire somebody ... and this budget says we're going to fire people, right? Let's put it on the table. Mr. Warshaw: Yes, it does. Commissioner Teele: It says we're going to fire people. I don't think you're going to get a big savings. I don't think you're going to get the million dollars ($1,000,000), seven hundred and fifty thousand dollar ($750,000) savings in the first year. The out years, maybe. But everybody's going to have some sick time, some vacation time, some planning time on where they're going to go to eat lunch, all in a box somewhere stored up and it's going to cost you money when you let people go in the first year, unless you do it within the first quarter, or the first 30 days or 60 days. But I am not necessarily wanting to communicate that we want to fire people, but I agree with Commissioner Gort on the issue of the Blue Ribbon Committee. And the second caveat that I have to that is ... and I don't mean to impugn anyone on the Blue Ribbon Committee. But there were no conflict kinds of issues associated with the Blue Ribbon Committee. The unions didn't really have an opportunity to provide input into that process and I can tell you, everybody that represents a company, whether it be a power company, a telephone company, an information company, a trucking company, a fleet management company is going to recommend that you consider privatization because that's a part of how the business of America works. So, with those two provisions, I accept it. Commissioner Gort: Yeah. What I'm saying is, the union should look through it because some of the things might be feasible, some might not be. But I think that we can establish some of the recommendations that will not cost to the City, but will make the department more efficient. That's what I'm looking at. They already did the work and they spent a lot of hours. We had a lot of good people looking into it, so I don't think we have to accept it all, but think the best of it. Commissioner Teele: I think an important part of this review... and, Mr. Manager, Mr. Director, Mr. Fire Director, Mr. Fire Union, I want to put it on the table. I think, given what's going on on Miami Beach... where's the fire union guy? I don't want ... oh. What's going on on Miami Beach, they've got the 27 AUGUST 14, 1998 same problem we've got, as I read the union problems. They've got trucks that don't roll out. They've got high-rises going up, getting higher, white diamond, green diamond, blue diamond and the ladders aren't working. We're getting the same problem. Maybe we ought to look at some kind of combination of services. Maybe there's a way we can pool ladder kinds of responses. I don't know. Maybe we could even talk about merging Miami Beach and Miami Fire Departments. I don't know. Vice Chairman Plummer: No. Commissioner Teele: J.L., I know you've got a vested interest in terms of a public vested interest, that you love to ride on the fire truck at Calle Ocho and Martin Luther King. But what I'm saying is the same thing that Mayor Carollo has talked about in Off -Street Parking. I don't think we ought to go into this thing with sacred cows and nothing on the table. I think we should look at whether or not we want to look at integrating the Fire Department with the Metro -Dade Fire Department. I'm not for it but I don't think those are the kinds of things that we should just take off the table because, if we don't begin to get some efficiencies, the kind of things that Commissioner Sanchez has been talking about for the first 15 or 20 minutes here, we're going to be in the same seat next year. Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes. Art, please. Commissioner Teele: J.L., that's my view. I don't really want to debate it. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: You've got your view. All that I'm saying is, is that when we look at these departmental reviews, we should look at those things. The same way I'm saying, when we look at Off Street Parking, we should look at an outside management company coming in, running it. We should look at merging it with the Public Works Department or Facilities Management, or a stand alone department. I don't think we're going to wind up saving anything, but I don't think we ought to say we're not going to look at. Vice Chairman Plummer: I think we have an obligation to, OK. Any time we can possibly do better for the City and the people, I think we have an obligation to explore, to look and to review. My problem with giving it to Metropolitan Dade County, the Fire Department, we're a number one department. I think they're a number six. So, basically... Commissioner Teele: J.L., I'm not at all proposing it. I'm saying, let's look at it. Let's don't take it off the table. Because I'm telling you... Vice Chairman Plummer: Anything and everything should be reviewed. Commissioner Teele: There's some efficiencies. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: Finally, as it relates to where we're going as the management... you know, this is a part of our annual element of the Five -Year Plan, which we've had no policy discussion about. I would like in the last meeting in September, the budget meeting, to propose, if the attorneys and Off Street Parking will agree, that we look at new revenues through the Florida Legislature for parking. I believe that the time has come that we must recognize that Miami is becoming like a lot of other urban cores. When the MetroDade was created, the metropolitan government, Miami was what, J.L., 50 percent of the Dade County? Forty some percent? Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, yeah, easily. Commissioner Teele: Incorporated Miami was 40, 50 percent of Dade County. Today we're substantially less. More like a sixth. Three, four hundred thousand people compared to two million people. Vice Chairman Plummer: We're 440 as opposed to 25. Commissioner Teele: Whatever that number represents. Four over 20. Some smart math person can figure 28 AUGUST 14, 1998 it out. In any event ... one fifth, perhaps. Lourdes is saying yes, I guessed right. The point is this, we need to look at how we structure our revenues in light of this phenomenon. Look at us as sort of like a Washington, D.C., if you will, where everybody's coming in to use our services. They're coming from Hialeah. They're coming from Broward County. They're coming from Palm Beach County. They're coming from all over. Coral Gables. And they're leaving and paying no taxes and, yet, they're using our services. Now, Chief, if you don't agree, you need to say I'm wrong. But my point is simply this, if we don't figure out a way to legitimately and legally ... we can't put a toll gate at Biscayne Boulevard as they cross ... what is it, Miami Springs? What's that city there? Miami Shores. Vice Chairman Plummer: Miami Shores. Commissioner Teele: We can't put a toll gate there as they come through Hialeah or Coral Gables but what we can do, legitimately, is look for ways to provide for revenue... additional revenue streams so that the citizens ... the residents of Dade County of the City of Miami are not paying it. Gentlemen, what we're doing today ... what we're going to wind up doing today is, we're going to put virtually one hundred percent of the burden of this City on the residents and the commercial businesses in the City of Miami and, yet, when you look at who's coming into the City working in our urban cores and in our areas for eight hours a day, virtually, most of those people, with the high paying jobs, are not depositing anything here. The sales taxes go to the State. So, I believe that we should look at a surcharge on parking. It will require legislation. I'm told that it could be a major number, ten to twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). It may be, at the end of the day, only a million. It may be only two million. I think it needs to be the kind of thing that is thought through. I would hope that Off -Street Parking and the Law Department would ... and the management would look at it. But I think that's the kind of thing we need to be talking about in our management... our core initiatives, as to how we're going to shift the burden or I should state it this way, how we're going to ensure that the users of City services are paying their pro rata and fair share for those services. Simply stated, it's not fair for the people who live in residential homes in Allapattah and Wynwood and Coconut Grove and Overtown and Model City to pay for people to come in here and work and leave and not pay taxes. Now, Chief, I really want to know if you disagree or agree. Mr. Warshaw: Not only do I not disagree, but as part of the original Stierheim Plan, which looked at a whole laundry list of options, one of the options was a commuter tax that was patterned. Well, it was in that plan. Never happened. That was patterned after the Denver Plan, which is a city similar to Miami in demographics, surrounded by an un-incorporated area where hundreds of thousands of people come into that urban core on a daily basis without paying any taxes or fees for police and other services and they did it in the form of a payroll tax for all employees who made over a certain amount of money, who worked within the corporate limits of Denver, and they raised somewhere between thirty and fifty million dollars ($50,000,000) annually. Now, I haven't looked at that lately but... Commissioner Teele: But see since I've been on this Commission... and I've only been here what, nine, ten months, nine months? We have not done ... we have not had any discussion, any thought about how we're going to shift the burden and ensure that the people ... all we're doing is, figuring out new ways to tax the people that live here and do business here. And I admit, we have a constitutional, statutory duty, Mr. Attorney, do we not, to produce a balanced budget? Mr. Vilarello: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: We must do that. If we don't do that, we will be subject to an allegation of nonfeasance or misfeasance? Subject to. Mr. Vilarello: Correct. Commissioner Teele: But there is ... all of this budget is going to be on the burden, on the backs of the people who live here. And I think our number one resolve should be, by resolution, in the budget meeting, is that future revenue enhancements should be shifted to those persons who are using our services and not paying. Finally, Mr. Manager and Mr. Attorney, Commissioners, whether you don't realize it or not, there is a new working group in the County and it's called the Water and Sewer Working Group. They have one mission, to make sure that the City of Miami does not tap into the excess fees of water and sewer. Now, let me just give you a little bit of a history. The City of Miami created with the County the Water and Sewer Department but reserved and retained a number of residual rights. Think about this as the Off Street Parking 29 AUGUST 14, 1998 for a minute. Excess revenues. Water and Sewer represents the biggest excess revenue in Dade County. In this whole government. The water and sewer administrative fees have gone from three percent to five percent to seven percent to seven point five percent to nine point five percent. They've gone from six million dollars ($6,000,000) a year-to-date, next year to fifty million dollars ($50,000,000). Forty-eight... forty... that's the cost of writing checks. That's the cost of the kinds of things that Lourdes Reyes does or the Clerk does in sending out notices. Those are the administrative fees, if you will, Our role and our relationship is complicated by a 1970 or so Chase Bond Indenture, a 48 agreement and a whole lot of other things and it's not clear. But one thing is clear, the City has under charter, by ordinance, of the County and the City, the obligation of reviewing the Water and Sewer Department's budget, administrative budget. We have a committee that is a standing committee, that was supposed to have been appointed each year and we're suppose to be in the business of basically providing the check and balance on ensuring that the water and sewer fees, not only don't go up, but the administrative or the excess dollars are split with the City and the County. The FAA (Florida Aviation Administration), by definition or by a comparison, only allows about a four percent administrative fee for the Airport Fund. That's a comparable fund. So, clearly, if the FAA is saying you can only charge four percent Dade County for this four hundred million dollar ($400,000,000), five billion dollar ($5,000,000,000), three billion dollar ($3,000,000,000) capital plan by administrative fees, clearly the City should be looking at this issue. I think it's an important management issue. Again, it goes right under the use of the fact that the entire Metro -Dade County, Miami -Dade Water and Sewer System uses the streets of Miami and that's a right. I mean, our right is the so-called utility right. Every bit of water in —every trash that's dumped in Hialeah comes right back through the City of Miami. Most of it, right, Mr. Vilarello? Mr. Vilarello: From the rest of the County through Hialeah to the City of Miami. Commissioner Teele: All right. So, this is a very serious issue. I mean, cities have gone to war over water rights. I read in the paper today, Nicaraguan and Costa Rico are fighting... about to go to war over a lake down there so, we'll be seeing an exodus of people leaving from Nicaragua soon. But, in any event, I think it's very important that we protect the City tax payers and we look at that. Those are the management... core management initiatives that I am interested seeing be put into this in any way, shape or form. Do you have any objections to any of these being core management initiatives for FY'99? Mr. Warshaw: No, sir. Commissioner Teele: All right. As it relates to reductions, I'm going to be very candid. I don't think there are a whole lot of reductions to get. I have read the Structural Committee's report. The Structural Committee's report contains about twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) of reductions. I am prepared to endorse and move forward with some of those, with further analysis. But my bottom line is this, the Structural Committee's report has one basic flaw and that is, it assumes that the Union will go along with the recommendations. For example, they make one recommendation of about five million dollars ($5,000,000) of moving cars, take-home cars from five years to seven years. There are some union contract problems with that, I would imagine, is that right, Mr... Mr. Rodriguez: Well, Commissioner, be quite candid with you, that is totally a union issue and, obviously, it would be inappropriate to discuss that at this venture. But I will tell you that, for this union, we have been and will continue to be willing to work with the City and the Administration to try to continue to come up with viable, sound, fiscal solutions and for this Union... Commissioner Teele: When does your contract expire? Mr. Rodriguez: My contract expires September 30. Commissioner Teele: This coming September 30? Mr. Rodriguez: That is correct. Commissioner Teele: Well, I'm going to tell you where I'm going to be, gentlemen. My motion is to going to be to instruct the Manager to come up with a contract before September 29th or to report back to us on September 29th so that, as a part of the budget hearing, we can consider any savings and any savings would be a reduction in millage, OK. But I believe that, if we negotiate in good faith and we negotiate well, there 30 AUGUST 14, 1998 may be some savings for FY '99. There should be some savings for FY '99 and I think we can come out of this thing with an absolute consideration that we can actually reduce the tax millage. I believe, Mr. Attorney, that a motion to instruct the Manager to negotiate is within our rights. Mr. Vilarello: Certainly. I think they're currently in negotiations now. Commissioner Teele: Well ... but to move the negotiation timetable, if possible, to report back to us before ... you know, 10 days before the 29th with a view toward trying to have an agreement on the 29th; with a view that any savings that may be resulted in FY '99 will not go in terms of trying to play around with the revenue game now but will go directly against the millage rate. Mr. Vilarello: If the Manager can deliver a negotiated agreement, you may consider it at your final hearing of the budget. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager, do you have any problems negotiating and moving forward with this, so that we can consider this for the 29th? Mr. Warshaw: There are no problems negotiating. I just can't commit to you now that we'll have a final contract by that date. That's a ... will be up to the process. Commissioner Teele: Well, of course, you can't. All right. Say again. Yeah, but ... I mean, look, let's don't play games because I'm going to tell you something, if there's a contract that comes up on October 1 or October 15th and then there are savings and then everybody's going to rush around to try to ... see, this is what's killed this City before. Everything's off the table. All that I'm saying is, let's put everything on the table. There's savings in the Structural Committee that recommends about twelve million dollars ($12,000,000). We could adopt them, but they're subject to a union agreement. If we instruct the Manager right here and now to negotiate ... if we ask the union to negotiate in good faith and to get back to us so that we can consider those savings as a reduction in our millage rate, if there are any, and that we don't start moving the savings around... because what's going to happen, gentlemen, is that if there is a contract, the savings are going ... I'm sorry, September 28th meeting, not the September 29th meeting ... the savings are going to go up in smoke. So, my motion is going to be, at the right time, to request the Manager and the Union to enter into a round-the-clock negotiation sessions, to come back with a contract well before September 28th, so that any savings can be considered as a part of the second budget hearing to be applied against a reduction in the millage rate. Mr. Rodriguez: Commissioner, let me just tell you that, as far as I'm concerned and for the Union that I speak for, I am categorically committed to doing exactly that and working around the clock with the management to get that done. I do not want to, nor do I intend, to go past the expiration of my contract date and not have a contract for our members. So, I am very much, to ease your mind and the other Commissioners, very much in favor of that and I would... Commissioner Teele: And does Fire feel the same way? Would the Fire Union representative come forward? And you all are the two unions that don't have contracts or the contracts are up? Mr. Tom Gabriel: Tom Gabriel, Local 587, Firefighters. I think I'd rather just be committed at this point. We are certainly willing to look at negotiating full-time with the City. As far as what savings could come of that, I guess it would depend on how much was put on the table. But I can tell you that we've heard about... Commissioner Sanchez talk about salaries, etcetera, and the truth is, that we haven't had raises in a very long time and that this four percent that's coming up ... with that being said, without belaboring how much we haven't been paid, we would be looking at negotiating whenever the City wants to get together. We are in negotiations right now. Commissioner Teele: Well, if the Commission directs or requests that we do that immediately and we negotiate around the clock, I would ... in deference to your comments, I would prioritize that the Police then go ... be given the first treatment because there...I didn't see any savings, quite frankly, in the Structural Committee from the Fire Department. This is not about trying to get a contract. This is about trying to get savings that can be a part of our Five -Year Plan, so that we could go forward. Mr. Gabriel: I understand your comments. We're, like I said, never opposed to negotiating around the 31 AUGUST 14, 1998 clock. We could negotiate around the clock and we may be able to come up with savings, although I'm not sure. Commissioner Teele: All right. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: That's going to be the motion. I really don't believe Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado, Commissioner Gort, that there's going to be a lot of savings here. I mean, I think that Commissioner Gorfs point of view of let's look at the options is where to go. But what I'm suggesting is, let's look at the savings on September 28th and let's come back with a very real look and let's reserve the right in adopting a budget today that does not mean that we will not look for further savings. Now, would that be acceptable to the Oversight Board, Mr. Manager, in your judgment? If we adopted a balanced budget today but with the caveat that in the budget hearing process, which is our duty anyway, that we will continue to look for savings and we will identify any savings, if any, on the 28th? Is that a problem legally, Mr. Attorney? Mr. Vilarello: I believe the Oversight Board simply wanted you to adopt all necessary legislation at this point. If you do what you just suggested and you find savings before September 28th, I'm sure that they would be more than happy to accept that. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's a plus item. Commissioner Teele: It becomes a plus item but I want... Vice Chairman Plummer: Absolutely. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager? Mr. Warshaw: I can't speak for the Oversight Board, but I agree that you've got an additional, acceptable recurring revenues or expense cuts, that they would certainly look at those favorably. Commissioner Regalado: One of the.. just briefly. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado. Commissioner Teele: Well, let me do this. I'm finished with the closing, that I would ask that the Budget Office be allowed to give us a very brief overview of the advantages or disadvantages of what's in the various four options that have been laid out and then we take up the first one and go through it, as Commissioner Gort has recommended. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, let's see what Mr. Regalado has to say. Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, very briefly. On September, I sent a memo to the City Attorney several days ago regarding precisely the Water and Sewer Department. I've tried to get details about the contract that the City entered with Miami Dade Dade County or Dade County at that time. And there are, I think, two issues. One issue is a million dollar ($1,000,000) that the City never got from the MiamiDade Water and Sewer or the Dade Water and Sewer. And the second issue is a provision, that I understand is there, that for City of Miami residents there should be a 15 percent discount on the bill. Now, you know, what we're doing here, like Commissioner Teele rightly said, is putting the brunt of the deficit on the people of Miami. So, if we can get any relief for the people of Miami in any areas ... I mean, even in food discounts... it would help because this is what we're here for. So, I would request from the City Attorney, on September 28th, to give us his views on what can be done, if anything, in terms of the Miami Water and Sewer Department. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Regalado: Do we need a motion for that or just... 32 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: No. He's so instructed. Commissioner Regalado: OK. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. I have a few questions before we start fishing and cutting bait. I'm still concerned about the level of Police at 1141. I'm concerned where the money is going to come from once the Federal money runs out. I think its ... you know, it would be nice to have a 1141 but I don't think its realistic. Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, we're not going to have 1141. When the Federal money runs out in the out years, the General Fund commitment is continuously going to be for a thousand forty unless that's ever changed in future years. Vice Chairman Plummer: So, it really, in fact, is a thousand and forty? Mr. Warshaw: Is the commitment from the General Fund and the hiring of the grant positions has been, from the beginning and continues to be, staged in anticipation of attrition so that those Federal police officers run back down so we get back to the base line number. 9. APPROVE MATRIX B, OPTION I OF FIVE YEAR PLAN SUMMARY REVISED, WITH TOFF STREET PARKING CONTRIBUTION. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. My next area, of course, is still the overtime in the Police Department. I would like to see it be reduced down to the five point two and, if it is necessary, that, in fact, it be taken from within your budget, whether you've got to cut salaries or you've got to cut positions or what you've got to do, that it be taken from within your budget. It's just to me, overtime is very poor planning. And so that's my thing there. I think that we talked yesterday about additional monies from the VIP and I think that those additional monies from the VIP can actually be used. Commissioner Sanchez, so we can use those for the operational review of hiring outside consultants to come in and then there might still even be some left after that. Mr. Manager, I think it is most important in two areas, and this is outside of really the budget but I think it's ... I've got to say it today. I hope that you will assign someone from your staff to be always present when the County is discussing their budget because their budget does affect us. And I think that we have never had anyone there on a full-time basis to protect the interest of the City as it relates to that budget. I think, also, we need a full-time person when the Assessment Board is doing the assessments or the reduction of assessments. Someone there to protect the City, which we have never had in the past and I find out that other cities have had people there to protect their interests and have come away from the table doing very, very well. The only other thing that I will have is, I have said it before, and that is that I will want a mandate on the Manager, that it be a one percent cut per month, not to exceed 10 percent, either in cuts or in additional revenues. And I believe it can be done without any major problem. So, other than that, that's all I have to say. And if nobody else has ... Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: I have a question. When it was asked of you what we needed for the first year, instead of 14, you said it was 11. If you say 11, then what you're doing is you're eliminating the two point seven million dollars ($2,700,000) and the Contingency Fee. I mean contingency. Mr. Warshaw: The I I ... it actually comes to eleven point six. We started with a base of fourteen point three. Took out the two million dollars ($2,000,000) for the staged hiring. Commissioner Gort: Right, OK. So, that changes the plan, number one. My understanding is, it brings the solid waste down by thirteen dollars ($13) and it brings the fire fee down by ten dollars ($10) when you take away the two million dollars ($2,000,000)? When you go to 11, instead of 14, your fire fee place here in number one, instead of 26 will be 13 and instead of 50...37 will be 27, using your same numbers. Mr. Parekh: Commissioner, we're looking at Option B. Commissioner Gort: I'm sorry. I'm looking at Option B. Mr. Parekh: OK. Commissioner Gort: Option 1, Option B. 33 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Warshaw: Matrix B, Option 1. Mr. Parekh: OK. In that particular issue, the solid waste fee would be a twentysix dollar ($26) increase and fire fee an additional 37. Commissioner Gort: But in that budget, where you have it at 26, you have included in the two million. When you take the two million away, two point eight million dollars ($2,800,000), that will reduce —one way you can do it, you can reduce solid to thirteen dollars ($13) and you can reduce the fire to twentyseven dollars ($27). Mr. Parekh: OK. Commissioner Gort: OK. Let me ask you. My understanding is, when you look at this appendix right now. Mr. Parekh: Right. Commissioner Gort: The fee that you have is to cover 14, not 11. Mr. Parekh: That is true. But in the summary on Matrix B, you already have Off Street Parking. Commissioner Gort: Which summary? Wait, wait. I might not have that document. Mr. Warshaw: Off -Street Parking is already contemplated ... or let's go through the numbers. Commissioner Gort: This is Off -Street Parking, not... Mr. Parekh: Commissioners, I'm going to refer to Matrix B, as we just voted on Off -Street Parking. If you look at the revisions slash initiatives, you will see that Off Street Parking has those dedicated revenues starting at two point two seven five million in '99, going up to two point two one three in 2003. Then, of course, if you exclude or include the one percent budget reserve contingency, you come to a fourteen point two seven two so, fourteen point three... Commissioner Gort: But, my understanding is, according to what the Chief just said a little while ago and the Manager stated, we're going to do away with the two point eight. Mr. Parekh: Yes. Or if you go now to Option 1, 2 and 3. Commissioner Gort: Right. Mr. Parekh: You will see that you have two point seven five. Commissioner Gort: I'm talking about right now, one specific option. Mr. Parekh: If you remove... Commissioner Gort: The two point eight million dollars ($2,800,000), if you remove that... Mr. Parekh: Oh, if you remove that? Commissioner Gort: Yes. Mr. Parekh: OK. I don't think we're removing that. Commissioner Gort: You made the statement that its going to be 11 something rather than 14. Mr. Parekh: That's based upon the savings you're going to have, based upon staged hiring in the amount of two million and the unclassified savings in the amount of seven hundred and fifty thousand. That's what we 34 AUGUST 14, 1998 were referring to. Mr. Warshaw: Correct. Commissioner Gort: What are we going to look at? We going to look at deficit 11 or 14? Mr. Warshaw: In which option are you're referring to? Commissioner Gort: Option I ... Option B, Option 1. Mr. Warshaw: What Option 1, with Off -Street Parking, does, it shows you how you're going to satisfy the structural deficit of fourteen point three million dollars ($14,300,000). What you're doing is, in that case, you've adopted the millage at four point seven million. You've done staged hiring at two million. The unclassified savings at seven hundred and fifty thousand. In this particular option, the solid waste fee at one point seven million. A fire fee at six point eight million. And the solid waste capital needs, which means a portion of the solid waste fee is going to fund the capital needs. That's how you get to the fourteen point... Commissioner Gort: Right. Mr. Warshaw: Three million dollars ($14,300,000). Commissioner Gort: But my question ... OK, I understand that. My question is, you made the statement that the capital need was going to be I 1 something. Is the capital need going to be I 1 or 14? Mr. Warshaw: The capital ... I didn't say the capital needs. I lost you there. Commissioner Gort: OK. The overall deficit that we're going to have, is it going to be 11.4 or is it going to be 14.3? Mr. Warshaw: Let's start all over again. I understand what you're saying. The structural deficit that has to be cured is fourteen point three million dollars ($14,300,000). By exercising all of the options broken down... Commissioner Gort: I understand all that part. Mr. Warshaw: ...you get the fourteen point three. Commissioner Gort: I was under the impression that you were going to take out the one percent out of it. Mr. Warshaw: What you're asking is, whether or not the fees at the bottom of Option 1 for'99... Commissioner Gort: What I'm asking is... Mr. Warshaw: ...will cure that deficit. Commissioner Gort: The one percent budget deficit reserve contingency, can we do that, instead of having that one percent there, can we do that with the sale of land? We always said that the sale of land should be for surplus and should be left in an escrow account. Mr. Parekh: Commissioners, the sale of the FEC (Florida East Coast) basically has two components to it. One is to offset the cost associated with the Blue Ribbon Committee recommendations, which there are 643 recommendations. Commissioner Gort: Right. Mr. Parekh: Then a balance of it, approximately sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000) for this fiscal year, which will be residual, will be left over to do something called Strategic Initiatives. Basically, either to offset bonds or take care of the Knight Center in terms of a longterm strategic initiatives which the City will come up. We are not predicating using any of those reserves, which have already been earmarked in the 35 AUGUST 14, 1998 prior Five -Year Plan, to offset any more additional General Fund reserves or contingencies. Therefore, it is OK to say that our structural deficit, as it stands right now, including the revenues we're going to get from Off -Street Parking... Commissioner Gort: Is fourteen. Mr. Parekh: ...is fourteen point three million dollars ($14,300,000). Commissioner Gort: OK. Mr. Parekh: Now, I think we're looking at all the several options, which the Commission has been discussing today and, if you allow me the opportunity, I would like to go through Option 1, 2, 3, and 4. Commissioner Teele: Commissioner Gort, I think it's important but I really think that Commissioner Regalado and Commissioner Sanchez... because... I mean, Commissioner Plummer, need to be here. I mean, you know, the real question is, what options can Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner ... each of us, individually work off oV And, I guess, Commissioner Gort said option number one, is that what...which option you said you'd like to work off of? Commissioner Gort: Teele, yes. I understand what you were stating yesterday. Let's have all the burden on one, but I think this Commission has made certain commitment that we're going to ... if we ... whatever we do today, we're going to try to eliminate in the future. Commissioner Teele: We're going to what? Commissioner Gort: Try to eliminate in the future. And we don't want to put the whole burden of the whole Five -Year Plan in one year. I think we got enough things going that over next two to three years, we will show enough recurring revenues to take care of the deficit. And I would like to take the option that has less impact within our community. That's what I'm looking at. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. So, now, tell me ... if I may? You know, I wish I had a chalk board. You want to go through the whole thing? Mr. Parekh: Whatever you want, Chairperson. Vice Chairman Plummer: Who has asked for you to go through the whole thing? I mean, is that again, duplicate or... Mr. Warshaw: Can I make a suggestion? Why don't we go through one of the options because, basically, all of the options contain the same components, just different numbers. So, why don't we go through one just to create an understanding of how we got to the numbers. Vice Chairman Plummer: Go. Mr. Parekh: OK. We're dealing with Matrix B, Options 1, 2, 3 and 4. Option 1 deals with the millage at 10 mills, which raises four point seven million dollars ($4,770,000) net. Secondly, is the concept of staged hiring, which, for fiscal year '99, raises two million dollars ($2,000,000). Then cuts in unclassified, which starts off with a saving ... a recurring saving of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000), continuing right throughout the Five -Year Plan. Here, a solid waste fee, at an increase of additional twenty-six dollars ($26), with the maximum rate for this coming fiscal year will be two hundred and fourteen dollars ($214), would raise one point seven million. A fire fee with an additional thirtyseven dollars ($37), which would net the City six point eight million and setting aside from those revenues one point six eight two million dollars ($1,682,000) for the solid waste capital needs. Therefore, having a balance of approximately ninety-four thousand two hundred and seventy-one dollars ($94,271) or just roughly hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for'99. However, we have to not only have a balanced budget for fiscal year'99, which is per state law, but we need to balance out all five years in terms of theFive-Year Plan to be handed to the Oversight Board on Monday. Vice Chairman Plummer: Can I ask a question? 36 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: On Option 1, are you telling... because I...when you say millage at 10 mills, then increase by two percent annually. You can't go above 10 mills. Mr. Parekh: No, sir. What we were saying in there, this is basically looking at the impact statement on a single family home. A State law basically limits an increase on single family homes to three percent maximum or CPI, whichever one is less. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Let's get down to the bone. Are you telling me that, in Option 1, the average homeowner is going to be increasing his ... her garbage tax by 214 or paying 214? Mr. Parekh: He will be ... he or she will be paying 214, which is an increase of twenty-six dollars ($26). Vice Chairman Plummer: But that's a total year of 214? Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Rather than 180... Mr. Parekh: Eight. Vice Chairman Plummer: ...eight. And you're telling me that a fire fee will be paid of sixtyone dollars ($61) by everyone of residential but the commercial has that sliding scale? Mr. Parekh: That's true. Mr. Warshaw: In fiscal year'99. Vice Chairman Plummer: I understand that, sir. Now, what does that do to the problem that, I think, that's created for all of us, of all the these damn bills? I mean, you know, every time I turn around, I'm getting another bill from the City, another bill from the City, another bill from the City. I mean, I don't mind it twice a year, all right. But I object to two bills from the City in the same month. Now, what I'm saying to you is, whatever the billing is on these kinds of fees, that the billing be done no more than twice a year. I mean, you know, in postage alone... Mr. Parekh: On the issue, Commissioner, of the taxes and the fire fees, if it's adopted today, it'll be on the tax bill. The solid waste, at this moment in time, until the City Commission chooses to change our billing option, it's in January and in July. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Gort, are you moving Option 1? Commissioner Gort: I wanted everybody to discuss it first. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry. Commissioner Sanchez: I'll tell you this much, I will not support Option 1, 2 or 3 until the City makes more sacrifices. Commissioner Teele: Will you consider four? Commissioner Sanchez: Not even four. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: All right. Vice Chairman Plummer: We've heard from another country. Mr. Teele. I assume Mr. Regalado is still in 37 AUGUST 14, 1998 the building? Commissioner Teele: Yeah, he's here. I just saw him walk by. Listen, let's put the cards on the table here. What is the impact to the average homeowner of Option 1? Mr. Parekh: Ninety-two dollars ($92.00), sir. Commissioner Teele: Bill the ninety-two dollars ($92.00). Tell me how you get the ninety-two dollars ($92). Let's just put it out on the table. Vice Chairman Plummer: It's right here. Mr. Parekh: There will be an increase... Commissioner Teele: Hold it, J.L. Mr. Parekh: ...on the taxes by twenty-nine dollars ($29), solid waste fee by twenty-six dollars ($26) and fire fee by thirty-seven dollars ($37). Commissioner Teele: I thought it was 61. I'm sorry, 37. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, 60...61... Mr. Parekh: We already have twenty-four dollars ($24), so that will be an increase by thirty seven dollars ($37) to 61. Commissioner Teele: Say that again. Mr. Parekh: You already have twenty-four dollars ($24) levied to a single family homeowner. So, an additional... Commissioner Teele: In the fire fee? Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. So thirty-seven dollars ($37) would make it sixty-one dollars ($61) net. Commissioner Teele: So, the impact to the homeowner is ninety-eight dollars ($98)? Mr. Parekh: Ninety-two dollars ($92.00). Commissioner Teele: Ninety-two dollars ($92). All right. That's the impact of Option 1? Mr. Parekh: For fiscal year'99. Commissioner Teele: What enhancements are we going ... how do we just ... you know, I'm ... I wish Commissioner Regalado was here now because ... how are we going to sell this? How do we justify it? What enhancements are we going to be providing to the homeowner for this? What enhancements... let's start with the fire fee. What are we going to be providing new, different and exciting that we're not doing now? Fire fee. We're talking now about a millage... I mean, a fire fee increase of, what is it, thirty seven dollars ($37) above the 24? What is it, 37? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir, 37 above the existing 24, which, of course, is committed to capital. Commissioner Teele: What is the thirty-seven dollars ($37) going to buy the average homeowner, the average citizen in Miami, that we're not providing now? Fire Chief Carlos Gimenez: The thirty seven dollars ($37.00) will fund the ...will offset some of the costs in the General Fund. Commissioner Teele: No, no, I don't want to know what it funds. Just ... please, Chief. Just think about it 38 AUGUST 14, 1998 and then just answer the question. What is this additional thirty-seven dollars ($37), over and above the twenty-four dollar ($24) base, going to provide the average homeowner in the City of Miami? Mr. Manager? Vice Chairman Plummer: What does he get tomorrow that he don't get today? Mr. Warshaw: It's going to... Commissioner Teele: Enhance service. Mr. Warshaw: It's not going to give... Commissioner Teele: What enhance ... what new benefit that they're not paying for now do they get with the thirty-seven dollars ($37)? Mr. Warshaw: There are no new benefits, that 1 know of None. Commissioner Teele: All right. OK. So, that's that. On the millage, how much is the millage increase, twenty-nine dollars ($29)? Mr. Warshaw: Twenty-nine dollars ($29). Commissioner Teele: What new services associated with the millage, with the millage, are they going to get? I know we're going to get better lawyers; we're going to get some more financial people in the Finance Department —by the way, did the new finance director ever arrive from Imperial Pope County? Vice Chairman Plummer: She's here. Commissioner Teele: Could I just, at least, welcome you, ma'am. I haven't had the opportunity to meet you. Vice Chairman Plummer: She might be leaving. You better do it in a hurry. Commissioner Teele: Would you please... ma'am, would you please just come and introduce yourself, at least? I don't know if A know that we all got the memo and we were waiting your ... we got Chief Warshaw's glowing recommendations and report and would you just, again, state your name and... Ms. Julie Weatherholtz: My name is Julie Weatherholtz. I'm the Finance Director for your city and I'm very pleased to be here and meet you. Commissioner Gort: You sure? Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes. Commissioner Teele: Thank you. And we're going to have one of the essential elements of the Blue Ribbon Committee's recommendation. One of the things that the External Auditor ... by the way, one of the things the External Audit says is that the signing stamp for the checks is not secured all the time. Could you make sure that that gets done? Ms. Weatherholtz: Yes, I will. Commissioner Teele: That's in the External Auditor's Report, current one that's out now. But other than locking up the stamp that has the checks for the City of Miami and getting more people... seriously, are we ... other than that, Chief ..and thank you very much, ma'am. Are we going to be able to see or deliver any new services to the homeowners for this twenty-nine dollars ($29). Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, I'm going to answer you, using some of the things you said to me and that is that, overall, the City needs a lot of new efficiencies and, obviously, this money ... this income is part of a whole strategic plan that I'm hoping is going to change the whole culture, the way this City does business. And there's a lot of things that need to be changed. So, in general terms, I'm telling you that the homeowner is going to see a whole change in the way we deliver basic services and is going to have the cleanest city in 39 AUGUST 14, 1998 America and is going to have the best park system in America and is going to have the finest streets and the finest landscaping and all the kinds of things that affect the quality of life of Miami citizens and that's something that I agree with you they deserve. Commissioner Teele: Well, I don't see it. I mean, honestly, we have a difference ... a professional difference of opinion. I respect your opinion. But the twenty-nine dollars ($29) is not going ... there is nothing...Jorge Luis is going to be able to go out and tell the people that they're getting ... that they're not getting now. Because, essentially, this is to provide the same level of services that ... we're just funding the deficit. I will vote for this measure... Commissioner Gort, I will vote for any of them here if I'm the third vote but I've got to tell you something, I believe that, if we're going to charge the homeowner ninety<two dollars ($92) more money, we ought to give ... and, again, I apologize, solid waste is twenty-six dollars ($26) additional? Vice Chairman Plummer: Yes. Commissioner Teele: And for twenty-six dollars ($26.00), I've gone through the Solid Waste budget for three hours last night ... four hours last night with you, Chief, and I'm grateful for the time you spent. We're not going to provide anything new. We're just going to cover a part of the deficit, which, for this department, is about sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000) is that right? Fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000). Mr. Warshaw: That's true, but... Commissioner Teele: That's the deficit. Mr. Warshaw: That's correct. Commissioner Teele: We're not adding anything new. I mean, we may get some efficiencies. And, so, my only point of view is this ... I yield. Commissioner Gort: Can I? For a minute. You know, it's ... maybe I'm looking at different papers, but my understanding, and Sanitation, you correct me, and Fire, you correct me. My understanding is, the fire fee ... the money was being utilized to upgrade all our trucks so we wouldn't have the problem that we had one time, when we had a fire and we had to borrow two pumps from somebody else because our equipment was not up-to-date. My understanding, we are going to spend money to bring that up-to-date and our fire people will be able to go and take care of fires. Our medical people will be able to take care of service of a heart attack within two to three minutes, so that should be better. My understanding from Sanitation that ... if I'm wrong and you guys have gave me the wrong information, let me know today. Sanitation's been telling me that the only reason they can't keep the City clean, because they don't have the crane to do so. I see in here about two million dollars ($2,000,000) in improvement to the trucks and we can have all that ... what do you call them? Vice Chairman Plummer: Crane. Commissioner Gort: The cranes operating, so we will be able to clean up. At the same time, you have made commitment that we going to inspectors out there, that we have given to them in the new budget so we can take care of illegal dumping that's taking place, which is not only is ugly to the city but, at the same time, it cost money to the City. Am I wrong in my options on this? Because this is what I've been told by you all. Mr. Warshaw: I'd like to be able to answer you. Commissioner Gort: Well, I think that's what you should have answered before. Mr. Warshaw: You're not wrong, Commissioner. Number one, the first twenty four dollars ($24) on the fire fee is going for capital needs and it is going to upgrade, over five years, all of the equipment. Now... Commissioner Teele: But that's been voted on. We're not voting on that today and I don't think we ought to mix apples with oranges. Mr. Warshaw: But Commissioner Gort's asking me about capital equipment and I'm telling him that there 40 AUGUST 14, 1998 are capital equipment needs that will be filled with that twenty<four dollars ($24) that was voted on previously. Now, from this point forward, Miami's Fire Department is one of the finest in the United States and, yes, you're right, these monies are going to, in effect, cure some of the deficit, no question about it, but citizens can expect to continue to get the same high level of quality service they get from an "A" rated Fire Department. Now, on the sanitation side, yes, it's true, that the Sanitation Department is under -funded and has a twelve to thirteen million dollar ($13,000,000) deficit. But, simultaneously with that, I've hired Clarence Patterson, who is one of the top sanitation people in the United States. He shared with me yesterday that, whereas last week, we were three and a half weeks behind in pick-ups. As of yesterday, we were a half a day behind. So, how you equate the money with the efficiency, it's a combination of both. Money alone is not going to cure everything. Part of the structural problem of the City and part of the Strategic Plan in all of the initiatives —and the Blue Ribbon Committee said, money is part of the problem but the real problem is there's been a culture in the way that the City has been doing business for a long time and part of the solution to that is to bring quality people, to have a culture in the City that says we're going to deliver the very best. And I can only tell you, I'm committed to make sure that happens for as long as I'm sitting in this chair. And I know we have a lot to do, a long way to go and a lot of things to change. Is this money alone going to change all those things? No. It's got to be backed up with processes, commitments, strategies and a whole mission to change the way the City does business. And, again, my commitment is there for that and I submit that to all of you. Commissioner Teele: If I may respond? Vice Chairman Plummer: Talking and you're going to lose me. Commissioner Teele: J.L., I just want to respond. He said it in three words, cure the structural deficit. And you can put all of the nice words around it but what we're funding with Option 1 is a first step toward funding the deficit. And, Willie, I understand what you're saying. If we don't fund it, you're right. The fire trucks aren't going to go out because we're not going to have enough people. We're going to have to reduce firefighters. But what I'm telling you is, we're not enhancing anything. We're curing the structural deficit and I have a policy problem supporting enhancing fees and taxes if we're not going to provide something new. Now... Vice Chairman Plummer: You're absolutely right. Commissioner Teele: The fact of the matter is, I will vote for this if the alternative is to have to cut back on the Fire Department. Because that's what we're saying. If we don't support it, we're going to reduce what we're already doing. But we need to be very clear. The Solid Waste budget deficit is thirteen million dollars ($13,000,000). And we can talk about Clarence Patterson and St. Peter and he, himself, but until we fund the Solid Waste Department fully, you're going to have problems with illegal garbage; you're going to have problems with clean-ups; you're going to have problems with schedules because those people are burnt out. Vice Chairman Plummer: If I may. Mr. Manager, you're not going to buy my vote. You just lost it, OK? Mr. Manager, I am not going to sit here and have you tell me that the people of this community are going to be paying more money and not do better off than what they are today. I thought we had a full understanding that Sanitation, the major complaint that all of us have, was going to be improved by whatever plan we adopt. Now, it's nice to say that you're not going to have anymore money for equipment and you're not going have anymore money for people. I'm telling you that, as far as I'm concerned, it's not a matter, do we want to give better service. It's a matter that better service is needed. We've got to have more people in Sanitation. We've got to have more money for equipment. The equipment is in poor condition. Now, what I guess I'm really saying to you, Mr. Manager, in Option 1, if I were to adopt it right now as it stands in Option 1, at ninety-two dollars ($92) additional a year, it would be hard pressed, I think, for anybody in this City to say that at twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day, which that comes out to be, twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day, that they could not afford and that's what I'm told by the Department, that ninetytwo dollars ($92) a year, 365 days a year, is twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day. I would much prefer, Mr. Manager, to go to another ten dollars ($10), if that's what it is. Another ten dollars ($10), which now is going to say, I'm going to have thirty cents ($0.30) a day and restrict two million dollars ($2,000,000) for equipment in Sanitation. Mr. Warshaw: This gives you one point six eight two million Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, you just said that it didn't. 41 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Warshaw: No. When we ran through the —when I ran through the option, I told you this gives you one point six million each year for five years to upgrade capital equipment in Sanitation. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Now, equipment... Commissioner Regalado: If I may, J.L. Vice Chairman Plummer: Equipment takes people to operate, OK? Now, how many people are you going to be adding to the department? Mr. Warshaw: And there are people who are built in in the staged hiring in 1999 in the Sanitation Department. Vice Chairman Plummer: How many? Hello? You're about to get my vote back. Commissioner Teele: Show me the budget number. Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Because I want to make sure that we understand that, with some new equipment and with some additional people, it's not going to be what they have to today. They're going to be better off. Commissioner Teele: J.L., let them give you the number. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's what I'm waiting for. Commissioner Teele: Because what they are is, they're already over their budget and what —they're already over their budget at Solid Waste and what they're doing, essentially... I'll let them speak for... Vice Chairman Plummer: I asked for a number. How many additional people are you going to be anticipated... additional in this coming year? Mr. Clarence Patterson (Director, Solid Waste Department): Commissioner, as I understand what we're talking about here, is something that we discussed in union negotiations about bringing on people to fill in for vacations, et cetera, et cetera, so that we don't have a delay in service that is generated by not having enough people. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Patterson, a simple answer. Is it 30 people, 40 people? Commissioner Teele: Mr. Patterson, show me the numbers. Mr. Warshaw: There are 15 people ... there are 15 people set aside in the Blue Ribbon Initiatives that are still vacant positions, that are part of the staged hiring. That's in addition to, in addition to the '99s that Mr. Patterson's referring to. These are people that are in the Blue Ribbon Initiatives. Vice Chairman Plummer: How many of those? Mr. Warshaw: Fifteen total. Commissioner Teele: Excuse me. Would you show me that in the budget book? Because I need to associate this with a number, Dipak. Vice Chairman Plummer: So do I. Commissioner Teele: Show me the number here, over and above, in terms of personnel, to answer J.L ... Commissioner Plummer's question. That's all. Just give us a number. Show us the number in the book. Mr. Warshaw: Those positions are built into the budget. 42 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Teele: Built into what budget, the Solid Waste budget? Mr. Warshaw: They're built into the Solid Waste budget; they're built into the City's budget, and they're a part of the Blue Ribbon Initiatives of the 200 positions that are now going to be delayed and staged. So, the question is, which of those positions will be hired first? And that will be management decision for the next fiscal year. Commissioner Teele: Would you just help me understand? Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. Commissioner Teele: And show me this in the budget? In the Solid Waste budget. Vice Chairman Plummer: I've got to ask another question real quick like, while they're looking that one up. How much money do you have in the Sanitation budget for recycling? Mr. Patterson: How much money do we have for recycling? Vice Chairman Plummer: That's my question. By the way, Mr. Manager, I am told that the fee by Bedminster of the seven hundred and eighty thousand, that the one point eight was established by the Administration for two years, not for one. Now, whatever it is, whatever it is, it's got to be paid. And what they agreed to the fact, whatever it cost us for recycling, that they would pay for, when that's been established and justified, that's a source of income. How much? Mr. Patterson: It's seven hundred and eighty-five thousand. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. So, in other words, if, in fact, a finalized deal is put together with Bedminster, they have to pay that fee and that would be a plus, am I correct? Mr. Parekh: The fee will have to be a little bit higher than that. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, whatever that fee is. Mr. Parekh: Yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. So, in other words, what I'm going to say, Mr. Teele, is if, in fact, that contract is finalized and that money is forthcoming from Bedminster, that the Administration cannot spend a penny of it until this Commission makes the decision of where it's going. That's how I'll get my additional people beyond ... up into the Sanitation Department and I'll get the equipment that's necessary at the tune of almost eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) a year. Thank you. Commissioner Regalado: But is that for recycling? That's being used for... Vice Chairman Plummer: No, no, no. Recycling ... the agreement from Bedminster is that they would pay the City, on a monthly basis, whatever it cost the City to, in fact, do recycling. Now, that number has been banning out from seven hundred and eighty-eight thousand, which Mr. Patterson just said. If, in fact, that contract is finalized, they'll start paying us immediately seventy thousand dollars ($70,000) a year ... a month. That money, I'm saying, is understood that they cannot ... the Administration cannot use that money until this Commission authorizes where that money is going to go. And its my intent that that money would go into greatly enhance and improve the trash and garbage pickup in this City. I mean, that could give us an additional eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000). Mr. Warshaw: Commissioner, there are monies built into next year's budget for temporary employees for the Sanitation Department, particularly, when existing employees, fulltime City employees go on vacation and ... why don't you give him the line item, so Commissioner Teele knows exactly where that is in the budget. Mr. Parekh: OK. For all thirteen temporaries, the amended budget was two hundred and eleven thousand. 43 AUGUST 14, 1998 For fiscal year '99 onward, it's seven hundred and eighty-five thousand five hundred and twenty dollars ($785,520). Furthermore, for the record, the adopted budget for... Commissioner Teele: And you're saying that the five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) difference is earmarked toward Solid Waste? Mr. Parekh: It is in Solid Waste Department's budget Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Gentlemen, the time ... sit down, Norman, please. I'm trying to help you. The time has come to fish or cut bait, OK. TV cameras 1, 2 and maybe 3. Mr. Gort is not here. I would ask that we have a full Commission so everybody has the opportunity to be a star, OK. Mr. Gort? Hello, Mr. Gort. Commissioner Teele: While we're waiting... Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: Let me just say this. The only option that I am prepared to support, initially, is Option 4. It puts probably the greatest burden on the homeowner. Vice Chairman Plummer: Where is four? Commissioner Sanchez: There is no four. Mr. Parekh: We gave it out to you. Commissioner Teele: They passed it out. Vice Chairman Plummer: Where ... I don't have four. All right. I do now, I guess. Commissioner Teele: It does not increase taxes from the current nine point six mill ... nine point five nine mills. It puts a much lower burden of fire fees, about half of what Option 1 does and a much higher burden on Solid Waste. The issue in Solid Waste, as far as I'm concerned, is twofold. One, every city in Miami, every city in Dade County is paying twice what we're paying and it ... and we're not paying what it costs. I think, to ask citizens to not pay what ... for something cost distorts all of the governmental services. And, two, I've been advised by the Manager and the Department that if Option 4 is considered and passed, that the services will be greatly enhanced, that the collection of trash will be merged with the collection of garbage, that there will be the opportunity that the large ... what do you call them? Themulti-bulk trash will no longer be on the sides of the roads because it will be containerized. It's my understanding that there will be a plan to sweep every street in the City of Miami, is that correct, Mr. Manager, under Option 4. Mr.Patterson? Mr. Patterson: That is correct. Commissioner Teele: And I think it is clearly one of the burdens, the most burdensome on the homeowner, but it clearly will provide a benefit to the homeowner but, more importantly, the homeowner will not be asked to pay any more than if we were to transfer this service to Dade County tomorrow or privatize it tomorrow. It is what the market costs to provide the service. Option 4 does not increase taxes and I represent that, with Option 4, we would be in a position to provide a substantial tax relief on September 29th, depending on the outcome of options by the union. If we were to be able to adopt any of the structural recommendations, I believe that the taxes could go down at least five tenths of a mill, based upon the four million dollars ($4,000,000)... seven ... twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) of savings projected, three to five of whom would probably be reasonable. It is a burden of approximately a hundred and seventy dollars ($170) on the homeowner, as compared to Option 1, which is a burden of hundred dollars ($100)... ninety-eight dollars ($98) to the homeowners. It provides a clear advantage that the homeowner is going to get something that he's not getting now. Every homeowner, every neighborhood would get something. It also would provide that the streets would be maintained in the commercial districts in a greater level because we would be adding the supplemental for street sweeping and street cleaning on a daily basis and all of the commercial areas in every neighborhood, Wynwood, Allapattah, would be identified and they would also get commercial sweeping, not on the same level of downtown and Coconut Grove, both of 44 AUGUST 14, 1998 whom are in one district, but very necessary to have that kind of quality service and I would urge you to consider that. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. You know, whatever we do right now ... I got to make a statement, Mr. Dipak. Mr. Parekh: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: You know what's very unfortunate? That the Oversight Board is not sitting on that side of the table to say, OK, gentlemen, if you do this, we find that acceptable or, gentlemen, if you do that, we don't find it acceptable. It just seems so much easier if they would have met with us and we don't have to say, give us your guesstimate, Mr. Manager, or what do you think, Mr. Manager? They could have been here and they can say, gentlemen, it's not enough. A little bit more. And we could have done a little bit more. But they chose not to meet with us. I don't know why. I've asked the question for 17 months. And we're going to do the best we can today. We're going to send it to them and, hopefully, they'll get around to making a decision. But I think it is most unfortunate that they're not sitting in the same room across the table where the question could be asked immediately. Now, let's fish or cut bait. All right, let... Commissioner Regalado: But that is a problem. That is a real problem because when Commissioner Teele was asking about sweeping streets, Mr. Patterson was saying yes, and Mr. Dipak was saying no. And Dipak is the one that is going to go before the Oversight Board and is going to criticize the Department for being out of control and probably say that the Commission, you know, did something and they want to... Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Clarify the record, please. Commissioner Regalado: Well ... so... Mr. Parekh: Let me clarify the record. Commissioner Regalado: So, I just want to make sure that... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Mr. Dipak? Commissioner Regalado: What someone... Vice Chairman Plummer: Under Option 4, is it ... the streets going to get swept or not? Mr. Parekh: I was just having a healthy conversation with the Department Director, sir. For the record, the recycling cost, I just wanted to put it on the record, was approximately one point eight million dollars ($1,800,000), sir. On the issue of street cleaning, the way all the options have been configured, is that the street cleaning will be enhanced. Now, I think Clarence Patterson would be better able to put that issue on the record, OK. Commissioner Teele: We need it on the record. Mr. Parekh: And I think the Department Director needs to say that and that's an issue which I was coming up to say, not the Budget Director Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, quit beating around the bush and let's get an answer. Commissioner Sanchez: On the record. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Patterson, yes or no? Mr. Patterson: Yes, as the office is Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. That answers it. Next question. Commissioner Regalado: Next question is, Mr. Manager, we heard Mr. Ray Goode. Mr. Ray Goode is, 45 AUGUST 14, 1998 without a doubt, a person that carries a tremendous moral weight in this community. Mr. Ray Goode had said on the record that he not only believes but he endorse the fact that whatever we do now, we can change that in the future. Well, that same statement that Mr. Ray Goode said, it has been said by this Commission and, yet, we have been accused of being irresponsible and not having political courage by the Oversight Board. So, just in case... Vice Chairman Plummer: What's your question? Commissioner Regalado: Just in case that ... like Commissioner Teele has said and I, personally, for one, would like not only to go on the record but if we need a motion to do so, that to every revenue enhancing measures that we can get in the next month will be to defray the impact that we're causing on the people of Miami. Do you think that these words may be used and will be used, not in a court of law but by the Oversight Board against the City Commission? Commissioner Sanchez: How about shall be used? Vice Chairman Plummer: Who knows? Mr. Warshaw: Not only do I not think they'll be used against the Commission, I think the Oversight Board has very clearly said and the Estimating Conference has said the same thing, that as long as the City can show additional, legitimate legislatively approved enhanced revenues, recurring and/or reduction in recurring expenses, that those future expense reductions and revenue enhancements could come back and subsequently impact by reducing whatever it is you might choose to do today. So, the answer is, as a daily part of doing business in the City, we're going to commit ourselves to find these additional revenues, find these additional expenditure reductions and bring them to you throughout the year as a part of regular Commission meetings. Vice Chairman Plummer: That's the fourth time this morning you've said that. I need a Manager that's going to be brief. Are there any other questions? I have one. And very simple question based on Mr. Regalado. In Option 1, does it do everything that RayGoode's Committee recommended? Mr. Warshaw: Yes sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: On the record. Mr. Warshaw: Yes, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Thank you. Now, the floor is open for a motion. Commissioner Regalado: I'm prepared... Vice Chairman Plummer: Everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. Steve Clark, are you listening? Commissioner Gort: Look. I am sure he is, believe me. Commissioner Regalado: I am ... Mr. Vice Chairman... Commissioner Sanchez: I have a motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Regalado has the floor. Commissioner Regalado: Well, I am prepared to introduce a motion supporting Option 1 and I understand what Commissioner Teele said and he makes a lot of sense. The only problem that I have is because, like he says, the impact will be in the residential and I'm telling you that I have visited many of the areas of our city and the burden that the owners of residences have now is unbearable and I would ask that we don't shift the brunt of this deficit on the residentials. So, my motion will be to go with Option 1, although... Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a second? 46 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: Although, I will be, you know, willing to hear the discussion. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a second? Commissioner Gort: I'll second the motion. Vice Chairman Plummer: There is a second. Under discussion on Option 1. Commissioner Gort: Under discussion. The reason I second is, I stated before, in many of our neighborhoods ... I'm going to have to be going for the next two months to all these neighborhood homeowners associations and explain the reason why we doing this and what are we going to do to improve it. At the same time, I agree with J.L., what you stated before, that by having the tax in the mills that, at least they'll be able to reduce it from the income tax, which will be a benefit. At the same time, doing on the mill, it also tax indirectly to the people that come and visit and work within the City of Miami, that occupies the major buildings and the major places and that's one way that we can get some taxes from those individuals. For those reasons, I support Option 1. At the same time, it's the one that creates the less impact in our community. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there any further discussion? Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: I will live with Option 1, although I will not support it. I want to advise this Commission that, if the Oversight Board takes exception to anything in thisFive-Year Plan, it will probably be deemed to be out of compliance because you have no further elasticity, no further response. In other words, if you go in and you report a millage of less than 10 mills, you can at least say well, we still have a reserve. There are a number of open issues. There's a number of open issues. The seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($750,000) of unclassified savings have been challenged by the Board —by persons on the Board. I don't know if their challenge is well-founded. I don't think it is. But what I'm saying to us is, is that ... in the military you don't commit everything on the first burst. You know, we've got absolutely no flexibility and I just think, from a financial point of view, this is continuing to take this all the way to the limit. I think Option 1 is a legally balanced and acceptable alternative as it leaves us. But, I think, if it is ... if there is twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) that are accepted under the Estimating Conference and the Oversight Board, we're going to be forced to come back into a meeting. I would strongly recommend that you all take the millage to nine point nine mills so that you at least provide some flexibility... or nine point eight mills ... some flexibility to balance things out with the Oversight Board. I believe that when we come back here on September 28th, we can reduce the millage, if we want to, or we can reduce the fire fee, if we want to. Well, we can't then because the notices will have gone out. But we can reduce certain things. But one problem that we have is that when you put this at 10 mills, you have no flexibility. My other reason that I'm voting against it ... but I will ... the other reason is that I don't think that the citizens are going to see any dramatic increase in services in any area. I have gone through the Solid Waste budget with the Budget Director, with the Solid Waste Director, with the Manager, and I am here to advise you, in my opinion, as one Commissioner, I do not believe that the Solid Waste Department will see enhanced human and manpower resources to address the main problems that people have confronted. Mr. Attorney, if this passes on a three to two vote, does our ordinance allow or does our Charter provide that I can change my vote to support it if it doesn't change the outcome of the vote? Mr. Vilarello: I'm sorry. I don't understand the question. Commissioner Teele: Disregard the question. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Just for the record, the indication was it was acceptable that the VIP from the Police Department, those monies could be used to do the operational reviews of Police and Fire and others by outside sources and that would be in the neighborhood of approximately ... estimated six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000). Mr. Warshaw: That's correct. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Now, Mr. Teele, I'm going to ask a question and maybe I really shouldn't, but I've got to ask it because maybe you have a little bit more experience than myself. When you say we 47 AUGUST 14, 1998 lose the flexibility of the millage if we go to 10 now, isn't there flexibility that we can gain back in the Sanitation and in the fire fee, that we can pull back ... if we've got to pull back, we can get the flexibility and go up another ten dollars ($10.00) or fifteen dollars ($15.00), whatever is necessary in those two fees, so it's not death's door. Commissioner Teele: You're absolutely right. Look, we have not set the millage when we voted a week ago. We're not setting it today. We're only expressing our intent. We can only set the millage on September 28th at the budget hearing. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Commissioner Teele: The point that I'm making is, if there is ... there are a number of open issues, which the Commission really hasn't been briefed on, but that's not that important, that the Oversight Board may have. I'm concerned about what happens between today, when this goes forward to the Mayor's Office and then to the Estimating Conference and then to the Oversight Board because if we don't reserve some flexibility, we're going to have to come back here and meet again if there is a problem. And my only concern is, I think it is not good public policy to have this City at 10 mills. Vice Chairman Plummer: I would, you know, love to be in a position not to but that's beside the point. All right. There is a motion duly seconded on the floor. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Commissioner Sanchez: I do. I strongly feel that the City could cut the budget by five percent. Although I disagree with the City Manager, I think, if done, it could be done and until I see some commitments from the City on that, I will not support any of the options. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm sorry? Your last statement was? Commissioner Sanchez: I will not support any of the options. Vice Chairman Plummer: You won't support any of the options, is that your statement? Well, OK. That's... you're entitled to that. OK. What did you just tell me? I was trying to listen to two of you at the same time. Mr. Vilarello: I want to caution you with regard to one comment that was made on the fire ... the preliminary fire assessment fee. If you increase ... you need to set that at its highest rate today. You can reduce it but you cannot increase it in September. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, look, you know, here again, and it's unfortunate. Mr. Dipak, give us your best guess, without those people sitting across from us, Option 1. Do you have the comfort that is going to be acceptable? Now, if its not, tell us. Commissioner Gort: It's got a contingency of two point million dollars. Come on. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Gort, I'm trying to come up and second guess a group of phantom people, OK. Now, do you feel comfortable that Option I will be acceptable? If you don't, tell me so now and I won't vote for Option 1. Mr. Warshaw: I'll tell you. Yes, I feel very comfortable it will be acceptable. Vice Chairman Plummer: Now, is your name Dipak? Commissioner Regalado: Here again, we have the same situation. Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. I would like to get an answer from Dipak. He is the guy that's got to sit in the hot seat. He's the guy that's got to stand there and defend us before the phantoms. Commissioner Teele: Or hand us up. Vice Chairman Plummer: Or hand us up. 48 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Regalado: Well, actually, I would like to say that Dipak has not defended this Commission. I really, you know ... and I respect your word, Dipak, but I think that the Commission bashing, in some instances by the Mayor of the City of Miami, by yourself and by the Oversight Board was uncalled for. And, you know, because we are ... you know, we're here trying to do what is best for the City of Miami, to protect the citizens of Miami and ... you know, I think ... I think, you know, when Mano Surana was Budget Director, I mean, some people should have jump and go to the press and said what was going on and I think it's unfair, this Commission bashing all the time by the Oversight Board, by the Mayor and sometimes even by you. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Now, Mr. Dipak, can you answer my question? Mr. Parekh: The only issue I have is that the Estimating Conference will take a look in the work papers on unclassified savings of that seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), where back up will be required. I'm not saying it is not possible but I want to put it on the record that is the issue. Vice Chairman Plummer: Do you recommend that we do something different? Mr. Parekh: I would recommend Option... Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Let me ask the question, please. I might not agree with him either. Mr. Parekh: No. I recommend Option 1 and also that we have a budget reserve and contingency set up so, bottom line, it will take care of Option 1. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Thank you, sir. Now, when the motion fails, Mr. Sanchez... Commissioner Teele: How big is the reserve you're recommending? Mr. Parekh: One percent, which is two point eight million. Vice Chairman Plummer: And that's the reserve? Commissioner Gort: We have ... that's part of the budget. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK, that's the reserve. All right. When this motion fails, I'm going to appoint Mr. Sanchez as a sole committee to come up with his option of where the cuts can be occurred because the motion can... Commissioner Sanchez: I could tell you right now. Five percent of the budget. Let them cut the budget. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. Any further discussion? What do we need first, an ordinance or a resolution? Mr. Vilarello: If the motion passes, I have an ordinance and a resolution. Commissioner Sanchez: I'll make a motion. Mr. V ilarello: Putting it into place. Vice Chairman Plummer: There's a motion on the floor, sir. Commissioner Sanchez: Requesting the City Manager to reduce... Vice Chairman Plummer: Excuse me. There is a motion... unless you're making an amendment or a substitute motion. Commissioner Sanchez: No, no amendment. 49 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Call the roll. Mr. Foeman: Roll call. Vice Chairman Plummer: I'm voting for thirty cents ($0.30) a day. I think that the people of this community can afford thirty cents ($0.30) a day. I don't like the idea of having to raise taxes in any way, shape or form but I think it's got to be done and that, as far as I'm concerned, I have to vote affirmative. Mr. Mayor? Excuse me. For the record, announce the vote. Mr. Foeman: Three, two. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Regalado, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-816 A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT, ACCEPTING THE "CITY OF MIAMI BUDGET AND FIVE YEAR PLAN SUMMARY, REVISED - WITH OFF-STREET PARKING, MATRIX `B', OPTION I", DATED AUGUST 13, 1998, ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. ABSENT: None. 10. APPROVE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22-12 OF CODE INCREASING ANNUAL SOLID WASTE FEE. Commissioner Teele: You have an ordinance? Mr. Vilarello: I have an ordinance. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Mayor, you ... excuse me. Mr. Mayor, do you wish to be heard? Mayor Carollo: Commissioners, I'd like to have the vote finished so that we could... Vice Chairman Plummer: All right, sir. The ordinance is next. Mr. Vilarello: It's an ordinance with regard to the Solid Waste fee. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is the ordinance understood? Call the roll. Mr. Foeman: I need a vote and a second. Vice Chairman Plummer: All right. Who's moving it? Commissioner Gort: I'll move it. 50 AUGUST 14, 1998 Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Gort. Seconded by Mr. Regalado, am I correct? Commissioner Regalado: Yes. Vice Chairman Plummer: Call the roll. Mr. Foeman: Roll call. An Ordinance Entitled - AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 22-12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, THEREBY INCREASING THE ANNUAL SOLID WASTE FEE AS SET FORTH HEREIN; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. was introduced by Commissioner Gort and seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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 Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None. Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Gort and seconded by Commissioner Regalado, 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 Joe Sanchez ABSENT: None. SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 11694 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. 51 AUGUST 14, 1998 11. AMEND RESOLUTION 98-773 RELATING TO PROVISION OF FIRE -RESCUE SERVICES/FACILITIES/PROGRAMS IN CITY RESCIND PORTION OF SECTION II (B) - AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO MAIL COMBINED NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - RESCIND APPENDIX A OF RESOLUTION 98-773 AND INCORPORATE ANEW RATE SCHEDULE AS APPENDIX A. Vice Chairman Plummer: Next thing you need, Mr. City Attorney? Mr. Vilarello: With regard to the preliminary rate resolution for the fire assessment. [AT THIS POINT, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE RESOLUTION INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.] Vice Chairman Plummer: Motion by Gort. Seconded by Regalado. The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gort, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-817 A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S), AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 98-773, ADOPTED JULY 21, 1998, RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF FIRE RESCUE SERVICE, FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA; MORE PARTICULARLY BY RESCINDING A PORTION OF SECTION 11 (B) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO MAIL THE COMBINED NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 19.5-10 OF THE CITY CODE; FURTHER RESCINDING APPENDIX A OF THE ABOVE RESOLUTION ENTITLED "ESTIMATED FIRE RESCUE ASSESSMENT RATE SCHEDULE" (RATE SCHEDULE) IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND INCORPORATING A NEW RATE SCHEDULE AS APPENDIX A, ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Regalado, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: You know, I cannot believe that we've gone through three days of hell for thirty cents ($0.30) a day to the tax payers. Commissioner Gort: Twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day. Vice Chairman Plummer: Twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day. Call the roll. What else do you need? 52 AUGUST 14, 1998 Mr. Vilarello: With regard to the fire assessment, there ... it is required to have a September 14th special meeting with regard to the finalization of that hearing. Commissioner Teele: So move. Commissioner Gort: Second. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a ... OK. And what date would that be? Commissioner Gort: September 14th. Commissioner Teele: What day is that? Vice Chairman Plummer: That's a Monday. Commissioner Gort: Monday. Vice Chairman Plummer: It can't be on the 15th? Mr. Vilarello: The notice requirements of publishing this notice and providing the requirements of the trim bill put us apparently in that very small window. Vice Chairman Plummer: OK. What time of the day? Is it just a single item agenda? What's the pleasure of the Commission? Commissioner Gort: Do it in the afternoon, 5:00. Vice Chairman Plummer: Five o'clock. Commissioner Regalado: In the afternoon. Vice Chairman Plummer: Five o'clock? OK. Moved by Teele, seconded by Gort, that on September the 14th, at 5 p.m., we will meet for purposes of the fire fee assessment. OK. All in favor say "aye." Any option? Show unanimous. No, wait a minute. I'm sorry. Joe, you vote against it? Commissioner Sanchez: Yeah, I vote against it. Vice Chairman Plummer: You going to vote even against a hearing date? Commissioner Sanchez: No, I vote for the hearing date. Vice Chairman Plummer: Oh, OK. Show it unanimous. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 53 AUGUST 14, 1998 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-818 A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 1998, AT 5:00 P.M., FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO IMPOSE AND PROVIDE FOR COLLECTION OF FIRE RESCUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-1999. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Vice Chairman Plummer: What else? Commissioner Gort: I have ... I have a question. Vice Chairman Plummer: Well, wait a minute. Let me try to get ... OK. Mr. Gort has a question. Mr. Gort. Commissioner Gort: I want to make sure we've taken quite a few days, staff, us, all us working together, we tried to come up with an option, with a plan. I want to make sure whatever representation we make to the media, or to the agencies, that we show a united front. Dipak is worried about some of the documentation in backing and my understanding was, a lot of the ... the reason we have a thirteen million deficit is because a lot of revenues that were presented did not have the backing of the paper to back those revenues. We want to make sure that paperwork is done and that its presented so we're not have any excuse to be rejected. And, at the same time, I want to make this statement, that we have the meeting in September the 28th, where a decision, anything that we can find, that we can do in the meantime, we should do so. But I think it's very important that we all show a united front right now and we all speak the same language. Commissioner Teele: Mr. Manager? Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Managers. Mr. Teele. Commissioner Teele: I want to echo what Commissioner Gort has said. My vote should not be interpreted as being a vote against Option 1. It is a vote against the fact that we're not going nearly far enough. As I said before, I will support Option 1, both with my constituents and with the media. But I really do believe that we have not gone nearly far enough and the burden that we're going to put on people will not have a commensurate level of enhancement of services. People don't mind paying for something if they're getting something. And I fear that we're going to ... unless the management priorities that we've outlined here today ... and I am glad that the Mayor has joined us because I think the Off -Street Parking, the Knight Center, the ... looking at other revenues, the appraisal, are very important. But unless some of that stuff is brought into fruition within the next six months, we're going to be sitting right here 12 months from now struggling to try to get it because it's going to be a very difficult picture. I think that the staff should be commended. I want to associate myself with the sentiments that the Manager, the Budget Officer and the entire ... and the Attorney, and the entire staff should support the Commission action and I don't think the vote ... a split vote should be interpreted negatively or not being some sense of unanimity in not moving forward and I 54 AUGUST 14, 1998 particularly urge you, Mr. Dipak, working through the Manager, to be supportive in your private comments to the extent you agree. And if there's anything that you don't agree with, I think you have an obligation and an opportunity now to tell us that you are concerned about certain things. I think Commissioner Plummer gave you that opportunity but I want to specifically give you that opportunity again. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Dipak. Mr. Parekh: Commissioners, number one, with the deepest respect I have for this City and the institution, I have never, ever gone to any committee and bashed the City Commissioners in any way. That is not my role. Commissioner Teele: And I believe you and I take your word for it. Mr. Parekh: OK? I have... Commissioner Teele: And I hope you're comfortable with this budget. Mr. Parekh: Well, I fully support it and I appreciate the help and assistance you have given me. But I have never and I'll never do that because my first obligation is to the City of Miami. Now, I may have disagreements and the City does this on a continuing basis and that is my role. If my role is going to be one of controls and procedures and, at the same time, I might disagree with my colleagues. I might disagree with them right here and with the Manager and I think that's what you pay me for and when that fails, I don't think I should be employed. And that's what you saw the history of the City of Miami in the last few years. 13. DIRECT CITY MANAGERTO NEGOTIATE'' WITH UNIONS WHOSE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS EXPIRE IN SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 IN ORDER TO OBTAIN SAVINGS' — FURTHER DIRECTING MANAGER TO BRING BACK PROPOSED AGREEMENT ON SEPTEMBER 14 1998 - FURTHER' STIPULATING THAT ANY SAVINGS WOULD BE USED TO REDUCE MILLAGE RATE. Commissioner Teele: I appreciate your comment. My final would be a motion, again Mr. Attorney, which I asked you to prepare, instructing the Manager and his team to negotiate with the unions, whose contracts expire on September 30th, prioritizing the Police Department and... Vice Chairman Plummer: Can I get finished the other? Commissioner Teele: And to seek to bring before this Commission on the 14th or the ... as soon as feasible a contract and a further proviso that any savings would be ... any savings would be earmarked for a reduction in millage for the homeowners. Vice Chairman Plummer: Motion made by Teele. Seconded by the Chair. All in favor say "aye." Any opposition? Show unanimous ballot. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 55 AUGUST 14, 1998 The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: MOTION NO. 98-819 A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE LABOR RELATIONS OFFICER TO NEGOTIATE WITH THOSE AFFECTED UNIONS (NAMELY THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE AS WELL AS THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS) WHOSE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS EXPIRE ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1998, PRIORITIZING THE POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, AND TO SEEK TO BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT FOR RATIFICATION BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 14, 1998, OR AS SOON AS FEASIBLE; FURTHER STIPULATING THAT SAID PROPOSED AGREEMENT CONTAIN A PROVISO THAT ANY SAVINGS WOULD BE EARMARKED IN FURTHERANCE OF A REDUCTION IN THE FINAL ADOPTED MILLAGE RATE OF THE CITY. Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 14. RESCIND RESOLUTION 98-754 SUBSTITUTE IN LIEU THEREOF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF CITY -OWNED REAL PROPERTY FOR USE AS RIGHT-OF- WAY IN CONNECTION WITH SOUTHWEST 2ND AVENUE BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION AT SALE PRICE OF'$682,000 WITH CONDITIONS. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. City Attorney, read what you've got. Mr. Vilarello: Commissioners, on July 21st the City Commission adopted a resolution which authorized the sale of certain property to FDOT with regard to the Southwest 2nd Avenue Bridge Project. That agreement that was attached thereto has changed and we need to bring it to your attention. Also, because of certain FDOT requirements, they will not able to close on September 15th. So, we ask you to consider this resolution and change the closing date to September 30, 1998. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a motion? Commissioner Teele: So moved. Vice Chairman Plummer: Is there a second? All in favor, say "aye." Show unanimous. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. 56 AUGUST 14, 1998 The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Teele, who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 98-820 A RESOLUTION, WITH ATTACHMENTS, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 98-754, IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND SUBSTITUTING IN LIEU THEREOF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF APPROXIMATELY 15,087 SQUARE FEET OF CITY -OWNED REAL PROPERTY, HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS PARCEL 120, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF (THE "PROPERTY"), TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR USE AS RIGHT-OF-WAY IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOUTHWEST 2ND AVENUE BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION (THE "PROJECT"), AT A SALE PRICE OF $682,000, SUBJECT TO SAID SALE CLOSING BY SEPTEMBER 30, 1998; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT ("AGREEMENT"), IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, AND TO CONSUMMATE SUCH TRANSACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AGREEMENT, WHICH TERMS MAY BE AMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS MAY BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE SUCH SALE IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM; PERMITTING FDOT TO UTILIZE APPROXIMATELY 8,754 SQUARE FEET OF CITY -OWNED LAND HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS PARCEL 702, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, FOR USE AS A CONSTRUCTION STAGING AREA FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS WITH CONSIDERATION TO BE PAID IN THE AMOUNT OF $96,000; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO CONSUMMATE SUCH TRANSACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SAID AGREEMENT, WHICH TERMS MAY BE AMENDED BY THE CITY MANAGER AS MAY BE NECESSARY IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE SUCH TRANSACTION. (Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.) Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gort, the resolution was passed and adopted by the following vote: Commissioner Wifredo Gort Commissioner Tomas Regalado Commissioner Joe Sanchez Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr. Vice Chairman J.L. Plummer, Jr. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. 15. SANITATION DEPARTMENT'S PLAN OF ACTION AND RECURRING REVENUE IDEAS. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, before we close today and I turn it over to the Mayor for whatever his comments are, I would hope that, for the first meeting in September, I personally would like to see a plan of action in the Sanitation Department. I would like to know and be able to tell the people of this community, for the twenty-five cents ($0.25) a day extra they're going to be paying in additional taxes, of what they're going to be expecting in additional services. I think they deserve nothing less. Mr. Mayor? 57 AUGUST 14, 1998 Excuse me. Mr. City Attorney, is there anything else you need? Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, anything else you need? Mr. Warshaw: No, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Dipak, anything you need? Any other Commissioner, anything they need? Mr. Mayor, its yours. Mayor Carollo: Thank you, Commissioner Plummer. Let me begin by saying that, what I told several of you before I went upstairs, when this meeting was beginning, that I would not let this Commission hang by itself if it would approve a responsible budget for the five years that we all knew would have to have a fee and/or tax increases. Just because I don't vote now with this Commission, in the form of government that we have, doesn't mean that I am going to let the Commission hang by itself. I appointed the Budget and Review Committee that had a total of 16 distinguished members, plus two consultants from the County. Had individuals that combined, were responsible in dealing with over nine billion dollars ($9,000,000,000) worth of budgets every year. I appointed these people from the public and private sector to truly help this City within the short frame of time that we had, to come to a conclusion based upon the strict requirements that we were dealt and we get into the reasons why, to give us the best honest opinion that they could. I think they did that. And I also stated from day one that I would back the recommendations and once they came to this Commission officially with their recommendations, I didn't back away. I told the Commission that whatever part of the recommendations that were given, that they would chose in the ale carte a suggestion that they were given that I would endorse. It's not easy for any governmental body to have to raise fees and/or taxes and I don't know of any resident in Miami or anywhere else in America or the rest of the world that would be in favor of higher fees or higher taxes. This Commission, this government has not had any other options at this point and time. This government has had to do the responsible thing, the responsible vote to be able to assure that this City, for the future, will have the best possible services that we can give, to be able to assure that, in fact, the residents of Miami would not end up having to pay higher fees and/or taxes while receiving less services in the future if this City would be dissolved. And no matter what the demagoguery from some sectors that might come out now or might be, don't fool yourselves. If the City of Miami were to be dissolved, at the end of the day we will be paying higher fees, higher taxes and we would be receiving a lot less services than we are now. I'll give you examples. Here in the City of Miami we have a Fire Department that has the highest rating in the country. There are only four other Fire Departments in the whole country, including our own, that have this rating. The highest that you could receive as a Fire Department. If any of our families would need to call the City's Fire and Rescue Services, we would have our paramedics there almost immediately, within two or three minutes. That service you will not get from the unincorporated areas of Dade County. Police. You try to call the Dade County Police in the unincorporated areas and I assure you, you'll be waiting for hours and hours, while, yes, at times we might not get there as quickly as we would like to and we should. While certain calls, we don't give that priority because of the nature of the calls. You don't have to wait anywhere near as long to receive a police officer, patrolman in the City of Miami as you would in unincorporated Dade County. Let's look at the garbage and trash collection in the City of Miami. Not only do we get two pick ups a week for garbage but we get a daily pick ... excuse me, a weekly pick up for trash in the City of Miami, together with a fourth pick up of recycling. And then at the ... for a whole year, each resident can ask for a special pick up at no cost to each resident. That we get, I believe, two or three of those on a yearly basis for refrigerators. Actually four, I believe it is, for refrigerators and items such as that. You don't get anywhere near those services in Dade County. In Dade County the three hundred and forty-nine dollars ($349) that you pay for garbage collection only, not recycling. If you bring the recycling into it, it's three hundred and eighty dollars ($380). You don't get anywhere near those services that you have in the City of Miami. So, we have done what is in the best interest for the City of Miami here. What is the responsible steps to take. The last years in the City of Miami we have cut, cut, cut, cut where, at the rate that we had cut, if we cut anymore, you'll be choking at the life line of the City of Miami, where we won't be able to provide anywhere near the quality of service that we do today. There are many things that we have to change in our government. We know that. And one way or another it's going to be done. The easy or the hard way and it's going to be done. But, in order for this City to have the foundation to be able to have the opportunity to accomplish that, this step had to be taken today. We can't be making budgets from year to year, doing a patch up of things where we don't know from year to year where the dollars are going to come from. At the same time, I truly believe that between 58 AUGUST 14, 1998 now and the months to come, there will be plenty of additional recurring revenues that this City will find, that will not be in any additional fees or taxes. Revenues of the kind that are solid, are responsible, that the Oversight Board, as they've stated, as the Budget Advisory Committee stated, could be presented and would be approved by the Oversight Board. Something we could not have done now. The bottom line is that the decisions that have been made, they're not popular decisions. They would not be popular here or anywhere else. But they are the only decisions that this Commission could have made. I have already started working on numerous plans and ideas and initiatives to be able to bring additional recurring revenue into the future. The Off -Street Parking, the Knight Center, these are two of the key ones that I have been talking about since last year. In the Five -Year Plan, it was not supposed to happen until the year 2000. 1 want to make sure that those two initiatives happen in this next fiscal year, and they have to happen in the next fiscal year. But we have to go about things in a responsible way. We have, as I've stated on numerous occasions, more virgin land in the City of Miami that's waterfront, in the heart of the City than any other major city in the America. Nine hundred plus acres. We have to begin to develop those properties now in a responsible way that will get the City of Miami the most amount of recurring revenue on a year-to-year basis. These will be some of the additional initiatives that I will be bringing forward in the near future to the City of Miami and how to go about this. But the employees of Miami, which have been the ones that have been getting bashed by some lately. And I will go back to a statement that was made briefly on bashing. Because, as I've told some of my colleagues, I wasn't leaving this meeting today and not coming back. I am the executive part of the government. The Commission is the legislative branch. I have given all the opinions, all the recommendations that I could up to this point, so I was letting the Commission do what they are supposed to do, legislate. And I told them that if I would be needed, that I could be called upon and I would gladly come down and discuss anything else that was needed. Apparently, maybe at least one thought I had left the building. That wasn't the case. The amount of bashing that is going out toward the City of Miami employees by some, the very same that claim that this is some kind of conspiracy to do away with the City of Miami by all kinds of mysterious sources, that bashing is very unfair because the employees that we've had ... and let me remind people just what the employees of the City of Miami have done for this City. Almost two years ago, when the crisis was discovered, it was the employees of the City of Miami that gave up raises for two years, they gave up numerous benefits in order to save the City of Miami over thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) during that two year period. And this was something that they did not have to do. There were contracts, solid contracts, that the City was bound to honor, but the employees gave that up. And, yes, there are salaries that are salaries that are well above the medium salary in the City of Miami that are paid in the City but, at the same time, if there are some demagogues that want to bash the City of Miami employees for salaries that they receive, if I could be shown Dade County government or, for that matter, any other government of any city this size across the country, that, on the average, is paying their employees less or their executives less or if they could show us that somehow we're paying our employees in salaries much more than what the average is, then let them come forth with that evidence but that is not the case. And we have to compete in the market to be able to attract and retain experienced, seasoned professionals. Otherwise, we just wouldn't be able to hire them or retain them. In order for us to bring solid professionals, like the new Budget Director that was brought in, in order to be able to attract someone with the experience of Clarence Patterson in Solid Waste, that was just recently brought back, we have to pay wages that are compatible. No more, no less. So, I wanted to bring that out because I know that the kind of things that will be coming from some areas now and it's always easy to pick on some that are the least that ... are the ones that the least that can defend themselves. But there was another statement made on the Mayor bashing the Commission and to my other four colleagues that I know do not believe that because its funny. The same sources that might feel that are the same ones that might be out there with their allies saying that the Mayor is anti Hispanic. He won't speak to the Hispanic media, they claim. Well, first of all, I think that you all know this is not true. At the same time, I can't be on radio every day or every other day or every week. If I would spend my time there, obviously, I will not have the time that I need to do my job here. But I do not spend my time going from station to station doing what others do. I try to be as responsible as I can when I do go to radio and I will be going to defend this Commission and this City and I will be doing it with a very unpopular issue and decision, the one that needs to be explained to the public. Having said that, I could certainly go on into other areas but I don't think it's the appropriate thing to do now. I think that if any individual member of this Commission has a particular problem with me, they shouldn't have to hide behind the other members of the Commission. They should say it's me. And they should have the courage to say Joe, let's you and I sit down and talk this out together. I've always been open for that. Commissioner? Vice Chairman Plummer: Amen. Thank God I'm in the funeral business. Before you adjourn, I have to ask for a resolution in designating Commissioner J.L. Plummer as voting delegate for the Florida Legal Cities in convention at Miami Beach. 59 AUGUST 14, 1998 Commissioner Gort: Move it. Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved by Gort. Seconded by Sanchez Garcia. All in favor say "aye." Unanimous ballot. So registered, please. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Commissioner Gort: I was going to nominate myself. Vice Chairman Plummer: May I congratulate Mr. Dipak. Let me tell you something, sir. We've had our disagreements. You did a hell of a job. Congratulations. This meeting's adjourned. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Mayor? Excuse me. Mr. City Attorney, is there anything else you need? Mr. Vilarello: No, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Manager, anything else you need? Mr. Warshaw: No, sir. Vice Chairman Plummer: Mr. Dipak, anything you need? Any other Commissioners, anything they need? Mr. Mayor, it's yours. Mayor Carollo: Thank you, Commissioner Plummer. Let me begin by saying that, what I told several of you before I went upstairs, when this meeting was beginning, that I would not let this Commission hang by itself if it would approve a responsible budget for the five years that we all knew would have to have a fee and/or tax increases. Just because I don't vote now with this Commission, in the form of government that we have, doesn't mean that I am going to let the Commission hang by itself. I appointed the Budget and Review Committee that had a total of 16 distinguished members, plus two consultants from the County. Had individuals that combined, were responsible in dealing with over nine billion dollars ($9,000,000,000) worth of budgets every year. I appointed these people from the public and private sector to truly help this City within the short frame of time that we had, to come to a conclusion based upon the strict requirements that we were dealt and we get into the reasons why. To give us the best honest opinion that they could. I think they did that. And I also stated from day one that I would back the recommendations and once they came to this Commission officially with their recommendations, I didn't back away. I told the Commission that whatever part of the recommendations that were given, that they would chose in the ale carte a suggestion that they were given that I would endorse. It's not easy for any governmental body to have to raise fees and/or taxes and I don't know of any resident in Miami or anywhere else in America or the rest of the world that would be in favor of higher fees or higher taxes. This Commission, this Government has not had any other options at this point and time. This Government has had to do the responsible thing, the responsible vote to be able to assure that this City, for the future, will have the best possible services that we can give, to be able to assure that, in fact, the residents of Miami would not end up having to pay higher fees and/or taxes while receiving less services in the future if this City would be dissolved. And no matter what the demagoguery from some sectors that might come out now or might be, don't fool yourselves. If the City of Miami were to be dissolved, at the end of the day we will be paying higher fees, higher taxes and we would be receiving a lot less services than we are now. I'll give you examples. Here in the City of Miami we have a Fire Department that has the highest rating in the Country. There are only four other Fire Departments in the whole Country, including our own, that have this rating: The highest that you could receive as a Fire Department. If any of our families would need to call the City's Fire and Rescue services, we would have our paramedics there almost immediately, within two or three minutes. That service you will not get from the unincorporated areas of Dade County. Police. You try to call the Dade County police in the unincorporated areas and I assure you, you'll be waiting for hours and hours, while, yes, at times we might not get there as quickly as we would like to and we should. While certain calls, we don't give that priority because of the nature of the calls. You don't have to wait anywhere near as long to receive a police officer, patrolman in the City of Miami as you would in unincorporated Dade County. Let's look at the garbage and trash collection in the City of Miami. Not only do we get two pick ups a week for garbage but we get a daily pick —excuse me, a weekly pick up for trash in the City of Miami, together with a fourth pick up of recycling. And then at the —for a whole year, each resident can ask for a special pick up at no cost to each residents. That we get, I believe, two or three of those on a yearly basis for refrigerators. Actually 60 AUGUST 14, 1998 four, I believe it is, for refrigerators and item such as that. You don't get anywhere near those services in Dade County. In Dade County the three hundred and forty-nine dollars ($349.00) that you pay for garbage collection only, not recycling... if you bring the recycling into it, it's three hundred and eighty dollars ($380.00)... you don't get anywhere near those services that you have in the City of Miami. So, we have done what is in the best interest for the City of Miami here. What is the responsible steps to take. The last years in the City of Miami we have cut, cut, cut, cut where, at the rate that we had cut, if we cut anymore, you'll be choking at the life line of the City of Miami, where we won't be able to provide anywhere near the quality of service that we do today. There are many things that we have to change in our government. We know that. And one way or another it's going to be done. The easy or the hard way and it's going to be done. But, in order for this City to have the foundation to be able to have the opportunity to accomplish that, this step had to be taken today. We can't be making budgets from year to year, doing a patch up of things where we don't know from year to year where the dollars are going to come from. At the same time, I truly believe that between now and the months to come, there will be plenty of additional recurring revenues that this City will find, that will not be in any additional fees or taxes. Revenues of the kind that are solid, are responsible, that the Oversight Board, as they've stated, as the Budget Advisor Committee stated, could be presented and would be approved by the Oversight Board. Something we could not have done now. The bottom line is that the decisions that have been made, they're not popular decisions. They would not be popular here or anywhere else. But they are the only decisions that this Commission could have made. I have already started working on numerous plans and ideas and initiatives to be able to bring additional recurring revenue into the future. The Off -Street Parking, the Knight Center, these are two of the key ones that I have been talking about since last year. In the Five -Year Plan, it was not suppose to happen until the year 2000. I want to make sure that those two initiatives happen in this next fiscal year, and they have to happen in the next fiscal year. But we have to go about things in a responsible way. We have, as I've stated on numerous occasions, more virgin land in the City of Miami that's waterfront, in the heart of the City than any other major city in the America. Nine hundred plus acres. We have to begin to develop those properties now in a responsible way that will get the City of Miami the most amount of recurring revenue on a year-to-year basis. These will be some of the additional initiatives that I will be bringing forth in the near future to the City of Miami and how to go about this. But the employees of Miami, which have been the ones that have been getting bashed by some lately ... and I will go back to a statement that was made briefly in bashing. Because, as I've told some of my colleagues, I wasn't leaving this meeting today and not coming back. I am the executive part of the government. The Commissioners are the legislative branch. I have given all the opinions, all the recommendations that I could up to this point, so I was letting the Commission do what they are suppose to do. Legislate. And I told them that if I would be needed, that I could be called upon and I would gladly come down and discuss anything else that was needed. Apparently, maybe at least one thought I had left the building. That wasn't the case. The amount of bashing that is going out toward the City of Miami employees by some, the very same that claim this is some kind of conspiracy to do away with the City of Miami by all kinds of mysterious sources, that bashing is very unfair because the employees that we've had ... and let me remind people just what the employees of the City of Miami have done for this City. Almost two years ago, when the crises was discovered, it was the employees of the City of Miami that gave up raises for two years, they gave up numerous benefits in order to save the City of Miami over thirty million dollars ($30,000,000) during that two year period. And this was something that they did not have to do. There were contracts, solid contracts, that the City was bound to honor, but the employees gave that up. And, yes, there are salaries that are salaries that are well -above the medium salary in the City of Miami that are paid in the City but, at the same time, if there are some demagogues that want to bash the City of Miami's employees for salaries that they receive, if I could be shown Dade County Government or, for that matter, any other government of any city this size across the Country, that, on the average, is paying their employees less or their executives less or if they could show us that somehow we're paying our employees in salaries much more than what the average is, then let them come forth with that evidence but that is not the case. And we have to compete in the market to be able to attract and retain experienced, seasoned professionals. Otherwise, we just wouldn't be able to hire them or retain them. In order for us to bring solid professionals, like the new Budget Director that was brought in, in order to be able to attract someone with the experience of Clarence Patterson in Solid Waste, that was just recently brought back, we have to pay wages that are compatible. No more, no less. So, I wanted to bring that out because I know that the kind of things that will be coming from some areas now and it's always easy to pick on some that are the least that ... are the ones that the least that can defend themselves. But there was another statement made on the Mayor bashing the Commission and to my other colleagues that I know do not believe that because it's funny. The same sources that might feel that, are the same one that might be out there with their allies saying that the Mayor is anti Hispanic. He won't speak to the Hispanic media, they claim. Well, first of all, I think that you all know this is not true. At the same time, I can't be on radio every day or every other day 61 AUGUST 14, 1998 or every week. If I would spend my time there, obviously, I will not have the time that I need to do my job here. But I do not spend my time going from station to station doing what others do. I try to be as responsible as I can when I do go to radio and I will be going to defend this Commission and this City and I will be doing it with a very unpopular issue in this decision, the one that needs to be explained to the public. Having said that, I could certainly go on into other areas but I don't think it's the appropriate thing to do now. I think that if any individual member of this Commission has a particular problem with me, they shouldn't have to hide behind the other members of the Commission. They should say its me. And they should have the courage to say Joe, let's you and I sit down and talk this out together. I've always been open for that. Commissioner? Vice Chairman Plummer: Amen. Thank God I'm in the funeral business. Before you adjourn, I have to ask for a resolution in designating Commissioner J.L. Plummer as voting delegate for the Florida Legal Cities in convention at Miami Beach. Commissioner Gort: Move it. Vice Chairman Plummer: Moved by Gort. Seconded by Sanchez Garcia. All in favor say "aye." Unanimous ballot. So registered, please. The Commission (Collectively): Aye. Commissioner Gort: I was going to nominate myself. Vice Chairman Plummer: May I congratulate Mr. Dipak. Let me tell you something, sir. We've had our disagreements. You did a hell of a job. Congratulations. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 1:12 P.M. ATTEST: Walter J. Foeman CITY CLERK Maria J. Argudin ASSISTANT CITY CLERK JOE CAROLLO, MAYOR C2 AUGUST 14, 1998