HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1987-01-22 MinutesI T Y OF
i
c 0 m s s 10 N
MINUTES
OF KITING HELD ON JANUARY 22, 1987
(PLANNING & ZONING)
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
MATTY HIRAI
City Clerk
INDEX
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
JANUARY 22, 1987
--------------------
ITEM SUBJECT LEGISLATION PAGE
NO. NO.
1. PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND PRESENTED 1-2
SPECIAL ITEMS. 1/22/87
2.
CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF CHARLES E.
R-87-73
2-3
GOTTLIEB.
1/22/87
3.
APPOINTING CHARLES BEBER TO THE
R-87-74
3-4
HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY.
1/22/87
4.
CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF MARILYN F.
R-87-75
4-5
REED.
1/22/87
5.
WAIVE SEALED BIDS - PREPARE UPDATED
R-87-76
5-7
"SANBORN'S 1972 CITY OF MIAMI
1/22/87
ATLAS" FOR MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS.
6.
WAIVE PROVISION OF CITY CODE -
R-87-77
7-12
AUTHORIZE CONSULTANT SERVICES
1/22/87
AGREEMENT (AFTER RETIREMENT) WITH
LUTHER LONG, IN CONNECTION WITH
BAYFRONT PARK REDEVELOPMENT.
7.
(A) NAME MILLER DAWKINS AS CHAIRMAN
M-87-78
12-31
OF THE AD HOC MINORITY ADVISORY
M-87-79
COMMITTEE FOR MIAMI ARENA. (B) NO
1/22/87
SPORTS ARENA CONTRACTS ARE TO BE
SIGNED UNLESS THE DEVELOPERS
MEETING THE MINORITY HIRING GOALS
SET BY THE CITY.
8.
REVIEW CURRENT CLUSTER HOUSING
M-87-80
32-33
APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE REVIEWED ON
1/22/87
THE BASIS OF THE REGULATORY
ORDINANCE WHICH WAS IN PLACE AT THE
TIME THE APPLICATION WAS MADE.
9.
(A) LOW INCOME HOUSING PROPOSALS
M-87-81
33-45
MUDST GO OUT FOR BID AND MUST
R-87-82
CONTAIN A CLAUSE FOR MINORITY
M-87-83
HIRING; (B) DESIGNATE MELROSE
1/22/87
TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT INC. TO
DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THE
MELROSE NURSERY SITE; (C) URGE
MELROSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT INC.
TO MAKE ALLAPATTAH DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY THE MARKETING AGENT IN
CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED
CONSTRUCTION OF THE TOWNHOUSE
COMPLEX AT THE MELROSE NURSERY
HOUSING SITE.
10.
URGE EASTERN AIRLINES NOT TO MOVE
M-87-84
45
THEIR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS TO
1/22/87
TEXAS (SEE LABEL #46).
11.
CONSENT AGENDA.
46
1/22/87
11.1
CORRECT SCRIVENER'S ERRORS IN R-86-
R-87-85
46
227 (FURNISHING OF TWO PATROL
1/22/87
VESSELS.)
11.2
DONATE SIX SURPLUS MOTORCYCLES TO
R-87-86
47
THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC.
1/22/87
11.3
ACCEPT APPRAISAL OF EDWARD M.
R-87-87
47
WARONKER TO ESTABLISH VALUE OF
1/22/87
PROPERTY AT 250 N.W. NORTH RIVER
DRIVE.
11.4
ACCEPT PLAT: JEFFERSON GROVE.
R-87-88
47
1/22/87
11.5
ACCEPT PLAT: RAFA SUBDIVISION.
R-87-89
47
1/22/87
11.6
TRANSMITTAL TO SOUTH FLORIDA
R-87-90
48
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF
1/22/87
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT.
12.
ALLOCATE $15,000 FOR "KEEP DADE
R-87-91
49
BEAUTIFUL, INCORPORATED."
1/22/87
13.
(A) DESIGNATE AREAS AND HOURS OF
R-87-92
49-50
OPERATION FOR VENDOR LICENSES
R-87-92.1
DURING GRAND PRIX EVENT. (B) THE
1/22/87
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
F.E.C. AND THE BICENTENNIAL PARK
PROPERTIES SHALL INCORPORATE THE
GRAND PRIX RACE TRACK COURSE IN ITS
EXISTING LOCATION.
14.
DESIGNATE CODEC, INC. TO DEVELOP A
R-87-93
51-62
LOW -DENSITY SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX
1/22/87
AT THE CIVIC CENTER SITE FOR LOW
MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES.
15.
EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW
ORDINANCE
62-67
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: "ENTRANT
10209
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - 1987" -
1/22/87
(23,000)
16.
(A) FIRST READING ORDINANCE:
FIRST
67-90
IMPOSE IMPACT FEES IN ADDITIONAL
READING
DEVELOPMENT TO FINANCE RELATED
M-87-94
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. (B) SCHEDULE
1/22/87
SECOND READING OF IMPACT FEE
ORDINANCE IN 60 DAYS (3-26-87).
17.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE:
FIRST
90-91
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM 11TH AND
READING
12TH YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1/22/87
BLOCK GRANT FUNDS - FUND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (C.D. - $417,
121)
18.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: FURTHER
FIRST
91-92
DEFINE (FOR PURPOSES OF
READING
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX
1/22/87
ASSESSMENT) "BROKERS, DEALERS,
BONDS, STOCKS, MORTGAGES, AND OTHER
SECURITIES."
19.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: PROVIDE
FIRST
92-93
UPON REQUEST INSPECTION OF REAL
READING
PROPERTY TO ASCERTAIN ZONING
1/22/87
VIOLATIONS.
I * a
20.
AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SUBMIT
R-87-95
94-99
APPROVED APPLICATION TO HUD (THE
1/22/87
HOMELESS ASSISTANCE PLAN)
REQUESTING $41,000 FOR EMERGENCY
SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM - AFTER
RECEIPT OF GRANT, AUTHORIZE MANAGER
TO NEGOTIATE WITH DADE COUNTY TO
ADMINISTER PROGRAM.
21.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH
FIRST
99-100
NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND:
READING
"EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM."
1/22/87
($41,000).
22.
PROCUREMENT CITY POLICY:
R-87-96
100-102
PROCUREMENT NEEDS OF THE CITY NOT
1/22/87
TO BE MET BY USING COMPANIES OR
SUPPLIERS WHO IN ANY WAY TRANSACT
BUSINESS WITH ANGOLA.
23.
ACCEPT BID: RADIANT OIL COMPANY
R-87-97
102-103
FOR (LUBRICANTS).
1/22/87
24.
ACCEPT BID: ROSS CORPORATION FOR
R-87-98
103-104
(LUBRICANTS).
1/22/87
25.
ACCEPT BID: FLOVAL OIL COMPANY,
R-87-99
104
SALA INDUSTRIAL SALES CORPORATION,
1/22/87
AND CONSOLIDATED OIL FOR
(LUBRICANTS.)
26.
AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF FUELS TO BE
R-87-100
105
PURCHASED, ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS
1/22/87
FROM LOWEST BIDDER.
27.
APPOINT REYNALDO MAYOR TO ZONING
R-87-101
105-107
BOARD.
1/22/87
28.
DISCUSSION REGARDING LENGTH OF
DISCUSSION
107
TERMS OF PRIOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE
1/22/87
MIAMI RIVER COORDINATING COMMITTEE.
(SEE LABEL #43)
29.
ALLEGATIONS BY PAT KELLER RELATING
DISCUSSION
107-112
TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD -
1/22/87
REFERRED TO CITY ATTORNEY.
30.
COMMENTS BY HARRY COLDHAMMER
DISCUSSION
112-115
RELATED TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
1/22/87
31.
DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF REQUEST
DISCUSSION
115-117
FOR FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH THE
1/22/87
HOLDING OF THE USTS BUD LIGHT
TRIATHLON.
32.
ALLOCATE $10,000 AND CLOSE STREETS
R-87-102
118-119
IN CONNECTION WITH THE FIRST
1/22/87
ANNIVERSARY OF THE "SECOND
LIBERATION OF HAITI."
33.
ALLOCATE $20,000 IN CONNECTION WITH
R-87-103
119-121
"SECOND ANNUAL LEAGUE AGAINST
1/22/87
CANCER FESTIVAL" IN WATSON ISLAND.
34.
SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING IN
M-87-104
121-122
CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED
1/22/87
RENAMING OF THE MIAMI BASEBALL
i
STADIUM.
35. LEAVE TO MANAGER'S DISCRETION
M-87-105
REQUEST FOR FUNDS RECEIVED FROM
R-87-105.1
"CARI$$EAN UNITED FIESTA 187 -
1/22/87
GRANT CLOSURE OF STREETS FOR 6AID
EVENT.
36. DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE
M-87-106
WORKSHOP FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON THE
1/22/87
PROPOSED ELIMINATION OF ALL
TRANSITIONAL USES - DRAFT ORDINANCE
AND BRING BACK IN 30 DAYS.
37. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REQUIRE FIRST
FULL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FROM READING
OFFICIALS ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES, 1/22/87
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES IN THE CITY
OF MIAMI.
38.
DECLARE CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF
M-87-107
MIAMI/JAMES L. KNIGHT CENTER LEASE
1/22/87
TO BE IN DEFAULT; NOTIFY LEASE HOLD
MORTGAGEE AND MIAMI CENTER
ASSOCIATES - INSTRUCT CITY ATTORNEY
TO TAKE APPROPRIATE LEGAL ACTION.
39.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND
ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE 9500 (OFFICIAL SCHEDULE
10210
OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS ENTITLED
1/22/87
"PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES") BY
INSERTING PROVISION UNDER RO-3 THAT
"USES" INCLUDE RG-3 AND USES
PERMITTED GENERALLY OR PERMISSIBLE
BY SPECIAL PERMIT IN THE RO-2
DISTRICT.
40.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND
ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE 9500, ARTICLE 20 (GENERAL
10211
AND SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS") BY
1/22/87
ADDING "CBD STORAGE FACILITY;"
ETC.
41.
UPHOLD ZONING BOARD'S AFFIRMATION
R-87-108
OF PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO
1/22/87
DENY CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT FOR
ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLUSTER
DEVELOPMENT (3 DUPLEXES AT
APPROXIMATELY 2816 S.W. 3 STREET.
42.
APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE BRICKELL
R-87-109
LOTH STREET PROMENADE DESIGN
1/22/87
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND URBAN DESIGN
GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
S.W./S/E/ 10 STREET BETWEEN S.W. 1
AVENUE AND BRICKELL AVENUE.
43.
APPOINT JOHN HALL, HUBER PARSONS,
R-87-110
JR., AND MONTY TRAINER TO THE MIAMI
1/22/87
RIVER COORDINATING COMMITTEE TO
SERVE SPECIFIED TERMS (SEE LABEL
#28)
44.
DISCUSSION REGARDING BEST POSSIBLE
DISCUSSION
USE OF SHORELINE PROPERTY ON
1/22/87
BISCAYNE BAY BETWEEN McARTHUR AND
VENETIAN CAUSEWAYS - INSTRUCT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO LOOK INTO
ALTERNATIVE POSSIBLE PUBLIC USES
FOR SAID PROPERTY.
45.
GRANT VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE 9500
R-87-111
TO PERMIT AN EXISTING ADDITION TO A
1/22/87
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONED CR3/7
AT APPROXIMATELY 1253 N.W. 35
STREET.
122-126
126-149
149-159
160-161
161-162
162
163-167
167-169
170-171
171-177
177-184
46. RESCIND PREVIOUS RESOLUTION PLACING R-87-112
LIMITATIONS UPON THE LENGTH OF 1/22/87
UNINTERRUPTED MEMBERSHIP SERVICE OF
ALL BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND
COMMISSIONS CREATED BY RESOLUTION
OR ORDINANCE.
47. REQUEST BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF R-87-113
EASTERN AIRLINES THAT THEY NOT MOVE 1/22/87
THEIR HEADQUARTERS TO TEXAS;
FURTHER EXPRESSING HOPE THAT
COMPANY DIFFERENCES WILL SOON BE
RESOLVED; FURTHER EXPRESSING THE
CITY'S SUPPORT TO SAID COMPANY (SEE
LABEL 010).
48. ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING FOR R-87-114
CONSIDERATION OF NO SUBSTANTIAL 1/22/87
DEVIATION & AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND MAJOR USE
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE 1221
BRICKELL PROJECT.
49. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ORDINANCE
DESIGNATION OF AREA GENERALLY 10212
BOUNDED BY S.W. 1 ST., S.W. SOUTH 1/22/87
RIVER DR., S.W. 2ND STREET AND S.W.
5 AVENUE FROM MODERATE -HIGH DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL
TO SPECIAL USE.
50. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE
ZONING ATLAS OF 9500 - APPLY HC-5; 10213
COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL HERITAGE 1/22/87
CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO
AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY S.W. 1
ST., S.W. SOUTH RIVER DRIVE, S.W. 2
STREET AND S.W. 5TH AVENUE.
51. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE FIRST
DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 364- READING
466 N.W. 26 AVENUE; 373-457 N.W. 27 1/22/87
AVENUE FROM SCHOOLS, CHURCHES,
CULTURAL TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL.
52. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE FIRST
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF READING
APPROXIMATELY 364-466 N.W. 26TH 1/22/87
AVE. FROM RG-1/3 TO CG-1/7.
53. ESTABLISH POLICY TO BREAK FOR LUNCH R-87-115
AT THE CONCLUSION OF ITEM BEING 1/22/87
CONSIDERED AT NOON AND ADJOURN AT
THE CONCLUSION OF ITEM BEING
CONSIDERED AT 9:00 P.M.
54. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE FIRST
DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY AT 3621- READING
3631 S.W. 22 TERRACE EXCEPT FOR 1/22/87
ONE -FOOT BUFFER STRIP FROM LOW
MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USE.
55. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE FIRST
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF READING
APPROXIMATELY 3621-3631 S.W. 22ND 1/22/87
TERRACE, EXCEPT FOR ONE FOOT BUFFER
STRIP ON SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE
FROM RG-1/3 TO CR-3/7.
185
186
186-187
187-188
188-189
189-193
193
194-198
198-204
204-205
fs Is
56. APPEAL BY OBJECTORS GRANTED: R-87-116 205-214
REVERSING ZONING BOARD'S SPECIAL 1/22/87
EXCEPTION WHICH PREVIOUSLY GRANTED
PERMIT FOR A PARKING LOT IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE DENNY'S
LIQUORS AND MON PETIT CLUB LOCATED
AT 3198 N.W. 7 STREET.
57. VICE MAYOR J.L. PLUMMER TO SERVE DISCUSSION 214-215
AS MEMBER OF THE CONSORTIUM BOARD. 1/22/87
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
On the 22nd day of January, 1987, the City Commission of Miami, Florida,
met at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive,
Miami, Florida, in regular session.
The meeting was called to order at 11:03 A.M. by Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
with the following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
ALSO PRESENT:
Cesar Odio, City Manager
Lucia Allen Dougherty, City Attorney
Matty Hirai, City Clerk
Walter J. Foeman, Assistant City Clerk
An invocation was delivered by Mayor Xavier L. Suarez, and Commissioner
J. L. Plummer, Jr., then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the
flag.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, AND SPECIAL ITEMS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proclamation: Ukrainian Independence Day: Commemorating the
PRESENTED sixty-ninth anniversary of the proclamation of the
political independence of the Ukrainian National
Democratic Republic and the sixty-eighth anniversary of
the Unification Act of all Ukrainian lands into one
national state.
Proclamation: Coconut Grove Elementary Day: Congratulating
PRESENTED Coconut Grove Elementary on their 100th anniversary.
(February 4, 1987)
Certificates Jose Rilo and Adam Jimeno: For their contribu-
of tion to the Miami Police Community Choir.
Appreciation:
PRESENTED
Commendation: Enrique Diaz, for his outstanding achievements
PRESENTED in the field of metaphysics.
Mayor Suarez: That's all the ceremonial items. We have the opening of the
bids. Could you, Madame City Clerk?
Mr. Dawkins: While we're waiting,...
Ms. Hirai: No, sir, we don't...
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins?
Mr.. Dawkins: ... for the bids, I'd like a point of special privilege.
Ms. Hirai: Not this meeting.
1 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Teems, would you come down to the mike, please. Mr. Teems.
The other day, we were having a discussion about some items, and I erroneously
said that Mr. Teems said they would strike, and he never said that to me.
Mr. D. H. Teems: No, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: OK.
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): What was the correction?
Mr. Dawkins: The correction is, that Teems never said to me that the Firemen
would strike. That would be irresponsible leadership, and I said it, and he
never said it, to I just wanted to put it on the record. He never said that.
Mayor Suarez: There is no opening of the bids, actually.
Mr. Dawkins: Hmm?
Mayor Suarez: There is no... there are no bids today. That was my mistake.
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): We were told the other day the only reason we were
meeting at 11:00...
Mr. Dawkins: We'd meet at 11:00, because we were opening the bids.
Mayor Suarez: At 11:00, that's what we were told, Madame City Clerk. When we
scheduled this meeting for 11:00, as opposed to beginning at 2:00, they told
us that there was opening of bids at 11:00, and that we had to... Maybe it was
something else that had been advertised for 11:00 - is that the confusion?
Mr. Dawkins: No. No, it was bids.
Mayor Suarez: I thought we were told it was bids.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENTS OFF MIKE)
Mr. Dawkins: What, we've got bid openings?
Ms. Hirai: We have no bids to open, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: See, I guess the way it was stated to us, was that there were
going to be openings of bids at 11:00. I presume it was a mistake, and we had
advertised these other hearings, for 11:00.
Mr. Odio: We did not have bids.
Mr. Dawkins: Yeah, OK, 11:00 o'clock, OK.
Mr. Odio: We are waiving requirements for sealed bids.
Mayor Suarez: Well, it's just that we were told that it was bids, and it's a
little confusing to show up and find out that that wasn't the reason. OK,
Item 1.
2. CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF CHARLES E. GOTTLIEB.
Mr. Plummer: Mayor, before you do.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Commissioner?
Mr. Plummer: It's appropriate - since our last meeting, this community has
lost two of the people who have been very much involved in their City, and it
is tradition that this City does express its condolence to these people, in
the form of a resolution. Mr. Charles Gottlieb died very unexpectedly last
Saturday. Charlie had served this City, in a program that was designed by the
Legislature, called the "Hospital Board," where they were able to get low-cost
loans through the City, and he served on that board, and served well, for a
period, I think, of about five or six years, and served as its chairman. This
2 January 22, 1987
0
community is much better off - Mercy Hospital is better off for about
$35,000,000 worth of improvetnentsr the Jewish Hoge for the Aged, which we had
the opportunity to go up and see, were much better off through their efforts
in the area of grants for building of new facilities, and it goes on and on.
Mr. Mayor, I would offer a motion, at this time, that this Commission express
to the family its condolences on the loss of a person who was deeply involved
and committed to its City, and I so move.
Mrs. Kennedy (OFF MIKE): Second.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-73
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST
CONDOLENCES OF THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI AND ITS CITIZENS TO THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF
CHARLES E. GOTTLIEB UPON HIS UNTIMELY DEATH.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
3. APPOINTING CHARLES BEBER TO THE HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I then would offer...
Mayor Suarez: We've had another loss. Commissioner?
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me, in that same vein: Mr. Mayor, I would offer, at
the request of the board, that the replacement for Mr. Gottlieb, who Mr.
Gottlieb himself has spoken to me before his death, that Dr. Charles Beber has
asked to serve on that board in his place, and I so nominate Dr. Beber at this
time, to replace Mr. Gottlieb.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll on that replacement.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-74
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL TO SERVE ON
THE CITY OF MIAMI HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY TO FILL THE
REMAINDER OF AN UNEXPIRED TERM.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
3 January 22, 1987
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote=
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
4. CONDOLENCES TO FAMILY OF MARILYN F. REED.
----____��__����-------- �..................
Mr. Plummer: And also, Mr. Mayor, sLace our last meeting, this community has
suffered the loss of Marilyn Reed. Marilyn served last year as our City
lobbyist in Tallahassee. She was very much keen and always attuned to the
Issues relating to the environment. Shq served her City for a period of time,
long before she was a paid lobbyist, and always appearing here in behalf of
anything environmentally sensitive. For your information, and other members
of the Commission, at her request, there will be a memorial service on
Saturday morning, at 10:00 A.M., at the place that was near and dear to her
heart, which was Kennedy Park. It will be a very simple memorial service,
mainly conducted by Marjory Stoneman Douglas, her very close and personal
friend. So, I would ask, at this time, that this Commission go on record
expressing its condolences to the family of Marilyn Reed, for her fine
dedication to her City and to her community, and so acknowledge, I so move.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-75
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST
CONDOLENCES OF THE CITY COMMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI AND ITS CITIZENS TO THE FAMILY AND
FRIENDS OF MARILYN F. REED, UPON HER UNTIMELY DEATH.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Suarez: Would you take care, Mr. City Manager, to make sure we have
that in the form of a proclamation or...
Mr. Plummer: Resolution.
Mayor Suarez: ... resolution, that can be...
Mr. Plummer: Conveyed to the family.
Mayor Suarez: ... conveyed to the family, through Commissioner Plummer. I
hope to be there on Saturday, but I'm not absolutely sure, so, just in case, I
know he's going to be there.
4 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer (Ott MIKE): Maybe you might have the one for Saturday prepared in
advance, so I can present that at the memorial service.
�------------------------------------------ ----- _----_---_
S. WAIVE SEALED BIDS - PREPARE UPDATED "SAN$ORN'S 1972 CITY OF MIAMI ATLAS"
FOR MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS.
------------ -__..—__.. ------ ....-..--------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: OK, item 1.
Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: Item 1 is a recommendation from the administration that
we waive the bids for the preparation of the updated atlas showing the
information on the City of Miami, of all the building, and so on, that we have
been trying to get for some time. The last time this was done was in 1972.
We don't have updated information for buildings, and so on, that we use, not
only for the comprehensive plan as part of the requirement, but also to send
notification to property owners, and collect bills, and to alert police and
fire to different emergencies, and also for files, and for liens that have to
be filed by the City. We advertised in the local papers, and we didn't
receive any other bids, and for that reason, and for the fact that this
company has been doing it for more than 100 years, and they have copyright on
this,...
Mayor Suarez: You're saying, basically, they're the sole source?
Mr. Rodriguez: The sole source.
Mr. Dawkins: Move it.
Mayor Suarez: Moved.
Mr. Plummer: Second.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second, under discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded, for discussion.
Mrs. Kennedy: Does this company have a local office?
Mr. Rodriguez: They have an office in Dade County
Mayor Suarez: Sergio, just out of curiosity, is it going to be one complete
map, plus individual maps for different sections, or how is it...
Mr. Rodriguez: We are going to have a set of maps, individually, for areas,
plus one map, and we're going to have all the information computerized for the
first time.
Mayor Suarez: And you're going to have... I'm sorry?
Mr. Rodriguez: Computerized information. Everything will be in computer -
all the listings, cross -listings, of all information for the first time.
Mayor Suarez: You know, a suggestion to the City Manager would be that each
of the members of the Commission would get a framed atlas of the whole City,
so that we can have available for, you know, our meetings and whatever.
Mr. Rodriguez: I can make you one available now, that is not as good, but I
can do it for you.
Mayor Suarez: And - you know - with a frame.
Mr. Dawkins: Secondly, what's the completion date?
Mr. Plummer: Just because they're good for election time doesn't mean a
thing.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yeah, just because three of you are running.
5 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Just don't worry about it.
Mayor Suarez: No, that's gust ao we can get the work of the City done right,
when people come.
Mr. Dawkins: What's the completion date?
Mr. Plummer: Be sure the precinct numbers are clear, and you can read them.
Mr. Rodriguez: The completion date will be December of this year.
Mr. Dawkins: Beg pardon?
Mr. Rodriguez: December of this year.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no, it's got to be ready before November, dummy.
(Laughing)
Mr. Rodriguez: Most of the information will be available for November.
Mayor Suarez: The initial draft to be available. Call the roll.
Ms. Hirai: Roll call. Mr. Plummer?
Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor, under discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, you know, you and I have sat on the Governor's Growth
Management Committee. Is there any chance that we can get the State to
reimburse us for this amount of money?
Mr. Rodriguez: We asked for a grant from them. In addition to that, we
already asked and we're receiving $200,000 in a grant, to do the plan, and
we're using part of that toward our efforts in this area.
Mr. Plummer: Well, the thought that I have is, I think we ought to bring to
the State's attention,...
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: ... by once again mandating a law that we must comply with,
without providing a source of revenue adequate to cover the cost, is just, you
know, it's a burden on cities. And, as far as I'm concerned, I think we need
to bring that to our lobbyists' attention, as well as, you know, making
application to make sure we try to get that money.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's in my list of items to be brought up, that we negotiate
with the lobbyists, to try to get money for it.
Mr. Plummer: Let's... I'll tell you what - if you'll give me a copy of that,
I will be going at the end of the month to the Florida League meeting, in
which... I'll tell you what - offer it in the form of a resolution, and I'll
take that with me to that meeting, because they will have an impact now,
because the new Governor is the immediate past president of the Florida League
of Cities, and he does listen.
Mr. Rodriguez: That should help, yeah.
Mr. Plummer: So, hopefully can get our money back.
Mr. Rodriguez: OK, very good.
Mr. Plummer: On the roll call, I vote yes.
(At this point roll call was continued by the City Clerk.)
6 January 22, 1987
a
0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-76
A RESOLUTION, BY A 4/5THS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THE MEMBERS
OF THE CITY COMMISSION AFTER A DULY ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARING, RATIFYING THE CITY MANAGER'S FINDING OF SOLE
SOURCE; WAIVING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPETITIVE SEALED
BIDS AND APPROVING THE PREPARATION OF AN UPDATED SANBORN'S
1972 CITY OF MIAMI ATLAS FOR USE IN PREPARATION OF THE
CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND A VARIETY OF OTHER MUNICIPAL
OPERATIONS FROM THE SANBORN MAPPING COMPANY A DIVISION OF
REAL ESTATE DATA, INC., FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AT
A PROPOSED COST OF $184,335.00; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR
FROM THE 1986-87 GEOGRAPHIC DATA BASE ELEMENT, SPECIAL
PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
INSTRUCT THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE A PURCHASE
ORDER FOR THIS SERVICE, SUBJECT TO THE AVAILABILITY OF
FUNDS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
6. WAIVE PROVISION OF CITY CODE - AUTHORIZE CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
(AFTER RETIREMENT) WITH LUTHER LONG, IN CONNECTION WITH BAYFRONT PARK
REDEVELOPMENT.
Mayor Suarez: Item 2.
Mr. Odio: Mr. Long, after long years of service in the City of Miami Public
Works, is retiring. His main responsibility has been, in the past few years,
the development of Bayfront Park. His retirement will cause delays in the
transitional period in that park, and we're recommending, not the two years,
as you see in the term there, but we've got one year, and see what progress we
have made in the park, and if we can begin to train somebody else in that
project.
Mr. Plummer: How much?
Mr. Odio: It will be $60,000 there - $60,000 a year.
Mr. Dawkins: Sixty-six.
Mr. Odio: Sixty-six, for one year.
Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, let me state, for the record, that I have had the
privilege of working with Pete Long during these past months on Bayfront Park.
Mr. Plummer: Who's Pete?
Mrs. Kennedy: We've been working very closely, and he's a very able and
capable and conscientious individual. However, in the best interest of the
City, could we, Mr. Manager, perhaps do it for one year, and then review it at
that time, and extend it, if necessary, to the following year?
7 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Well, the question is, I think, you know, that's fine, but do
you have any anticipation that that project will be completed in one year?
Mr. Odio: It will not be completed in one year,...
Mr. Plummer: OK,...
Mr. Odio: ... all the phases.
Mr. Plummer: ... I think that... you know, Rosario, I understand what you're
trying to say, but I understand also the administration is trying to have a
continuity, that the same individual, as we did with Vince Grimm, and I just
question... I Mould hate to see, at the end of the year, the man say, "OK,
thank you for the one year, goodbye, I'm not interested in the second," where
if we could get a two-year contract, in anticipation that it would be finished
in that time, we are guaranteed his services during that period of time. So,
I just wonder how valuable that consideration might be.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager, Mr. Long is retiring - is that correct?
Mr. Odio: Yes, air.
Mr. Dawkins: Approximately what will his retirement salary be - I mean, his
retirement be annually?
Mr. Odio: I have no idea. It will be about the same amount we're talking
about, I guess.
Mr. Dawkins: Beg pardon?
Mr. Odio: It depends on the number of years; he has many years of...
Mr. Dawkins: Thirty-five. He'll get about 80 percent of his salary.
Mr. Odio: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: What's his salary?
Mr. Odio: He'll probably make around $60,000 a year in retirement.
Mr. Dawkins: In retirement, $60,000 a year. And now, you're going to give
him $66,000 more, and make him make $126,000 a year as a consultant.
Mr. Odio: Yes, sir, because he won't work for free.
Mr. Plummer: He's going to be a hell of a taxpayer.
Mr. Dawkins: And you can't hire nobody with the expertise, for $60,000 a
year, a new person, to give an unemployed person a job?
Mr. Odio: I can hire somebody for that money; I won't say I cannot. The
question is, by the time that person comes in, and learns all the "in's" and
"out's" of that project, it will be six months.
Mr. Dawkins: You know, I sit up here and talk just to hear myself talk.
Nobody listens to me. Now, I went through this with Vince Grimm, OK? And at
that time, you were not the Manager, so I can't blame you; but I told him it
does not make sense for the City of Miami, every time somebody in a key
position retires, you cannot replace that individual, that you have to return
that individual back to the payroll. Now, that doesn't make no damn sense to
me, see. Now, I will say it to you this time, Mr. Manager, and I'm not going
to let nobody else off the hook, OK: these key positions, you'd better get
some minorities or somebody, and put them in there on on-the-job training with
them. It wouldn't have cost $60,000 to train some damn body to be in there to
do this job. But all we do is, we've got this "good old boy" system, and
everybody's up there, and so now, "he's been a good fellow, he's been loyal,
and now we're going to turn him out to pasture with $66,000 a year," see.
But, as Commissioner Kennedy said, it's an expertise that's needed, and,
Commissioner Kennedy, you're correct. We should have had somebody in place.
Mrs. Kennedy: Um-hmm.
8 January 22, 1987
i
Mr. Dawkins: It's unfair to us, because the public is going to look at us.
Mrs. Kennedy: That's right.
Mr. Dawkins: See? But you, you were trying to help get the park finished,
see, on time.
Mrs. Kennedy: That's right, and these are funds...
Mr. Dawkins: But out here, nobody out there sees that. All they know is
that, here's a man going to get $60,000 in retirement, and we're going to pay
him $66,000 on top of that.
Mrs. Kennedy: flight. You have a point.
Mr. Dawkins: See?
Mrs. Kennedy: But let me also point out that these are funds that have
already been allocated for this project.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, see, you and I don't have a problem, because, see, J.L.'s
got to explain that to the voters, not us.
Mr. Plummer: Do what? (LAUGHTER) Say what?
Mr. Dawkins: As much as I... but, Mr. Manager, don't let this happen again,
please, sir.
Mr. Odio: No, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: Get me a list of all the key positions you've got, and if you
don't know, if you can't find people to put in training with them, I will help
you.
Mr. Odio: We have begun...
Mr. Dawkins: I'm going to move, reluctantly, very reluctantly, I'm going to
move this.
Mrs. Kennedy: And I second, and, Mr. Manager, under...
Mayor Suarez: We're talking about one year? Wait a minute.
Mr. Dawkins: Yeah, one year.
Mayor Suarez: I will not vote for two years,, so you'll lose one vote here.
Mrs. Kennedy: One year.
Mr. Dawkins: One year, one year, and at the end of that year, just like we
found the money somewhere else this year, we'll find it next year, no problem.
Mayor Suarez: I don't know about that.
Mrs. Kennedy: John, will he be working out of your office?
Mr. Gilchrist: Yeah, he will be assigned to my office, on a 40-hour week.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, um-hmm.
Mr. Dawkins: No, wait a minute, now. See, here again, who... let me see that
item, please, because I threw mine in the garbage. Item 7.
Mr. Plummer: Seven?
Mrs. Kennedy: Item 2.
Mr. Dawkins: Item 7. "It is agreed..."
Mr. Plummer: Seven?
9 January 22, 1987
r�
Mr. Dawkins: Seven. I mean, not Item 1 - number 7 on the Professional
Service Agreement.
Mr. Gilchrist: Article 7.
Mr. Plummer: Oh. Oh, oh, oh.
Mr. Dawkins: Number 7, on Item 2. Item 7: "It is expressly agreed that
consultant will be able to participate in other personal services agreement
with individual who does not create any conflict of interest with the City."
Now, you're going to pay him $5,500 a month, and then let him go out and make
more money? Come on, give me a break. Give me a break.
Mrs. Kennedy: Ok, would you like... let me offer...
Mayor Suarez: Plus the retirement!
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: ... another solution. Commissioner, would you... perhaps we
can state that if he does work outside the City, that salary, or that money,
could be decreased...
Mr. Dawkins: That month he doesn't work for us; I have no problem with that,
Commissioner.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, let's decrease...
Mr. Dawkins: I have no problem with that.
Mrs. Kennedy: ... that money, then.
Mr. Odio: I have no problem in saying that.
Mrs. Kennedy: Let's deduct it from his $66,000 salary.
Mr. Dawkins: No, we just don't pay him.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK.
Mr. Odio: We paid him according to the... if he works the total hours he's
promising in the contract,...
Mr. Dawkins: No, he... see,...
Mr. Odio: ... less...
Mr. Dawkins: ... you can't hire,...
Mr. Odio: ... less...
Mr. Dawkins: ... Mr. Manager, in my opinion, now, - I don't know about the
other Commissioners - you can't hire a consultant for hours. See? Because if
you get hung up in this, Commissioner Kennedy,...
Mr. Odio: I can do what she said.
Mr. Dawkins: ... if you get hung up in hours, then a man will, if he has to
do the job, and it takes extra, he may say, "Well, the hell with it, I put in
40-hours; I'm going home."
Mayor Suarez: What does a regular employee of the City have to do to be able
to have outside income? Doesn't he have to get the Manager's approval?
Mr. Odio: He has to have a special permission, yes.
Mayor Suarez: I would treat him in the same way. He's supposed to be working
on this full time.
Mr. Dawkins: For $5,500 a month, I know darn well he is.
Mr. Odio: Yes, sir. We'll do it that way.
10 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: And with the Commission's strong suggestion that you then
negotiate a deduction from his payment, according to whatever else he's going
to do during that time. It's either a full-time thing, or it isn't. He's
getting paid that, plus the pension.
Mr. Odio: Yes, air.
Mr. Plummer: Yeah, but your problem is, all of these retired employees go to
Miami Beach, which is now known as "The Exiles of Miami."
Mr. Dawkins: Yep, that's right.
Mrs. Kennedy: Lucia came to us from tte Beach.
Mr. Plummer: That's the other way.
Mayor Suarez: I asked for a review of the entire pension schedule, for all of
our employees, for future hires - obviously, we can't affect present hires -
and I was told that it would affect the actuarial solidity of the system, and
the plan, and I don't accept that, and I hope that...
Mr. Odic: We're still working at it.
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, OK, I know that. I just want to tell, you know, so
people are aware of that, that we don't... at least I don't accept that, and I
don't hear the other Commissioners accepting that. It doesn't make any sense
to say that we're going to lower benefits for new hires, that somehow that's
going to be bad for a system, because that does not necessarily require that
we lower their contributions to the system.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, in backing up what you say, because we've been
fighting this for years,...
Mayor Suarez: Yeah.
Mr. Plummer: ... I'll bring to your memory, maybe: when the State system
went in, many municipalities across the State of Florida joined the State
system, and cut off their other funds, and the benefits with, in fact, the
State system, were much lower - much lower - than what they had in their own
systems. And there was never a challenge at that time about anything. Some
people didn't like it, but definitely it was done, and it can be done.
Mayor Suarez: And we're saddled, in addition to all of that, with paying back
$200,000,000 over the next 30 years, in unfunded and underfunded liability.
That's another little goodie that we got from the prior administration. OK.
Did we take a vote, Madame City Clerk, on that?
Mr. Dawkins: No.
Ms. Hirai: No, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Please call the roll.
11 January 22, 1987
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-71
A RESOLUTION WAIVING BY A 4/5THS AFFIRMATIVE VOTE OF THE
CITY COMMISSION THE REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITION CONTAINED
IN CITY CODE SECTION 2-302; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, SUBJECT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
APPROVAL AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS; FOR PROFESSIONAL
CONSULTANT SERVICES WITH LUTHER E. LONG, PRIMARILY IN
CONNECTION WITH THE BAYFRONT PARK REDEVELOPMENT AND
ADJACENT PROJECTS, FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR COMMENCING
FEBRUARY 1, 1987 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 1988, SAID AGREEMENT
ESTABLISHING A FIXED MONTHLY PAYMENT FOR SAID SERVICES TO
BE PAID FROM PROJECT EXPENSE FUNDS ALREADY ALLOCATED FOR
BAYFRONT PARK REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASES I AND II AND
BY FUTURE PROJECT EXPENSE ALLOCATIONS FOR BAYFRONT PARK
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASES III, IV AND V.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
7-A. NAME MILLER DAWKINS AS CHAIRMAN OF THE AD HOC MINORITY ADVISORY
COMMITTEE FOR MIAMI ARENA.
7-B. NO SPORTS ARENA CONTRACTS ARE TO BE SIGNED UNLESS THE DEVELOPERS
MEETING THE MINORITY HIRING GOALS SET BY CITY.
-------- ---------- ------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Commissioner.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I've got two emergency items here I'd like to bring
up.
Mayor Suarez: Please.
Mr. Dawkins: I think that this Commission must be made aware of the failure
of Linbeck Company to carry out the intent of this Commission.
Mayor Suarez: On the Sports Arena?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, on the Sports Arena. The intent of this Commission was
that local people in this community would gather money from working on this
project, OK? Last week, I asked for a tally of what was happening, and, Mr.
Manager, through you to Mr. Blaisdell, as of last week you had no signed
minority contracts, and no idea of what you were going to do. Now, all week,
the administration worked with Linbeck. What do you have this morning... no,
first I'd like to know, what's the total cost of this project?
Mr. John Blaisdell: The total construction cost is estimated to be
$33,435,000.
Mr. Dawkins: All right. So now, so 17 percent of 33 is what - like
$4,000,0007
12 January 22, 1987
Mr. Blaisdell: It's approximately $5,600,000.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, $5,000,000. OK. How many... how much work are you
proposing to award to women this morning?
Mr. Blaisdell: But can I make a statement?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, go right ahead, Mr. Blaisdell.
Mr. Blaisdell: Under the $33,000,000, that includes...
Mr. Dawkins: A hundred and thirty-three million?
Mr. Blaisdell: No, out of the $33,000,000, total cost - that includes
contingency fee and a lot of things that a subcontractor or supplier cannot
participate in.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, wait a minute. Wait, now. If the subcontractor cannot
compete in it, that means it goes to the majority. See, I'm not going to
get... see, that's why I want this Commission to understand what's happening
here, see. You can't take out damn near all the choice projects, and then
tell me, "Now, you take what's left, and I'm going to give you your 17 percent
of that." The intent of this Commission - and if I'm in error, one of the
Commissioners will correct me - was that 17 percent of the total contract
would go to women, 17 percent of the total construction contract would go to
Blacks, and 17 percent of the total contract would go to Blacks and Latins - I
mean Cubans. So, now, don't tell me... I mean, don't tell me now that you
took the elevator, because Blacks can't do it and no Cuban's got an elevator
company, and gave it to the Whites, so now that brings it down to $30,000,000;
and we took the elevator shafts because we've got no Blacks or Cubans or
ladies who've got the elevator shafts, so we take that out, and that brings it
down to 20; and we finally get down to $13,000,000, and now "you are entitled
to 17 percent of that" - no, that wasn't our intent, OK? And I want to make
sure, and I'm doing this here because I don't want this to happen in
Overtown/Park West. So, now, how much... so, you have sat down, you and
everyone, and you've come up with a figure. How much is in the stages of
being negotiated to the ladies now, as of today?
Mr. Blaisdell: For the ladies... for females?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes. I guess they...
Mr. Blaisdell: Two million, seven hundred and eighty-four thousand dollars.
Two million, seven eight -four, six hundred.
Mr. Dawkins: Two million. About half of what they're entitled to, right?
Mr. Blaisdell: Under the...
Mr. Dawkins: Of five million...
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir, under the circumstances you just described, that
would be correct.
Mr. Dawkins: All right, so that... but at least they've got two million, all
right. Now, what do the Hispanics have?
Mr. Blaisdell: I'm sorry, I was incorrect. It's $2,042,000; I was reading
the wrong line.
Mr. Dawkins: All right. What do the Hispanics have?
Mr. Blaisdell:_ Two million, five-o-five, six fifty-two.
Mr. Dawkins: Out of five million. OK, what do the Blacks have?
Mr. Blaisdell: One million, two-o-four, two eighteen.
Mr. Dawkins: Out of five million. OK. Now, I'll let you make a statement,
of any kind, if you've got anything to say.
13 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask a question.
Mr. Dawkins: Go right ahead, J.L.
Mr. Plummer: Any one of the three categories - were there more bidders than
what you are awarding? Let's use the women; I think that's the aspect where
it's been the most problem. Did you have more women minority bidders, that
were not winners - acceptable ones?
Mr. Blaisdell: Let me just give you an overview of the quick bid process.
Six hundred and seventy-five total subcontractors and suppliers were
identified. Out of those, 276 were minorities. Out of those minorities, 27
bid; that's aggregate Latin - I'm sorry, Hispanic - female, and Blacks. Out
of the 27, you had 18 Black submissions, 5 Hispanic submissions, and 6 female
submissions.
Mr. Plummer: OK, the question I'm asking...
Mr. Blaisdell: I'm sorry, Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer: The question that I'm asking: did all six of the women bid on
the same project?
Mr. Blaisdell: Not on the same discipline of work, no; not on the same scope
of work, no.
Mr. Plummer: All right. Were there any of the women minority who did not
receive an award?
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: How many out of the six?
Mr. Blaisdell: I believe that there's only been two awarded, so, by
attrition, it would be four.
Mr. Plummer: So, in other words, those four will not receive anything?
Mr. Blaisdell: At this point in time, Commissioner, that's correct.
Mr. Plummer: All right. Did they bid against each other?
Mr. Blaisdell: I'm not quite sure I know the answer to that question,
whether... I don't think so; I think they were all in different disciplines.
I don't think you had a female -owned company in one scope of work.
Mr. Plummer: All right. I guess, really, what Commissioner Dawkins is
saying - I'm trying to understand - there is the goals that have been set, of
17, 17, and 17. What are you talking about, as to the total scope of
construction, not contingencies, not anything like that, that no one will
actually bid on - contingency, nobody bids on, of course - so, what are you
down to, as to actual construction cost?
Mr. Blaisdell: To the best of our ability, we've been able to identify
approximately $16,380,000.
Mr. Plummer: All right, so half of that, roughly, is eight.
Mr. Blaisdell: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Blaisdell: Fifty-one percent of that is $8,353,000.
Mr. Plummer: OK, so call it, for round figures, eight, all right? And you're
telling us this morning that out of the total of bids ready to be awarded,
that you have five...?
Mr. Blaisdell: Five million, seven fifty-two, seven forty.
Mr. Plummer: All right. Now, is there other bids yet to be awarded?
14 January 22, 1987
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Blaisdell: Out of that $16,000,000...
Mr. Plummer: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, now, don't get ahead of me. Of the
$5,000,000 that is going to be awarded to minorities, how much is yet to be
awarded, that is riot being addressed, in what the bids have been calculated,
tallied, and are ready for award?
Mr. Blaisdell: The numbers that I have just represented to the Commission
indicate the tally to date. There are currently approximately $3.7 million of
work, scope of work, that is out for bid, which has not been awarded per se.
It has not returned back to the contractor and to the Authority for
evaluation.
Mr. Plummer: Is that all that is left?
Mr. Blaisdell: In the... in the... yes, that's correct, that's all that's
left.
Mr. Plummer: In other words, that's yet to be awarded?
Mr. Blaisdell: That, plus there is some non-food service, furnitures,
fixtures, and equipment...
Mr. Plummer: Well, that's not the construction. I think he's speaking to the
construction at this time.
Mr. Blaisdell: Construction, there's 3.7, $3.7 million.
Mr. Plummer: OK, then it has to be indicated that 100 percent of that is not
going to go minorities, under the normal circumstances. So, the question,
then, remains, as he is figuring and I'm figuring, there's not going to be met
the goal of $8,000,000.
Mr. Blaisdell: Potentially, that's correct.
Mr. Plummer: And what is being done to address that goal?
Mr. Blaisdell: Let me give you...
Mayor Suarez: As you answer that, would you tell us if our committee, that we
set up, has met yet - the Minority Participation Committee, because I have a
suggestion to make, that we incorporate into that committee, to give a little
teeth to it, one of the Commissioners, and see if Commissioner Dawkins would
be willing to serve on it. That's the only way that...
Mrs. Kennedy: Let me just state, for the record - John, let me ask you: do
you know how many contracts have been awarded to women since this ordinance?
Mr. Dawkins: None.
Mrs. Kennedy: One percent.
Mr. Plummer: Two, he says.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, total.
Mr. Plummer: Two contracts.
Mrs. Kennedy: Total, total in the City - only one percent. Now, of course,
women -owned companies are going to be smaller; of course, women -owned
companies are going to have less experience; but these are things that should
be taken into consideration. And, Mr. Manager, you promised me and you
promised this Commission, that you would go out into the community and talk to
these groups of women. Now, what have you done about that?
Mr. Dawkins: Let me give you something else, Commissioner Kennedy, to put
with that. And if I'm in error, Mr. Blaisdell will correct me. The two
contracts signed with ladies - women - are not signed as ladies. They are
15 January 22, 1907
Black. A Black Jamaican - how, how she got to be Black... if you went to
Jamaica and called her Black, she'd have a hemorrhage. OK? And the other one
is a Black female. And they're not in as ladies, see? They're in as Blacks.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but wait a minute, now. In all fairness, if you have 680-
some potential bidders,...
Mr. Dawkins: Um-hmm.
Mr. Plummer: ... and you put out the RFP's, and, still using the women as the
example, you only had six women companies to bid - John,...
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: ... of the six women bidders, how much money did they actually
bid on?
Mr. Dawkins: And in what disciplines?
Mr. Plummer: What was the scope of the potential that they...
Mr. Dawkins: And in what disciplines, J.L.? What disciplines did they...
what trades?
Mr. Plummer: OK,...
Mr. Blaisdell: OK, let me identify...
Mr. Plummer: In other words, were they, in effect, going after $4,000,000
worth of contracts, $1,000,000 worth of contracts - what was... if every one
of those women were successful, how much would they have received in work?
Mr. Blaisdell: Can I modify your request a little bit, because of the lack of
information? The three women that are under consideration for award, which
is: Falcon Chemical for the plumbing, represents approximately $700,000; the
second woman - she's a White female - the second consideration for a female
award is to Pompano Masonry,...
Mr. Dawkins: Pompano?
Mr. Blaisdell: ... which is a White female -owned...
Mr. Dawkins: Pompano?
Mr. Blaisdell: That's correct, that's...
Mr. Dawkins: Nothing in Miami - Pompano?
Mr. Blaisdell: No, that's... the name of the firm is Pompano Masonry.
Mr. Dawkins: OK.
Mr. Blaisdell: OK? They're out of Broward. And that represents
approximately $1,100,000. The third company which potentially bid was a
precast erection firm, that the bid was approximately $375,000. The other
three firms... (ASIDE) I'm not quite sure; which... do you remember what they
are? But those are the three that are under consideration right now. Two
have actually been recommended for award, and letter of intent have been
prepared and mailed to the firms. That represents approximately almost a
million... million two... million nine, almost $2,000,000.
Mr. Dawkins: What contracts have been signed... I mean, contracts have been
signed with what companies as of now?
Mr. Blaisdell: Usually, subcontracts take anywhere from zero to 120 days for
execution.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, no. Give me the names of the companies that
subcontracts have already been signed with on this job.
Mr. Blaisdell: There are two contracts. One is with Bob Young, who's done
foundation excavation work,...
16 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Vm-hmn.
Mr. Blaisdell: and the second one is with Jaffer, who does drainage wells
on the site.
Mr. Dawkins: Who?
Mr. Blaisdell: Jaffee
Mr. Dawkins: Is there a Xavier, Inc., working on this job?
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: Is the contract signed with them?
Mr. Blaisdell: Not to my knowledge, sir, no.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, how are they working on the job, then?
Mr. Blaisdell: They have a letter of intent, which is not unusual in the
magnitude of this job.
Mr. Dawkins: Is Helena working on this job?
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: Gentlemen, now... Madame City Attorney, do not miss this,
because I want to see how... what this is. It says, and I'm reading from Dun
& Bradstreet, it says: "Linbeck Construction Company, subsidiary of Linbeck
Corporation, Houston, Texas. Related companies: the following are also
wholly owned by the parent company," which is Linbeck. Number one is P & L
Equipment Companies, wholly owned by Linbeck; Irving Construction, totally
owned by Linbeck; Helena, Inc., totally owned by Linbeck; Lucia, Inc., totally
owned by Linbeck, and Xavier, owned by Linbeck. Now, City Attorney, how can
they bid on contracts with themselves, and award themselves the contract?
Explain that to me, Madame City Attorney.
(APPLAUSE)
Mrs. Dougherty: There's nothing illegal about it.
Mr. Dawkins: Nothing illegal about it. But it's damn immoral, huh? OK, you
see, this is how we...
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait, wait a minute, wait a minute. Madame City Attorney,
I'm assuming you're familiar with the ordinance for that, I'm sure. But they
also signed an agreement with this City. Now, maybe there's nothing illegal,
but is there a compliance with the contract, excluding the ordinance?
Mrs. Dougherty: You're talking about the Minority Participation portion of
the contract.
Mr. Plummer: The contract that Linbeck signed with this City, in reference to
compliance, in the Minority section. That was in their contract, separate
from...
Mrs. Dougherty: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: ... the ordinance. Now, yes, it might not be illegal, as to,
maybe, filing criminal charges, but does their contract with the City become
possibly breached - I'm sorry, with the Sports Authority?
Mrs. Dougherty: There's no breach of...
Mr. Plummer: Is there a potential breach?
Mrs. Dougherty: There's no potential breach of contract. The way that our
contract is structured is that if they do not have a good faith effort to
comply with the contract, that is 17, 17, and 17, and we determine that there
has been no good faith effort to reach that goal, then the remedy for us is in
arbitration, under the contract.
17 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: But here again, now, Commissioner Dawkins is...
Mrs. Dougherty: Therefore, there's no real breach of contract by reason of
this. It may be an indication of bad faith, is what I'm saying. There's no
breach of contract, per be.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, wouldn't it be fraud if I were to put out a contract that
leads you to believe that you're bidding on a job that I know you're not going
to get, because I've got it myself? Would that be fraud?
Mrs. Dougherty: Well, I assume that if other bidders were the lowest
qualified bidder, they would have been awarded the contract, as opposed to
Helena or Lucia Construction.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, I think your assumptions are incorrect.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me...
Mr. Dawkins: OK, wait a minute, no, wait, J.L.
Mr. Plummer: Go ahead.
Mr. Dawkins: What was the lowest bid on the work given to Helena?
Mr. Blaisdell: Helena? Under the structural steel and deck erection, Helena
was the low qualified bidder.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, now I have a bid... qualified - OK, now, who determined who
was qualified?
Mr. Blaisdell: Through a recommendation by the contractor, and approval...
Mr. Dawkins: OK, and who was the contractor?
Mr. Blaisdell: Linbeck Construction Corporation.
Mr. Dawkins: So, how in the hell are they going... I mean, so, you're in a
bag!
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Blaisdell: Commissioner, we reviewed...
Mr. Dawkins: You're in a bag! See, you're boxed in. And the lowest
contractor who you say... no, I'm sorry, who Linbeck said is unqualified, was
$65,000 under them. So, now, they're charging us $65,000, the Sports
Authority, in order to say that these people are not qualified, or not
whatever, and they're going to do the job for $65,000 more.
Mr. Plummer: Well, was that particular line of work put out to bid?
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, air.
Mr. Plummer: And how many bids were there?
Mr. Blaisdell: Commissioner, the $65,000... Commissioner Dawkins, the $65,000
difference in bid price which you are referencing is the precast erection,
where Helena and another company, Jimrock, submitted a bid, and they currently
have been issued a letter of intent, indicating to them that if they can bond
and insure, pursuant to the contract documents, which, for purposes of precast
erection, is critical...
Mr. Dawkins: It's 12:00 o'clock - let me see if I can bring this to closure.
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute, I haven't got an answer to my question.
Mr. Dawkins: Go ahead, J.L.
Mr. Plummer; On that particular phase, how many people bid on that portion of
the contract?
18 January 22, 1987
Mr. Blaisdell: TWO.
Mr. Plummer: 'l 0 Helena and another company?
Mr. Blaisdell: To the... I think... to the best of our ability to tell you
right now, we could come back to you with more specific information, but I
think it's to Helena and... (PAUSE) Four.
Mr. Plummer: Pour bid on it?
Mr. Blaisdell: I... hold on, let me get... (GOES OFF MIKE)
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me tell you what I think is the bottom line. Is there
anyone here from Linbeck?
Mr. Paul Sipes (OFF MIKE): Yes, I'm
Mr. Plummer: Is the company's name Linebeck?
Mayor Suarez: Linbeck, Linbeck.
Mrs. Kennedy: Linbeck.
Mr. Plummer: Linbeck. And who is that representative?
Mr. Sipes: It's Mr. Paul Sipes, Vice President.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Sipes, are you present? - would you come to the microphone
for a minute, sir? For the record, we have to get your name and mailing
address, sir.
Mr. Sipes: Paul Sipes, with Linbeck Construction, P.O. Box 22500, Houston,
Texas.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. For the record, your company signed a contract
with the City of... excuse me, with the Sports Authority, understanding the
goals to be reached in minority participation, sir. It has been, this
morning, determined - we could be corrected in rounding off the numbers - that
those goals would be representing approximately $8,000,000 in minority
involvement. We are told by our in-house expert that you have reached
somewhere in the neighborhood of $5,000,000. What is the intent of your
company to fulfill your obligations to the minority contract, sir? How do you
plan on meeting those goals?
Mr. Sipes: The ordinance, sir, is a good faith effort to achieve the goals,
and we think we have exerted good faith effort to achieve the goals, with the
$5,000,000 participation.
Mr. Plummer: Of the other four companies, or two, or whatever, since nobody
has a direct answer, were there minorities in that one work with the Helena
organization - were there any companies who bid that work that were
minorities?
Mr. Sipes: In the precast erection, which, I think, is the discussion,...
Mr. Plummer: If that's... I don't know what it was for.
Mr. Sipes: There were four bidders, and one of them is a minority -owned firm.
Mr. Plummer: Of the bids that were received, how much difference was there
between the low bid and the minority firm?
Mr. Sipes: The minority firm has the low bid amount. They cannot provide
adequate insurance or bonding, and therefore we ruled them not the low
qualified bidder.
Mr. Plummer: Does part of your contract with the Sports Authority mandate
that they must be able to provide that?
Mr. Odio: I think we need to clarify that it is not with the Sports
Authority. Linbeck's contract is with Decoma, not with... the contract is
with Decoma.
19 January 22, 1987
it
Mr. Plummer: Ali right, then, OK.
Mr. Sipes: Commissioner, the... there's...
Mr. Plummer: What is our contract? The Sports Authority's contract with
Decoma - what does it call for?
Mr. Blaisdell: The Minority Participation Agreement is a triparty agreement,
between the Authority, Decoma, and the City, OK? That details the minority
participation requirements in the arena project. The construction contract,
which is the standard operating guidelines for construction of the arena,
which does not detail any issues in connection with minority participation -
OK? - is between Decoma and Linbeck...
Mr. Plummer: All right. Well, then...
Mr. Blaisdell: ... and as to certain provisions, the Authority has approval.
Mr. Plummer: John, I understand what you're saying. So, then, what we need
is a representative here of Decoma.
Mr. Blaisdell: I think Mr. McCrary is here representing Decoma.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. McCrary. As you know the rules, your name and mailing
address for the record, sir, and how, in what capacity, you represent Decoma.
Mr. Jesse J. McCrary, Jr.: My name is Jesse McCrary, 3050 Biscayne Boulevard,
Miami, Florida. Commissioner, I represent... I am general counsel to Decoma.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. Now, you have heard the question I asked,
erroneously, of Linbeck, because they have a contract with your company. How
do you intend to achieve the goals in the remaining monies that are left?
What is your company going to propose to do?
Mr. McCrary: Commissioner, on yesterday, we met for approximately nine hours
with the Sports Authority and with Linbeck. Out of the...
Mr. Plummer: "We," Decoma?
Mr. McCrary: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. McCrary: In an attempt to rectify what Commissioner Dawkins has raised as
a very serious problem, and obviously it is a serious one. Out of the
approximately, I suppose it's $3.7 million left to be bid, we're trying to
devise some way to ensure that minorities get their fair share of that. It
has been suggested that possibly some of this work could be single -sourced, in
terms of minorities who could apply. It's also been suggested that they be
rebid. It's also been suggested, as a third alternative, that the Sports
Authority add an addendum to the Minority Participation Agreement, and
indicate some of it as a set -aside, in order to fulfill the goals. That has
not been cast in concrete as yet. What we did do yesterday, for nine hours,
was come up with new money, what we called "new money," for minorities in this
process. It was the intent of all the parties to meet again, to figure out
some way that this company can effectively meet those goals, as prescribed by
this Commission.
Mr. Plummer: Why did Decoma wait until the horse was out of the barn? What I
mean is, they allowed the awarding of roughly $12,000,000 to $13,000,000 in
contracts, knowing fully well that it remained only 3.7, where there was not
any chance that that could be achieved.
Mr. McCrary: Commissioner, I... and respectfully, I'm not trying to shift any
blame; Decoma takes its lumps just as you give them. When a contract...
Mr. Plummer: Well, I'm not giving them lumps, I'm asking questions at this
point. I'll give them the lumps, eventually. Yes, sir, rest assured.
Mr. McCrary: Yes, sir, I know you will, Commissioner. When the contract is
"let," that is, it comes from Linbeck and goes to the Sports Authority; and
20 January 22, 1987
the Sports Authority has to sign off on it as being a responsive bid or the
one that they will accept, Decoma, in the process, Commissioner, is really...
Decoma really is not in that process, but must take the responsibility,
because of its contractual relationship with the Sports Authority.
Mr. Plummer: And the City.
Mr. McCrary: And the City. We would admit, Mr. Plummer, that probably we
didn't watch the contracts as much as we should have.
Mr. Plummer: OK, that's spilled milk.
Mr. McCrary: Yes, air.
Mr. Plummer: Now, the question is, you say you are going to propose these
three items to the Sports Authority, hopefully that they will accept or ratify
parts or all of what your recommendations are.
Mr. McCrary: Not propose. What we did yesterday was collectively discuss
some alternative ways, and it was not a proposal solely by Decoma, it was a
result of an all -day conference between us; I mean, some ideas came from
Decoma, some came from the City Attorney's office, some came from the Sports
Authority, as to how we could resolve it.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Blaisdell. You know, all of this is fine... excuse me, all
of this discussion is fine, but the bottom line is, is containing within a
budget. Now, I guess the next question has to be, are you confined to the
restraints of the budget, of what has been proposed and projected, and where
are we along those lines?
Mr. Blaisdell: The answer to your first question is yes, this project has a
very tight budget. The answer to the second question is, we have currently,
in the total tally, bottom line - when we commenced this project, the outlook
was less likely to be favorable. Where we are right now is that we're pretty
even on being able to complete the project, with the funds that are available.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. McCrary.
Mr. McCrary: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: I suggested to Linbeck, three weeks ago, that they get in touch
with Mr. Dausch of Bayside, to see how we could resolve this, what we've got,
OK?
Mr. Plummer: That's easy, if they put up a million dollars.
Mr. Dawkins: Now, what you have is beautiful, OK? But every one of us
sitting up here knows that any minority firm out here that gets a bid, and
goes in to negotiate with them, under the present conditions, that they must
provide a bond, will get nothing. OK? Very few Black or small Cuban out
there that can bond a $5, 000, 000 job. Now, I wish you would f ind out f rom
your client if your client is willing to break these contracts down into
increments. If it's a $2,000,000 contract, then bond it at $200,000. When a
guy completes that phase of it, give him another $200,000, and when he
completes that phase of it, and he's still bonded, give him another $200,000.
Now, if they are in "good faith," they will do this. But if they're still,
counselor, you know, going around in "bad faith," they're going to come back
here in a month and tell me, "I was going to give this to A, B, C, D and E,
but they couldn't get bonded and insurance," and I've gone through an exercise
of futility. The second thing, Mr. Manager, - stay there, counselor - I'm
going to say to you, through you, to Mr. Blaisdell: no more contracts should
be signed until you're satisfied that these minority goals have been met.
Now, I don't... I'm hoping that all of... and I want to say, see, the victim
in this is Mr. Bufman, OK? He's the victim, see? Because he's trying to get
a franchise, he doesn't need any adverse publicity, and yet Linbeck couldn't
care less, because they're going to make their money and leave, and we've got
a problem. The second thing is, counselor, will you inform your client that I
have some carpenters here - stand up, you fellows from the Carpenters' Union,
OK? These gentlemen have been pushed off the job by Xavier, the parent of a
firm - sit down, gentlemen, thank you - from the parent of... from Xavier.
Mayor Suarez: That's a hell of a name.
21 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: And the reason they've been pushed off the job is, Xavier does
not want to pay them a prevailing wefe, arrmrd4*,g... it's alleged - I can't,
because, see, you're a lawyer; I have to stick with you - it's alleged, sir,
that they refuse to pay a prevailing wage. So, will you get with them, and
get with your client, and see if your client can't find out how these people
can work, or what the problem is. And I have nothing further to say, Mr.
Mayor.
Mr. McCrary: Commissioner, am I to render a report back to you on that
question?
Mr. Dawkins: You and Ms.... and...
Mayor Suarez: Linbeck.
Mr. Dawkins: ... the City Attorney here, um-hmm.
Mayor Suarez:
Mr. McCrary: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: You know, from my perspective, let me tell you, Jesse, how I
feel. As far as I can tell, objectively, Linbeck is not meeting the goals.
We all agree on that, that's an objective evaluation - they're not meeting the
17-17-17 percent goals. Certain totally -owned companies, apparently - I
didn't know this until this morning - are being hired as subcontractors, and,
to me, that already raises a presumption of "bad faith," to tell you the
truth. Thirdly, when... if it turns out that some of the companies that were
bidding against the totally -owned companies of Linbeck, had a lower bid
amount, then that, to me, almost makes it a conclusion of "bad faith." And I
would, without reaching any conclusions right now, because I don't know if
those are the facts, suggest to you and to this Commission, that we give a
little teeth to the Committee that we have supervising all of this, and ask...
and resolve to have Commissioner Dawkins be a part of that committee, to
review all of the data, and all of the things that have been asked for today,
to report back to this Commission, so that we can have it absorbed and
digested, and delivered back to us with a recommendation. But it, just
superficially - and I was not ready for this item, so I have not had a chance
to meet with you and hear your responses, and I'm sure you've got some, and
you've given some this morning, in terms of bonding, or whatever - to me,
that's not going to be enough. To me, you've got to make the effort.
Commissioner Dawkins and I were with the Insurance Commissioner just a couple
of weeks ago, trying to work out ways to solve the problem of bonding for
minority companies, and I think it can be solved a lot of ways. One way is
for Linbeck to bond them, and, to me, that's not an impossibility by any
means. That would cost a little bit more, and maybe that has to be built into
the bid price amount, but don't just rule them out, even if they're $60,000 or
$70,000 less in their bid, because of the bonding. Or split it up into
segments, as Commissioner Dawkins has suggested. Come up with creative
solutions. We have done this in the Bayside project, and it can be done in
the Sports Arena. So, I would entertain a motion to have Commissioner Dawkins
be included in that committee, and report back to us.
Mrs. Kennedy: So moved.
Mr. Plummer: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-78
A MOTION NAMING COMMISSIONER MILLER DAWKINS AS A MEMBER OF
THE AD HOC MINORITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR MIAMI ARENA TO
SUBSTITUTE FOR ONE OF THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS TO SAID
COMMITTEE; FURTHER DIRECTING THAT COMMISSIONER DAWKINS BE
NAMED CHAIRMAN OF THE SPORTS AUTHORITY.
22 January 22, 1987
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote-
AYES- Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Mr. Dawkins: Madame City Attorney, will you have Ms. Kelly, or someone in
Your office, draw up for me an addendum, to attach to all bids going out, that
Linbeck is a company that one Commissioner on the City of Miami does not care
to work with, and any contractor that comes in here with Linbeck as a
construction manager will not get a favorable vote from me. And I want that
as an addendum to every bid that goes out, because they have not acted in
"good faith," and until these people understand that we are concerned about
our community, and that some of these dollars remain in our community, and
that people who work, work in this community, then I don't want them in here.
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Gene?
Mr. Gene Marks: I'm on the Authority; my name is Gene Marks, and Mr.
Blaisdell and I have been meeting in Houston, trying to upgrade the arena, if
there's certain savings in certain areas. Was the motion, Mr. Dawkins, is
that no one will do any work who does not have a signed contract? Now, there
is intents of contracts, that we have approved, but the final wording of that
hasn't been done. If it's done, like Xavier, for an example, who is doing the
foreman work out there, a contract, they have admitted, has not been signed,
but the intent, by Mr. Blaisdell and I, going over the bids - and we can only
go over what is submitted to us by Linbeck; we cannot force them to use
anybody; they can give us the bids, the low bids, for the breakdowns, and then
we recommend, you know, on that basis. If your motion means that being that a
valid contract has not been signed, are you including them in it? If it is, I
will tell you now, the job is stopped as of right now.
Mr. Dawkins: That was my intent, OK?
Mr. Marks: Well, that's...
Mr. Dawkins: Hold it! It... you...
Mr. Marks: ... one thing I wanted clear for the record.
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, wait, Gene.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, I'm trying to clear it for you, if you let me.
Mr. Marks: OK. All right.
Mr. Dawkins: OK? That was my intent, OK? But then I sat down and I thought.
You know, somebody could really and truly be trying to be sure Miami does not
get the franchise. So, if we can create the atmosphere of ill will between
the City, the Sports Authority, and the basketball team, then the individuals
giving out the franchise will say we're not together. So I said no, I'm not
going to do it. I'm not... I intended to stop the job, OK? But why... but
like I say, Mr. Bufman is the victim in this, see; he's done all he can to get
a basketball team, and we've got guys around here who are trying to shaft him,
OK? So, now, I said, and I will say again, that the Manager has to make a
decision. That's what we pay him for. And I said that he does not let Mr.
Blaisdell sign off on anything that he's not satisfied with. That was the
motion.
Mr. Marks: Big difference. So, if that is the motion, then, at this time,
then the project... Xavier, being there is not a... can I just give you a
little background of this? Mr. Blaisdell and I have been going to Houston,
and I've spent an awful lot of my time, which I don't mind, as a native of
this town all my life,...
23 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Well, you're rich - it won't hurt you.
Mr. Marks: Miller, I remember when you didn't have anything either.
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Plummer: Hell, that Mes yesterday.
Mr. Marks: Let's not get into personalities. OK, I was just kidding you.
The contracts between Decoma and the Authority, Decoma has picked Linbeck to
construct for them. We are taking the short cut, of going directly with
Linbeck to try to get this worked out. As we are in Houston, Decoma's
representative is on the job, going over all the prices. There is ways of
saving, and I'm going to ask you people, as the Commission: the monies we
have saved in certain areas, we want to upgrade the seats, because it was bid
as seats, plastic back and plastic seats. What we saved, we felt, is going
Into something that was comfortable. Now, if you want to save on that, and
it's your decision to stay within the budget and go over and give higher
prices to subcontracts, it's possible, it can be done, but you're going to end
up with bad seats, you're going to end up with just plain concrete floors -
we're trying to upgrade the arena. So, I just want this understood there,
that we do have a budget, and it's very, very tight.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask you, Gene, because you're a contractor: is it
a normal procedure that a company would do business with another company
without a signed contract? I guess I've got a problem with that. To me, how
do you hold somebody's feet to the fire, if you don't have a signed contract?
Mr. Marks: J.L., it has to be the trust between the two parties, with the
intent. I mean, it's... that's what it amounts to. I have done this, if I
know a certain contractor, by the time you get the insurance and, you know, so
on and so forth, there may be odds and ends; but if the intent is there, the
letter of intent, it can be done.
Mr. Plummer: Is that just as binding?
Mr. Marks: Like I say, it's between the two parties, if they trust each
other. You've got to know who you're dealing with.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I don't know what Xavier... the Xavier company is doing,
but, say something goes wrong in the interim, between the time of letter of
intent and a contract - would that give them the possibility of escaping, and
say, "Hey, guys, thank you, I quit" - and then you're stuck with it? I mean,
I don't know.
Mr. Marks: Xavier is a subsidiary of Linbeck, so they will work it out
between themselves.
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Blaisdell: Commissioner, on the example of Xavier...
Mayor Suarez: Let me just clarify something here, procedurally, because we...
Mr. Dawkins: Xavier is you?
Mayor Suarez: No, it's no relation. That's a great name, though. But...
Mr. Plummer: Yeah, but they're a wholly -owned subsidiary of Suarez.
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Dawkins: But Mr. Manager...
Mayor Suarez: Not all kids were baptized Xavier after me. But we have not
passed any motion to the effect that is being discussed now. So far, we have
Just given our indication of the consensus of how upset we are, that we
wouldn't want any new contracts to be signed. I'm not sure that we can pass
such a motion, legally, but... so, we haven't passed that yet, and I don't
want anybody to get that impression. We're not discussing that; we're just
discussing the Commission's consensus that we would like no new contracts to
24 January 22, 1987
be signed, unless some of these goals are being met to our satisfaction. Now,
how we put that, in terms of Commission action, we haven't decided yet.
Mr. Blaisdell: May I suggest something to the Commission?
Mayor Suarez: Sure.
-.... ------,----------------------------------------------------------
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Commissioner Joe Carollo entered the meeting at 12:13
P.M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Blaisdell: In connection with the Commissioner's motion, and one point of
clarification, is that in the process of approving the selection of a
subcontractor, after the evaluation is completed by Linbeck, that is submitted
to Decoma, who is the owner under the agreement, and then, at the same time,
It's also submitted for review to the Authority. So it is not the case,
whereby the Sports Authority, on its own, makes a determination whether or not
the contract should be awarded to contract A, B, and C. Decoma is, in
addition, supposed to sign off and approve the subcontract to be awarded.
Mr. Plummer: What happens if the Sports Authority does not sign off?
Mr. Blaisdell: We would have to go into arbitration. If Decoma disagreed...
if we said we don't agree, and they were recommending it, they could not enter
into it. We would have to go to arbitration.
Mr. Plummer: Has there been such an incident occur?
Mr. Blaisdell: No, sir. So far all the recommendations from Linbeck have
also been recommended by Decoma. We have elected...
Mr. Plummer: Wait, whoa, whoa, one more step. Have all of the
recommendations recommended by Linbeck to Decoma, and Decoma to the Sports
Authority, been signed off on?
Mr. Blaisdell: No, sir. As a result of our... of the Authority's... as a
result of our knowledge of the importance of the minority participation to the
City Commission, and Commissioner Dawkins' comments, we elected, on certain
subcontracts, not to approve them pursuant to their recommendation, and we
tried, along with some of the local minority business enterprises, the
associations, to try to assist to make that possible, because the reason that
the minority contract... the reason that company that they were recommending
was not awarded the contract, was because they (a) could not insure or they
could not bond. But after two or three months of gyrations and going back and
forth, it became apparent that there is a... we get to a point of no return,
where now we have to make a decision for the project as a whole, and in
looking at the total participation of the project, we are faced with... we
have to make a decision. And we, here, and the numbers that we recommended to
the Commission today, we have made an affirmative decision on those two which
were previously withheld.
Mr. Plummer: Did the Sports Authority sign off on the contracts of Helena and
Xavier?
Mr. Blaisdell: On Helena, for the structural steel erection, they were low
qualified bidder, and the Authority signed off on that one. On Xavier, Xavier
was not the low qualified bidder; the low qualified bidder recommended to the
Authority was Ceco Corporation. Ceco Corporation is... has been a union firm,
mason firm, concrete forming firm, for a long time. They have just elected to
go to nonunion, except for in Chicago. And they, after we signed off and
awarded the bid to them, pursuant to their recommendation, so they didn't
recommend their firm - they recommended the low qualified bidder. Ceco
Corporation...
Mr. Plummer: That's important.
Mr. Blaisdell: That's what I'm trying to clarify. Ceco Corporation pulled
out, and said, "You guys are on your own." And the second bidder, the second
low qualified bidder, happened to be Xavier Structures. And when you evaluate
25 January 22, 1987
the way you come to numbers, there is no... the numbers are there; I mean, the
documents, and they're open to review, and they're open to audit.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, what is the problem, then, with Xavier and the carpenters?
Mr. Blaisdell: The carpenters... Paul can speak to the labor issue. My
understanding is, Xavier is a nonunion firm, and they have elected to hire
local carpenters,...
Mr. Dawkins: From where?
Mr. Blaisdell: From Miami, to... who are...
Mr. Dawkins: Out of what section?
Mr. Blaisdell (OFF MIKE): Paul, do you want to address the issue or not?
Mr. Dawkins: No, you address the issue,...
Mr. Blaisdell: I don't think that there's a...
Mr. Dawkins: ... I don't want to... I'm through talking to him.
Mr. Blaisdell: OK. They have elected not... they're a nonunion contractor,
so they are not using union personnel, so the current picketing...
Mr. Dawkins: All right, but what is the prevailing nonunion scale?
Mr. Blaisdell: For carpenters? I don't know.
Mr. Dawkins: All right, that's all right. What's the prevailing nonunion
scale? Anybody over there. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND REPLIES) Come up and give
your name and...
Mr. Paul Walker: My name is Paul Walker. I'm with the Carpenters' Union.
Some of my men have went in, and asked for jobs, asked how much they're
paying. It's $10, $12, $9, depending on what we want to pay you. The
prevailing rate in Dade County today - I've got a prevailing rate job right
here at Jackson Memorial Hospital; total package is $13.88.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, thank you.
Mr. Walker: Thank you.
Mr. Plummer: Is that union, or nonunion?
Mr. Walker: That is a prevailing rate; it is a nonunion job.
Mr. Plummer: For both? For both?
Mr. Walker: Sir?
Mr. Plummer: The prevailing rate is for union or nonunion?
Mr. Walker: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right.
Mr. Walker: That's the prevailing rate, that's set by the Federal government
and Dade County.
Mayor Suarez: It's a non -negotiated prevailing rate, just...
Mr. Dawkins: See, OK, and you guys are locked out because they don't want to
pay you $13. They're going to get somebody off the street they can pay less,
is that correct? (SILENCE) See, I mean, see this... they're not operating in
"good faith," J.L.
Mr. Walker: Commissioner, I cannot answer you that question, because I have
not negotiated with Linbeck or Xavier. I'm just relating to you what my
members have came and told me.
26 January 22, 1967
0
Mr. Dawkins: All right, we've got one more thing, and it's almost 12:30 P.M.
Lot me say this, Mr. Mayor and fellow Commissioners. I want to ask one more
question, John, and theft I'm going to...
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: ... close this out. Who bonds Xavier... I mean, where does
Xavier Corporation and Helena get their bonding from?
Mr. Blaisdell: On their own.
Mr. Dawkins: On their own?
Mr. Blaisdell: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Are you convinced that they...
Mr. Dawkins: Well, all right, who's property log sheet do they use, theirs,
or...?
Mr. Blaisdell: I'm sorry, could you... I didn't understand...
Mr. Dawkins% See,...
Mayor Suarez: Are you convinced that they didn't use the financial statements
of the parent corporation to get their bonding?
Mr. Blaisdell: No, I'm not sure.
Mayor Suarez: I would suspect that a subsidiary...
Mr. Dawkins: They'd have tot
Mayor Suarez: ... that has a bonding limit, would get help from their parent
corporation in their financial statement.
Mr. Dawkins: They'd have tot I mean, that's standard common sense.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that would be depending on the scope of the project.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, Mr. Manager...
Mayor Suarez: No, right. I mean, I was just... it's a guess. They don't
have to. A subsidiary can stand on its own, if it can get the bonding, but
I'd bet you that, if I had to bet, that they used the parent corporation's
financial statement.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Manager, - I agree with you - Mr. Manager, I'd like to bring
this to closure. Would you instruct... Madame City Attorney, is there any
way, now, to tell Can -American, Cruz Construction, and Sirka Bonds, that no
contract is going to be signed with them, until they have met the minority
part of the agreement. Can we do that?
Mrs. Dougherty: In other words, make it a mandatory minority...
Mr. Dawkins: Before we sign anything with them, they've got to come in here
with minority -signed contracts - 17 percent Cuban, signed; 17 percent ladies,
signed; 17 percent Black, signed, and then we sign with them.
Mr. Plummer: All right, question.
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Are you likewise saying that they have to be the low bidder, and
capable of bonding? I think that's important, because, if you don't...
Mr. Dawkins: But you see, J.L., the "capable of bonding" - no, because
Bayside worked out the bonding, and they are well pleased with the two
individuals they've got over there. And I hate to say this, but Tom is
blackballed from somewhere, because Tom has lost two jobs that he bid on, and
they told the people that... told him it was union, and told the other people
it was nonunion, and he lost the bid.
27 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Well, but my question is: each of these companies have made
representations to this City, as to what they're proposing, and their rates,
and what they're going to charge. Now, if you go to this, are you going to
have a safeguard provision in there, that these minority firms must be bidding
In at the same price, or below bidder? Because, if you don't...
Mr. Dawkins: Oh, yeah • but, no, wait now,
we don't have any...
we do want to
accept the low bid, OK? I have no problem
with that.
Mr. Plummer: OK, all right. Well, that's
a safeguard.
Mr. Dawkins: But I cannot sit here, and let anybody think that
I'm going to
vote for anything where they have excluded
us, by bonding.
Mr. Plummer: OK, so what you're saying
is, that they've got
to produce a
mandated 51 percent, but they must be also
through a bidding procedure,
and
must be low and responsible bid.
Mr. Dawkins: Got to be competitive.
You've got to be
able to bid
competitively, or you don't... you've got
no business being in
business. I
have no problem with that, J.L.
Mayor Suarez: Why couldn't...
Mrs. Kennedy: Is that in the form of a motion?
Mayor Suarez: ... we have an opportunity...
Mr. Dawkins: Um-hmm.
Mayor Suarez: ... to resolve their bonding...
Mrs. Kennedy: Is that in the form of a motion?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, um-hmm.
Mayor Suarez: ... problems whenever those come up - the City?
Mr. Plummer: Well, because you're talking... I guess you're talking, Xavier,
of millions and millions of dollars.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, let's...
Mr. Plummer: There's no question about that.
Mr. Dawkins: I'm finished.
Mayor Suarez: Well, that's...
Mr. Dawkins: I'll close that, because we've got one more, and it's almost
12:30 P.M.
Mrs. Dougherty: So you're asking that we...
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mr. Dawkins: Um-hmm, OK.
Mrs. Dougherty: ... make that a...
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded.
Mrs. Dougherty: condition of the...
Mayor Suarez: Under discussion.
Mrs. Dougherty: ... all of the contracts.
Mr. Dawkins: We'll discuss it and bring it back at the next meeting as a
resolution. OK, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I've got one more, and I'll
be ready to go.
28 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: You don't want to vote on it?
Mr. Dawkii,s: Yes, vote; vote, yeah - I want to vote on it.
Mr. Blaisdell: Mr.... and Commissioners. Mr. Sipes, from Linbeck
Construction Company, would like to make a statement in connection with the
carpenter's statement on the wage, if...
Mr. Dawkins: By all means, by all means. Um-hmm.
Mr. Blaisdell: Thank you.
Mr. Sipes: I am with Linbeck Construction Corporation, and Xavier Structures
Is an affiliate of Linbeck Corporation, which Linbeck Construction Corporation
is also. I'd like to point out, several months ago, Linbeck Construction
Corporation contacted the Carpenters' Local, to tender a contract at their
wage, and they... we have reached impasse, due to their actions. Xavier
Structures, to the best of my knowledge, has also done the same thing; they
have not at the prevailing wage. I'd like to point out, because the project
Is not totally union, that there might be others that will be in here with the
same actions, and that should be considered in what this body does. Thank
you.
Mr. Gustavo M. Figueroa: Commissioners, Mayor. Is this on? (MIKE)
Mr. Dawkins: Your name and address, please.
Mr. Figueroa: My name is Gus Figueroa. I'm a State representative for the
Carpenters' Union, Florida State Council of Carpenters. We're located at 295
West 79th Place, Hialeah, Florida. We had been contacted by Linbeck a few
months ago, like Mr. Paul Sipes mentioned, and we were trying to enter into
"good faith" negotiations with Linbeck Corporation, and also, recently,
shortly after that, we were contacted by Xavier for the same purpose. Linbeck
Corporation offered us... wanted us to tie our hands on the project, to,
basically, secure employment for one or two carpenters that were going to be
their lead people on the job site, running all the operations, and while the
rest of the job would go, basically, open shop, or, basically, we would have
no way to protect our members or protect the community at large, from
substandard wages and benefits and conditions that were being employed or this
particular project. We refused to negotiate, in any manner, of any sort, with
that type of condition imposed upon us, with Linbeck. And with Xavier
Construction, Xavier Construction, even though this is not the proper forum to
bring up collective bargaining issues between the unions and the private party
involved in these negotiations, Xavier Construction, their representative,
Bill Scott, had contacted our facilities, to discuss the possibility of a
collective bargaining agreement being drafted and worked out, for a project
basis only, on this job site. We have agreements that are executed on a
county -wide basis, in this area, and have successfully negotiated with many
contractors from the local area. Xavier has, basically, asked us to provide
them with a front, in regards to making it seem like we would accept a few
contractors... I mean, a few carpenters, on the job site, getting the
prevailing wage, while we turn the head, and let the rest of the community
suffer with lower substandard wages and benefits being paid to them, and lower
our heads and shy away from that particular situation. Even, you know, that's
a situation that caused us to be out there in full force like we are right
now, with a protest, before the community, about the substandard wages and
conditions; and we refuse to bargain in that manner, when we're being told to,
basically, play games, when we don't play games with the community, and we
don't expect the contractors in this community to have games played with them,
either, in the process that they bid the projects, etc., in the ongoing
situation down here.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you for your statement.
Mr. Figueroa: Thank you.
Mr. Plummer: Well, why don't you just follow that up, the gentleman from
Linbeck Construction? Has he made a true statement, sir?
Mayor Suarez: It's a matter of interpretation.
29 January 22, 1987
Mr. Sipes: I really cannot speak to what the conversations are between them
and Xavier Structures.
Mr. Plummer: No, r,c, he said they first went with you; they talked with you.
Now, he's made...
Mr. Sipes: At our invitation, yes, they did.
Mr. Plummer: 'Excuse me?
Mr. Sipea: At our invitation, we had those conversations, yes.
Mr. Plummer: And was it your intent to only hire two, to be front people?
Mr. Sipes: No, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Did that discussion evolve at any time during your discussion?
Mr. Sipes: No. No, sir.
Mr. Plummer: So, what you're saying is, that he's incorrect.
Mr. Sipes: I think he just said that was Xavier who did that.
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, he said both.
Mr. Sipes: Well, that... it's incorrect.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, is... did you not say both?
Mr. Figueroa: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir.
Mr. Sipes: Well, that's not correct. I was in the conversations, and that
did not occur. We have more... we have like two carpenters on the project
now, due to the time frame of the work.
Mr. Plummer: I just wanted it on the record.
i
Mr. Figueroa: Commissioner Plummer,...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Figueroa: ... if I can interject a second, here. If that was the intent
of Linbeck, to, basically, self -perform on the project, on the form work, and
so on, why is it that their subsidiaries are involved in the project, in the
bidding process, and involved in contract work?
Mr. Plummer: Well, they have every right to bid, there's no question about
that.
Mr. Figueroa: But, to contradict the issue, Commissioner, in regards to
that... when we were approached, in regards to being offered a contract with
Linbeck, that would, basically, tie our hands in regards to no strike, no
walkouts on the project, etc., which is the strong language that they have
imposed in their proposal to us, their employment proposal was to employ just
the lead carpenters on the job site. The rest of the carpentry work, which we
represent, would have gone open shop, or whichever way it was let out.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, he said that didn't happen.
Mr. Sipes: Commissioner, I think what he is attempting to say is, other
subcontractors' workers would be whatever that subcontractor chose to do, and
that is a fact. That is a true statement. But the people in the direct
employ of Linbeck Construction Corporation would have been... their wage,
whatever scale that was. I would like to add that the Laborers' Local, the
Operators' Local, and the Ironworkers' Local, have all signed our agreement, a
similar agreement that we tendered to the carpenters.
Mayor Suarez: Do we have a pending motion?
30 January 22, 1987
4
Mrs. Kennedy: The motion on the floor.
Mr. Plummer: No.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, Mr...
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, what is the...
Ms. Hirai: It was a direction to the administration.
Mrs. Kennedy: Commissioner Dawkins put it in the form of a motion and I
seconded.
Mayor Suarez: What was the...
Mr. Plummer: Oh, this is in reference to the other group. Not... it doesn't
speak to this, it speaks to the other groups that you're talking about.
Mr. Dawkins: Yes. Yeah, the other groups, yes.
Mayor Suarez: And when would it take effect, Mr. City...
Mr. Dawkins (OFF MIKE): Immediately.
Mayor Suarez: You're talking about for Overtown/Park West, then?
Mr. Dawkins (OFF MIKE): Yes.
Mayor Suarez: OK, all right. Call the roll on that motion.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-79
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER NOT TO ALLOW ANY
CONTRACT TO BE SIGNED IN CONNECTION WITH THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SPORTS ARENA UNLESS SAID COMPANIES
PROVE THAT THEY HAVE MET THE STIPULATED MINORITY
HIRING GOALS WHICH HAVE BEEN SET BY THIS CITY.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Comment made during roll call:
Mr. Plummer: With the assurance that the safeguards of the competitive
bidding, the bonding capacity, and responsible, are built into the procedures,
I vote yes.
31 January 22, 1987
-----------------..—_______--------------------
8. REVIEW CURRENT CLUSTER HOUSING APPLICATIONS ARE TO BE REVIEWED ON THE
BASIS Of THE REGULATORY ORDINANCE wh1CH WAS IN PLACE AT THE TIME THE
APPLICATION WAS MADE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Dawkins: I've got one more here. Madam City Attorney, would the
gentlemen who got the zoning problem come down? This gentlemen said that he
applied for cluster housing on January 9th and he was given everything and
then when he goes... and the first reading on the banning of cluster housing
was December llth, and we had the second reading... no, second reading was
December llth, it became law January filth, but yet, they accepted his
application January 9th, knowing that we were going to have the second reading
on January 9th. Nov, it appears to me... go ahead, J.L.
Mr. Plummer: Well wait a minute, one more key factor! Not only did they
accept his plans, they accepted his check for the processing fee.
Mr. Dawkins: Yes. See, so now, along the way somewhere, the City of Miami
lead this gentlemen, in my opinion, astrayl Now, is he grandfathered in,
because they accepted his money, or what do you do now?
Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Commissioner, I am aware of the problem, and very often,
the way the City has resolved this sort of issue, and when we did it, when
9500 became law, we did it with some of our other major zoning changes. We
provide a "grandfather" provision in the ordinance itself, which says, "that
any application on file will be viewed, or reviewed under the ordinance that
was in existence at the time the application was filed."
Mr. Plummer: Prevailing.
Mrs. Dougherty: We did not have that provision in the ordinance that did away
with cluster housing. Therefore, if you didn't have a permit when the law
took effect, you are not "grandfathered" in. What I would suggest in this
case, is and maybe this will resolve not only this gentlemen's problem, but
also problems like this in the future, is that we, or you direct the Planning
Department to consider an ordinance, and it could apply retroactively within
the next... last month, or even the last zoning change, that would say that
any application that is on filewill be reviewed unless elected by the
applicant to be reviewed under the new ordinance, will be reviewed under the
provisions of the old ordinance, and if you would so direct me to prepare such
an ordinance, and the Planning Department to put it on the Planning Board's
agenda, we will do so.
Mrs. Kennedy: Commissioner, do you want to put that in the form of a motion?
I'll second.
Mr. Dawkins: What?
Mrs. Kennedy: If you want to put that in the form of a motion, I will second.
Mr. Dawkins: I move the recommendation of the City Attorney.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded.
Mr. Plummer: Under discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: I am going to vote for the motion because I think that has been
the tradition of the City. My understanding, and to make it clear that there
are only two people who qualify in that position, and this gentlemen is one,
that in no way does this motion in which we are prepared to vote upon today,
indicate that that is an automatic approval of a project.
Mr. Dawkins: Then we'll fight it out up here.
32 January 22, 1987
% 0 #
Mr. Plummer: It merely allows them to have the standing prior to the change
of the ordinance under the prevailing ordinance before the vote, to go through
the same safeguard procedures that were in the past. Is that understood?
Mrs. Dougherty: That is correct. All that you are doing is permitting him to
be reviewed under the ordinance that existed when he applied.
Mr. Plummer: That's fine.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll. I'm sorry, anything further? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 67-60
A MOTION INSTRUCTING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD STIPULATE THAT ANY
APPLICATIONS HERETOFORE FILED WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI
IN CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF CLUSTER
HOUSING WILL BE REVIEWED ON THE BASIS OF THE
REGULATORY ORDINANCE WHICH WAS IN PLACE AT THE TIME
THE APPLICATION WAS MADE UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUESTED BY
THE APPLICANT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
9. A. LOW INCOME HOUSING PROPOSALS MUST GO OUT FOR BID AND MUST CONTAIN A
CLAUSE FOR MINORITY HIRING;
B. DESIGNATE MELROSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT INC. TO DEVELOP AFFORDABLE
HOUSING AT THE MELROSE NURSERY SITE;
C. URGE MELROSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT INC. TO MAKE ALLAPATTAH DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY THE MARKETING AGENT IN CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
OF THE TOWNHOUSE COMPLEX AT THE MELROSE NURSERY HOUSING SITE.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(AGENDA ITEM 22)
Mayor Suarez: I have been informed that Mr. Sox's father is seriously ill.
Our initial intent in calling this session for 11:00 a.m. was to go from 11:00
a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and then break until 3:00 p.m. We have nothing scheduled
until 3:00 p.m. in the afternoon, and then we would have in effect, a two hour
break which we can always shorten to one and one-half hours, if the Commission
so desires. It is going to be a little tough, frankly, to - I don't know that
we can do it even in the next 26 minutes. I am willing to try if *the
Commissioners want to stay and hear this so that you can get back to your
father's...
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know, the immediate question has to be, there are two
arguments. Are the other people prepared to go with their argument at this
time? I mean, will you hear both sides?
Mayor Suarez: Oh, yes.
Mr. Cazo: Yes, Commissioner, we are prepared.
Mr. Plummer: That is fine with me.
33 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: We are going to go for 26 minutes. I think Commissioner
Carollo indicated he has to leave at 1:00 p.m. That was the initial intent.
I think all of us really are going to be a little taxed to go beyond 1:00 p.m.
So, we will go to 1:00 p.m., if we can resolve it, fine. If not, at least we
tried, Mr. Sox.
Mr. Jerry Gereaux: I only need five, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Plummer: You got three)
Mr. Gereaux: I can do it in two.
Mayor Suarez: Oh, what are your recommendations? Were you able to analyze
them apples and apples and oranges and oranges?
Mr. Gereaux: OK, to make a long story short, we know what we are here to talk
about. We have two proposals for the development of housing on the Melrose
Nursery site. Both proposers were at the last City Commission meeting. Staff
directed the Administration to go back, look at the two proposals, compare
them, make an evaluation, both from the site planning point of view, from the
affordability and financing point of view as well. The conclusion that staff
has reached on the Melrose project is that we recommend that the City
Commission conditionally, and I emphasize the word, "conditionally", designate
the Melrose Townhome Development Inc., the nonprofit housing development
corporation formed by the Plumbers Local, be awarded the right to proceed with
the finalization of their plans on the Melrose site. As you recall, their
proposal was for 160 units of townhouses which is what I came to the
Commission in September to ask you to designate the site as. The other
proposal was for 240 units of stack townhomes, garden apartments, over two-
story condos, or two-story townhomes. The difference, of course, is that one
is a de minimis pub ownership. It is fee simple ownership of the individual
units and the land under them. That is the Melrose Townhome Development
program. The other one can best be characterized as something in between a
condominium and a townhome development, while it provides for more units, the
units are smaller. In the final analysis, and I said I would only take a
couple of minutes, the bottom line is, which proposer is offering the best
deal for the purchaser. This Commission's intent is to produce housing that
is affordable to the lowest economic range possible in the community, at the
best price; and the bottom line of all of that is if you turn to exhibit "b"
in this package, you will see when all is said and done, we bring it down to a
square foot purchase price value. The Melrose Townhome Development Inc. group
is proposing a sales price to the consumer of $41.05 per square foot of house
purchased. The competing proposers which is a joint venture, it is a
nonprofit development corporation, private developer joint venture, proposes
to sell to the consumer that same square foot of house for $48.33, which is a
difference of around $7.00 per square foot. I want to say, after having said
all of that, that our recommendation is conditional. What you received on the
8th were preliminary proposals. All the "its" were not dotted, all the "t's"
were not crossed. I recommend that if you go along with my recommendations,
that Melrose Townhomes Incorporated be given 90 days to cross those "t's", and
dot those "its", and be back before the Commission with their final proposal
for your review. Further, I am recommending, as far as the - and I know this
is a concern to everybody on the Commission - how much should the City get
reimbursed for land. I don't think we are prepared at this point, certainly,
it is staff's recommendation to you, that at this point, we do not discuss the
conveyance of the site, only in a conceptual sort of way, because when the
final proposal is prepared for your ratification, and keeping in mind the fact
that we are looking for affordable housing, this, in fact, will be the
flagship project for the City of Miami, in this public/private joint venture
kind of deal between the private sector and government that we have all been
paying a lot of lip service to, but we have not really put together yet. This
is the opportunity to do that. I would come back to the Commission: the
resolution asks you to give the City Manager permission to negotiate the price
of that land, and if we can't come back to you with a rational, logical
explanation, given the nature of the program, then you can throw us out of
here, but I don't think that will be the case.
Mr. Kennedy: Jerry, OK, have you checked out both of these groups to
ascertain that both are not for profit?
Mr. Gereaux: The Melrose Townhome Development Incorporated group that we are
recommending is a non-profit housing development corporation, organized
34 January 22, 1987
specifically for the purpose of carrying out this project. The competing
proposer is the Allapattah business Development Authority which is a nonprofit
C.D.C. in a joint venture with two private developers, sc the answer to the
question, is no; I would defer to the City Attorney on that, i think she will
agree with toe; but beyond that point, Commissioners, inherent in a nonprofit
development deal, which is what we want here, is no profit being taken out of
the deal. The proposal submitted by the Melrose Townhome Inc. takes no profit
out, which explains why they can deliver the units at a per square foot price
$7.00 less. On the other hand, on the information that I was provided and
that you were provided, there is profit being taken out by the competing
group. Now, that profit is...
Mrs. Kennedy: Meaning the developer's fee, or what, exactly?
Mr. Gereaux: Well, it is not... no, it is not just a developer's fee. The
Information that was made available to me at the last meeting was slightly
different than what was made available to you by the competing proposers.
However, the information that I have is that there will be profit split
between the C.D.C. and the two private sector developers, which amounts,
according to the numbers that we were given, to $727,540, and I submit to you,
that that is not for profit housing. That is a profit making venture,
regardless of what their profit is going to be used for.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask a question, because I am lost here somewhere.
The union says that they got their funding from the pension fund.
Mr. Gereaux: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: Now, they have an obligation to their pensioners that that money
is to be invested in a certain manner, in which it brings back a good return,
or a fair return for the future of their recipients. Are you saying to me
that in no way - how can they take union pension funds and invest them and tie
them up without giving something back to the fund? I lose something
somewhere.
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, sure, sure. Let me explain that to you in this way and
what we are talking about is the source of construction financing. Both
groups - one group, the plumbers, is providing construction financing to the
nonprofit development corporation that has been formed, called Melrose
Townshomes Incorporated. They are certainly going to be charging an interest
rate because they have a fiduciary responsibility to the members of the union,
and it also happens to be a Federal law. On the other hand, the Allapattah
group is also getting their construction financing, but it is coming from a
different source. There will be interest changed for their construction
financing to them as well. I am not talking about the soft cost of
development here, which include a lot of things, legal fees, a number of
other, what we call, soft development fees. What I am talking about is the
bottom line of the deal, and I am talking about profit that is going to, in
the case of the Allapattah joint venture group here, profit - profit.
Mayor Suarez: Jerry, what you are saying is the interest charges are going to
be pretty much the same for both and it will be determined by the market.
Mr. Gereaux: They are - a point or two, and they will be determined by the
market and by law and by the people who provide the construction financing,
but what I am talking about is profit, after the hard and soft costs have been
taken care of, and some soft costs cost money, like construction interest
financing. After all is said and done in those soft costs, there is profit
being taken out by the competing proposer, and by that I mean the people at
the other podium. That amounts to $727,540, after everything else. Now, that
profit is being split, as _ from the information we have here, between the
C.D.C. in the amount of $2917000 and some change, and by the two - not of the
two private partners in the deal, $436,524.
Mr. Plummer: One other question.
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: And it applies to both of these applicants in this situation and
to the Civic Center site, all right, sir? Number one, we the City are
involved.
35 January 22, 1987
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, we are.
Mr. Plummer: Because we have control of the property. Are normal City
bidding procedures going to prevail? Number two, does the minority, as we
just spoke of, mandate apply in these cases as well?
Mr. Gereaux: Because the City's involvement is in having a piece of land,
Commissioner, and offering that land for a price to be determined, as I
discussed earlier, you know, we have that kind of involvement, and we also
have that kind of control over the ultimate product and the site plan, I know
you were concerned about, and some other things I am concerned about, because
we have preliminary proposals at hand. As far as the competitive bidding
between the two sponsors, legally, we don't have a role in that.
Mr. Plummer: Well, we can ask for it.
Mr. Gereaux: We can ask for it, but I question whether or not it would be
vise to do that, Commissioner. I think that both groups have done their best
to come up with the lowest construction cost that was possible and that is the
private sector's role in the public/private venture.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but before you get to answer number two, let me tell you
where this Commission could have some kick back, OK? You have not, I have
not, the City has not gone through what their construction. Now, I don't know
construction, and I am not sitting here proposing to be an expert, but I know
there is good construction, and I know there is damn bad construction and if
for some reason, they bid out damn bad construction, no intent made, but the
possibility, and those things turn out bad, you know who is going to catch
hell, it is going to be this Commission, because we didn't control it. Now,
what I am saying to you is, because we have an involvement, even at the
proposal of 75 percent of what the value of the land is, what control is this
City going to have involved that we are going to be guaranteed that
construction is fair and good, that we are not a year from today going to have
200 residents of that project coming before this Commission and saying: "You
let them build inferior housing, they did inferior this and they did inferior
that!" Now, how are you going to protect this City?
Mr. Gereaux: Mr. Commissioner, if you will refer to the first page of my
recommendation, what I am requiring, if you go along with this recommendation,
is providing Melrose Townhome Inc. with 90 days to come up with a final site
plan that addresses the concerns that you expressed, many of the concerns
that the Planning Department expressed. In addition to that, final project
and unit plans and specifications, I want to know whether the floors are
terrazzo, or cheap carpeting. I want to know what is going on the walls, I
want to know what the light figures look like. That is my roll, Commissioner,
but...
Mr. Plummer: Jerry, excuse me, wanting to know, is one thing, having control
is another.
Mr. Gereaux: We will have that control.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Gereaux: We will have that control through the Building Department,
through the Housing Agency, through the Planning Department, and remember,
this recommendation requires that the sponsor come back to you, not only to
satisfy the Administration, we have to verify the detail work, but you, as the
policy makers of this community have the final ratification, not only of that
site plan, but also, of the - not only the price, but the method in which that
land is delivered to the sponsor.
Mr. Plummer: Is there a requirement of competitive bidding?
Mr. Gereaux: The answer to the question in this case is no, and again I would
defer to the City Attorney on that point, but my response is no.
Mayor Suarez: Can we build it in, is what he is asking. Is there - can we
build it in?
Mr. Gereaux: That is a policy decision of the Commission, and would have to
be responded to by the two sponsors. If that were made a requirement, I think
36 January 22, 1987
11
then that we would have to defer to the sponsor and let him make that choice,
but of course, it is a policy decision of the Commission. My recommendation
Is that you don't do that.
Mr. Plummer: Well, here is the point, if the City had no involvement, OK?...
if the City was not in any way involved, I understand the private sector, I
respect it, I am a part of it, but here you have taxpayer's monies one way or
the other involved in this project. We spend, what?... $2,100,000 for this
site?
Mr. Gereaux: $2,400,000, Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer: OK, $2,000,000 plus. Now, we have got taxpayer's dollars
involved in that. They at best, from what I have had of conversations, have
not proposed that they would be back more than 75 percent return to the City.
I am saying is, what responsibility does each one of us have sitting up here
to answer to the public that this went through a procedure which was best
delivered to the taxpayers of this community for the bang of their dollar, and
I don't know how you do it without competitive bidding.
Mr. Gereaux: I think what we have here, because we did not require
competitive bidding back in September, when I suggested that, is competitive
bidding. We have two sponsors, each proposing something to you.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no, I am not talking about competitive bidding of the
sponsors. I am talking about of the hard construction cost.
Mr. Gereaux: I will respond to that. I think that you have a great
responsibility and I think that the reason you have people like me working for
the City and other people, is to make sure that we do our job to make sure
that the taxpayers do not get a bad deal on the deal and we shouldn't be here
if we cannot come back to you with a proposal that is supportable and that is
in our professional best judgment, the best quality product that can be
produced for the price.
Mr. Plummer: No problem with that! I expect you to do that. That is what I
pay you to do, but how do you know, if you don't go through competitive
bidding that you have got the best price?
Mr. Gereaux: You don't.
Mr. Plummer: You bet your bippy!
Mr. Gereaux: However, Commissioner, you know, there is nothing in the world
that is for sure, but based on our expertise, what you pay us to do, we feel
that the prices that are offered, at least on the preliminary plans, the
construction that is proposed, the financing that is proposed, this will be
the best deal for the City, but again, I go back to my point - that decision
does not need to be made by this Commission today.
Mr. Plummer: No, I think it does.
Mr. Gereaux: I think because I have given you, recommended to you that this
whole thing go through a staff evaluation, which includes all of the
departments with all the skills in construction that we have on board, but
again, the final ratification is yours, as the policy makers of this
community.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know, we did this same thing, Jerry, with the Vizcaya
site. We mandated competitive bidding with the Liberty City site, we mandated
it with the Little Havana site, that they had to go through competitive
bidding. Now, my question, I guess is, we felt very strongly about that point
at that particular time, why aren't we feeling just as strongly now? See, I
don't know how you guarantee the taxpayers, if you don't go through
competitive bidding procedures with minimum standards of course, that they got
the best bang for their buck! I don't know any other way.
Mr. Gereaux: I...
Mr. Plummer: Let me try to smplify it for you. I'll make a motion, Mr.
Mayor, at this time, that this procedure include the minority, as we did this
morning, clause, and it also has a bidding procedure. I'll so offer that in a
motion.
37 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: So moved. Understanding that those two things sometimes, one
runs counter to the other, sometimes, but that is...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, I will separate them. I will first make a motion...
Mayor Suarez: Well, I think they have to be made together, because if we
intend to apply both, we have to go ahead and do it together, but...
Mr. Dawkins% Second the motion and under discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Second. Under discussion.
Mr. Dawkins: I follow J.L.'s reasoning, but when we had these two groups to
bid on the job, we did not tell them that it was going to be a bidding
process, and I don't know if either group can bid and come in at the figures,
I mean, if they go out and bid, they will be able to come in at the figures
that they come in and may they are going to produce that.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: Well...
Mr. Plummer: I thank you for your comment.
Mr. Dawkins: I say I don't know.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Dawkins, I would have no problem if your statement was
absolute. There was no bidding procedure. These two groups, this one here
showed up in a meeting. There was no bidding procedure, there was no R.F.P.
Now, what I am saying to you is, had we gone through that bidding procedure,
we could have built in the protections of that time. We have not done that,
and I am saying, what is different in these two projects...
Mayor Suarez: No, actually, it would have worked the other way around, if we
had gone out to an R.F.P.'s, this selection, at this level would have been
totally competitive, but beyond that level, we would not have had any control.
Mr. Plummer: OK, what I am saying
projects different than the Vizcaya,
projects where we demanded that?
Mr. Gereaux: Well...
is, what makes this project, these two
the Little Havana, the Liberty City
Mr. Plummer: I don't see any difference.
Mrs. Kennedy: Jerry?
Mr. Dawkins: Well, OK, I will discuss it after the vote. I will tell you
what the difference is after the vote. OK, I call the question on the motion.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-81
A MOTION STIPULATING THAT IN CONNECTION WITH ALL
FUTURE PROPOSALS RECEIVED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME HOUSING, (a) ALL RESPONSES MUST BE
RECEIVED PURSUANT TO A BIDDING PROCEDURE, AND (b) ALL
PROPOSALS RECEIVED MUST CONTAIN A MINORITY CLAUSE
REFLECTING MINORITY HIRING GOALS STIPULATED BY THIS
CITY.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote-
38 January 22, 1987
0
W
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mrs. Kennedy: But, I'd like to hear from Jerry on that.
Mr. Gereaux: I was only going to say, Madam Commissioner, that I have been
advised by the Melrose Townhomes Incorporated, the group we are recommending,
that they indeed have gone through that process, and are willing to continue
going through that process with the proviso that in their competitive bidding,
they will do competitive bidding through union shops, and I guess that is up
to them.
Mr. Plummer: Sure, I have no problem with that.
Mayor Suarez: Would you build that into your motion so we have a
clarification in the case, or maybe we ought to do that after the selection
process.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, you would do that when you select one of the
two firms, or one of the two proposals, excuse me. Now, that does not mean, I
respect what they say, and I appreciate what they say, that the other group,
if they chose not to go that route, can do such and make it a competitive
bidding, OK? I think that... look, they have, each group has given to this
Commission a line that says we feel construction is going to be "X" number of
dollars. We see that, OK? and we know that, and I think that we need to
guarantee, not only does "X" number of dollars guarantee the quality of the
Job, but I think it also must guarantee the safeguard that that which they
said will be done, and I have no problem with including if you want that in
their motion, they make it as a part of their negotiations in the 90 days.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, they can proffer that if they are the group selected.
Jack?
Mr. Jack Luft: Commissioner, to explain the difference, for instance, the
Vizcaya project.
Mr. Dawkins: Very much.
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, don't
somewhat separated from the Little
speak to one of the two there.
speak to the Vizcaya, because that was
Liberty City, and the Little Havana, so
Mr. Luft: Well, we are talking about a developer who is known a head of time,
who was told to come back with a cost for the unit, and he competitively bided
it, but here we are saying two opposing developers, who have no claim on the
site yet, to come to us with a total package, including a price, and in
effect, what the process results in, is they must go out and in their own
process, come up with a competitive contractor and a price, or the total
package will not be competitive at all, but, do you see what I am trying to
say? Under the...
Mayor Suarez: Yes, if anything, Jack, what you are saying is what we build in
should assure that their prices will hold, so don't...
Mr. Luft: In effect, they have gone through a competitive process, but they
wouldn't pick a contract or a builder who is going to give them a high price,
because that is going to throw them out of the process.
Mr. Plummer: But wait a minute, whoa, wait a minute, Jack! That's fine, but
through a competitive bidding process, let's say that they said, I remember
one figure $9,000,000. Let's say through a competitive bidding process, they
come in with a company who offers and assures quality at $7,000,000. I want
that saving passed on to the people that are going to buy it, and if you don't
go through a competitive procedure, you'll never know that.
39 January 22, 1987
Mr. Gereaux: Jack made a very interesting point that they cannot bid on
something that they cannot guarantee the development of, because you have not
made a decision yet, but I presume that...
Mr. Plummer: That is what we are going to the ninety days for.
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, I presume that that is going to be included in the 90 days.
I have taken more than two minutes, but I am duty bound to make a couple of
other comments about our reason for selecting the group that we selected; and
it goes back to a couple of City Commission meetings when I have heard this
City Commission, and I, myself, and other people in the Administration have
been concerned that it has been very, very infrequently that we have seen
local financial institutions participate in inner city development. The
Melrose Townhome Development Group has received conditional preliminary
commitment from a consortium of six local commercial banks, who to my
recollection at least, have never been involved in inner city housing
development. Now, we all know that Federal funding is going away, and that
the name of the housing game is changing. It is going to be local governing
bodies, it is going to be local banks that are going to make housing work in
the future, at least for the next ten or fifteen years. Here, we have an
opportunity to take advantage of that.
Mrs. Kennedy: Excuse me, Jerry, not only that, but if it happens and it
works, we can set a precedent for this to follow many other cases.
Mr. Gereaux: I would expect that if the plumbers are recommended, I call them
the plumbers, excuse me, the Melrose Townhome Incorporated...
Mr. Plummer: No association.
Mr. Gereaux: No association, I apologize, Commissioner, that we can expect,
and that this City Commission should expect that if this project is
successful, and I have every reason to believe in my experience it will be,
that the plumbers will be involved in other projects in this community.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, Commissioner Carollo said he had to leave at 1:00
p.m. We have not heard from the opposing groups. I would hope that Mr.
Gereaux would give them the courtesy of let's hearing from them, and then see
what we are going to do.
Mr. Armando Cazo: Thank you, Commissioner. Mayor, members of the Commission,
my name is Armando Cazo, I am an architect with offices at 3501 S.W. 8th
Street, Suite 204.
Mr. Plummer: Just for the record, you are registered.
Mr. Cazo: Yes, I am, now I am.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir.
Mr. Cazo: I am just going to be brief. I think there is - actually, there
are three items that I want to cover, and I want to call to your attention.
Mainly, one of the items is density. The reason why we chose to go 240 units,
instead of going less than the amount of units, that we firmly believe that
the City should get reimbursed for their investment on the land, and by doing
that, the cost of the land to the City is $2,400,000. By having the magic
figure of 240 units, our intent was to reimburse this City for every penny
that they invested in the City, and at the same time, trying to keep the units
at a level that would be affordable.
Mayor Suarez: They give us the additional calculations, including price of
the land?
Mr. Cazo: Well, the additional calculations were based on the fact that land
value, or land cost was not taken into account when the staff made the
recommendation.
Mayor Suarez: Right, so you built that into your modified calculations?
Mr. Cazo: That is correct, right.
40 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer; Well, wait a minute. The question, Jerry, you quoted us a
number here, that said that their price per square foot was $48.35. Was that
based on 100 percent return to the City?
Mr. Gereaux: That is based on no return to the City for the land, and the
reason we did that...
Mr. Plummer: None, zero?
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, right. I can give you an explanation on that if you would
like.
Mr. Plummer: No, it explains itself.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, we will have to decide the percentage return to the City.
The figures so far don't include that, and they have chosen to include into
their additional proposals so we can see the figures, what they look like, the
cost of the land.
Mr. Cozos Correct, that is basically the reason why we did that.
Mayor Suarez: Both sides could do the same thing, and it would affect the
cost by about the same amount.
Mr. Cozo: Well, actually not by the same amount, there is a difference...
Mayor Suarez: Well, on a per unit basis, it would not be.
Mr. Cozo: On the per unit basis, yes, correct.
Mr. Gereaux: In fairness to the...
Mayor Suarez: Go ahead, sir, Armando, go ahead, sir.
Mr. Cozo: OK, I think something else that we must make emphasis on, and I
would like to correct staff on that, is the fact that we as developers are not
making a profit out of the project. The fact is that we are making a
development fee, which you know, nobody works for free, and the fact also is,
that the C.D.C., which is the Allapattah Business Development Authority, will
walk out of the project with approximately $421,000, which they will reinvest
in the community to continue their efforts that this City Commission has
mandated on them to do.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, whoa, whoa, because I think that is very key now. Are you
saying that that money of $400,000, whatever number you used, $435,000, which
would be a fee to you as a developer and a community based organization?
Mr. Cozo: No, sir.
Mr. Plummer: A fee goes to the Allapattah group?
Mr. Cozo: The $421,000 will go directly to the Allapattah Business
Development Authority.
Mr. Plummer: Does this City control what the expenditures of that money will
be?
Mr. Cozo: That...
Mr. Plummer: Well, I am asking.
Mr. Cozo: ... would have to be answered by the members of the Allapattah
Business Development - What Mr. Urra is saying is that the City of Miami
allocates about $50,000 a year to Allapattah Business Development Authority,
and in turn...
Mr. Plummer: We are well aware of that.
Mr. Cozo:... 'OK, in turn that money is used to do certain things in the
community to'develop the community.
41 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: well, but that $50,000, remember, we hold complete control over
how it is spent. I am asking, of the fee that you will make from that as part
of your kitty, will the City have the same control over that amount of money?
Mr. Coto: Most of the persons of the board are present here, and if I read
them right, they do not have any objections to have the City control those
funds.
Mr. Plummer: OK, I am just asking on the record.
Mr. Cozo: And basically, that concludes my presentation. I have a lot of
other points that I wanted to go over, but I believe that the time and the
fact, I will rest.
Mayor Suarez: We take note for the record, of other arguments made in the
past, which distinguishes your group from the union in terms of the fact that
It is a community based organization and the implicit benefits to the
community from that and also, the answer the union has given to that, which is
that they also have a substantial membership, you know, in the City, and City
resident and that the benefits would also reflect back to the community, but I
don't if you meant to make that part of your argument, and you didn't do so
because of time constraints. I don't want you to feel - you can always come
back after the lunch recess and the Commission could decide not to decide at
this point, and you could...
Mr. Dawkins: I move I make a motion...
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner.
Mr. Dawkins: ...when they finish.
Mr. Cozo: Well, basically, what you said is correct, Mayor, and that was our
emphasis, that you know, a community based organization would be benefiting
from the project right in the area.
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins? Commissioner Kennedy?
Mr. Dawkins: I am ready. I have a lot
worked with them, and they have worked
sit here and not vote for the plumbers,
we negotiated this, and we said that
could take their $2,000,000 and use as
recommendation of staff.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
of friends with this group and I have
with me, but I could not in good faith
when the plumbers sat down with me and
this would be the first time that we
housing, so I move that we accept the
Mrs. Kennedy: I will second that motion and upon doing so, let me just go
under discussion on a number of things that I have been jotting down. The
Melrose Townhouse site has less number of units, but they are larger. They
have incorporated open public space with a playground. Allapattah has a
swimming pool and a children's playground, but they don't have open space and
swimming pools, let's face it, are very expensive to maintain, and this we
have to figure out the maintenance increase later on. Melrose, the
construction will open up about 200 construction jobs. The Allapattah
will open up about 100. Again, on prices, even though the units are larger in
the Melrose, the selling price comes out to $41 a square foot versus $48 for
the other group, and one thing that I really weigh a lot is the fact that we
have for the first time, a lot of local banks working together on this
project, and as I said earlier, this can set a precedent for many other
projects to follow, and it is obvious that the City needs affordable housing,
but we just can't pack people in one place, 200 units to me, is way too much,
and I think that the units are much nice in the other place. These are some
notes that I just want put into the record.
Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, I will vote favorably on the motion because
the motion does in fact, follow the recommendations of the Department and the
professionals. In that motion, it is not absolute, it is giving them the
right to sit down for 90 days, come back with a completed package in which
this Commission will say yea or nay as to the final approval. If for whatever
reason at that time it is not successful, then we have our right to do what we
want. To enter into negotiations which is the sum and substance of this
particular case, that they will deal with this company and come back and
42 January 22, 1987
answer, I will vote with the motion based on the recommendation of the
professionals.
Mayor Suarez: Any further discussion? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-82
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING MELROSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT,
INC., A NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION, TO
UNDERTAKE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW -DENSITY SALES
TOWNHOME COMPLEX ON THE MELROSE NURSERY SITE
AFFORDABLE TO FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS OF LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME; AND FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO REQUEST METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY TO CONVEY
TITLE TO THE SITE TO THE DESIGNATED SPONSOR/DEVELOPER
SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor, I would also like to say that I have also sat down
with Mr. Urra, the same as I have sat down with Mr. Fair, and if there is any
way that the... not the Allapattah Development, I want to make sure now, we
understand what I am saying, but the Allapattah Community Inc., that is the
one that feeds the people, is it not?... that the Allapattah Community Inc.,
be a part of the marketing with this, and that that unit will get, the same as
the Urban League gets a fee for managing this one that we are selecting...
Mayor Suarez: How about tenant selection of applicants referrals.
Mr. Dawkins: Whatever, I mean if that can be worked out and Mr. Fair can sit
down with Mr. Urra and show him how we are doing it, and he will accept it, I
would like for them to come back with that with their recommendation.
Mayor Suarez: Do you want to make that into the form of a motion to built
into the negotiations?
Mr. Dawkins: So moved.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you are asking that it be considered. Second the motion.
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, asking that the union consider making the Allapattah
Community Inc. the marketing agent and whatever...
Mayor Suarez: Referrals, selection, the whole...
Mr. Gereaux: Richard Sox is here, and I would like him to respond to that.
Mr. Richard Sox. I am Richard Sox, my address is 224 Palermo, Coral Gables.
First, I want to thank all of you for taking us out of turn, because I do need
to leave just as soon as we are finished. We will be happy to try to work
something out with the folks on the marketing and. Our intent has not been
unlike - I think both of us have the same intent, we are trying to benefit the
community as a whole, and particularly this particular area, so we will be
happy to sit down with them and see what we can work out as to the marketing
and of it. We have done some preliminary marketing studies ourselves, and
certainly we think we will be successful working something out with them.
43 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll on that motion.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: Thank you. Did you say Allapattah Community Inc., or
UMPTA?
Mr. Cazo: Allapattah Community, Inc.
Mrs. Kennedy: You always have to have the last word!
Mr. Plummer: That is what happens when you get too many organizations going.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, you get a headache.
Mayor Suarez: Which is the logical entity?... I mean, I don't...
Mr. Dawkins: OK, the logical entity, in my opinion, the logical entity is
Allapattah Community, Inc. in that it is doing service, community service
work.
Unidentified Speaker: That is not Allapattah
Mr. Dawkins: OK, which is the one that Urra runs?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Unidentified Speaker: The Allapattah Development Authority.
Mr. Dawkins: Who? That is what?
Unidentified Speaker: Mrs. Markowitz.
Mr. Dawkins: No, I want the - what is the name of the unit where I come
up...
Unidentified Speaker: The Allapattah...
Mr. Dawkins: Wait a minute, wait a minute. Go ahead, sir.
Unidentified Speaker: The Allapattah Development Authority.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: That is the one you guys want?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Dawkins: If that is what they want, give it to them.
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Mrs. Kennedy: That's it. We have no problems.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, that is the C.B.O.
Mayor Suarez: That is the one that receives the community development monies
from the City, OK? So corrected, the motion and the second. Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-83
A MOTION URGING THE MELROSE TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENT, INC.
TO CONSIDER MAKING ALLAPATTAH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
THE MARKETING AGENT FOR REFERRAL, SELECTION, ETC. IN
CONNECTION WITH PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF LOW DENSITY
SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX AT THE MELROSE NURSERY SITE.
44 January 22, 1987
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Dawkins: I vote yes on the correctipn. That's why I need you to keep me
straightl
THEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION WENT INTO A LUNCHEON
RECESS AT 1:11 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 3:04 P.M., WITH
ALL MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT
EXCEPT COMMISSIONER CAROLLO.
10. URGE EASTERN AIRLINES NOT TO MOVE THEIR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS TO TEXAS
(See label 046)
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Plummer and fellow Commissioners, I would like to propose
that we go on record, and send a resolution, or something to Eastern Airlines,
telling Eastern Airlines that we hope that they do not move their corporate
headquarters to Texas, and that we would hope that they would be able to work
out the differences without laying all these people off in this economy, and
along with that resolution, I'd like for the Manager to take it, and if the
rest of the Commissioners so desire, I would like for us, as a Commission to
meet with Eastern Airlines officials to discuss the impact of this on the City
of Miami.
Mr. Plummer: Miller, there is nothing that would give me greater pleasure.
Eastern Airlines is probably, besides the State of Florida, the School Board,
is probably the largest employer in Dade County, and I want to tell you
something, I think that they have got to remember, or be reminded that this
community has stood behind them in the past in every way possible, and that we
are now looking that that same continued support be a two-way street, and that
we want them to stay in this community and I second your motion and as far as
I am concerned, I would love to join with you and anyone else who would like
to go and say to them, "Hey, this is your home, it is our home, and let's keep
it that way."
Mr. Dawkins: OK, Mr. Mayor, would you set that up, a meeting for all of us to
go and meet with them?
Mayor Suarez: Absolutely. We'll grab the president, tonight hopefully, if we
get out of here early enough. Call the roll.
THEREUPON THE FOREGOING MOTION 87-84, DULY INTRODUCED
BY Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Plummer was passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
(LATER FORMALIZED INTO RESOLUTION 87-113)
45 January 22, 1987
0
11. CONSENT AGENDA.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I have nothing... unless any other Commissioner, I
have nothing to pull from the Consent Agenda and I will move it if there is no
Other items to be...
Mayor Suarez: Those are items three to ten.
Mrs. Kennedy: I have one item to pull. I am just calling my office to have
the agenda, and I believe it is number seven, so give me two minutes.
Mayor Suarez: OK, when you get that ready, we will get to it.
Mr. Dawkins: I will pull five and...
Mr. Plummer: Is that the only two pulled?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, oh, and 171
Mr. Plummer: 17 is not on the Consent. Henry, does Joe have any to pull?
Mr. Dawkins: OK, that is all.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I move the Consent Agenda with the exceptions of
items five and seven.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? If anyone wants to be
heard on items three through ten with the exclusion of items five or seven,
this is your opportunity to do so. This is a Consent Agenda. Let the record
reflect that no one has stepped forward for or against any of the items on the
Consent Agenda, those being items three to ten, with the exceptions of five
and seven. Call the roll.
THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WERE INTRODUCED BY COMMISSIONER PLUMMER,
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KENNEDY AND PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
11.1 CORRECT SCRIVENER'S ERRORS IN R-86-227 (FURNISHING OF TWO PATROL
VESSELS.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-85
A RESOLUTION CORRECTING TWO SCRIVENER'S ERRORS IN
SECTION 1 OF RESOLUTION NO. 86-227, ADOPTED APRIL
10, 1986, TO REFLECT JULY 17, 1985 AS THE BID OF
COBIA BOAT COMPANY FOR FURNISHING TWO PATROL VESSELS
AND ALLIED EQUIPMENT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION AND ALSO TO REFLECT THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT TRUST FUND AS THE SOURCE OF FUNDS FOR
THE PURCHASE OF SAID VESSELS AND EQUIPMENT AS
AUTHORIZED BY SAID RESOLUTION NO. 86-227.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
46 January 22, 1987
0
11.2 DONATE SIX SURPLUS MOTORCYCLES TO THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-86
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE DONATION
OF SIX (6) SURPLUS MOTORCYCLES TO THE DOMINICAN
REPUBLIC FOR USE BY THE NATIONAL POLICE OF THAT
COUNTRY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
11.3 ACCEPT APPRAISAL OF EDWARD M. WARONKER TO ESTABLISH VALUE OF PROPERTY AT
250 N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-87
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE APPRAISAL
PROPOSAL OF EDWARD M. WARONKER, PROPERTY
CONSULTANTS, INC., MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE
OF REAL ESTATE APPRAISERS, AT A FEE OF $5,000, TO
APPRAISE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING THE FAIR
MARKET VALUE OF THE CITY'S FEE SIMPLE INTEREST AND
THE MIAMI PIONEERS' CLUB LEASEHOLD ESTATE IN CITY -
OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 250 N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE
WITH FUNDS THEREFOR BEING ALLOCATED FROM PROPERTY
AND LEASE MANAGEMENT ENTERPRISE FUND, DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
11.4 ACCEPT PLAT: JEFFERSON GROVE.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-88
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED JEFFERSON
GROVE, A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI; AND
ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AND
ACCEPTING THE COVENANT TO RUN WITH THE LAND
POSTPONING THE IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL REQUIRED BY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT AND
PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF SAID PLAT IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
11.5 ACCEPT PLAT: RAFA SUBDIVISION.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-89
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED RAFA
SUBDIVISION, A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI; AND
ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AND
ACCEPTING THE COVENANT TO RUN WITH THE LAND
POSTPONING THE IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL REQUIRED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT AND
PROVIDING FOR THE RECORDATION OF SAID PLAT IN THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
47 January 22, 1987
11.6 TRANSMITTAL TO SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL FOR OVERTOWN/PARK WEST REDEVELOPMENT.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-90
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TRANSMITTAL TO THE SOUTH
FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL OF THE APPLICATION
FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (ADA) FOR THE SOUTHEAST
OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AREA AS A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM ATTACHED.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
- --- - ------------------- ----------
12. ALLOCATE $15,000 FOR "KEEP DADE BEAUTIFUL, INCORPORATED"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item S.
Mr. Dawkins: Item 5, Mr. Manager...
Mr. Odio: Yes, sir.
Mr. Dawkins: I keep hearing that we have no money in Solid Waste and we are
talking about cutting salaries in Solid Waste and reducing fees, etc., and
etc., but yet, I see here where we are going to take $15,000 from the
operating budget of the Solid Waste Department. What is that going to do to
the whole department?
Mr. Odio: What will it do to the department?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mr. Odio: The money is there. They are part of the program of "Keep Dade
Beautiful," and they feel that it is important that we continue with that
program.
Mr. Dawkins: I agree with you in total, and I think we should participate,
but see, I am getting mixed signals when you put out a memorandum that says
you have got to save $3,500,000 in the Sanitation Department. You expect them
to do that, but now I see where you are going to take $15,000 from that same
budget, or is that the next year we are going to save out of?
Mr. Odio: Commissioner, they have a target savings. It is not that we have
reduced the target savings. However, there are certain things that we are,
you know, that we have to do. They feel that this is one of them. They are
very active in the "Keep Dade Beautiful" and...
Mr. Dawkins: OK, I am going to move five with the expressed that if I
need $15,000, you will do just like we are doing now, find it and give it to
me.
Mr. Plummer: Second the motion.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
48 January 22, 1987
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-91
A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING $15,000 FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING
BUDGET OF THE SOLID WASTER DEPARTMENT, IN SUPPORT OF THE
"KEEP DADE BEAUTIFUL, INCORPORATED" PROGRAM WHICH PROVIDES
PROGRAMS AND SERVICES AIMED AT ELIMINATING PROBLEM AREAS
IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT
WITH SAID ORGANIZATION IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Russ, you made a brief and eloquent presentation.
------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
13. A - DESIGNATE AREAS AND HOURS OF OPERATION FOR VENDOR LICENSES DURING
GRAND PRIX EVENT.
B - THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE F.E.0 AND THE BICENTENNIAL PARK
PROPERTIES SHALL INCORPORATE THE GRAND PRIX RACE TRACK COURSE IN
ITS EXISTING LOCATION.
Mayor Suarez: Item 7, we will take that then.
Mr. Plummer: May you always be such an easy winner
Mrs. Kennedy: I have no objections to this item, but there is something
related to it that should be straightened out. At the last Commission
meeting, we instructed the Manager and the Planning Department to leave the
consideration of the Grand Prix Race in developing the Master Development
Plan. That has to be changed to location instead of configuration, so we have
drafted a resolution which reads:
"A resolution directing the Planing Department that, in the preparation
of the Master Development Plan for the F.E.C. and the Bicentennial Park
Properties, the final recommendations shall incorporate the present
Grand Prix race track course in its existing general location and any
changes if any, shall take into substantial account the final impact of
the City and Miami Motorsports, Inc."
Mr. Plummer: Just for clarification of the record, my understanding is,
because the City has put up $650,000 to change the course for the convenience
of Bayside, that, if in fact, that course is reconfigured at the City's
behest, and recommendation, then the City is going to stand ready to change
and to pay for those changes, is my understanding, and as long as that is the
case, then I have no problems. To change that course is expensive, and I
think both sides recognize that. Now, we have extracted from the promoter
monies to do that this time as well as City monies. I think that if we were to
change the configuration, which I want to give the City the latitude to do,
then the City would have to recognize that if they demanded, they would have
to pay for it. That is all I wanted to put on the record, that that is
understood. Are you moving seven with those understandings?
49 January 22, 1987
Ej
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: I second seven.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. The record should reflect....
Mrs. Kennedy: Oh, I gave it to the City Attorney.
Mr. Plummer: She incorporated it into item seven.
Mayor Suarez: It was misread toward the end, but as long as we get the
wording correctly. At the end it said "on" instead of "of". Call the roll on
the motion.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-92
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND APPROVING THE CITY
MANAGER'S DESIGNATION, PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 39-
13, OF CERTAIN AREAS OF THE CITY WITHIN WHICH VENDOR
LICENSES ARE NOT APPLICABLE BETWEEN 7:00 A.M. AND 7:00
P.M. ON FEBRUARY 28 AND MARCH 1, 1987 FOR THE MIAMI GRAND
PRIX EVENTS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-92.1
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT, IN
THE PREPARATION OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
F.E.C. AND THE BICENTENNIAL PARK PROPERTIES, THE FINAL
RECOMMENDATIONS OF SAID DEPARTMENT SHALL INCORPORATE THE
PRESENT GRAND PRIX RACE TRACK COURSE IN ITS EXISTING
GENERAL LOCATION AND TAKE INTO SUBSTANTIAL ACCOUNT THE
FINANCIAL IMPACT UPON THE CITY AND MIAMI MOTORSPORTS, INC.
OF CHANGES, IF ANY, IN SAID PLAN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
50 January 22, 1987
0 0
14. DESIGNATE CODEC, INC. TO DEVELOP A LOW -DENSITY SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX AT
THE CIVIC CENTER SITE FOR LOW MODERATE INCOME FAMILIES.
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item 23.
Mr. Plummer: Are both parties present, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Suarez: I believe so. They have been here most of the day.
Mr. Jerry Gereaux: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, we went through
the same process we used in evaluating the two proposals for the Melrose
project, that we did for evaluating the Civic Center project. You have a
complete package before you. In item 23, the Planning Department also
reviewed the site plans in both the Housing Conservation and Development
agencies, and the Planning Department recommended of the two proposals
submitted, that submitted by CODEC, a not for profit County wide housing
corporation be recommended in accordance with the same terms and conditions,
as those that we recommended for the former site. If you will return to your
exhibit, exhibit "b", last page of exhibit "b", you will see that when all is
said and done, CODEC is offering the consumer a product at $34.69 a square
foot, where the counter proposal is offering at $48.35 a square foot. The
other point I would like to make on this, is that again, CODEC is a not for
profit housing sponsor. They are taking nothing back out of the deal in the
form of profit, which is not the case for the competitive proposal.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I've got to ask this question now, and it is amazing how
these numbers have just reversed, exactly reversed! I guess my first question
has to be - this is CODEC, is that the word?
Mr. Gereaux: CODEC is ...
Mr. Plummer: Oh, OK, this is Allapattah, CODEC and Allapattah. If Allapattah
is proposing to do this project at $34.69, and the other project was $48.35,
where is the big difference?
Mr. Gereaux: I will get back to my...
Mayor Suarez: No, Allapattah is at $48.35 a square foot in this one, isn't
it?
Mr. Plummer: No, Allapattah... oh wait a minute, I...
Mr. Gereaux: No, what I was referring to...
Mr. Plummer: Have I got them twisted?
Mr. Gereaux: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: OK, so in this particular case, CODEC is at $34.69, and
Allapattah is exactly as they were in the last.
Mr. Gereaux: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: And that is based on at your level, that there is no property
return at all on that basis.
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, we used zero base for all of these, Commissioners...
Mr. Plummer: So you could measure them.
Mr. Gereaux:... so we had apples and apples, and again, I am recommending we
negotiate the present site.
Mr. Plummer: OK, now, to both developers, to both developers, you know,
because you were here before, I don't know that this gentlemen was, but this
Commission has imposed two things on any of the negotiations. One, that the
construction and all matters shall be competitively bided; number two, that in
fact, the minority set aside of 17, 17 and 17 will be honored, prior to the
letting of contracts. You are aware of that?
51 January 22, 1987
Mr. Julio de Quesada: Yes, we are aware of that.
Mr. Plummer: And you have indicated for the record that there is no
objection. Sir, are you aware of that, and do you have any objections?
Mr. Julio de Quesada: None of them.
Mr. Plummer: OK, fine, I just wanted to make that on the record, and excuse
me, for the record, would you put your name on the record, and your position
with the company?
Mr. de Quesada: Yes. My name is Julio de Quesada, executive director of
CODEC, Inc.
Mr. Plummer: And for the record, you have no objections to either one of
those impositions?
Mr. de Quesada: For the record I have no objections to the two conditions you
just mentioned.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you, sir.
Mrs. Kennedy: Excuse me, before we start, Jerry, the not for profit group,
could you tell us... we have established the fact that this group is for
profit and, we will have a say in the money.
Mr. Gereaux: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: They were in the previous, are they in this?
Mrs. Kennedy: First of all, is this the same group as was here this morning?
Is this the same...?
Mr. Gereaux: This group, yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: Right, the Allapattah.
Mayor Suarez: The same joint venture, with the same composition, with one for
profit, or is it two...
Mr. Gereaux: That is correct, it is a nonprofit C.D.C. with two private
sector co -developers for profit, co -developers.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, and CODEC?
Mr. Gereaux: CODEC is a not for profit housing development corporation.
Mrs. Kennedy: All right.
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute. This morning you said that they were
getting roughly a $700,000, whether it be fee, or what it was. Does that same
thing prevail in the civic project as it did in the Melrose project?
Mr. Gereaux: In the analysis, Commissioner, that we conducted, the Allapattah
Business Development Authority joint venture C.D.C. profits, according to the
figures provided on this one are $1,236,000.
Mr. Plummer: Much more than the previous!
Mrs. Kennedy: Much higher.
Mr. Gereaux: And the proposal submitted by CODEC shows no, you know, profits,
on the deal.
Mayor Suarez: OK, do you want to respond to that, Armando?
Mr. Armando Cazo: My name is Armando Cazo, for the record. I am an architect
with offices with 3501 S.W. 8th Street.
Mr. Plummer: And for the record, you are a registered lobbyist.
52 January 22, 1987
Mr. Cazo: Yes, I am. I am representing Allapattah Business Development
Authority. 1 have a lot of problems with the study made by the staff. First
of all, I am going to respond to what you just said about profit, which is
completely erroneous, but first of all, let me ask, through you, or Mr. CODEC,
the representative of CODEC, Julio de Quesada, if the cost per square feet of
the project, or actually, the sales price of the project, $34.61, is that...
you can produce a unit for that amount of money, sales, soft cost and hard
cost?
Mr. de Quesada: Yes, we can.
Mr. Cazo: That is for the record, and you will be able to deliver those units
at that particular price?
Mr. de Quesada: Correct.
Mr. Cazo: That's correct, OK. For the record also, and in correction, the
net proceeds of the project, which $100,236 dollars, not $1,000,200. That
will go strictly to Allapattah Business Development Authority, and also,
j another correction - average price per unit is not $48.35, but it is $45.52
per square foot.
Mr. Plummer: Per square foot?
Mr. Cazo: Per square foot, that's right.
Mr. Plummer: Jerry?
Mr. Cazo: I have...
Mr. Plummer: Wait, wait, whoa. $3.00 is not a lot of money except when you
multiply it by $100,000.
Mr. Gereaux: That's correct. Give me a second here.
Mr. Plummer: Hey, while you are looking, you have triggered something else
now, OK? With the recent award to the Plumbers Union, we awarded that based
on a figure of $41.05 per square foot. We are talking about this gentlemen,
if his f igures are correct, and I am not going to sit here to say that they
are or not, at $34.69, or roughly $7.00 a foot cheaper then what we just
awarded the previous one. Now, something is left unsaid here.
Mr. Gereaux: Commissioner, I believe that can be explained by the type of
construction that is being used by the two groups. Getting back to the...
Mr. Plummer: Are you saying that CODEC's construction is not the same type as
the union?
Mr. Gereaux: No, I do not think it is. I don't have that information here.
What we are evaluating is what was presented to us, Commissioner, and as I
said, we will hold their feet to the fire regardless of who is selected for
the numbers that they have provided us.
Mr. Plummer: Jerry, my only problem, so you understand...
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: My problem is between the four developers who are contending all
the way along that they are pretty much even. There is $14.00 a square foot
difference between this gentlemen's bid at his price and the Allapattah, of
$48.35. Now, somewhere in between, either that $14.00 is profit, better
quality, less quality, there has got to be somewhere in there when you are
dealing with apples to apples, that there is a $14.00 difference.
Mayor Suarez: Well, in comparison to the union...
Mr. Plummer: How many square feet?
Mayor Suarez: In comparison to the union, one other factor is the labor cost,
because they would be - the union would be using union labor.
53 January 22, 1987
i
!� Mr. Plummer: Well, I understand that, but that is not consideration. They
were in between. They were the figure of $41.05, OK?
Mr. Gereaux: That's 4-orrect.
Mr. Plummer: OK? So leave them out, because they are in the middle. This
gentlemen is at $34.00, and they are at $48.00. How many square feet are you
talking about, let's say in the Civic? How many square feet of construction?
Mas o menos, approximately?
Mr. Adolfo Albaisa: My name is Adolfo Albaisa, Pancoast Albaisa Architects.
Mr. Plummer: I don't need the commercial. How many square feet?
Mr. Albaisa: You don't need the commercial! We are talking about 93,000
square feet.
Mr. Plummer: So you are talking about really, $1,000,000 difference.
Mr. Albaisa: I could be - yes, it could be that much.
Mr. Plummer: Now, OK, to my staff, to the high priced help that I have.
Mr. Albaisa: I think I can explain.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, I want him to explain, because that is who we sent it to
to do the look-see. Jerry, you've got a $1,000,000 difference. In your
opinion, where is that $1,000,000 of difference?
Mr. Gereaux: Well, where I think it is, and after having said that I want to
explain that on the information I have on the profit, I could be off, and if I
am, I apologize for that, but that is the information I have.
Mr. Plummer: I am not speaking profit.
Mr. Gereaux: I think that that is the difference, because what we are talking
about when we are talking, we are not talking about square foot construction.
What we are talking about is the square foot sales price, which would include
hard construction cost, the soft construction cost associated with development
in anything else. The point that I am making, Commissioner, is that the
anything else, and probably the fact that results in the biggest differential,
in the two per square foot delivery prices to the consumer, is the profit that
is being taken out of the project by the Allapattah Business Development Joint
Venture, which does not exist with the proposals submitted by CODEC, so if you
add all of those costs up, divide the total sellout by the total construction
square footage, you come up with a number, and you are right, those numbers
are drastically different.
Mr. Plummer: So you are saying the $1,000,000 difference is between one
corporation taking $1,000,000 profit and the other, none.
Mr. Gereaux: Well, one group, you know, having soft costs added to the total
cost of the project, including profit, that is different.
Mr. Plummer: But, all right, here again, I am going to come back to the same
thing...
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: ...and it is not a union this time.
Mr. Dawkins: In plain English!
Mr. Plummer: This gentlemen is not in business for charity. He is in
business to make a profit, now that is nothing wrong with that. Profit is not
a dirty word. The amount of profit could or could not be. Where does he, as
a developer, and a proposer, make his money in this deal?
Mr. Gereaux: I will let Mr. de Quesada...
Mr. Plummer: No, no, I want you to answer.
54 January 22, 1987
0 t
Mr. Gereaux: Well, the - OK, CODEC, being a county -wide non profit, is
supported by Metropolitan Dade County's Department of Economic Development and
Planning with administrative money. That money is used to support their
staff's services. Because they get that money, and as a condition for them
getting that money from the County, they have to develop projects where no
profit, only costs, you know, the necessary costs of development are passed on
to the consumer, but they are not allowed to make a profit on individual
deals.
Mr. Plummer: That makes sense! OK, I just wanted to know. Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Armando.
Mr. Cazo: Yes, I do have another question for Julio de Quesada, and I, you
know, it seems to me that the figures, $34.00 and some odd cents, $34.69, is
such a low figure for the construction, development, hard costs and soft and
hard costs, you know, it baffles me, the fact that you are able to deliver
those units at that particular price.
Mr. Quesada: Armando, I think that your organization should revise its
policies as a community development and community leaders...
Mr. Cazo: Excuse me, forgive me...
Mr. Quesada:... when they try to protect the interests of the community.
Mr. Cazo:... we are not, I am sorry...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, we have to go through the Chair.
Mr. Quesada: Because you are putting a $1,000,000 profit on a project that is
considerably smaller than the other one, and I am not - if you are questioning
my costs, I am questioning your profits.
Mayor Suarez: Julio, we have left out now the issue of the profits, that has
already been considered. Is there anything else that you feel that is
different in the way that you plan to do the construction that would make your
figures so much lower than his?
Mr. de Quesada: Yes, and I will let my architect explain that. It is a
matter of design and other factors.
Mr. Albaisa: Yes, again, I will go with the commercial, Adolfo Albaisa,
Pancoast Albaisa Architects, 2964 Aviation Avenue. I am representing CODEC,
I'm registered. My firm during the last five years has built over 4,000
units, designed and built in Dade County and the City of Miami. We have
delivered those units at those prices. That is all I can say. We have
pictures, we have buildings, you can go visit them.
Mayor Suarez: How about the one down here that I keep seeing all the time, El
Bosque, is that...?
Mr. Albaisa: No, that is not my design. That is our , but the building
that...
Mayor Suarez: Do you know what the per square foot cost was?
Mr. Albaisa: No, the building that we are proposing, the basic cost is $23 a
square foot, and we are building those units in Kendall, and they are for
rental and condominium purposes. I have pictures to show you. The buildings
are either built already, or under construction, so I don't know what the
problem is. Yes, we can deliver the units for the price that it was set, that
is all.
Mr. Cazo: I don't have any further questions, then. Yes, what is
suggesting, you know, with all due respect, I think you should be commended
for your price, and also should be given an opportunity to bid on the price on
the Melrose site. I mean, contracted from the plumber's union. Those
prices, I am sure the City will benefit from them.
Mayor Suarez: We are not going to open up that can of worms.
55 January 22, 1987
2
Mr. de Quesada: We are not interested in the Melrose site.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: My name for the record, is Mariano J. Cruz. I live at 1227
N.W. 26 Street. I live in Allapattah for the last 22 years, resident of the
City of Miami for 27 years. I am also a member of the Community Development
Advisory Board, Citywide, representing the Allapattah neighborhood, elected by
the people. Also, I serve in the committee in that Community Development
Board, on the committee of housing. You don't recognize this? That is the
state of the Union, the state of the City message. I am going to quote a few
things here. I mean, if this is just rhetoric, or is it the policy of the
City?
"Miami is still a charming and pristine place with a future among those
with only a past. It is the only major American city that has not
celebrated it's 100th birthday, but because it is a young city, we lack
the roots of the other great cities of this nation. We are determined to
plant these roots, particularly in our neighborhood communities, where
our citizens live, work, and raise their families. To accomplish our
goal, we are dealing with our neighborhoods on a one to one basis,
assuring citizens that they have our attention and will be heard in
recognizing the individual needs of these neighborhoods." Xavier Suarez,
Message from the Mayor.
On page 16, I am quoting from here. It is not my words, but from here. Our
Neighborhoods, Housing. Let me see here.
"In 1985, the City of Miami entered into a $250,000 contract with the
Enterprise Foundation to train neighborhood non profit groups in housing
development techniques. This year the Foundation... bla, bla, bla..."
It goes on and on, and another quote in here:
"Innovative financing resulting from government and private sector joint
development partnerships."
All that, and then here it mentions the scattered housing. Now, one of the
reasons I am here, because I heard that the County is involved in this, and
anytime Metro government is involved, the County, I am, you know, I kind of
that, because if they are talking about track record of housing, when
there was a Housing Division of Community Development, the Housing Division
of Community Development was responsible through a joint venture with Metro
for the scattered housing in Allapattah, the scattered housing that Manor Park
didn't want, that Little Havana didn't want and Flagami didn't want, and they
went there and they sold us on that and then they said "Oh well ,"
bla, bla, bla, and you know what happened? - We don't have the scatttered
housing yet, on 30 Street, on the 1600 block of 30 Street, we have got eight
duplex units, 16 units in one block. That is cluster housing there. And you
go there, you go there, right now you can go there and you see the broken
windows, broken screens, not taken care of. Whose monitoring that?... the
Housing Division now, the Housing Agency of the City of Miami? They are not
doing their job, when you talk about track record and...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, let me clarify that, because we do have a housing agency,
which we didn't have before.
Mr. Cruz: Well...
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: COMMISSIONER CAROLLO ENTERED THE MEETING AT 3:31 P.M.
Mr. Gereaux: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. The housing that this gentlemen is
referring to is public housing. It is operated by Metropolitan Dade County,
the people do have a legitimate complaint, but it is not the responsibility of
the Housing Agency to maintain Dade County's property.
Mr. Cruz: But, it was a joint venture with Community Development of the City.
You were selecting the site, or the place there, and you gave it to the
County, and they clustered the site.
Mr. Odio: Mariano, we do not maintain those buildings.
Mr. Cruz: I know, you don't maintaint
56 January 22, 1987
Mr. Odio: We are not responsible for those.
Mr. Cruz% Well, you were supposed to oversee, and let them know.
Mr. Odio: We let them know. We let them...
Mr. Cruz: You That is what you didn't want in Little Havana. That
is what you didn't want in Manor Park. When it is something of the County, I
am very...
Mayor Suarez: I know they weren't wanted in Shenandoah and Silver Bluffs
and...
Mr. Cruz: Right! You were not Mayor at that time, but you were very active.
I heard you on the radio. I even entered on the radio to talk about it,
and...
Mayor Suarez: And Allapattah didn't want them, and East Little Havana wanted
them.
Mr. Cruz: Right. Mr. himself went there. Also, he said an informed
citizen is the foundation of a democracy, that is why I am participating, and
they told us about the C.B.O.Is, the funding for generating their own
and we are not trying to do anything different than Tacolcy
Belafonte are doing, that the Urban League is doing now, because,
building. Who is the landlord agent for that
building? The Urban League! They generate their own funds. That is what
they are getting, their own funds too. We are the neighborhood too, a
nonprofit from the City. I live in Allapattah there. I pay taxes in
Allapattah and I pay a lot of Federal taxes, and that money comes from
Community Development later on, back to the City and that is my main reason
for being here. I have got no business in this, nothing. I just deliver the
mail. I get paid by delivering the mail, and I come here as a taxpayer, and
that is the main thing, so according to your book, you are going to listen to
us...
Mr. Plummer: The only thing you bring me is bills.
Mr. Cruz: ... so you listen to us.
Mayor Suarez: And you get Thursdays off.
Mr. Cruz: Right: One thing, remember that you were there. You mentioned
here in the beginning that you are there to represent the public. The
taxpayers , and remember too, and I said that before, there are two
people today that are not sitting there that they forgot about the
neighborhoods and they went to downtown and Central America, South America.
But you know what happened, the people from downtown, they live in Coral
Gables and Kendall. They don't vote in the City of Miami and the people from
Costa Rica, they don't vote in the City of Miami. That is true, you can keep
that in mind.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you for your statement.
Mr. Plummer: Can I speak to the gentlemen, the architect?
Mayor Suarez: Armando.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, you know, I am trying every way in the world to get a
community based organization to be the favored contract, and I don't say that
in detriment to this gentlemen, because I do feel that they do have a feeling
for the community. Now, if I am not mistaken, and somebody correct me if I am
wrong, the real difference between the two proposals is profit. If you speak
to $14 a square foot difference, construction total cost, and you speak as
Jerry did now, he said he might be stand corrected of $1,400,000, based on
97,000 square feet, the whole difference is the profit. Now, is there a way
that your community based organization could sharpen its pencil and come in at
a reduced cost?
Mr. Cazo: Commissioner, to answer your question, our number is $45.52. That
is sales price.
57 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir, then we are talking about $11.00 difference. It
is significant. It is $1,000,000 any way you cut it. That is the difference
between the two proposals. Now, I understand that this gentlemen, and I did
not know it before, is being subsidized by Dade County to pick up his
administrative expense and some of his soft cost, which you don't have, but I
am saying, is there a way that you can cut down on the amount of profit that
is anticipated, and I am not holding to exact numbers, to where this
Commission could, in good conscience, try to help you, a C.B.O. That's all I
am saying.
Mr. Cazo: Well, the way that we have had, brought up our numbers has been by
studying each individual item - construction, development, soft cost, and we
have come out with that final number.
Mr. Plummer: Armando, sir, regardless of how you study it, if I accept your
figure, instead of Jerry's at $45.00 a square foot, I am still looking at
their cost at $34.69, which is a basically, a $10.00 to $11.00 difference.
Mr. Cazo: What I don't understand is the difference in the $1,000,000 worth
of our difference in square footage.
Mr. Plummer: 97,000 square feet is $11.00. How else do you figure it?
Mr. Cazo: Well, the 97,000 square feet, it is not the difference between the
two projects. Our project is 79,960 square feet, and their project is 106,272
square feet, if that is correct.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, I am not the author. Did you not tell me 97,000?
Mr. Cazo: Sir, if we are talking about that, we are talking about a
difference of $10.00 per square feet and we are talking about a difference of
20,000 some odd square feet, which is $200,000, that is the only difference we
have.
Mr. Gereaux: I think the architect quoted you that square footage,
Commissioner, but...
Mr. Plummer: 97,000.
Mr. Gereaux: ...I want to go back to the bottom line here, if I may.
Mr. Carollo: Well, that makes a big difference, doesn't it?
Mr. Gereaux: Yes, yes it does. In doing the evaluation, we made kumquats and
cantaloupes into peaches and nectarines, or something. And as a result of
that evaluation based on what we were provided as of January 8th, the figure
that we have arrived at, is that these gentlemen are proposing to sell their
units for $34.69 per square feet, and these gentlemen are proposing to sell
their units for $48.35, but there, you know, I don't have any new numbers and
I refuse to take any new numbers as per your direction, but whether it is
$34.69, as opposed to $45.00, you know, there is still a $10.00 per difference
square foot value.
Mr. Plummer: Jerry, am I out of base by saying that the real difference in
the per square foot is the profit?
Mr. Gereaux: The real difference in the per square foot, according to my
evaluation, Commissioner, is several things. One, the profit that is being
taken out of the deal, which I recommend against, and a difference in the
estimated soft costs, that is why, we, regardless of who is selected here,
they will have 90 days to prove to staff that their costs are indeed real, and
for you to ratify that total deal in all respects, including site plan and
everything else. Profit, I want to make another point, Commissioner, and I
stand corrected, I read the numbers wrong when I was talking about profit. I
said close to $1,000,000 in pure profit, and I apologize to the proposers, the
profit is only a third of $1,000,000.
Mr. Cazo: I am sorry, again, there is no third of $1,000,0001
Mr. Plummer: Whoa, you just dropped $700,000.
58 January 22, 1987
Mr. Gereaux: That is correct. I read the wrong number, and I have just
corrected myself. The number that was provided was $291,000 in profit, and a
$50,000 developer fee, which in the parlance of development, is also profit.
The difference is who that profit goes to, so we are at a third of $1,00U,U00.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know, if we can keep dropping like that...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mr. Carollo: If we include the additional square footage that they are
providing, how far off are they from each other then?
Mr. Gereaux: I can't stand here and calculate that, Commissioner. I could
bring that back in a few minutes.
Mr. Carollo: Well, we will get Mano, that is what we pay him for. Maybe we
will have it by next week.
Mr. Gereaux: There are other considerations too, of course, and that they
are included in the resolution.
Mayor Suarez: Their square footage is how much total?
Mr. Gereaux: The total square footage of construction...
Mayor Suarez: Do you know, Armando?
Mr. Plummer: Armando said 120.
Mr. Cazo: Our total square footage of construction is 79,960 square feet.
Mr. Gereaux: Well...
Mayor Suarez: Your total is what?
Mr. Albaisa: Maybe we can communicate between architects. I guess we...
Mayor Suarez: No, wait, wait a minute, before you start communicating with
each other. What is your total square footage?
Mr. Albaisa: I think we are kind of getting into the wrong direction.
Mayor Suarez: No, no, please. What is your square footage? We want to get
these calculations down once and for all.
Mr. Albaisa: It really doesn't matter. We are providing 96 units.
Mayor Suarez: There is about a 20,000 square foot difference. The difference
per square foot is about $10, so that is $200,000 that your project will be
more than...
Mr. Albaisa: Less, you mean.
Mayor Suarez: I mean less than theirs, right.
Mr. Albaisa: Let me put it this way. Our total sales price for the 96
units which is what it amounts to is $3,638,000. How much is their total sale
price?
Mr. Cazo: You are asking me what is our...?
Mr. Albaisa: What is your total sales price including all the units, if you
were to sell the project?
Mr. Cazo: It is $4,363,000.
Mr. Albaisa: That is the difference. I don't care how many square feet. Per
unit we are larger, we have 96 units, they have 88. There is no... what are
we doing here? - I mean, what are we comparing?
Mr. Cazo: Let me correct you, the units, we are 40 feet larger on the two
bedroom units, and you are slightly six feet higher on the three bedroom
units, so that is actually not the case.
59 January 22, 1987
0
11
Mr. Albaisa: Well, let's put it, let's assume that they are equal, OK.
Mr. Cazo: You have more units than we do, that is correct.
Mr. Albaisa: We have more units and let me point out, having more units will
give us more ability to return to the City what they paid for the land. As a
matter of fact, our project, we don't even need the surtax. We were charged
to provide affordable housing, and we did. That's all.
Mayor Suarez: Commissioners, I have - I will make a motion to accept the
City's recommendation. Let me say very briefly that I have seen the CODEC
project in Little Havana, E1 Bosque, and from what I can see of that project
which I understand is totally sold out for home ownership; and I went again
and saw the sign the other day, and in fact, I showed it to the governor the
other day as we were walking by there. It is $1,950 down payment, and less
than $300 a month, P&I, I believe, principle, interest and insurance, and to
me that is proof of what CODEC can do. Now, in making the motion, I recognize
that this is the second time that we bypassed Allapattah, if the Commission
votes along with my motion, and that concerns me, because the whole idea is
for you to get the experience and building that CODEC has and that some of the
other groups throughout the City, and we are going to be working feverishly on
that; but one very important thing is to figure out a way not to have a large
participation of a for profit agency, at least in the present mode of what we
are doing, that we are trying to award these two nonprofits. Now, it may be
that we will turn around and go out for in the future - we have acquired
quite a few other sites, for RFP's and at that time we will only get for
profit, fine, and maybe you will come in under priced as you know, being the
low bidder. For now, I think they have the experience. They are recommended
by the City and they are not making a profit and to me, that makes them
preferable.
Mr. Plummer: There is a motion on the floor, is there a second? There is a
motion on the floor, is there a second?
Mrs. Kennedy: I heard you. Let me second the motion.
Mr. Plummer: No, you are out of order unless there is a second.
Mrs. Kennedy: I said I second the motion.
Mr. Plummer: Second for discussion.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, I offer a second to the motion. Under discussion...
Mr. Plummer: There is a motion and duly seconded. Under discussion,
Commissioner Kennedy.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, I'd like to say that Allapattah offers smaller dwellings
than the average, and also, the concept bothers me. Your concept is the
apartment on the bottom, with the townhouse on the top. Their concept is the
three apartments in three individual buildings, and I think that is much more
salable. We are going to have families living there and I think it will go,
and of course, they have a much better price and it is a proven record of
construction. I have also seen some of your work, and therefore, I second
your motion.
Mr. Plummer: Any further discussion? Let me under discussion... Mr. Mayor, I
would like to call to your attention, as their own statement, I have not seen
any of their projects. I have seen the El Bosque, and it has been an unusual
delayed project for whatever reason. It is my understanding that project is
not under this same concept. It is a different concept than what is being
proposed here today, so don't compare the E1 Bosque project, which is a first
class project to that which is being proposed.
Mayor Suarez: No, no, I actually - by the time all is said and done, I
expected this particular project should look better than E1 Bosque, because E1
Bosque has basically surtax, and no other subsidy, and in this case, they are
getting either a partial or a total subsidy, depending on how much of the land
we give them, without having to return to the City, which we haven't decided
yet, and they will also be eligible for surtax, though.
60 January 22, 1987
0
Mr. Plummer: OK, now, before the roll is taken, and we start the roll, I want
to go on the record. I will be voting against the motion for this reason: I
would prefer this item be deferred to give the Allapattah C.B.O., and 1 make
no bones about it, that a C.B.O. should try, whenever we can, to give
preference, and I would like to give them the opportunity to go back and
sharpen their pencil and see if there is a possibility that they can come back
in with the same numbers as what we have by this developer. Possibly, it
cannot be done, and if so, I will tell you flat out, I will vote for this
other proposer if you cannot sharpen your pencil, but I want to give you that
opportunity to try, and...
Mr. Carollo: Commissioner, if you would make that into the form of a
substitute motion...
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, there is a motion on the floor and I will hold to that,
OK? The floor is open, Joe, for other motions, but my running the meeting, I
don't think it is proper for me to make a motion.
Mr. Carollo: I will wait for this motion to go by and I will make another
motion if this one doesn't pass.
Mr. Plummer: OK, I was just putting on the record my position, OK? Now, is
there any other discussion on the motion on the floor? Hearing none, call the
roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Mayor Suarez, who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-93
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CODEC, INC., A NOT FOR PROFIT
CORPORATION OR ORGANIZATION, TO UNDERTAKE THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW -DENSITY SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX ON
THE CIVIC CENTER SITE AFFORDABLE TO FAMILIES AND
INDIVIDUALS OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME; AND FURTHER
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO REQUEST METROPOLITAN
DADE COUNTY TO CONVEY TITLE TO THE SITE TO THE
DESIGNATED SPONSOR/DEVELOPER SUBJECT TO CERTAIN TERMS
AND CONDITIONS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
Mr. Plummer: The motion passes. It is with the same provisions that they
will be sent to this organization for negotiation within 90 days. This is not
a final approval. You will have to come back with the Administration to make
their final proposal to this Commission, OK?
Mayor Suarez: One other thing, Armando.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: You are more than welcome, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Supposing that CODEC could work with you on referral screening
and all the other aspects of what we did in the other site. Are you interested
in that?
Mr. Plummer: If you can't have the whole cake, try to get a piece.
61 January 22, 1987
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Cazo: There doesn't seem to be an interest on it, Commissioners. Thank
you.
Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, I know you supported me, and I will be looking for that, I
have no problems with that, I support my convictions. All right? -
Unidentified Speaker:
Mr. Dawkins: I don't have no problems at all. I wasn't born no Commissioner
and I won't die one. I am only a Commissioner as long as you elect me. If
you stop electing me, I will not be a Commissioner.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Dawkins: Ok, a problem but I've got three years to sit here.
15. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: "ENTRANT
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - 1987" - (423,000)
Mayor Suarez: Item 11.
Mr. Odio: This is to establish a new special revenue fund entitled Entrant
Assistance Program - 1987, and appropriate $223,000 for operation from the
United States Department of Health and Human Services, and authorize the City
Manager to accept this fund from the South Florida Employment and Training
Consortium. This is money needed to provide job training and placement to
entrants and refugees in the City for the period of January 1, 186, through
December 31, 187. Allocation is over 50 percent less than City received under
previous contract. Previous contract was for $243,000 for six months. This
is primarily due to under performing during the previous contract term. We
were contracted to serve 100 persons and we actually only served 84. The
allocation breakdown based on 100 placements is $14,000 for administrative
costs, $80,000 for participant salaries, and $3,000 for participant
transportation. The Entrant Assistance Program can be operated as part of the
Neighborhood Jobs Program in the Community Development Department.
Mr. Dawkins: No problem, no problem at all.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: I have gone extensively into this item. I think there needs to
be, if you all want, I don't think it is really necessary. The history of
this project has not been good, I want to tell you that. The provisions of
this project to the future, I want to tell you are even worse. I can tell you
that one of the provisions of this project is serving youths which are 18 to
21, unemployable, dropouts from school, and in fact, is bad. Now, they have
streamlined this system in the City, and I have agreed with them, that I could
support them based on the system of two provisos: number one, that they give
monthly reports to this Commission as to the status, and number two, that at
any time during that period of time that the City wishes to withdraw, we can.
I want to remind this Commission that this is the kind of a system, a kind of
a program, that in the final analysis, if you have a loss, the City has got to
reimburse the consortium._ Now, the reason that there was no losses last year
was because of taking it from a 50 percent reserve that they had the year
previous. There really was a loss, but in the over all, there was not. Now,
I am willing to try, because they have streamlined, they have cut down, and
they have new sense of direction, but the only way that I could vote for this
program, is based on the two predicates: number one, that they give us monthly
report status, and number two, if we see that the program is not going to be
successful, that we can withdraw. I think the big thing to remember, and the
big emphasis that they are going to be making, will be demonstrated between
now and the first of May, because they are going to be going very strong to
62 January 22, 1987
make a play for Bayside, and I think the potential is there under this program
of offering an employer 50 percent of what you pay an employee. My personal
opinion, if they do it properly, they will have a chance of meeting their
goals, but if this does not contain these two provisos, then I must vote
against it. I want to vote for it, and hopefully, the Commission will
consider those two provisos.
Mrs. Kennedy: Frank, what is Community Development doing so that it brings up
the standards in the program and is funded for more money?
Mr. Castaneda: Well, the first thing we have to do is increase productivity.
Mr. Plummer: It is streamlined and cut out and they cut Bayside.
Mrs. Kennedy: Let me hear from him.
Mr. Castaneda: The first thing that we have to do is increase productivity.
One thing that we have already done is we have consolidated the programs.
Originally there were three programs operating in the City, now we basically
have one program. Since last Monday we have people working at Bayside and
they are taking recruitments for employment at Bayside and we expect to be
very successful in doing that. We are also going out into the different
communities recruiting people. We are working very closely with Miami Dade,
and we intend to not only meet our goals, but surpass them, and if
Commissioner, we can't do this, I am the first one to tell you that we should
give it back.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, I so move with those provisos that...
Mr. Plummer: Well, all right, and I second the motion. Let me just go on the
record. The most successful program of this endeavor in Dade County has
placements for 150 youths, which they have had I think, for four months or
five months, and they have gone out and turned every stone, and out of the
availability of 150, they have only been able to recruit 39. Now, this is the
' most successful program. You know, it is just baffles my mind that in all of
the things that we the Commissioners hear, day in and day out, that, "I need a
job, I need a job!", that these programs are going wanting. This offers an
employer 50 percent of what he pays an employee for 26 weeks, and yet, they
can't get people to come forth and get involved in the program. Something is
radically missing. Either the employers are not aware, and I say that this
program will be made with the City or broken with the Bayside, because we do
have a City involvement.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Castaneda, what did we receive in this program last year?
Mr. Castaneda: Well, we received approximately the same amount of money as
this year, but the problem is that last year we received the same amount for a
period of six months. Now, we are receiving an equal amount for a period of a
year, so it is basically half the amount.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, you misleading, Frank.
Mr. Dawkins: And the money was supposed to be used for what?
Mr. Castaneda: For job placement, 100 job placements.
Mr. Dawkins: For what?
Mr. Castaneda: Of Mariel and Haitian refugees, basically.
Mr. Dawkins: And how many? How many were they supposed to place?
Mr. Odio: 100, and we place 84.
Mr. Castaneda: Right.
Mr. Dawkins: Of the 84, how many were Haitians?
Mr. Castaneda: I believe 38 percent.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but see, Miller, that is not the area that is key. That is
great, because it in fact gives 13 to 26 weeks, but the real success rate of
your program is judged on how many of those placements...
63 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Whose there now?
Mr. Plummer: Exactly!
Mr. Dawkins: That is what I was getting to.
Mr. Plummer: 30 days after, 60 days after, and 90 days afterl
Mr. Dawkins: That is what I am getting to. OK, now, of those 38 that you
placed, how many of them are still there now?
Mr. Plummer: 84.
Mr. Dawkins: 84?
Mr. Castaneda: No, no, no, a lot lower figure. 35 out of the 84 are still
there now.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no. Of the 38 Haitians that you placed, 38 Haitians...
Mr. Castaneda: 23 of the 38 Haitians are there now.
Mr. Dawkins: Still there now?
Mr. Castaneda: From day one.
Mr. Plummer: That is a good record.
Mr. Dawkins: They have never left the job?
Mr. Castaneda: That is correct.
Mr. Dawkins: That is remarkable if that is true. All right, send to my
office to substantiate that, give me names, where they are so I can go see
them.
Mr. Castaneda: Sure. Commissioner, I would just like to say that we are
working with -in order to creating a better network with the community, and we
are intending to increase the number of Haitians participating in this
program.
Mr. Plummer: But you see, wait a minute now, Frank, tell him one other thing,
because I see Jacques and the rest of them here from Little Haiti...
Mr. Castaneda: H.A.C.A.D. also.
Mr. Plummer: The new program is not necessarily Haitians. The new emphasis
is on youths.
Mr. Castaneda: Well, let me explain, there are two programs, Commissioner.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, no, this says entrant money.
Mr. Castaneda: Right, there is the O.J.T. program, which basically serves the
Citywide at large population, and then the Entrant Program which is
specifically... under the Entrant Program, you can only serve Mariel refugees
and Haitians, basically, and...
Mr. Plummer: OK, is this money all dedicated to that?
Mr. Castaneda: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: And you have no requirement for youths?
Mr. Castaneda: No youths, but there are youths in the O.J.T. Program, which
is also the big difficulty, but let me tell you, the Entrant Program is even
as more difficult than the youth program.
Mr. Plummer: You bet! Hey, you guys sitting back there shaking your heads,
you are aware, you know that these things are available.
64 January 22, 1987
0
11
Mr. Odio: That is Roger Biambi.
Mr. Plummer: You are the people, Roger, that come before this Commission,
asking for more employment. Now, what are you doing in the Haitian community
to get these people to the City and to the other programs that are available
that are going wanting?
Mr. Roger Biambi: Commissioner Plummer, Mayor and Commissioners, we have been
assisting the City of Miami over the past few years in referring Haitian
clients to them because the location of the City of Miami office is too remote
for Haitians to be accessible to it. We have...
Mr. Dawkins: Hold it now, hold it, I am not going to buy that.
Mr. Plummer: Are you telling me a...
Mr. Dawkins: Wait a minute! J. L., I am not going to buy that, because if it
is too remote for them to get to the station, it is to remote for them to get
to the jobs, so don't say that. Don't say that, Biambil
Mr. Biambi: Commissioner...
Mr. Dawkins: Don't say that, Biambil
Mr. Biambi: ...the office is on S.W. 8th Street.
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, but the job may be on the southwest!
Mr. Biambi: No, no.
Mr. Dawkins: Come on now, don't say that, because you are boxing them in.
Mr. Biambi: I have worked with Frank for the past three years on that. They
have made special arrangements for City staff to come to H.A.C.A.D. to recruit
Haitians for the program.
Mr. Dawkins: Hold it, hold it. Why not go to the Cuban -American Democrat
League? Why do they have to come to H.A.C.A.D.? See, I mean, you are
creating a problem for everybody else. H.A.C.A.D. may not be centrally
located. Come on, Roger, give me a breakl
Mr. Plummer: Roger, are you telling me for one minute that a hungry man who
needs a job cannot catch a bus to go anywhere in the small City limits of the
City of Miami, that, that is the stumbling block?
Mr. Biambi: Commissioner, what I am telling you is based on facts. Frank
Rodriguez' office has contacted us in the past, and we have assisted, and we
will continue to assist. We were told that was a problem for Haitians to go
to that office. We told them that is no problem, we can refer clients to them
for that program. If you don't enroll people in that program, if you don't
place them, you don't get your management fee, that is simple as that.
Mr. Plummer: Roger, that is not the point I am making. The point I am
making, are you telling me that a man who needs a job, it is an absolute
stumbling block for him to catch a bus to whatever, whatever location to get
that job? I can't believe that.
Mr. Biambi: Commissioner, in the first place, by going to the City office to
register in the process and be sent to the Caleb Center, you are talking about
maybe three different steps. There are jobs that we have been able to find
for Haitians, that because of the transportation system, we are unable to get
to the job on time at the particular hours that they are called for to start
the job and we have missed out on many opportunities. We have been placing
under this... program, Haitians in jobs for the past five years and we have a
little bit of experience in this matter. There are jobs we simply cannot fill
because of transportation problems, and those are facts.
Mr. Castaneda: Commissioner, part of the problem with the Haitian population
is also the documentation problem, that they have to demonstrate proper
credentials in order to qualify under the program.
Mr. Plummer: But that is not what Roger is saying.
65 January 22, 1987
Mr. Castaneda: I know, but let me also...
Mr. Plummer: What Roger is saying is, is because we don't have an office in
H.A.C.A.D., that they can't come down to the - to wherever, I don't know,
where is your location that you do the screening?
Mr. Castaneda: At 1145 N.W. 11 Street, but let me say that we are having
recruitment efforts in the community. We were just in Little Haiti in late
November, at the First Haitian Baptist Church and we had a recruitment drive
there with a big office, and we are planning to go out into the neighborhoods
and look for those people that need employment.
Mr. Plummer: Do you already have employers?
Mr. Castaneda: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: How many?
Mr. Castaneda: Let me introduce Ivey Kearson, who is basically running the...
Mr. Plummer: You don't have to... introduce Ivey.
Mr. Castaneda: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: How many Haitians job developers do you have?
Mr. Ivey Kearson: We have two Haitian job developers.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, and they can find a way to the Haitian community, is that
right?
Mr. Kearson: Yes.
Mr. Dawkins: You think so?
Mr. Kearson: Yes. Yes, we are working at it, and we have developed a number
of jobs. I can't say exactly the number, but we have more jobs than we have
people right now, because what we have got to do is put the network together
that we are working on as far as going out into the communities and bringing
these people back to our office.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, I am going to monitor this weekly also, Mr. Castaneda. I
want a weekly report of what we are doing, and I also want the names of the
Haitians that you have on jobs, and you will and I will get in a City car,
because I am not going to burn up my gas, and go see them.
Mr. Castaneda: OK.
Mr. Biambi: Mr. Mayor, for the record, I am not against the City applying for
those funds. I am just stating facts to you.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, hold it, Roger. Everybody knows where your heart is,
OK? We know that, OK? All right.
Mayor Suarez: OK, we have a motion and a second with the provisos attached.
Call the roll.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL
REVENUE FUND ENTITLED: "ENTRANT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM -
1987," APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME
IN THE AMOUNT OF $223,000 FROM THE UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT A GRANT AWARD
FROM THE SOUTH FLORIDA EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING
CONSORTIUM TO PROVIDE ON THE JOB TRAINING AND
PLACEMENT TO ENTRANTS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
66 January 22, 1987
0
Was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner
Plummer, for adoption as an emergency measure and dispensing with the
requirement of reading same on two separate days, which was agreed to by the
following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Kennedy and seconded
by Commissioner Plummer, adopted said ordinance by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10209.
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.
16. A- FIRST READING ORDINANCE: IMPOSE IMPACT FEES ON ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT
TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
B- SCHEDULE SECOND READING OF IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE IN 60 DAYS (3-26-87).
Mayor Suarez: Item 12, impact fees.
Mr. Rodriguez: Good afternoon. I was going to follow the memo dated January
14, so we can establish as much as possible a good record on this item. As
you instructed me in July of 1986, we have an impact fee ordinance before you
today and the major exceptions that have been excluded in the impact fee now
have been the exclusion of City owned and operated facilities and single
family residential. If you look on page two of your memo, you will notice
that the impact fee, if it were to be approved as presented, that we are
projecting $44,000,000 by the year 2005 with an average of $2,500,000 per
year, being revenues that will be coming to the City through the impact fees.
Mayor Suarez: What is a typical impact fee on a single family...
Mr. Plummer: None.
Mayor Suarez: None on a single family resident, right?
Mr. Rodriguez: None.
Mayor Suarez: When do they pick up, at duplex size?
Mr. Rodriguez: Duplex.
Mayor Suarez: What is a typical impact fee on a duplex, whatever the minimum
size for a duplex is.
Mr. Plummer: $1,000.
Mr. Rodriguez: It is about $1,000. It depends on the area, but it could be
about $1,000.
67 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: And did anyone in your department go to the extent of actually
determining what the cost factor of the impact is by a new developer?
Mr. Rodriguez: What do you mean by that?
Mr. Plummer: Well, in other words, when you put in a duplex, it makes a new
demand upon roads, upon sewers, upon sanitary sewers, upon parks, upon fire -
all the capital improvements that have to go along.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: I'll guarantee you that a duplex at $1,000 creates tremendous
amount more impact than the $1,000. Did your department do any kind of a
study? You are talking about 13 and 5, 18 years of $44,000,000 of impact fees.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: I would love to believe that the City of Miami could do all the
capital improvements it needs because of the impacts created for $44,000,000.
I would venture to say you are probably talking about at least $500,000,000.
Mr. Rodriguez: What we did in arriving to the figures that we have and the
coefficients that we have, we established the cost of each one of those
facilities. If I may go in the process that I was going to follow, we
projected a growth in each one of the areas of the City, and based on that
growth by planning area, we established what would be the cost of providing
the facilities for each one of those areas, for each one of the type of
facilities that we have - police, fire and rescue, parks and recreation,
streets, storm sewers. Based on that cost, we established how much it would
be per square foot of development and based on that, which is the answer to
your question, Commissioner Plummer, we established a coefficient, and yes,
that is it.
Mr. Plummer: No, my question was, did you make any determination in the next
18 years how much the impact of new construction in this City is going to cost
the taxpayers? You are talking about $44,000,000 you are going to raise if
these fees are successful.
Mr. Odio: No, no, if we get $44,000,000, we are going to spend $55,000,000.
Mr. Plummer: No, that is not true. You won't even come close to it. We
passed bonds at $100,000,000.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: And that is just for sanitary sewers.
Mr. Rodriguez: The answer to your question again, yes. It is included in the
figures that we have.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me tell you, in my estimation, my friend, your figures
are extremely low. When you talk about that a duplex, the average duplex in
this community is not going to cost more than $1,000 of impact, I say your
wrong!
Mr. Rodriguez: Let me go back...
Mr. Plummer: And I'd like to believe that, but I don't think it is anywhere
near reality.
Mr. Rodriguez: OK, if you go to page nine of the ordinance, and you look at
the figures that we have for residential coefficients, we have a low of 1.12 -
$1.12 per square foot, to a maximum of 1.76. Let's say that you were to build
in Little Havana. Little Havana will be $1.25 per square foot, if you were to
have a duplex of 1,000 square feet, you will be basically... they will have to
pay, if we follow the ordinance, $1,247. This is the best that we could
estimate at this point with information that we have received from all the
different departments to support an ordinance that we feel is legally
defensible.
Mr. Plummer: Let me put on the record the questions I asked you this morning.
Number one, how many cities in the State of Florida already have impact fees.
68 January 22, 1987
0
0
Mrs. Kennedy: I was going to ask that - either have it in place, or...
Mr. Plummer: No, no, that is the second question.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK.
Mr. Plummer: Because the second question is going to be revealing.
Mr. Rodriguez: This is a little bit outdated, but information that I have is
that we have at this point, 32 new impact fee ordinances being considered in
cities in Florida and 38 new ordinances by counties, so we have a total of 70
impact fees on the survey that was done out of 130 cities, so the 130, about
70 already have impact fees that are being considered.
Mr. Plummer: More than half.
Mr. Rodriguez: More than half, and according to the report that we got, we
also have about 15 counties and 36 cities that already have some form of
impact fee requirements for all new developments.
Mr. Plummer: Now the second question. Put on the record what you told me
where Dade County is.
Mr. Rodriguez: Based on information that they gave us in a meeting we had
with them about one month ago, they don't have an impact fee in place yet.
The one that they are considering at this point deals with transportation
only, and the figure they gave us is $86.00 per trip, which will be equivalent
to about $94 per square foot. The farthest away you go from... the closer you
go to downtown, the smaller the figure will be.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Bad Sergio.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: I asked you to put on the record what you told me in my office.
Mr. Rodriguez: Which one? I am sorry
Mr. Plummer: Your answer, when I asked you about Dade County was, that they
are letting us take the lead, and they want to follow and do exactly what we
are going to do.
Mr. Rodriguez: I think they are looking at us for guidance and then, based on
what we do, they will look at other possibilities. The first one they can go
with is transportation, because this is the one they can feel easier to
justify in the area where they are applying first, which is West Dade.
Mr. Plummer: OK, now, the other thing that I need things clarified on the
record is this is only for new construction.
Mr. Rodriguez: This is only for new construction, and it is only related to
the impact created by that new construction, and we have followed exactly the
legal requirements of establishing a rational nexus.
Mr. Plummer: Any renovations?
Mr. Rodriguez: Renovations would be new construction. I mean, it is more
than 1,000 square feet and it is not single family, and it is not in a City
owned, City operated property, yes, it is considered as part of the ordinance.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you, sir.
Mrs. Kennedy: Sergio, in terms of day care, could an impact fee be imposed?
Mr. Plummer: That is capital improvements only unless you go
Mr. Rodriguez: If it is a facility, yes. Otherwise, what you can do is have
a linkage, which is something that we have used in City in other areas. We
have linkage fees for housing that we have been using for the last four years,
and a linkage fee is a fee that is applied as a bonus. If you want to achieve
a certain bonus - if you went to keep a certain intensity, you start with a
69 January 22, 1987
certain base density, and as a linkage fee, you pay additional amount to
increase your density, and it has been used, for example, for services
sometimes. In that category we have housing and we have child care. In the
case of child care, you can use it, for example, to build the actual facility,
the capital improvement. Impact fees can only be used for capital
improvements, physical construction.
Mrs. Kennedy: And then if we don't pass the ordinance, what is our
alternative, to do it with bonds?... to do this program with bonds?
Mr. Rodriguez: If you don't pass the ordinance, the impact created by new
development will have to be taken care of through either bonds or general
funds, or exactions from developers or any other means that we can think of.
We have also the possibility of assessing fees, specific fees in areas, you
know like fee assessments that we have in certain areas of this City, we could
do that too.
Mayor Suarez: Sergio, let me interrupt you for a second...
Mrs. Kennedy: I...
Mayor Suarez:... Commissioner, because I thought this would go a little
quicker.
(NOTE FOR THE RECORD: AT THIS POINT, MAYOR SUAREZ RECOGNIZED AND WELCOMED A
GROUP OF MAYORS FROM BRAZIL)
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I don't know if there is anyone here to speak against
the ordinance or for it, my... hello there!
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: The only thing I would like to know is, how are we going to...
now, I looked through this, I don't see anything, and you explain to me why,
for garbage and other G.S.A. services - after this is passed, how are you
going to tax the area for the extra garbage that has got to be picked up and
the other public works that has got to be picked up when you don't have it in
this.
Mayor Suarez: Is there an item for capital improvements in the area of the
Solid Waste?
Mr. Rodriguez: We don't have anything on Solid Waste, or G.S.A., because at
the time we prepared the ordinance, I thought I shouldn't delay it any longer
and information that we have received from them was not in our opinion, in
shape good enough to make it legally defensible, and for that reason it is not
included. It would be possible though, that as we go along, if you want to
amend the ordinance in the future, there is no problem to amend the ordinance.
Mr. Dawkins: There has got to be something in the ordinance, because you are
going to have... it is going to necessitate our picking up more garbage, so
now why should the other citizens pay for it, if you are going to make them
pay for all the other things that they are getting.
Mr. Plummer: You can build a disposable plant, OK? Let me ask this question.
Let me use the Police Department.
Mayor Suarez: Well, to complete that, you are going to figure in if this
ordinance passes, the additional capital improvement costs related to solid
waste disposal, right?
Mr. Plummer: Any of it you can - capital improvement.
j
Mr. Rodriguez: If we get information from those two departments, yes, for
sure, sir.
i
Mr. Plummer: OK, Sergio...
i
Mayor Suarez: Don't argue that there won't be any capital improvement needs
because I could argue that all of this calculation is fallacious and start
that way; I mean, I don't believe in the whole concept and I am liable to vote
against it. I may vote for it on the basis of the experts telling us that in
i 70 January 22, 1987
fact there is a correlation between each unit of new construction and some
capital improvements, but as of now, I don't buy it at all.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, from the Police Department, using that as an example,
what did they give you as a figure for their improvements, capital
improvements?
Mr. Rodriguez: OK, if you go back to your package, Roman numeral four, so it
will be in the record, they gave us the following police standards: There will
be three sworn personnel per 1,000 residents, and 1.5 sworn personnel for
1,000 residents.
Mr. Plummer: How about just the bottom line?
Mr. Rodriguez: The bottom line is, they will... what I am trying to give you
there will be... hold on a second, let me look for the pages.
Mr. Plummer: You know, the guy you replaced used to do that.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's why you replaced him.
Mayor Suarez: He used to have it right at his fingertips, right?
Mr. Plummer: How much is the bottom line for the Police Department?
Mr. Rodriguez: One second.
Mrs. Kennedy: And they are going to need parking and equipment.
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute now, we have got $10,000,000 worth of
construction, so let's see where they came upl
Mr. Rodriguez: OK, the total amount for the Police Department will be...
Mr. Plummer: Capital improvements.
Mr. Rodriguez: ...capital improvements...
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Rodriguez:... that will be collected from both...
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no.
Mr. Rodriguez: Wait one second... that will be collected both from commercial
and residential, not including single family, will be $2,600,000.
Mr. Plummer: And you have got $10,000,000 worth of substations being built.
You have got $500,000 worth of horse stables being built.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: We are building then, near $5,000,000 in construction, capital
improvements. What?
Mrs. Kennedy: Walter is calling you over there.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS - OFF MICROPHONE)
Mr. Plummer: I am not saying that. He is saying to me... excuse mel
Mayor Suarez: Presumably those substations were needed by the level of
construction already in existence.
Mr. Dawkins: You can't take the money and put anything prior to the
assessment
Mr. Plummer: I've done pretty well in business. You are telling me in the
next 18 years the only capital improvements needed for the Police Department
are two point what million dollars?
Mr. Rodriguez: $2,600,000,
71 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Absolutely...
Mrs. Dougherty: That is not what he is saying. What he is saying that is all
you can charge to the new construction. The impacts that necessitate those
substations are not created by new construction only.
Mr. Plummer: But how can you come to any kind of a conclusion, that says that
the only needs from new construction... you have got buildirgs downtown for
$100,000,0001 I am talking with... as you know, the Olympia York,
$800,000,0001 Their needs in capital improvements from the Police Department
alone are going to be $1,000,000. Bayside is going to require a special
security force, which are going to have to have buildings, they are going to
have to have this, that, and the other thing, and you are telling me... who in
the hell did those numbers? In 18 years, $2,200,000? No wayl No wayl Well,
give me the number for the Fire Department.
Mr. Rodriguez: Actually, to clarify...
Mr. Plummer: Give me the number for the Fire Department! We are considering
building at least ten new fire stations, for the entire... how much is the
total?
Mr. Rodriguez: For the Fire Department it will be $1,300,000.
Mr. Plummer: Absolutely ludicrous! Absolutely, completely out of question!
Why do you talk so heavy to parks? The people in this community like parks,
but they love their Police and Fire, and you are telling me in 18 years the
only need is going to be two point...
Mr. Rodriguez: You have people from the Fire and Police departments here to
answer that question. I can't answer it.
Mr. Plummer: If you were in private business, as I told you before, you would
starve to death.
Mr. Rodriguez: Don't tell mel
Mrs. Kennedy: No, he is very good, come on. Sergio, can we get further
clarification on those numbers?
Mr. Rodriguez: Sure.
Mr. Dawkins: But I think though, Sergio, you should explain... did you
explain to everybody, as you explained to me, that this money that you are
speaking with, only deals with the amount of stress that would...
Mr. Rodriguez: Impact.
Mr. Dawkins: .... be put on the system by the new construction?
Mr. Plummer: That's right.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: And let me give you an example. We are talking in just two
projects to be announced in this coming year. One, $800,000,000. One,
$1,000,000,0001 That is to be announced in this year, Miller, and you are
telling me that roughly $2,000,000,000 in construction is only going to
create, that is all new, that is only going to create two point two need in
the capital improvements of the Police Department? Hell, they spend that in a
week.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Stop and considerl Their budget is $74,000,000 a year.
Mr. Dawkins: As of now, and right...
Mayor Suarez: That is operating, not capital. Sergio...
Mr. Plummer: Where did you come up with this fantasy?
72 January 22, 1987
N 0 0
Mr. Rodriguez: Let me try to finish, if I can make my point, please. It is
worse than that, OK?
Mr. Plummer: Ha ha! Don't tell me about it then, I don't want to hear it.
Mr. Rodriguez: No, no, I want to put it on the record so it will be clear, so
you won't be mislead. The information that we have for the Police Department,
the impact, I am reading on page 8 of the ordinance, OK? The cost for
additional facilities that we have for police, created by residential is the
one that creates the $2,600,000 facility, we don't have any figures,
Commission Plummer.
Mayor Suarez: Why the residential and not the commercial?
Mr. Dawkins: He can listen while he talks.
Mr. Rodriguez: We don't have any figures for commercial because the Police
Department couldn't find any acceptable standards that they could fill behind
them to use...
Mayor Suarez: I see. You would have to find the rational nexus between the
expenditures expected to be incurred, the capital expenditure, and the new
construction, commercial construction. There is no formula devised yet by man
to do that, OK?
Mr. Rodriguez: That they could use. The only information, remember, we
prepared the ordinance, and we have to follow the information given to us by
the technical people in this field, in each one of these fields. If they tell
us that they cannot have any information, we have to accept that.
Commissioner Plummer, as I was trying to tell you, the only impact fee that is
shown for the Police Department, is in the area of residential. If you look
in the area of commercial, so your example will be clear, we don't have any
figure for impact fee caused by commercial on police, because the Police
Department, at the time this was drafted, couldn't find any national
standards that they could use to support the position they have. I remember
that this had to be... we had to have a clear rational nexus established that
they, the technicians in each one of these areas, had to be able to support in
court. If they don't have it, I am not going to create it. Your wrath is
directed to the wrong person and I think it is unfair also to argue to them.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio... No, I guess my wrath is directed at your because you
accepted the numbers from obviously people who did not know what they were
doing. You just accepted them.
Mr. Rodriguez: No, we questioned the numbers, and when we don't get the
numbers...
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, I just spent... all right, the City, $7,000,000 for
radios alone. Now, let me ask you another...
Mrs. Kennedy: What is radios?
Mr. Plummer: What? That is capital improvements.
Mayor Suarez: Well, good question, what do they classify those? I don't
think they know.
Mrs. Kennedy: Can you use... would that be included, Sergio?
Mr. Rodriguez: Radios could be included, if it is certain radios.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, let me ask you one other question which I haven't heard
the answer to.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: What do you propose in the next 18 years, will be the total
amount of revenue... excuse me, what is the total construction amount of money
in the next 18 years?
Mr. Rodriguez; Construction from whom?
73 January 22, 1987
0
IF
Mr. Plummer: New construction in this City.
Mr. Rodriguez: Hold on a second.
Mr. Plummer: OK, what do you propose, or what does your projection show of
new construction in this community in the next 18 years as to the year 2005.
Mr. Rodriguez: If you go to page seven of your ordinance...
Mr. Plummer: How much?
Mr. Rodriguez: If you go to page seven of your ordinance, so it will be on
the record, we show 45,000,000 square feet of new construction. If you
multiply that times 100 dollars, it will be $4,500,000,000.
Mayor Suarez: It would be $5,000,000,000?
Mr. Plummer: OK, now you are telling me...
Mayor Suarez: Roughly half, per year.
Mr. PLummer:..... that in construction, which major portion of it is going to
be commercial, we know that, OK? Better than 50 percent will be commercial.
Mr. Rodriguez: We are estimating maybe half and half, more or less.
Mr. Plummer: where do you come up with those numbers? I am talking
about two projects alone that are $2,000,000,000, in the next two years!
Mrs. Kennedy: Exactly, in the next two years.
Mayor Suarez: No, no, I wish that was the case, though.
Mr. Plummer: What do you mean no, no, no?
Mr. Rodriguez: It will take five or six years for that.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, there is no way those projects will be completed.
Mr. Rodriguez: Well, whatever, you know.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, I didn't say completed.
Mrs. Kennedy: Not completed.
Mr. Plummer: OK, the one is thirty...
Mrs. Kennedy: Started.
Mayor Suarez: But, that is... you have to take it over the span of time that
it takes to complete it.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Mayor, Olympia York is proposing 30 months of
construction. The $1,000,000,000 of the project, you are correct it is ten
years.
Mayor Suarez: I hope you are right, I hope you are right.
Mr. Plummer: No, it is ten years.
Mayor Suarez: So it is $100,000,000 a year.
Mr. Plummer: Now, that is still within there... Mr. Mayor, that is still
within the 13 - 18 year time frame that he is speaking about. That is two
projects that is half of what he is talking about, two projects alone) Now,
that is 50 percent of the money that he speaks of.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, and we don't know that either one will get built. We hope
they will, but we don't know if either one of the two will get built.
i 74 January 22, 1987
i
0 0
Mr. Rodriguez: If I may, on that issue, the projections that we made were
based on projections made by Hammer, Siler & George, and the projections by
the State and the County of all the growth that we will have every year.
Mr. Plummer: Who was this company?
Mr. Rodriguez: Hammer, Siler & George.
Mr. Plummer: Where are they located?
Mr. Rodriguez: God knows!... Washington, I guess.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, that figures, because they don't know a thing about Miami.
Mr. Rodriguez: But, they are here... wait, they have worked for us before on
many different occasions and we have been using their figures for other
projects. They have a local office over here, and more importantly, the
projections they have made, that were supposed to be reasonable, is 600,000
square feet of offices for the next 20 years.
Mr. Plummer: What is the Worth project?... a million square feet.
Mr. Rodriguez: I think it was two, one and one, if I remember correctly.
Mr. Plummer: That is just a project!
Mr. Rodriguez: But, I...
Mr. Plummer: A project.
Mr. Rodriguez: But, based on the demand that we have, this is the best
information that we can give at this point, and we have to be complete in this
report of what we are giving you.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, let me tell you something. Every dollar that we put
into that impact fee, saves the taxpayers... the taxpayers money in their
taxes.
Mr. Rodriguez: I agree with you.
Mr. Plummer: Because if you don't collect it in impact fees, you have got to
get it by floating bonds.
Mr. Rodriguez: I agree with you.
Mr. Plummer: And when you float bonds, all five of us siting up here have to
pay for those bonds. Now, if you are sitting there and you will write your
personal check guaranteeing me that the only impacts that we are going to have
for the next 18 years is $44,000,000 and you will supply the difference after
that, I'll go along with you. I say to you that these numbers are not... not
realistic. I quit.
Mr. Rodriguez: And in answer to that, what I am trying to tell you is that
this is the best that we have at this time, and the one that we can support.
If we can get the different departments which have prepared the impact
information to change their figures based on something they can back up in
court...
Mayor Suarez: OK, we...
Mr. Rodriguez: ... we will gladly do it.
Mayor Suarez: We gather that it is very difficult to predict what the total
amount of improvements are going to be, caused by new developments, the nexus
between the new development and the improvements and the whole philosophy of
this is still questionable, but maybe we ought to hear from the opponents and
get on with it.
Mrs. Kennedy: Excuse me a second, before we start Russ, Sergio, if we don't
use it, is the money returned to the developers then?
75 January 22, 1987
i
Mr. Rodriguez: If the money is not used or encumbered within six years, the
money is returned to the applicant at a rate of three percent.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, rest assured, this big city will find a way to spend it.
Mr. Russ Marchner: Mr. Mayor, thank you. I am Russ Marchner, representing
before you the Real Estate Action Council of Dade, which includes the Miami
Board of Realtors. I have been hearing this discussion back and forth, and I
am just wondering whether you have enough information at hand, I know I don't
have enough information in hand, maybe it is because I haven't seen the
ordinance, but I appeared before you one time before on impact fees. Perhaps
it should be sent back for more study, and...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, after we pass it on first reading.
Ms. Truly Burton: My name is Truly Burton, and I represent the Builder's
Association of South Florida. We have about 1,000 members who are commercial
and residential home builders throughout Miami and Dade County. Our folks
have worked real hard for about seven or eight months with the Planning
Department staff on it, and there have been some significant changes,
incorporating some good ideas. However, we still think that there are two
major points that we want to bring to you today that are of concern to our
folks, and that is how the fees for parks and roads are set out to be used in
the ordinance. Now, I am not an attorney, but maybe others behind me can
speak to that, but by legal precedent on things that I have read, impact fees
can only be used to fund capital improvements, to relieve the impact of new
growth. However, when I looked back in project descriptions for what the City
plans to do for roads and parks, which is back in this section, everything
says park renovation, or road rehab or renovation, and I would just point out
to you that our association members feel that is an improper use of impact
fees. Any maintenance, or rehab or renovation of roads or parks has to be
done, where that is usually the thing used for general... excuse me... for...
Mayor Suarez: There comes a time though, Truly, and I generally agree with
some of the points you are stating, but there comes a time where a road is no
longer operative and you have to rebuild it. Whether you call that rebuilding
or what, it is a capital improvement, isn't it, by just about any... you would
want it to be in your tax calculations, wouldn't you?
Ms. Burton: Well, my point is that there is no funding for signalization, or
their project description doesn't include anything for signalization, for
added turn lanes and so forth.
Mr. Plummer: That will be in the County. We don't control that. The County
will do that in their impact ordinance because they have full control over
signalization. Likewise, bridges, jails, everything that is regional in
nature, is a County responsibility, and they will have to do that in their
impact fee.
Ms. Burton: All right, I appreciate the clarification. I am just concerned
that renovations and repairs seem to be general fund things, as opposed to
things that an impact fee is supposed to be used for.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, what would happen to the wear and tear that is put on
these roads by this new construction? What would that be?
Ms. Burton: I guess you would have to go back with staff and find out what
that is, because that is an unanswered question to me. I don't know.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, I am not asking staff, see, I am asking you. See, we
are going to put all this new construction here. We are going to have more
automobiles, more etc., more etc., more use on the sewers, I mean, more water
flushed in, and with that wear and tear, what do you call that?
Mr. Plummer: Commissioner Dawkins?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, J. L.
Mr. Plummer: May I make a suggestion? She makes a good point and Sergio, I
think the point is well taken and it is very simple in my estimation to
correct. You just call it upkeep.
76 January 22, 1987
Mr. Rodriguez: No, actually, if I may...
Mr. Plummer: That is all, upkeep!
Mr. Rodriguez: No, Commissioner Plummer, we are not using any of this for
maintenance. We are using to increase capacity of roads. Without
improvements, there would be no capacity.
Mr. Plummer: Maintaining standards, that is all you call it. She makes a
good point. If we are talking about the same thing, and I am sure she doesn't
object, it is just the terminology and I think she makes a good point.
Ms. Burton: I am not sure that is exactly the way I would put it, but that...
Mr. Plummer: You are very eloquent.
Ms. Burton: Thank you. A couple of other points still remain in the
ordinance that are important to us. First, the ordinance still allows for
developer exactions to be made in addition to impact fees. I know that our
members would appreciate it if staff would provide guidelines as to when and
what type of developer's action will be required. When is this...
Mayor Suarez: What sort of developer's actions are we talking about here?
Mr. Rodriguez: That is the point I was trying to make, Commissioner Plummer.
In the cases of Worth and this buildings, we are going to have
developer's exactions created specifically by those projects which are
specific, so we are not taking away that. That is separate from the impact
fees.
Mr. Dawkins: OK now, from the viewpoint of the builder now, how do we not
double dip, here?
Mr. Plummer: Well, we do double...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, Commissioner. If we have a developer exaction,
let's say for a major project downtown, and we are able to calculate the
impact on capital improvements that it will have, and we are able to exact
that through the regional planning process, or otherwise, why do we need for
those kind of projects an impact fee on top of that?
Mr. Rodriguez: Let's say for example, you have a development of regional
impact, in which you will create the need for street lights.
Mayor Suarez: But, the Worth project is a good one. We have been using that
as an example. A total of...
Mr. Rodriguez: OK, for example, you find that you need some improvements,
which was not included in the calculations that we have here. You can ask
specifically for that project to take care of that improvement, specifically.
Mayor Suarez: OK, supposing now that... OK, you are saying then for
incremental improvements that are not taking care of by the anticipated
process of impact fees. Now, let's say we didn't have the impact fee at all,
which is to me, still a pretty good scenario, and we were looking at those
major projects downtown to which Commissioner Plummer has been referring.
Wouldn't they, in any event, under the regional planning concept and
provisions have an exaction that would cover any impacts specifically created
by those major mega -projects, if you want to call them that?
Mr. Rodriguez: To start with, we cannot require that anymore as of July 1.
They have to...
Mayor Suarez: We need for them to give it voluntarily.
Mr. Rodriguez: And in addition to that, it will deal only with projects of a
certain nature, or a certain threshold. Below that, nobody else pays anything
now.
Mayor Suarez: Well, but as you see, even in the analysis, Commissioner
Plummer is referring to these mega -projects. Those are the ones that come to
77 January 22, 1987
mind when you think of the great capital improvement needs of the City in the
future, you think of those major projects downtown. You don't think of the
guy who builds a duplex, at least I don't.
Mr. Plummer: Like the bifurcation.
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, the bifurcated ramp, and the expansion of the bridge, and
the downtown...
Mr. Plummer: $25,000,000 in just the bifurcation.
Mayor Suarez: ... the downtown grid lock at Dupont Plaza from the traffic and
all these other major impacts.
Ms. Burton: OK, thank you. Like I said, our members want to make sure that
they have some kind of guidelines from staff as to when they are going to be
asked for these developer exactions, so they don't get surprised, because that
is the purpose for an impact fee ordinance is to make sure that you don't have
surprises and you can plan for the impacts.
Mr. Plummer: When is the proposed effective date?
Mr. Rodriguez: When you finish the second reading, if you approve it today
first reading, second reading will be February. Thirty days after that it
will be law.
Mr. Plummer: So you know the date. We would have the second reading on
February 26 and it would become effective the 26th of March, assuming that we
go through the reading as proposed.
Ms. Burton: OK, third, I think the members want to make sure that the impact
fees that they are paying and the developer exactions that they are also being
asked for aren't duplicate payments for the same capital improvements, so the
left hand knows what the right hand is doing, capital improvements and the
impact fees and the exactions should be there, and I am not sure that that is
written into the ordinance.
Mr. Rodriguez: We have a provision in the ordinance by which if there is some
duplication, there will be credit given to the developer.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, I thought we just stressed that.
Ms. Burton: Is that the way that...
Mr. Plummer: Well, Truly, don't you represent the contractors?
Ms. Burton: Builders, contractors. Builders and...
Mr. Plummer: OK, you are actually paying... your people are not paying the
fee. The developer is paying the fee.
Ms. Burton: I represent developers and home builders and people that pay the
fee, not contractors, no.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, OK, I thought you were the contractors, OK.
Ms. Burton: No, and last, we just wanted to make sure, which is the question
I heard raised by one of the Commissioners, that the capital improvements that
are listed in the backup data are in fact exactly what is necessary by each
department, with the exception of police.
Mayor Suarez: Well, we don't really have that down too tight so far, but...
Mr. Rodriguez: That is information that we have for this point, and every
year through the process you will be able to amend that, if it is not up to
date, as you do it now.
Ms. Burton: Well, there is one last point I want to make about...
Mr. Plummer: Let make one, because I think she was on a point. Didn't we
stipulate that that impact fee had to be paid when?
78 January 22, 1987
Mr. Rodriguez: At the time of the building permit.
Mr. Plummer: At the time of the permit, OK. I wanted to make that clear.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: OK, that was going to be my point.
Ms. Burton: Yes, that is in the ordinance, I am pleased for that. The last
point I want to just reiterate is the issue of parks. As I look on page nine
of the ordinance, the center table, it says, Commercial impact fee
coefficients by type of service." For downtown, Parks and Recreation is the
highest one there. It doesn't exactly make sense to me, notwithstanding any
arguments about streets or sewers why that is the highest one. I know that
maybe there might need to be some renovation of parks, but I don't think
spending impact fee dollars on what should be a general fund item is
appropriate, and I think you may have some legal questions you might want to
ask the City Attorney about that. It just doesn't make sense for commercial
to bear that much of a fee on parks. Most of the time the...
Mayor Suarez: Any problem with that, legally, you think, Joel?
Ms. Burton: It is not a capital improvement, it is a renovation?
Mr. Rodriguez:
Mayor Suarez: Well, you have made the argument, let's get...
Mr. Joel Maxwell: Mr. Mayor, that is a matter of semantics as to whether or
not it is a renovation or a capital improvement. I think that the studies
that we have so far substantiate what we have, and we don't see a legal
problem with what has occurred.
Ms. Burton: OK, given our member's points, I know that they would appreciate,
you know, having another opportunity to sit down with staff. I know that they
have been real cooperative, and it is not an easy document to put together,
especially for a City that has already been urbanized. Most of the time
impact fee ordinances are put together for undeveloped areas and it is real
easy to do, but I appreciate that...
Mayor Suarez: Sure, you start with nothing and you are going to have
development and it is easy to calculate in a portion to the new development.
Ms. Burton: It is a lot easier, I appreciate that, but I know that they would
appreciate one more time to sit down with Sergio. Thank you.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask one more time, make sure I understand. Sergio, you
are telling me that you are proposing in this ordinance, no impact fees for
Police and Fire from the commercial construction?
Mr. Rodriguez: No. I am saying that we don't have adequate standards for
police in commercial development.
Mr. Plummer: So you are not collecting anything.
Mr. Rodriguez: For. police.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Rodriguez: In commercial development. If we get standards that they can
support and information they can support, we will include it in the ordinance.
I am telling you what I have. We don't have it. If we were to get from the
Police Department standards that they feel they can support, on which we can
use it as the basis for making the calculations, we will include it.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Manager, who in the Police Department, failed, or dropped
the gun to provide those standards at the inception of this ordinance? Now,
you know, it is very difficult, after we provide this ordinance, to go
back and change it later, and I am at a complete loss to understand, it has
been now almost a year and one-half. Sergio, how long have we been working on
this ordinance, a year and one-half?
79 January 22, 1987
0
Mr. Rodriguez: More.
Mr. Plummer: More? That the Police Department, in a year and one-half, or
not the Police Department, because that is not their responsibility. It is
the Budget Department, or, wherever, the Finance Department, that in 18 months
could not come up and say that we have standards that we could provide to
demonstrate that there will be a need in the commercial for police, and as
such, we are not asking for a single dollar for the next 18 years. If that
makes sense to some people, please tell me where I am wrong.
Mr. Dawkins: The same thing...
Mr. Plummer: Well, but he is the same man that put these numbers together.
Mr. Dawkins: The same thing applies to the Sanitation Department, J. L., and
General Services, and I asked Mr. Rodriguez the same question. Why is it that
you ask for information over and over again and did not receive it?
Sgt. Joseph P. Longueira: Commissioner Plummer, to explain how we had
approached this. First of all...
Mr. Plummer: For your record, give your name.
Sgt. Longueira: Sgt. Joseph P. Longueira, I am supervisor in the Planning
Unit at the Police Department.
Mr. Plummer: Have you been working on this the full 18 months?
Sgt. Longueira: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: And you have been unable to establish any standards?
Sgt. Longueira: Let me explain something. For a long time, the Police
Department could not conform under the policy guidelines that was written.
Mr. Plummer: Set by who?
Sgt. Longueira: Set by the City.
Mr. Plummer: Set by us?
Sgt. Longueira: Right.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Sgt. Longueira: Because the capital improvements had to be inside each of the
planning districts.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Sgt. Longueira: Basically, we generate our services out of downtown until
just recently when it was decided we were going to have two substations, but
basically, all of our services generate from downtown. Under the guidelines,
the only place we could have done an impact fee was downtown. Finally, I got
clarification because our services are delivered out in the community, we
based, since it is a City policy of three officers per 1,000 residents, we
used that as our basis for projections on future growth of officers. Then we
took whatever equipment was needed to support those officers, that is what we
based the impact fee on.
Mayor Suarez: Equipment and facilities.
Sgt. Longueira: Yes, radios, M.D.T.Is, parking and building expansion -
expansion based on the additional officers.
Mayor Suarez: You headed towards a rational nexus. What happened? Did it
break down somewhere? Why don't we have the figures?
Mr. Plummer: Joe, I want to remind you, I might not be here as a Commissioner
after November, but I am going to be here as a taxpayer to remind you that you
have stated for the record the only thing you could demonstrate was capital
needs in the improvement of the Police Department for the next 18 years of
42,200,000.
80 January 22, 1987
Sgt. Longueira: Only for the impact additional growth.
Mr. Plummer: I am going to be here to remind you.
Sgt. Longueira: OK, for new growth. Now...
Mayor Suarez: And that new growth does not necessarily mean new population
growth, it is new construction.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, Mr. Mayor, you know, look, as I said, we spent
$7,000,000 for radios. We are getting reading to spend $10,000,000 for two
substations. We are making improvements every day. We want this City to stay
in the forefront. We are going to renovate all of the fire stations. We are
buying fire trucks, that is capital improvements.
Sgt. Longueira: But, that can't be charged under the guidelines.
Mr. Plummer: Who said sot
Sgt. Longueira: It says in the guidelines it must be directly attributable to
the growth. Replacement is not covered.
Mr. Maxwell: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: You are telling me I cannot build a fire station?
Mr. Maxwell: No, I am not. What we are saying is the cost of that new fire
station that is borne by the impact fee must be attributable to new growth.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly. Exactly, but what they are telling me is that in all
of the downtown, that not one penny, not one penny, of commercial is going to
the impact fees of the Police Department.
Sgt. Longueira: OK, we...
Mr. Plummer: Because you could not, in 18 months comes up.
Mayor Suarez: Why don't you come up with some kind of figures so at least we
would have a figure to work with at this point.
Mr. Plummer: If that is wrong, please correct me.
Sgt. Longueira: We had a meeting the other day about this, and I've got
people working on it. What we are going to do, is we are going to be able to
take the $2,600,000 improvements and show how much of that should go against
residential and commercial, but it won't increase that number. It will just
apportion it between the two.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, you had a meeting the other day.
Sgt. Longueira: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: And I am happy to hear that. You had 18 months to work on this
ordinance - 18 months to work on this ordinance!
Sgt. Longueira: It wasn't that long ago that we could comply with the
restrictions placed on us.
Mayor Suarez: Counselor, so we can complete this, counselor.
Mr. Tony O'Donnell: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, for the record,
my name is Tony O'Donnell, with law offices at 1401 Brickell Avenue. I am
representing Tishman Speyer Properties, the developer of Brickell Square on
Brickell Avenue today. I have a few points I would like to make.
Mayor Suarez: Not repetitive, please.
Mr. O'Donnell: I hope not, but hopefully to clarify our position, which is
that this particular ordinance is very defective from the legal point of view.
I hope that each of you have received the letter from Mr. Scharlin, the
Downtown Development Authority, and read it. It does reflect an accurate
81 January 22, 1987
assessment of this ordinance under Florida law. In our view, and I think, Mr.
Plummer, you probably hit on it in focusing on Police and Fire, there may well
be in this ordinance, a lack of Police and Fire assessment as to impact fees.
All right, but I am addressing...
Mr. Plummer: Tony, I would not have a problem with a lack. I have a problem
with none.
Mr. O'Donnell: I understand, but the point I want to make is that the roads
and the storm sewers and the parks that are included in this particular
ordinance, may well be capital improvements. They may well be something that
the City wants and needs to do to stay a f irst class city, but they are not
the subject of lawful impact fees. This is not an impact fee ordinance as it
relates to roads, to storm sewers, and to parks. It is not an impact fee
ordinance. It is a permit fee ordinance, an effort to raise revenues for
capital improvements that the City feels it needs, because none of these
improvements meet the test of the Florida Supreme Court, which requires a
capacity enhancement, a major addition, which also has to be a capital
improvement, which is caused by the new development. None of these do that.
They are all renovations and rehabilitations. That is not semantics, that is
reality. There isn't one street lane that is added in order to increase the
capacity of the road system so that the traffic...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait there. We have a problem there, I mean, because...
Mr. O'Donnell: It is true.
Mayor Suarez: ...if you don't consider capacity enhancement a street that is
no longer functional, and that is totally redone, I mean, you tear it up and
you rebuild it, I mean, I wonder what the Supreme Court is thinking about
there. That is capital, that is a capital improvement. It is a 30 year, or a
40 year, or whatever number of years it lasts.
Mr. O'Donnell: That is simply not true, because what the Supreme Court is
saying is, that which would be done in any event, and that is what the Supreme
Court said in Dunedin, that is a complete replacement of a capital facility,
such as a sewer treatment... no...
Mayor Suarez: Well, don't we have wear and tear additionally from all the
people that are living in those new...
Mr. O'Donnell: Exactly, and we will, our particular...
Mayor Suarez: So, we don't know that we would have had to do those
improvements had it not been for the additional people, Tony.
Mr. O'Donnell: No, that is not the philosophy behind impact fees.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Maxwell.
Mr. O'Donnell: No, but the reason...
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Maxwell, do you feel, as you said before, Mr. Maxwell, that
we can defend this impact fee in court?
Mr. Maxwell: The information that we have at hand at present indicates that
the impact fee is based on adequate studies and information supplied by the
departments based on the guidelines that the Law Department gave them, and we
had in mind, the Dunedin three pronged test, they were informed that it had to
be attributable to new growth and that it could not be maintenance. The
question of roads was addressed, Commissioner Dawkins, and based on what we
have on hand right now, I would have to say, yes, it defensible.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, we cannot guarantee the citizens of Miami of how the
judges will rule, but we can defend our position.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir. Again, we don't know what the court would say. It is
a new situation here, because of course the City of Miami is a built up area,
but we feel right now that we are on safer ground then we might otherwise be.
Mayor Suarez: And nobody else has done this so far. It seems like we are way
ahead of pack , but go ahead, Tony.
82 January 22, 1987
Mr. O'Donnell: All right, for the record...
Mayor Suarez: We are forewarned on that point, I mean...
Mr. O'Donnell: For the record, I have to say, however, that the Supreme Court
did address this very issue, and whether it is legal or not, as a matter of
good public policy, let me explain why the Supreme Court said what it said.
It said the cost of new facilities should be borne by new users to the extent
new use requires new facilities, but only to that extent. Then it went on to
say that when new facilities must be built in any event, which is the case in
all of these instances, looking only to new users gives old users and
continued users a windfall. Now, what does that mean? That means that we
have been paying taxes on vacant property and haven't used this street for 30
years. Now, the City wants to renovate the street. They are going to charge
the new development an impact fee and then charge them taxes after that. That
is double dipping, it is not fair, and it is an unlawful tax in Supreme Court.
Mr. Dawkins: But, Counselor, would we need the improvements if the developer
didn't want to develop it?
Mr. O'Donnell: Yes, and that is what your own City staff would say, because
they already have...
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, we could go along with what you say, and modify our
repair, but we wouldn't have to bring it up to the level and carry the loan
that you are talking about.
Mr. O'Donnell: That is simply not true, under the...
Mr. Dawkins: Well, that is what the court will have to decide. See, that is
your opinion and my opinion.
Mr. O'Donnell: But, that is not what your staff is telling you. They are
saying that they...
Mr. Plummer: Plus the taxes that you paid on a vacant lot were significantly
less, based on an assessment of not use, as opposed to the high rise building
that you are building.
Mr. O'Donnell: That is correct, but, when we build a high rise, we pay
additional taxes. The reason they limit it to new capacity increases is
because then it is not a tax, it is a lawful impact fee. For instance, if
your road improvement program included, which it certainly perhaps should
include, a number of additional turn lanes, or a number of additional straight
lanes, or new roads, or new bridges, then our proportional share, because we
were coming in and you needed that, in order to keep a level of service "C" or
"D" or whatever your standard was, we should pay for it, and there is no
question about that, because it relates to our impact. That is not what is
happening. What is happening is, new capital improvements are being asked
for. There are capital expenditures, but they are simply resurfacing streets;
re -putting in storm sewers; which by the way, my project doesn't even use
storm sewers, since we have all on site drainage; replacement of these items,
renovating parks, which certainly the renovation of a park is not caused by
new development in this area. Certainly a Brickell office building is not
causing a need for renovation of park downtown. That doesn't mean it doesn't
need to be done, and that doesn't mean when someone comes in for rezoning, you
don't want to have a contribution from that person in order to give something
to the public as a gesture for purposes of what you are giving them, but
someone who has the right to...
Mayor Suarez: That is called a linkage ordinance that we are hopefully in the
process of putting one of those together too.
Mr. O'Donnell: Fine, but that is not 'an impact...
Mayor Suarez: But you know, the longer you argue, the more you are convincing
me, because I was initially on your side, of the opposite point, I'll tell you
why - the converse of what you are saying is also true; the two substations
that were agreed to be built in anticipation of a lot of this construction,
now we cannot assess part of that to new construction..
83 January 22, 1987
Mr. O'Donnell: Well, I think from what I...
Mayor Suarez: ... arA I would like to revisit that, and the more you argue,
the more you convince me that this ordinance is going to do what I thought it
wasn't going to do...
Mr. O'Donnell: What we are saying is...
Mayor Suarez: ...which is going to tax the major developers downtown and on
Brickell for future capital improvement needs of the City.
Mr. O'Donnell: Mayor Suarez...
Mayor Suarez: I thought it impinged... I have to tell you this because of all
your arguments...
Mr. O'Donnell: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: ...I thought it impinged unfairly on the small builder in the
neighborhood, but I don't see the small builders out here opposing this, and I
see all the downtown and Brickell interests, and I am almost convinced now all
of a sudden, that...
Mr. O'Donnell: All right, but let me...
Mrs. Kennedy: Well, for example, Mr. Mayor, out of the seven...
Mayor Suarez: The arguments are cutting the opposite way from what you are
making them sound, I'll tell you, I warned you of that.
Mrs. Kennedy:... out of the $7,500,000 for Bayfront Park, $1,000,000 is coming
from Worth.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, you know Tony, I want to remind you of something. Have you
drawn your permit?
Mr. O'Donnell: For what?
Mr. Plummer: For your building.
Mr. O'Donnell: For which building?
Mr. Plummer: The building you are here representing.
Mr. O'Donnell: For the Tishman Speyer, we haven't drawn our permit for the
second two phases.
Mr. Plummer: And that is for the island?
Mr. O'Donnell: No, I am talking about Brickell Square, the Brickell Square
project on Brickell and 8 Street.
Mr. Plummer: You know, Tony, I want to remind you of something, OK, and I
want you to go back and tell your developers how cooperate you people were,
you people, the people of Brickell Avenue, when this City single handedly,
with the stroke of a pen, quadrupled your allowable building capacity on
Brickell, and how much and how over enthusiastic they were - "Yes, we
understand there is going to be impact, but give us that quadruple amount of
density, and we will be happy to pay the impact fees", and now what do we see?
You have your quadruple amount of use of your property, and we are finding a
resistance that was so reluctantly offered in the past to be rescinded.
Mr. O'Donnell: Mr. Plummer...
Mr. Plummer: Now, let me tell you where I am, OK?
Mr. O'Donnell: Well, yes sir.
Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney... Sir, what does this City have to do to go
back and revert to take away that bonanza that we gave the Brickell people
when they so voluntarily offered to pay the impact fees. What do we have to
do to revert it back, since they don't now want to pay it, to take them back
84 January 22, 1987
.
to the zoning that they previously had before, because, I will tell you
something, to me this is, they have their cake and they want to eat it too.
Mr. Dawkins: Listen closely to what J.L. says.
Mr. Plummert Now, what do we have to do, this man does not have a permit, and
if we take and impose this impact fee, he has to pay it, or tie it and
litigate it in court, and we are going to tie him up for years, OK, and I
don't want to do that. I took it in good faith when this Commission almost
quadrupled every use of every piece of property on Brickell. "Yes,
Commission, we will pay the impact fees. We understand we are going to create
it four times more than before, and now, what do I hear?... "We don't want to
pay it. You know why we don't want to pay it? Because we got what we
wantedt" Now, what do we do to make this reasonable? What do we do, what
does this Commission do to say, OK, guys, you don't want to do what you
promised, just revert back to the zoning that you had before, because Tony,
you know what is going to happen. We are going to tie you up for years in
court.
Mr. O'Donnell: Mr. Plummer, I am not trying to avoid...
Mr. Plummer: You are doing a good job of doing it.
Mr. O'Donnell: I understand that, but...
Mr. Dawkins: You asked the attorney a question.
Mr. Plummer: I asked the attorney a question.
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner Plummer, the remedy that the City would have would
be to rezone the property to the extent that they have the same building
permits on it and have no rights to
Mr. Plummer: Does the City have the right to do that?
Mr. Maxwell: The City can always rezone properties.
Mr. Plummer: OK. Hey, as far as I am concerned, you got your choice.
Mr. O'Donnell: Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Donnell: Please, can I please explain the reason our objections to...
Mr. Plummer: Explain all you want, because whatever happens, you know we are
going to meet you in court, Tony.
Mr. O'Donnell: All right, I think that the...
Mr. Plummer: And I want for the record, you are creating your own hardship by
your discussion here before this Commission, making allegations that are not
true, in my estimation. That is my opinion, which I am entitled to. You are
going to tie yourself up in court, so don't come back to this Commission
looking for damages of monies that you have lost because of construction. You
folks offered to do it, '..a went along. Yes, we will go along with you when
you have your impact fees, and as far as I am concerned, you know Tony, you
say whatever you want, because you have talked yourself into court.
Mr. O'Donnell: Yes, I understand. Mr. Plummer, let me finish. The
objections that we have are not to the impact fees that you spoke of with
respect to Police or Fire needs that may or may not be there. They are not
with respect to street improvements which are required by the impacts of these
projects. They would not be objecting to changes in the ordinance, even if
the same amount of impact fees were imposed. The objections, and what I have
tried to relate to you, and I think I am justified, the 38 cities that have
enacted impact fees have steered clear of, including Dade County, have steered
clear of trying to put maintenance, rebuilding, renovation costs into an
impact fee revenue generating program. I think it would be advisable that the
City do the same thing, and that is the major objection to this ordinance.
What you were talking about when you mentioned new capital improvements for
fire stations, new capital improvements for Police, we have agreed, in fact in
85 January 22, 1987
M
our development order, to pay those. We don't see them in this impact fee,
but I am sure if they are based upon improvements that are required by the
development, we would pay them. There is no objection to a legal impact fee,
but I feel obligated to advise you as we have advised from the Downtown
Development Authority, and as we have advised staff and your legal department,
that this effort, particularly with parks and replacement of streets and
replacement of sewers is capital improvements, but it is not a valid impact
fee, and I would request that the City relook at that, limit its impact fees
to those that are justifiably increasing the capacity of these particular
facilities, and take a second look at those Police, Fire, and other facilities
that may be helpful, and also may be related to the actual impacts of the
development. Finally, with the sanitation, I believe that that is handled by
a user impact fee that now exists. I think that is one of the major reasons
why it wasn't included in this impact fee, that they have an ability that when
a new user comes along, that they make a contribution, that supposedly would
handle those capital improvements.
Mayor Suarez: What about that, Walter? Does that user impact fee apply to
sewage, is that... or solid waste?
Mr. Rodriguez: What? I am sorry, I missed the question.
Mayor Suarez: Tony, do you want to repeat that point?
Mr. O'Donnell: My understanding of the discussions that we had, that one of
the reasons, if not the major reason why sanitation impact fees were not
imposed is that the new users, that is, the owner of the building, or the
operator of the building, when they come in to get the service, have to pay as
a user fee, have to pay to get that service, and that that is where it would
be a proper method for obtaining the... then it would be a real user fee, one
you could identify the new capital improvements to the actual use, rather than
the permit itself.
Mayor Suarez: You don't mean a regular solid waste fee?
Mr. O'Donnell: Yes, but...
Mayor Suarez: But that is for service, not for capital improvements. It
doesn't take care of disposal, it doesn't take care of plants...
Mr. Rodriguez: Right. We are not dealing... the impact fee doesn't deal
with services, only deals with capital improvements.
Mr. O'Donnell: Right, but what I am saying is I think the discussion there,
and it may not be correct, the discussion was if users are the ones that are
going to benefit from the capital improvements, that it should be collected by
a user, and not by a developer who may or may not have that impact.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, we are doing that already. OK.
Mr. O'Donnell: But, in some, the County ordinance, and other ordinances,
which impose impact fees make an express limitation so that they exclude
anything that is non -capacity enhancement with respect to impact fees and are
not related...
Mayor Suarez: Capacity enhancement term is the only one that gives me
trouble. Your arguments that maintenance cannot be included as an assessment,
you are right, and I think we have made an effort not to include that. You
talk about replacement, or what was the other term you were using?
Mr. O'Donnell: Renovation?
Mayor Suarez: Renovation. I don't know, it sounds to me like in a lot of
situations, replacement of a facility could include some capital improvement
related to a new facility. I mean, maybe not the entire cost, but some part
of the cost, and I...
Mr. O'Donnell: Yes, and I agree... in so far as it increases the capacity, in
other words, a rebuilding of a road, which also adds a lane, that is the way
they do it with most impact fees.
Mayor Suarez: And I presume that is built into the numbers, I don't...
86 January 22, 1987
M
Mr. O'Donnell: No, it is not.
Mayor Suarez: OK, maybe we will have to correct that by second reading,
because we don't want...
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, for the record, define what you mean by replacement.
Mr. Rodriguez: Let me define that what we are doing with the ordinance, is
not any maintenance, and that is clear.
Mayor Suarez: Well, we have got that. What about replacement or renovations?
Mr. Rodriguez: What we are doing in the cases of renovation is increasing the
capacity of the facility to take care of the capacity created by the impact of
the new growth.
Mr. Plummer: Isn't the word, "upgrading" proper? We are upgrading to meet
the demand of the new impact.
Mr. Rodriguez: right.
Mr. Plummer: So we are upgrading. It is not remodeling, it is not
maintenance, it is upgrade.
Mr. Rodriguez: I don't want to get trapped into language that might be used
in court later on, that might be wrong. That is why I want to make clear that
we are not doing any maintenance with this. We are increasing the capacity to
take care of the growth that will be brought with the new development and the
impact.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, let's hear from the Legal Department on that.
Mr. Maxwell: I was going to comment on something different, Commissioner
Kennedy, but to comment on that, again, you know, we are still into a question
of semantics. In the past, road improvements, the courts have looked at
particularly the adding of lanes and so forth, because that is where impacts
were used, usually in undeveloped areas, but in the City, where we really
can't widen our roads, it sometimes becomes cost prohibitive. The adding of
capacity may mean, for instance, the rebuilding of a road, that the
strengthens the road bed, so that you can carry this increased capacity, but
you don't add lanes. Well, that is going to cost money, and to the extent
that we can specify exactly what amount of that increased cost is caused by
the new development, it is a reasonable use of the impact fee, in our
opinions, and secondly, if I may comment, I'd like to reiterate the comments I
made concerning Commissioner Plummer's rezoning question. Again, just for the
record, we'd like to clarify that the City can always rezone, as long as there
are no vested rights at stake, and it is a reasonable rezoning caused by
generally changed conditions, or necessitated by some other changing
conditions, but of course, we can't do it in an arbitrary capricious fashion.
Mr. Plummer: Never would do such a thing!
Mayor Suarez: Go ahead. Last comment.
Mr. Robert Green: Yes, sir. My name is Robert Green, my address is 9100
South Dadeland Boulevard, and I am coming to you today in two capacities,
first, as a builder of rental housing in the City of Miami, and secondly, as a
director in the Builder's Association of South Florida.
Mr. Plummer: Are you getting compensated to appear here, sir?
Mr. Green: No, sir, I am not.
Mr. Plummer: You are not an attorney?
Mr. Green: I am not a practicing one.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that could be said of a lot of them.
Mr. Carollo: Don't feel bad, we have a few like that around here too.
87 January 22, 1987
Mr. Green: As you all may or may not be aware, the Builder's Association,
although it does contain a few large commercial developers, we primarily are
an organization of small, residential builders and that is really the issue
that I want to hone in on today, is the fairness of the impact fee ordinance,
as it relates to residential development. 1 think that there are two fairness
issues that staff ought to go back and explore, as it relates to the impact
fee ordinance. The first thing is, is it fair to assess impact fees at the
same level, for luxury condominiums, as it is for low and middle income
housing. I just don't think it is fair that that a $500,000 luxury condominium
is assessed at the same level as housing which is developed for low and middle
income people. The second thing is, is it fair to assess for sale housing at
the same level as rental housing? As you all know, tax reform has absolutely
crippled the ability of the developer to put together low and middle income
housing under the current law, and I think at this time for the Commission to
enact an impact fee ordinance which draws no distinction whatsoever between
the low income groups and the high income groups, I think is to place a very
onerous burden on the type of housing that I think as a policy matter, you
have already established as a goal, and I think as a policy matter, should be
a goal. And so what I am encouraging you all to do today, is to give staff a
chance to go back and look at this ordinance and see if there is a way that
you can create some more fairness to it.
Mrs. Kennedy: Nineteen months.
Mr. Green:.... as it relates to residential housing.
Mrs. Kennedy: A question that came to my mind, Sergio, affordable housing
downtown is exempt, correct?
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK.
Mr. Rodriguez: It is included. You can always make any exceptions that you
want throughout the whole course of
Mayor Suarez: Why is it exempt? Explain that.
Mr. Rodriguez: It is not exempt. I am sorry, is it exempt?
Mrs. Kennedy: Exempt. It is included.
Mr. Plummer: Yeah, it has to be. To meet the test of fairness across the
board, it's got to be included.
Mr. Rodriguez: Oh, no, I am sorry, it is included. You can make an exception
of any impact fees that you desire through the process that we have
established.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I move item 12 on first reading.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any further discussion? Call the roll.
Mr. Plummer: And Mr. Mayor, for the record, any of these people that have
spoken, including my good friend Russ, who I disagree with all the time, that
if you would like to go back between now and second reading and discuss with
Sergio, who sometimes is not reasonable, the matters relating, please feel
free to do so, and I can tell you, without question, that if he feels you make
a good case, he will present it before second reading, so I want you to be
invited to go back and talk with Sergio and make your points, so that when we
come back for second reading, they will be addressed.
88 January 22, 1987
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AMENDING
THE CITY CODE BY ADDING THERETO A NEW CHAPTER 54.6
IMPOSING AN "IMPACT FEE" ON ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT AS
HEREIN DETERMINED IN ORDER TO FINANCE RELATED CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS, THE DEMAND FOR WHICH IS CREATED BY SUCH
DEVELOPMENT; SETTING FORTH FINDINGS AND INTENT;
PROVIDING THE AUTHORITY THEREFOR; PROVIDING
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY OF THE IMPACT
FEE; PROVIDING FOR IMPOSITION OF THE IMPACT FEE;
PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
SUBAREAS; PROVIDING FOR DETERMINATION OF DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF AN IMPACT
FEE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM; PROVIDING FOR
ESTABLISHMENT OF IMPACT FEE COEFFICIENTS; PROVIDING
FOR CALCULATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR
ADMINISTRATION OF IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR BONDING
IMPACT FEE RELATED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING FOR APPEAL PROCEDURES;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner
Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
Mayor Suarez: Russ has requested, as he has, I believe individually, a little
longer between first and second reading of this ordinance. How does the
Commissioner about it?
Mr. Plummer: 30 days is enough.
Mayor Suarez: You had requested 90 days?
Mrs. Kennedy: What are you requesting, Russ?
Mr. Plummer: Oh, no, not
Mr. Marchner: A longer time between first and second reading, because it
takes a while for my realtors to sit down and study this, because as I said, I
have been derelict, and I don't have a copy of this, the new one. Mr. Maxwell
gave me the old one some time ago, so I don't... so it is going to take a
little more time for a special committee of the realtors, so I am asking for
90 days between first and second reading.
Mr. Plummer: I can't agree.
Mrs. Kennedy: How about 60 days - compromise?
Mr. Matchner: We will take what we can get.
Mr. Plummer: How about 31?
Mayor Suarez: Move one of the two so we can get on.
Mrs. Kennedy: I move 60.
Mayor Suarez: 60 days between first and second reading?
0
89 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: Right.
Mayor Suarez: No?
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: No, I am just asking if we have a second. I'll second it. I
don't know if it will pass.
Mr. Plummer: Motion to grant 60 days, duly seconded. Under discussion?
Hearing none, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-94
A MOTION DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE SECOND
READING OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN CONNECTION WITH IMPACT
FEES NO SOONER THAN 60 DAYS BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND
READING. (This item will be considered at the March 26,
1987 Commission Meeting.
Upon being seconded by Mayor Suarez, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None
17. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM 11TH AND 12TH YEAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS - FUND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS (C.D. - $417,121).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item 13.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I'd like the City Attorney to at least prepare for me
the ordinance, or whatever is necessary to have it at the next meeting for the
purposes of possibly readdressing the Brickell zoning and have it prepared for
the next meeting.
Mr. Joel Maxwell: You mean the next Planning and Zoning meeting?
Mr. Plummer: Yes, air.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Matthew....
Mr. Rodriguez: This is a housekeeping item.
Mayor Suarez: Housekeeping?
Mr. Rodriguez: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: I will entertain a motion on item 13.
Mr. Dawkins: Move it.
Mayor Suarez: Moved. Do we have a second?
Mr. Plummer: Second.
90 January 22, 1987
1 0 4
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Read the ordinance.
Mrs. Kennedy: What item is this?
Mr. Plummer: 13.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 1 AND 6 OF ORDINANCE
NO. 10150 ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 25, 1986, THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 1987 BY APPROPRIATING $417,121 FROM 11TH
AND 12TH YEARS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDS, INCREASING REVENUE IN A LIKE AMOUNT TO FUND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
WITHIN THE CITY OF MIAMI.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Plummer and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
18. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: FURTHER DEFINE (FOR PURPOSES OF OCCUPATIONAL
LICENSE TAX ASSESSMENT) "BROKERS, DEALERS, BONDS, STOCKS, MORTGAGES, AND
OTHER SECURITIES."
Mayor Suarez: Item 14.
Mr. Robert Clark: Item 14 is an ordinance which simply adds the definition
for mortgage brokers into our occupational license chapter. There had been a
question before.
Mrs. Kennedy: Move it.
Mr. Plummer: Second the item for discussion. Had there been anything in
there previous to this?
Mr. Clark: Nothing other than the fact it laid a tax on mortgage brokers
without defining what mortgage brokers were. We received a letter of complaint
from a bank who are now handling mortgages. The State statute expressly
exempts banks and this is a housekeeping item.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 31-48 (B) OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING
SUBSECTIONS (c),(d) AND (e) TO FURTHER DEFINE, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE TAX ASSESSMENT, THE
DEFINITIONS OF BROKER(S) AND DEALER(S) IN BONDS,
STOCKS, MORTGAGES OR OTHER SECURITIES; CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
91 January 22, 1987
Was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Commissioner
Plummer and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
19. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: PROVIDE UPON REQUEST INSPECTION OF REAL
PROPERTY TO ASCERTAIN ZONING VIOLATIONS.
Mr. Dawkins: Move item 15.
Mayor Suarez: Item 15 has been moved.
Mr. Plummer: I second it. Under discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Under discussion.
Mr. Plummer: Does this include single family residences?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: And how will these inspections be initiated?
Ms. Editha Fuentes: On a voluntary basis they will... they can call up the
office and request for an inspection on a certain piece of property. However,
we will request them to follow it up with a written request, so we can put
that on the file.
Mr. Plummer: Why would somebody voluntarily call you and ask you to come
inspect their house? What benefit is it to them?
Ms. Fuentes: We have been...
Mr. Plummer: And to pay the fee.
Ms. Fuentes: We have been faced with serious problems, let's say, when it
goes to the Code Enforcement Board, on a - let's say a new property owner, had
they known there was serious violations on the property, they could have
corrected it prior to the selling or buying of the property.
Mr. Plummer: How about the literally thousands of violations that exist in
this City today, of single family residences that are no more single family
than the man in the moon?
Mr. Carollo: That's correct, like all those tenements that we have some
places.
Mr. Plummer: Well, this doesn't address it.
Mrs. Dougherty: We already have that.
Mr. Plummer. Sure.
Mr. Pierce: You are right, and that is a different tag than. I have been
talking with two of the Assistant City Attorneys and we have started looking
at a program, along with the Housing Agency, to try to copy some ordinances
92 January 22, 1987
0
Ei
that we found that apply to cities like Detroit, Newark, New York,
Philadelphia. We plan to be back to the City Commission hopefully within 60
to 90 days with this.
Mr. Plummer: I can show you one square block downtown where the density would
be higher than that of a jail, and they are all single family homes.
Mr. Pierce: Mr. Plummer, I believe you because about four months ago, I was
looking to buy a duplex in an area near my house, and every house that a
realtor showed me, out of about seven, five of them had been illegally
converted from two unit buildings to three and four unit buildings.
Mr. Plummer: Well, when are we going to do something about it?
Mr. Pierce: That is what I am saying. We are preparing an ordinance right
now. We just got started on it just before Christmas. We will be back to you
probably either the second meeting in March, first meeting in April, for first
reading.
Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, I asked you about looking into the
ordinance that mandated that any construction... the builder materials had to
have a City of Miami permit number on it.
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, that was at the last Commission meeting. You told me to
have it on the February, first one, and we are going to have it on the first
meeting of February.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Did you read the ordinance yet?
Mrs. Kennedy: Has it been moved?
Mayor Suarez: Yes, we have a motion and a second.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-76 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING A NEW
SUBSECTION (E) THERETO TO PROVIDE, UPON REQUEST, FOR
INSPECTION OF REAL PROPERTY BY THE BUILDING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER ZONING VIOLATIONS
OPENLY EXIST ON SAID PROPERTY; ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR
THIS SERVICE; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Plummer and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
93 January 22, 1987
20. AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO SUBMIT APPROVED APPLICATION TO HUD (THE HOMELESS
ASSISTANCE PLAN) REQUESTING $41,000 FOR EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT
PROGRAM - AFTER RECEIPT OF GRANT, AUTHORIZE MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE WITH
DADE COUNTY TO ADMINISTER PROGRAM.
Mayor Suarez: Item 16.
Mrs. Kennedy: Move 16.
Mayor Suarez: 16, you move it?
Mrs. Kennedy: I am glad to see that the City...
Mr. Plummer: Well, OK, I am...
Mrs. Kennedy:... Giving the money to nonprofit agencies that have the
experience.
Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, I am seconding it for discussion. You know, I
have contended that this City has been put in a bad light for many years in
national T.V. about the homeless. This speaks to just that question. My
answer, and I think truthfully, has been, that the homeless is part of Dade
County Welfare, which in fact, the County has the responsibility, even though
national T.V. always says, Miami. Now, are we, in this receiving of this
grant of $41,000, when they are speaking on national T.V. of 8,000 homeless in
this community, would we not be smart to give this $41,000 to the County, and
say, "gentlemen, it is your responsibility, you assumed it, that obligation
when you took over welfare from the City, as you took over the airport we gave
you free of charge, the hospital free of charge, the seaport free of charge,
Water and Sewer, $400,000,000 free of charge." Are we doing ourselves a
disservice by taking $41,000 to address 8,000 homeless people?
Mr. Castaneda: Commissioners, $41,000...
Mr. Plummer: Do you see my point?
Mr. Castaneda:....$41,000 is a drop in the bucket in the homeless problem of
Dade County.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but you see, they are going to be able to say in the
future, well, you got Federal money!
Mr. Castaneda: The only two entitlements in the State of Florida that are
receiving funds are the City of Miami, and Metropolitan Dade County. We are
recommending to contract out the whole $41,000.
Mr. Plummer: Can we contract with Metro?
Mr. Castaneda: Well, Metro is contracting out as well. They are not...
Mr. Plummer: Can we give our money to Metro and say look, we realize that it
is your responsibility. You assume from all municipalities, the welfare.
That comes under the category of welfare. I think that we are going to be
taking, accepting a pittance, and then from that point forward, we are going
to take the full blunt of responsibility. Now, you just can't address 8,000
homeless people, the majority, unfortunately, are in the City of Miami, and
say we are going to take care of the homeless problem. You can't do it with
$41,000.
Mr. Castaneda: Commissioner, let me tell you the problem that staff has with
this issue. We had several problems. The first problem is, our staff serves
to help the coalition of the homeless group and we have very good contacts
with the coalition. In trying to distribute the money, we found that we could
not contract with almost everybody, because everybody is a religious
organization, and religious organizations are not eligible to rehab any of
their buildings with this money. Salvation Army was not eligible for any of
the rehab money. The only amount of money that we could give the Salvation
Army is 15 percent. I think the coalition itself now, you know, is very
frustrated with this issue.
94 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: I'd like to accept the money
Mr. Dawkins: I don't want to even be accepted.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. Don't ever turn back...
Mrs. Kennedy: So why don't we make a motion?
Mr. Plummer: I'll make a motion.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, wait a minute, before you make your motion, why is it, Mr.
Castaneda, that we would give this money to the Salvation Army, when Camillus
House has loads of people around there who need food so why don't we give the
$6,000 to the Camillus House?
Mr. Castaneda: Well...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Castaneda: They both are.
Ms. Francena Brooks: See, the problem is, the Camillus House is a religious
organization and the money which is - has as its main
Er. Plummer: And so is the Salvation Army.
Mr. Dawkins: So is the Salvation Army.
Ms. Brooks: Right, no, no, but there is a difference.
Mr. Dawkins. They sing and pray.
Ms. Brooks: No, the main purpose of the money is to improve the quality of
shelters, and the portion that cannot be given to them, which is the bulk of
it, 85 percent of it, you cannot give to any religious organization to improve
their building, a building they own. If Camillus House, or the Salvation Army
operated out of a City facility, or a County facility, they could be given
the money to do that, but since they own their facilities, we cannot improve
their structure. That is Federal law.
Mr. Plummer: Would there be...
Ms. Brooks: And that has always been an issue, especially for the Salvation
Army on...
Mr. Dawkins: But you are talking about the Salvation Army, you are talking
about Camillus House, and I want to know why can't we give it to Camillus
House?
Ms. Brooks: Because Camillus House is...
Mr. Castaneda: No, he is saying instead of giving the money to Salvation.
Ms. Brooks: Oh, to them? Camillus House is traditionally not wanting to
accept public grants. They work on donations. They do not receive United Way
funds. They don't receive public funds because of the contracting process
that they have to go through, so that is why, and the Salvation Army was
willing to work with us.
Mr. Plummer: Would a motion be in order that we accept the grant and give the
County, telling the County we realize that the responsibility for the homeless
is Dade County welfare, and we would like to accept this money and give it to
you, since it is your responsibility. Can we do that?
Ms. Brooks: I don't think we can. Actually, if we turn the grant back, then
IiUD redistributes it someplace else.
Mr. Plummer: No, we are not turning it back. Excuse me, I am not turning it
back, we are accepting it, and then we are giving it to the County, because it
is their responsibility.
95 January 22, 1987
Ms. Brooks: The regulations give us the authority to subcontract with a not
for profit.
Mr. Plummer: We subcontract with the County.
Ms. Brooks: With a not for profit, but not with another governmental
organization.
Mr. Plummer: I've never known Sergio to make a profit over there yet.
Ms. Brooks: The County is experiencing the same difficulty though, because of
the nature of the grant, they are likewise recommending that a Miami bridge
facility be improved, the one that is down in Kendall, and that the Salvation
Army piece be funded jointly with the City.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I'll still...
Ms. Brooks: It is again because of the nature of the money. Even though they
operate emergency shelters, we can't buy space, it is weird.
Mr. Plummer: ... make a motion. I'll make a motion that we accept the
grant...
Mrs. Kennedy: I withdraw my motion.
Mr. Plummer: I'll make a motion that we accept the grant and acknowledge the
responsibility of Dade County for the homeless in this community under Dade
County welfare, and that we forward that grant to them to be used in their
subcontracting for more services to this community. I so move.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded.
Mr. Dawkins: Under discussion, Mr. Castaneda.
Mr. Castaneda: Commissioner, let me just say that what we have to do is
submit a plan of action to HUD.
Mr. Plummer: So do it!
Mr. Carollo: And the plan of action explains what actions we were going to
take to spend the $41,000, and...
Mrs. Dougherty: They aren't going to give you the money if you are going to
give it to Dade County.
Mayor Suarez: Well, I don't know how the Commission...
Mr. Castaneda: And the County is basically not running a program and...
Mayor Suarez: I don't know how the rest of the Commission is going to vote, I
can't vote with that motion. We are not going to...
Mrs. Kennedy: Is it feasible, first of all?
Mayor Suarez: ... we have been told it is not feasible, and we have got to do
the best we can with the resources we have, and these are $41,000 that we have
available. We ought to try to do something with it. We can subcontract out.
Mr. Carollo: Whoa, I've got a solution for it, excuse me.
Mr. Dawkins. I'm not voting with the Salvation Army, I don't care how it
goes, so you have got... I don't vote for the Salvation Army. Anything else
you do, you got me. Salvation Army, no!
Mr. Carollo: OK, you want a nonprofit organization, correct?
Mr. Castaneda: Involved in the homeless arena.
Mr. Carollo: Involved in...?
96 January 22, 1987
Mr. Castaneda: Homeless.
Mr. Carollo: Service to homeless. OK, well, I am going to present to you an
organization that they do provide service to some people that are homeless,
even though they also provide service to some that are not, and that is the
National Council of Negro Women. They are trying to build a home. They have
the land already and everything for it. They are trying to build a home, so
they could tutor kids from all different races, creeds, colors, after school
hours. I think that if we worded it property, that could qualify.
Mr. Plummer: Joe, my only problem is that when you do that, and you accept
this money, you are also accepting the responsibility for which we have been
blamed for. You know, if you were talking about a grant of $1,000,000, I
would maybe look at it differently, but to me, this is a drop in the bucket,
is to say, OK, City, we are going to make you responsible, as you have been
accused for $41,000. I think it is an insult, I really dot It is the
County's responsibility.
Mr. Castaneda: No, and all the publicity that they have given out to this...
Mr. Plummer: We have gotten millions of dollars of bad publicity, and now
they are trying to us off with $41,000. I think it is wrong, I am sorry.
Mr. Dawkins: Not only that, J. L., as you said, we have got millions of
dollars worth of bad publicity, and the Federal government realizes that this
is bad publicity, so the Federal government is getting the monkey off its back
by giving you this pittance...
Mr. Plummer: That's rightl
Mr. Kennedy: That's right!
Mr. Dawkins: ... and then they say, "Well, you know, we gave them $41,000. It
is not our problem that they couldn't get more out of it."
Mr. Plummer: Well, when the need is like...
Mr. Dawkins: Like $41,000,000.
Mr. Plummer: Yes. Well, hey, I have expressed myself. In lieu of that
motion, as much as it hurts to look a "gift horse" in the mouth, I would vote
to reject it, and hopefully, they will redistribute it to the County.
Mr. Dawkins: I second it.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded.
Mr. Kennedy: To reject the $41,000?
Mr. Plummer: No, no, I would like to do the other way first. It is the
County's responsibility. Give them the grant of money and let them, in their
subcontracting, do further, because it is their responsibility!
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, and I understand what you are saying, Mr. Castaneda, see,
but there again, by not informing the Commission, we don't know what you are
doing, see. So, now you have written to the Federal government, telling them
what you are going to do with this money...
Mr. Castaneda: No, no. We are asking your approval, and then we would submit
an application.
Mr. Dawkins: Oh, then we have no problem.
it for Dade County.
Mayor Suarez: Forget it, it just...
Mr. Castaneda: That is not how it works.
Mr. Plummer: We are part of Dade County.
In the application, say we accept
Mr. Castaneda: What I think that we might be able to do, is to say that we,
you know, we would pass our allocation to Metropolitan Dade County for the
homeless issue...
97 January 22, 1987
r
Mr. Kennedy: That is ghat he is saying.
Mr. Plummer: That is what my motion said.
Mr. Castaneda: Right.
Mr. Plummer: The motion might not pass.
Mrs. Kennedy: But, that can be done, right? My question was, is it feasible?
Mr. Castaneda: We would have to see technically if that can be done, but...
Mrs. Kennedy: What if it doesn't pass? What happens, do we have the right
then to see the money again, and to dispose of it?
Mr. Castaneda: Well, the application has to be submitted.
Mrs. Kennedy: And what?
Mr. Castaneda: Has to be submitted by the 28th.
Mr. Plummer: Of January? How long have you known about it?
Mrs. Kennedy: The 28th of this month?
Mr. Plummer: How long have you known about it?
Mrs. Kennedy: That is less than a weekl
Ms. Brooks: No, we were notified, around the 20th of December, about the
availability of it, and that is part of the thing with this whole process,
that it has to be done very quickly.
Mr. Dawkins: You know, we are in a Catch-22 situation. If we accept the
money, and we can't service the populace that needs to be serviced, we are
going to be in a bad fix.
Mr. Plummer: No way.
Mr. Dawkins: If we do accept it, and we are going to be in a bad fix.
Mr. Plummer: Well, my first...
Mr. Dawkins: We are going to get bad publicity either way we go.
Mr. Plummer: Well, if my first motion doesn't pass, then I would vote along
the lines that says we just reject it, that is all.
Mrs. Kennedy: Well, didn't it...
Mr. Dawkins: What was the first motion, I'll second it.
Mr. Plummer: My first motion is that we accept the grant and forward it to
Dade County, recognizing their responsibility for this area. That is my first
motion.
Mr. Dawkins: I seconded it.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, under discussion, Frank. Due to the time constraint that I
wasn't aware of, do we have time to do this?... or is it absolutely possible,
and then we won't waste our time.
Mr. Plummer: I take an attitude if you don't try, you will never know.
Ms. Brooks: Yes, just let me mention that according to the regulations, if we
do return the grant, they will make it available to the City or urban county
that serves the area.
Mr. Plummer: We did not... we are not rejecting it. We are accepting it.
98 January 22, V< 37
Ms. Brooks: OK, but they don't speak specifically to whether we can just turn
it to Dade County.
Mrs. Kennedy: That is not rejection.
Mr. Plummer: That is not rejection, we are accepting the grant.
Mr. Dawkins: Now, getting back to what Commissioner Plummer said... I'm
sorry, Commissioner Carollo, didn't you say that this could not be used to
build buildings?
Ms. Brooks: It cannot be used to build buildings, no.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, thank you.
Mayor Suarez: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Call
the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-95
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN
APPROVED APPLICATION CALLED THE HOMELESS ASSISTANCE
PLAN TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) REQUESTING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$41,000 FOR A PROPOSED EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT
PROGRAM; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, UPON
APPROVAL OF SAID GRANT BY HUD, TO ACCEPT THE SAME AND
TO EXECUTE THE NECESSARY IMPLEMENTING CONTRACT WITH
HUD; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
NEGOTIATE A CONTRACT WITH DADE COUNTY TO ADMINISTER
SAID EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mrs. Kennedy: Boy, that is really tough. I'm going to vote yes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ESTABLISH NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND: "EMERGENCY
SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM" ($41,000).
Mayor Suarez: I guess we don't need to handle item 17, do we?... creating the
fund, and all that?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, that gives them the authorization to do it.
Mayor Suarez: OK, I entertain a motion on item 17.
Mr. Plummer: Move item 17.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
99 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded, thirded.
read the ordinance first, please.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
Any discussion? Call the roll,
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
ENTITLED: "EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM,"
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR OPERATION OF SAME IN THE
AMOUNT OF $41,000 FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AN URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD); CONTAINING A
REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner
Dawkins and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mayor Suarez: No, I can't vote for that. We would be establishing an
emergency shelter grant program, telling the whole world we have an emergency
shelter grant program, except we don't have the money, so I vote no.
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.
22. PROCUREMENT CITY POLICY: PROCUREMENT NEEDS OF THE CITY NOT TO BE MET BY
USING COMPANIES OR SUPPLIERS WHO IN ANY WAY TRANSACT BUSINESS WITH
ANGOLA.
Mr. Carollo: Commissioner Plummer, we need you here now. Something is going
to come up. Before we take up items 18, 19, 20, 21, I would like the City
Attorney to read the following resolution that this Commission can consider
adopting. This is what I discussed at the last meeting that I was going to
present this time around.
(THEREUPON, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ RESOLUTION NUMBER 87-96 INTO THE RECORD.
SEE HEREINBELOW)
Mr. Odio: All I have is one question.
Mayor Suarez: Mr. City Manager.
Mr. Odio: If I may, Commissioner Carollo, I want to comply with the
resolution and they of course will... how do we know, though... Lucia, how do
we know who is doing business with Angola?
Mr. Carollo: Well, obviously, you know, some people, some firms, are going to
be quite obvious. Now, if we find out later on that we have dealt with some
people, if this passes, that have not been truthful to us, then we will deal
with them appropriately.
Mr. Odio: OK, I just wanted to clarify that.
Mr. Carollo: But, I think it will be sufficient to proceed in the manner that
we are going to in making the resolution..
Mr. Dawkins: Joe, could we include South Africa in this?
Mr. Carollo: That was my next step, Miller, to bring a separate one outside
of that. I'd like to make them separately if we could.
100 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: OK, no problem.
Mr. Plummer: City Attorney, for the record, I am assuming that you are saying
this is legal?
Mrs. Dougherty: This resolution is legal.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you. Are you moving it, Commissioner?
Mr. Carollo: Yes, I am. I so move this resolution.
Mr. Plummer: I second it.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-96
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE INTENT AND POLICY OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, THAT THE
PROCUREMENT NEEDS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI FOR GOODS,
EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES NOT BE MET USING ANY COMPANIES
OR SUPPLIERS WHO THROUGH THEMSELVES OR THROUGH WHOLLY -
OWNED SUBSIDIARIES EITHER (1) PURSUE A POLICY OF
MAKING PAYMENTS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FOR THE
PROTECTION AND SECURITY OF THEIR HOLDINGS AND
PROPERTIES IN ANGOLA TO THE MARXIST-COMMUNIST MILITARY
GOVERNMENT FORCES OCCUPYING THE NATION OF ANGOLA; OR,
(2) DO BUSINESS WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF ANGOLA; FURTHER
URGING THAT OTHER CITY GOVERNMENTS AND ALL
GOVERNMENTAL UNITS ON THE COUNTY, STATE AND FEDERAL
LEVELS FOLLOW A SIMILAR PROCUREMENT POLICY; FURTHER
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FORWARD COPIES OF THIS
RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN NAMED OFFICIALS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mr. Carollo: Now, Madam City Attorney...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, Commissioner, what...
Mr. Carollo: I have to ask a question.
Mayor Suarez: Proceed.
Mr. Carollo: Should we bring it back also in the form of an ordinance after
is advertised"
Mrs. Dougherty: No, sir.
Mr. Carollo: There is no need to do that, then?
Mrs. Dougherty: No need to do that.
Mr. Carollo: Is the resolution binding enough?
101 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Dougherty: It is binding enough.
Mr. Carollo: OK, can you go ahead and draft one in the similar terms that
would be appropriate on South Africa.
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Carollo: So we could bring that back at the next Commissioner meeting.
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes, sir.
Mr. Carollo: Because there are some areas that would not apply to the South
Africa ordinance, but others that would, but it would be a total not buying
of...
Mr. Dawkins: Any damn thing from South Africa.
Mr. Carollo: Anything whatsoever, of any firms that do business with them,
the same as this one.
Mr. Dawkins: Right, thank you.
Mayor Suarez: So ordered to prepare such an ordinance, work with the
Commissioner on the wording of it.
23. ACCEPT BID: RADIANT OIL COMPANY FOR (LUBRICANTS).
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item 18.
Mr. Plummer: Is item 18 in compliance with that which we just passed?
Mr. Williams: To our knowledge it is, and...
Mr. Carollo: And I think that all these should be voted upon, based upon
these companies are in compliance with it.
Mayor Suarez: That is why he asked, and the answer is that he believes so.
Mr. Williams: That is true to the best of our knowledge at this point,
Commissioner.
Mr. Carollo: Yes, well, you know, we will approve it today, based upon you
verifying that with them.
Mr. Williams: Yes, sure will.
Mr. Plummer: Move 18.
Mayor Suarez: Do we have a second?
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll on 18.
102 January 22, 1987
1 0 &
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-97
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE LOW BID OF RADIANT OIL
COMPANY FOR FURNISHING SPECIFIED LUBRICANT ITEMS ON A
CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE YEAR WITH OPTION TO RENEW
ANNUALLY FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS AT A TOTAL ESTIMATED
FIRST YEAR COST OF $12,360.000; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE CHIEF
PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS FOR THIS
MATERIAL.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
24. ACCEPT BID: ROSS CORPORATION FOR (LUBRICANTS).
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item 19.
Mr. Plummer: Move item 19.
Mayor Suarez: Moved, do we have a second?
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll on 19.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-98
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE LOW BID FROM THE ROSS
CORPORATION FOR FURNISHING SPECIFIED LUBRICANT ITEMS
ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE YEAR WITH OPTION TO RENEW
ANNUALLY FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS AT A TOTAL ESTIMATED
FIRST YEAR COST OF $28,057.71; ALLOCATING FUNDS
THEREFOR FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION;
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE CHIEF
PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS FOR THESE
MATERIALS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote-
103 January 22, 1987
•
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
25. ACCEPT BID: FLOVAL OIL COMPANY, SALA INDUSTRIAL SALES CORPORATION, AND
CONSOLIDATED OIL FOR (LUBRICANTS.)
Mayor Suarez: Agenda item 20.
Mr. Plummer: Move item 20.
Mayor Suarez: Moved, do we have a second?
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll on 20.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-99
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE LOW BIDS FROM THE FLOVAL
OIL COMPANY, SALA INDUSTRIAL SALES CORPORATION AND
CONSOLIDATED OIL COMPANY FOR FURNISHING SPECIFIED
LUBRICANT ITEMS ON A CONTRACT BASIS FOR ONE YEAR WITH
OPTION TO RENEW ANNUALLY FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS AT A
TOTAL ESTIMATED FIRST YEAR COST OF $3,067.50;
ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING
BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
INSTRUCT THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO ISSUE
PURCHASE ORDERS FOR THESE MATERIALS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
104 January 22, 1987
26. AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF FUELS TO BE PURCHASED, ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS FROM
LOWEST BIDDER.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Item 21.
Mr. Plummer: Move 21.
Mayor Suarez: Moved, seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-100
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF THE FOLLOWING
FUELS, REGULAR GASOLINE, UNLEADED GASOLINE, SUPER
UNLEADED GASOLINE (HI TEST) AND DIESEL FUEL NO. 2 ON
AN AS NEEDED BASIS FROM THE LOWEST BIDDER AT THE TIME
OF NEED ON THE OPEN MARKET, AT A TOTAL ESTIMATED FIRST
YEAR COST OF $1,596,298.00; ALLOCATING FUNDS THEREFOR
FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING BUDGET OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER TO
ISSUE PURCHASE ORDERS FOR THIS MATERIAL.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
------------------ -----------------------------------------------------------
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: AGENDA ITEM 24 WAS DEFERRED.
27. APPOINT REYNALDO MAYOR TO ZONING BOARD.
Mayor Suarez: Item 25, my appointment to the Zoning Board, and I appoint Rey
Mayor.
Mr. Carollo: That is the alternate member. Who are you appointing now, Mr.
Mayor?
Mayor Suarez: Rey Mayor.
Mr. Carollo: Who is that?
Mrs. Kennedy: La Mayor?
Mayor Suarez Rey Mayor, is his name.
105 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plumt:er: Excuse me. Sergio, on those appointments, the alternate was
supposed to switch back and forth.
Mr. Carollo: That's right.
Mr. Plummer: Now, who is the appointment now entitled to, and who is the
alternate now entitled to?
Mr. Carollo: The alternate is the Mayor's right now. I had the alternate
last year.
Mr. Plummer: All right, and I had it the year before.
Mr. Carollo: Yes, the Mayor's appointment is the alternate. I get the
regular appointment. What I'd like to do, if I may, is defer this item until
the following meeting.
Mayor Suarez: We will defer your appointment until the following meeting.
Mr. Carollo: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: OK, I will entertain a motion on my appointment.
Mr. Dawkins: Moved.
Mr. Plummer: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute. Give me the name again.
Mayor Suarez: Rey Mayor.
Mr. Plummer: Spell the last name.
Mayor Suarez: M-a-y-o-r.
Mr. Plummer: Like Mayor?
Mayor Suarez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: There is no semblance, or resemblance?
Mr. Carollo: Vibes he carry a 38, or a 380?
Mayor Suarez: He is a very knowledgeable member of the banking and building
community. Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-101
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO SERVE
AS MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote-
106 January 22, 1987
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
28. DISCUSSION REGARDING LENGTH OF TERMS OF PRIOR APPOINTMENTS TO THE MIAMI
RIVER COORDINATING COMMITTEE. (See label #43)
Mayor Suarez: Personal appearances. Yes, Walter.
Mr. Walter Pierce: Mr. Mayor, if I may, for a moment. At the last City
Commission meeting, you appointed three people to serve on the Miami River
Coordinating Committee. The Clerk's office said they had sent that back to us
saying that you failed to designate which member would serve which term.
There are three terms, a one year term, a two year term and a three year term.
The three people that were nominated, were appointed, were Monty Trainer,
Huber Parsons and John Hall. We need to designate which of them will serve
which terms.
Mayor Suarez: Why don't they do it by lot?
Mr. Pierce: But, the Clerk informed us that the City Commission had to do
that.
Mr. Plummer: Well, here, you want to do it? We will do it the old fashioned
method.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Here.
Mayor Suarez: OK, while you do that, item 26.
AT THIS POINT THIS ITEM WAS MOMENTARILY DEFERRED.
29. ALLEGATIONS BY PAT KELLER RELATING TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD - REFERRED
TO CITY ATTORNEY.
Mayor Suarez: Item 26. Pat.
Mrs. Pat Keller: Yes, good afternoon. Incidentally, it is awfully cold in
here. I just think that they just don't realize that.
Mayor Suarez: Could you check on the temperature and see how we are doing?
Go ahead, Pat.
Mrs. Keller: At any rate, I'm Pat Keller.
Mr. Carollo: It is that warm blood you have, Pat.
Mrs. Keller: I think that you... yes, a fighter, as you know, Mr. Carollo.
We are good buddies, aren't we?
Mrs. Kennedy: Pat, after we are finished with you, it will get much warmer!
Mrs. Keller: I think you are right, I think you are right. At any rate, I am
Pat Keller, president of the Allapattah Community Association, and my
complaint this afternoon is about the Zoning Code Enforcement Board of the
City of Miami. As you know, this is a quasi -court. It is under the
107 January 22, 1987
jurisdiction of the State. The members are appointed by the City Commission
and the purpose of the board is, quote, "To provide equitable, expeditious,
effective and inexpenq;ve method of enforcing the zoning code and ordinances
enforced in the counties and municipalities." Mr. Frank Cobo serves on that
board. Each member of the board, as you know, should serve those ends. The
enforcement of the zoning code, by means of hearings, the code violators are
brought before that board. For two - and - one-half years ... where has
everybody gone? Gee, I am boring people again, I don't know, there is
something about me...
Mayor Suarez: Proceed, Pat, proceed.
Mrs. Keller:... that bores people to death. I just don't know what it is!
Mayor Suarez: You may or not be boring people, but we will have to judge that
afterwards, go ahead.
Mrs. Keller: I guess so, yes. I think I am boring Carollo, though.
Mrs. Kennedy: I told you it would get much warmer.
Mrs. Keller: Yes, you are right! At any rate, for two and one-half years,
Northwestern Meat was brought before this board. As you know, Northwestern
Meat operated a business in opposition to the Code Enforcement Board and the
courts of the City of Miami. They also built a building without a permit.
Frank Cobo fought like a tiger for two years, so this c.;ase was never heard
before this board. On February 27, 1985, Mr. Cobo not only fought hearing
this matter, but threatened to leave the room and sabotage a quorum. I must
tell you, it was you, Mr. Suarez, that asked me to bring this evidence before
you.
Mayor Suarez: Well, so far, we don't have any evidence, just your statement.
Do you have the transcript, or do you have...?
Mrs. Keller: Well, try to be very patient, and I do have it. At any rate, I
am going to quote Mr. Cobo on February 27, 1985, on a hearing on N.W. 23rd
Street, case number 82.00060, Mr. Cobo said, "Now, if it is the will of this
committee to hear this case, I will walk out of this meeting and you will only
have three members and you will have to cease the meeting." If you will be
patient a moment.
Mrs. Kennedy: Does Mr. Cobo know about this, by the way?
(AT THIS POINT, TRANSCRIPT IS PLAYED INTO PUBLIC RECORD, with voice alleged to
be that of Mr. Frank Cobo making a statement as shown hereinabove)
Mrs. Keller: Was that understandable? I have the whole entire...
Mr. Plummer: Whose voice was that on the recording?
Mrs. Keller: Frank Cobo's.
Mr. Plummer: That didn't sound like Frank Cobo to me.
Mrs. Keller: It is Frank Cobo. This was presented to me by Gloria Fox. It
was the meeting of February 27, 1985. Mr. Copeland can confirm that he did
make that statement. That is Frank Cobo's voice. I have another... I
excerpted this statement that Frank made. I excerpted it...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but wait, Pat...
Mrs. Keller: Let me finish this point.
Mr. Plummer: Pat, wait a minute. Pat, you know, now, in all fairness, for
you to stand here and make accusations against Mr. Cobo, in which you readily
admit that you are taking excerpts from an entire meeting, I don't know what
he said prior to that, or after that.
Mrs. Keller: No...
Mr. Plummer: I think...
108 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: He should be here also.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, you know, let me tell you something. I think what we
ought to do is, we are not a judge and jury up here, OK? I think what we need
to do is to send this matter to the City Attorney's office, let her hear both
sides and come back and make a report to this Commission. I think it is
extremely unfair to allow you to stand up here without Mr. Cobo present and
just rattle off all kinds of accusations... and I am not defending Frank Cobo,
I am defending the right of another individual who is not here to defend
himself! To me, that is absolutely wrong. Now, you know, you are going to
pick up tomorrow morning's paper and you are going to see that Frank Cobo
said, this, this and this, and we all know Frank, I guarantee you, he has got
another side to the story, but we near him, and we need to hear both of you at
the same time, where he can refute, agree, or disagree with you. This is
totally unfair. Mr. Mayor, I would say that this matter should be deferred
out to the City Attorney's office, that the City Attorney, if that is the
appropriate party, I just figured that they were the fairest, and let them
hear both sides of this story, and come back to this Commission and say, hey,
there is a basis, or there is no basis.
Mayor Suarez: I would be disposed to so order. Let me ask the City Attorney
a question, but before that, let me also remark that if heard correctly, the
indication that you are about to leave a meeting, and that if you leave it, if
you are a member of a board, it would be without a quorum, happens constantly
here on this Commission, and it does not mean anything to me one way or the
other, but
Mrs. Keller: If, if...
Mayor Suarez: Madam City Attorney... wait a minute... can she follow the
procedure suggested by Commissioner Dawkins, and not proceed at this point?
Mrs. Dougherty: You mean, Commissioner Plummer?
Mayor Suarez: Plummer, right.
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes.
Mrs. Keller: I have already addressed...
Mayor Suarez: It is a very fair way to do it, Pat, and I don't think you can
object to having a hearing before the City Attorney, who will hear all of your
evidence, and then probably afford an opportunity to Frank to defend himself
before it comes back to the Commission for a little bit more rational
proceeding here, and fair.
Mrs. Keller: I want to address several things. In the first place, I have
addressed the City Attorney in this matter. I have pointed out that Mr. Cobo
sabotaged that meeting as well as refused to hear this case for two years.
You are well aware, Mr. Mayor, that this City Commission had to turn around
and sue the Code Enforcement Board in order to expedite this matter. Two
community organizations also had to...
Mayor Suarez: Well, I don't think today, we have ever sued one of our own
boards, I mean, I...
Mrs. Keller: Well then, who did the suing, then?
Mayor Suarez: No, no, we just directed them to take action on that. I do
remember it was quite a long time before anything was done on that. I am very
familiar with that project, yes.
Mrs. Keller: Right, two years, two and one-half, yes. Now, I told you I
excerpted that, Mr. Plummer. Here is the full text, if you want to hear the
full meeting, you are welcome to hear it, right here.
Mayor Suarez: Well, I have a feeling that we won't for the moment, but our
City Attorney is going to hear the full text, it looks like.
Mrs. Keller: Yes, I have already addressed the City Attorney, and she informs
me that she didn't consider this type of behavior worthy to dismiss Mr. Cobo.
We are calling for the dismissal of Mr. Cobo, we don't...
109
January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: Let me ask her a question now. Are you familiar with all of
these things, Lucia,that our directing her to you, would just be a waste of
your tithe? You've already heard the tape, you're already familiar with the
allegations?
Mrs. Dougherty: I am familiar with the allegations. I remember that she
wrote me a letter some time back, asking me to investigate it, and I thought
that was inappropriate for me to do so, unless, of course, you direct me to,
and if you...
Mr. Plummer: That's what we're doing.
Mrs. Dougherty: ... and if you direct me to, I will.
Mrs. Kennedy: So, looks like that all we're doing right now.
Mayor Suarez: OK, so directed; she will, this time.
Mrs. Dougherty: I might tell the City Commission that some time back, Ms.
Keller asked you for reimbursement for some attorneys' fees, and she is suing
us, based on the fact that you all didn't do it.
Ms. Patricia Keller: One word from you, and you do as you please, I notice.
I would appreciate getting a small amount.
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute, now; whoa, whoa, whoa. Are you indicating,
Madame City Attorney, that Pat Keller, here, is coming here, making these
accusations, based on... to support her defense in court, to get back her
attorney fees?
Mrs. Dougherty: It's possible.
Mr. Plummer: Oh-hol Whoa!
Ms. Keller: I'm making the statement on Cobo to get attorneys' fees?
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, I just asked the City Attorney, and she said that was
possible.
Ms. Keller: Hmphl I'd have to be crazyl
Mr. Plummer: Let me tell you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: I would like to hold that hearing before the City Attorney,
until the conclusion of the lawsuit. Now, you know, if that's the case, then
let's play it fair right down the line, so that she will not have the
opportunity to appear in court, and use that as part of a text, to try to gain
her lawsuit. Let's hold up that hearing... when is that suit going to be
heard, do you know?
Mrs. Dougherty: There's a pretrial tomorrow, and I don't know when the final
hearing will be.
Mr. Plummer: I think, in fairness, we should hold that investigation up, if
you want to call it... that's not an investigation.
Ms. Keller: Mr. Plummer, in the... it makes no difference to me, but the
lawsuit has not a single thing in the world to do with Mr. Cobo. I have
brought this matter up, in relation to his behavior......
Mrs. Dougherty: It's the same... it's a whole issue.
Ms. Keller: ... continually now, for well over a year. At any rate, I would
like to finish my presentation. I wanted the records to reflect that this is
the entire tape, having to do with this meeting, and I am presenting it to you
people, and you're welcome to listen to it right now, if you so desire. Mr.
Suarez requested that I bring this information and this evidence before him,
and I'm doing that today.
110 January 22, 1987
i
Mr. Carollo: You said Suarez had asked you to bring it here today?
Ms. Keller: Yes, he did.
Mr. Carollo: OK, just wanted to get that clear.
Ms. Keller: Yes, he asked me to bring the evidence, the absolute evidence,
and I have...
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, on any allegation that is made against anybody, I always
ask for the evidence.
Ms. Keller: Yes, you did, and I have the minutes of the meeting at which you
requested that I bring this to you. At any rate, in so doing, Mr. Cobo
violated his oath of office. He obstructed justice, he refused to carry out
his duties,...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor,...
Mayor Suarez: OK. Pat,...
Mr. Plummer: ... I object to her standing there and making these allegations,
without the party...
Ms. Keller: Why...
Mr. Plummer: ... she's making...
Mayor Suarez: Pat, we have...
Mr. Plummer: ... them against...
Mayor Suarez: ... on these particular allegations,...
Mrs. Kennedy: It is not fair!
Ms. Keller: He's welcome to come here, if he likes; this is a public meeting.
Mr. Plummer: That's fine, but give him that opportunity, not to let you stand
there and ramble!
Mayor Suarez: Pat, we have chosen, for this issue, to refer you to the City
Attorney, but because of a concern, so far expressed, that you may be using
this in some way to...
Mr. Plummer: I'm going to walk out of this meeting, if you won't help.
Mayor Suarez: I'll tell you what, I'll tell you what, Pat...
(LAUGHTER)
Ms. Keller: Well, I'll tell you, I've got a record of it, then, right here.
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): But I'm going to
Mayor Suarez: That sounds like your voice on that tape. (LAUGHTER) Pat, I'll
tell you what we're going to do...
Ms. Keller: You know, I can't believe, Mr. Suarez,...
Mayor Suarez: I'll tell you what we're going to do, Pat. I am not going to
make you wait until you complete your case; I don't think one thing has
anything to do with the other;...
Ms. Keller: What's the big deal? It's no big deal.
Mayor Suarez: ... the City Attorney is directed to meet with you on this
issue, as indeed you may do with any of the Commissioners, but, in this
particular case, we want - at least, I want - her opinion of the facts, as
stated and presented, in the evidence that you've got, and I'm sure she's
going to want to hear from Frank Cobo also.
III January 22, 1987
Ms. Keller: Yes, that's fine by me, um-hmm.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Pat.
Ms. Keller: Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Agenda items 27 and 28 were withdrawn.
------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------
30. COMMENTS BY HARRY GOLDHAMMER RELATED TO GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
Mayor Suarez: Item 29. Mr. Goldhammer.
Mr. Carollo: Harry Goldhammer.
Mr. Harry Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Which one's the Mayor?
Mr. Carollo: That's the one, over there, right there.
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Goldhammer's my name...
Mrs. Kennedy: You have to go to the microphone, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Well, but you have to address the entire Commission.
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Thank you for giving me the invitation to meet you
again. I met you in 1974 or 5, with your wife. And now I'll tell you what I
have to say.
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): Well, the last one was "hate Cobo," this one is "hate
Suarez." Who's next?
Mr. Goldhammer: Mr. Mayor,...
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): Oh -oh.
Mr. Goldhammer: ... you are a lawyer, right? I'd like an answer.
Mayor Suarez: What was the question?
Mr. Goldhammer: You're a lawyer. I met you in 1974 or '75. My former wife's
name was Dorothy Sellerstien. She was a worker for the retarded children.
That's when I met you; I had to take her there. Now, I'm going to go on with
my story. When you were a lawyer, what kind of oath does a lawyer take, to do
justice, or just to be a lawyer? Can I get an answer?
Mayor Suarez: Well, it's not particularly relevant. A lawyer takes an oath
pretty similar to a public official. Go ahead.
Mr. Goldhammer: I want to say this: that I am fighting here, now, against
one of your Commissioners, against a judge that I'm going to throw out as
being an unfaithful judge, and I want to know who the Commissioner is, that
has a backing over station four and over that queer Neil Rogers...
Mayor Suarez: Please. Please, Mr. Goldhammer, don't make any references to
anybody's...
Mr. Goldhammer: I'm making remarks clear.
Mayor Suarez: Strike that from the record.
Mr. Goldhammer: I'm going to make the remarks.
Mayor Suarez: Do you have anything else to say, Mr. Goldhammer?
112 January 22, 1987
Mr. Goldhammer: hell, 1 don't care what anybody says, I'm going to tell you,
and I'll tell the whole world, that I'll fight, to the Supreme Court, to get
justice. I have a grand jury investigation going on now.
Mr. Plummer: Of what?
Mr. Carollo: 'There's a few of those going on.
Mr. Goldhammer: And I'm fighting for justice. Now, let me say this to you,
as a mayor,...
Mr. Carollo: Is he a friend of Jorge Mas Canoga, too, or...
Mr. Goldhammer: Will you take, and tell me who the Commissioner is, that
teaches Neil Rogers what to say?
Mayor Suarez: The Commission has absolutely nothing to do with Neil Rogers in
any way that I can think of.
Mr. Goldhammer: This has something to...
Mr. Carollo: Sir, sir,...
Mr. Goldhammer: Yes, it has.
Mr. Carollo: ... all that I can assure you is, that I have never...
Mr. Goldhammer: All right.
Mr. Carollo: ... been to his program;...
Mr. Goldhammer: All right,...
Mr. Carollo: ... I don't know if the Mayor could say the same.
Mr. Goldhammer: ... I have that going on. Well, can you give me the
Commissioner's name who was with Mayor Ferre, that I threw out of office, the
dirty skunk - I want him to sue me - and the skunk that sits behind him.
Mayor Suarez: Well, that's one way to do it, is to keep saying things you're
saying. Really, do not make those remarks about people, because they could be
defamatory.
Mr. Carollo: Can you also strike that from the record, please.
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, strike that from the record.
Mr. Carollo: If he wants to protect his friend, I'll protect the former
mayor.
Mr. Goldhammer: All right. Now, I would like you to tell me, as a mayor, who
the man is, the Commissioner is, that was next to Mayor Ferre, when I threw
him out through the Miami Herald, the Miami News; that he has paid them off
$6,000, which don't belong to them, and I told them if they would put that
$6,000 to the retarded children, I would forget suing them, knowing if I don't
get that within a week, I'm suing the Miami News and the Herald for
obstructing justice, taking money for nothing, and for being as crooked as
Mayor Ferre was.
Mayor Suarez: Please - don't make such references to...
Mr. Goldhammer: Now, if you can give me anything on that, I'll take it.
Mayor Suarez: ... present or former... strike that from the record, too.
Mr. Plummer: I thought he was a "skunk."
Mr. Goldhammer: All right, I'm going to say this.
Mayor Suarez: OK, can you wrap up? Can you tell him to...
Mr. Goldhammer: I will say further, I have...
113 - January 22, 1987
0 0
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldhammer.
Mr. Goldhammer: ... I have...
Mayor Suarez: Can you tell him to wrap up? He's got just a half a minute.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldhammer.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He wants you to wrap it up,...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldhammer.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: to finish; to...
Mayor Suarez: Finish off.
Mr. Goldhammer: Wasn't that kind of quick?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: ... finish. Yes.
Mr. Goldhammer: All right,...
Mayor Suarez: Finish your presentation.
Mr. Goldhammer: I will wrap it up quick. If you give me...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldhammer, is it true you're hard of hearing?
Mr. Goldhammer: I can't hear him.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Goldhammer, is it true you're hard of hearing?
(LAUGHTER)
Mayor Suarez (OFF MIKE): What is your basic point - can you just finish it
up, whatever it is that you're going to say?
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Yes, well, I want to finish up what I've got to
say. I want you to help me; say who the advisor was, that goes over
channel... goes to the news.
Mayor Suarez (OFF MIKE): I don't know.
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Now, you... I think you should know.
Mayor Suarez (OFF MIKE): OK, we'll have a private meeting; I don't think
we're accomplishing anything here - OK?
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): Well, if you want to let it go at that, I'll have
to, but I... I'm...
Mayor Suarez: We appreciate you...
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): What I think, that you should see I do get
justice, with not only you, but your followers - they all pull that same
stunt; they just blame it on the next one. But the mayors have
responsibility!
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): See?
Mayor Suarez: I will take that into account.
Mr. Goldhammer (OFF MIKE): If you want to throw me out, you can.
Mayor Suarez: No, no, we're not going to throw you out; just ask you to sit
down and listen to the proceedings, or witness the proceedings.
Mr. Carollo; Can you say it in the records there...
114 January 22, 1987
Mr. Goldhammer: I am hoping that you... that 1 have fought... I'll tell you
this now: 1 have fought for the colored people,...
Mr. Dawkins: God bless youl
Mr. Goldhammer: ... and that dirty rat, Ferre, has hated
them, hated the
Jews, and hated the Cubansl
Mr. Dawkins: Right. God bless you again.
Mr. Goldhammer: As far as the Cubans is concerned, I don't care who the Cuban
is - if he's an honest man, I'll go all the way in the world
for him; and if
he is crooked, I want to throw him the hell outl
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Mr. Goldhammer: Now, that's the answer.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you.
Mr. Goldhammer: You'll hear the newspapers, Channel 4 news
will give me the
other news.
Mayor Suarez: OK, thank you, Mr...
Mr. Goldhammer: I thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Mr. Goldhammer.
Mr. Carollo: How about Neil Rogers?
Mr. Goldhammer: All right.
Mr. Carollo: How did he get into this?
Mayor Suarez: No, please, please, please, Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer: And may the good news be yours.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. DISCUSSION AND DEFERRAL OF REQUEST FOR FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH THE
HOLDING OF THE USTS BUD LIGHT TRIATHLON.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Item 30, representatives of the Sun Bank of Miami.
Mrs. Kennedy: Notice that he said "honest man."
Mayor Suarez: N.A. Sports Action Committee.
Mr. Odio: The Department of Parks and Recreation have been working with the
organizers of this event, and we are recommending denial of this request,
based on the City's "no funding" policies.
Mr. Plummer: Move to uphold the City's recommendation.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Want to make a brief presentation? It
doesn't look like it's going your way.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Doesn't look so good so far, but let me talk, just a...
Mayor Suarez: Give us your name and address too.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: ... a little bit.
Mr. Plummer: Sun Bank of Miami?
115
January 22, 1987
0 0
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sun Bank of Miami is incorrect.
Mr. Plummer: You need our money?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Let me clarify.
Mrs. Kennedy: And if this is being sponsored by Bud Light, why come to us for
money?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: This is a little incorrect. It should have read
"Chamber of Commerce - Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce." I work for Sun
Bank, and that's why some of the correspondence was on that stationery.
Couple of points that we'd like to make. The Greater Miami Chamber of
Commerce is supporting the idea of making Miami the "outdoor sports capital."
Mr. Plummer: How much money are they putting into it?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The Chamber of Commerce?
Mr. Plummer: Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The Chamber of Commerce is acting as an expediter, if
you will, to bring an event...
Mr. Plummer: How much money are they putting into it?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: None.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, so they're not a supporter.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We are contributing whatever time that the people in
the committee have put in.
Mr. Plummer: But you're not a supporter - you're not a financial supporter?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Not a financial supporter, no.
Mr. Plummer: Right. I understand.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We have spent the time to organize a course, we have
identified a race director, that we would like to see represent this event.
We think it's an event that should be in Miami.
Mr. Plummer: So do we.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's been in Fort Lauderdale.
Mr. Plummer: We think it's great, and we wish you well. We hope you're a
success.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: If I can continue. It's an emerging sport. Tennis was
the sport in the '60s - it was growing; in the '70s, it was running; in the
180s, it's triathlons. We think the reason that the City should support this,
is to make sure that the first triathlon that comes to Miami is well done. We
want to stay involved as a Chamber, to oversee, coordinate, and make sure that
it's a quality event. We simply want to ensure that there are enough funds
and in -kind services, to make sure that it's a safe and well run race.
Mr. Plummer: How much are you getting from the county?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We feel like...
Mr. Plummer: How much are you getting from the county?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Ninety-nine percent of the event happens within Miami,
Mr. Plummer: My question...
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: in the City,...
Mr. Plummer: ... my question...
116 January 22, 1987
0 0
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: ... so we have not gone to the county and asked them
for anything, at this point.
Mr. Plummer: OK. How much money have you got from the TIC, Arts and
Cultural?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Nothing. We're coming to you to see if you are
interested in helping us with this, because, particularly, the ESPN coverage.
It's the kickoff of this event, it's thirteen cities, it is the first this
year, it's the kickoff, we have ESPN coverage. If you've seen any of the ESPN
coverage of triathlons in the different areas, it's excellent; they give a lot
of play to the City. The City of Miami will be co -host, along with the
Chamber, for the work that we're doing, and we are helping... or, looking for
some outside sponsors.
Mr. Plummer: How much money are you looking for?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We're looking for $15,000. And I think for ESPN
coverage and for a national event,...
Mr. Plummer: Live?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: ... that's not a lot of money. Three...
Mr. Plummer: ESPN live?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, it's tape -delayed, with three playings.
Mr. Plummer: And where will it take place?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Well, the course is this: We want to use, and the idea
is to focus on, downtown. We'll use Bicentennial Park as our transition area.
We'll swim in the bay just adjacent to Bicentennial Park. The swimmers come
out, we'll have a transitional area...
Mr. Plummer: When will this take place?
Mrs. Kennedy: When will this take place?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: May the 3rd.
Mr. Plummer: May the 3rd. Mr. Mayor,...
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's a Sunday morning.
Mr. Plummer: ... after all kidding aside - you know, we do spend an awful lot
of money, for example, with Superstars. If we could get ESPN coverage, and
guaranteed of three hours, even though it's three one -hour segments, for
$15,000, I would ask the Commission to let me look into it further - I've
dealt many, many times with ESPN - and come back and make a report to you at
the next meeting. I think it does have advertising value - I really do.
Mayor Suarez: Deferred until the next meeting. I don't think you need a
motion to...
Mr. Plummer: If you'll meet with me between now and the next meeting.
Mayor Suarez: ... further consider this, and meet with the Commissioner, and
he'll report back to the Commission.
Mr. Plummer: You know, Mr. Mayor, we do now have the money from the bed tax.
Mayor Suarez: And you withdraw your motion, your prior motion.
Mr. Plummer: Yeah.
Mayor Suarez: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: It went better than I thought for a moment, there. Thank you
for your presentation.
117 January 22, 1987
32. ALLOCATE $10,000 AND CLOSE STREETS IN CONNECTION WITH THE FIRST
ANNIVERSARY OF THE "SECOND LIBERATION OF HAITI."
Mayor Suarez: Item 31, representatives of Radio Club Culturel.
Mr. Odio: They are requesting a street closure, plus $10,000 for City
services, in connection with a celebration to be held on Northeast 54th
Street, to mark the first anniversary...
Mr. Plummer: Fifty-fourth Street?
Mr. Odio: Fifty-four - to mark the first anniversary of the liberation of
Haiti. We are recommending denial of funds, based on the "no funding" policy;
however, we do recommend approval of street closure, if they can demonstrate
ability to pay City costs.
Dr. Henri Hall: Mr. Mayor,...
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, for the record, what does the amount of in -kind
services represent?
Mr. Odio: Six thousand, seven hundred and twenty dollars, just on police
alone.
Mr. Plummer: Well, no, the total in -kind services that they're asking for?
Mr. Odio: You can add $2,000 to that, you are $8,720.
Mr. Plummer: That includes sanitation and fire?
Mr. Odio: That includes sanitation and police and fire.
Mrs. Kennedy: Police and fire.
Mr. Plummer: So, the total request is $8,000. (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Ten thousand?
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Mr. Marcellus.
Dr. Hall: Mr. Mayor, City Commissioners, my name is Dr. Henri Hall. I have
my office on 54th Street. The number is 54 Northeast 54th Street. As you
might know, I am also of... I am a Haitian physician, and Miami, nowadays,
represents a big city for Haitians, because the opposition, and finally the
liberation, of Haiti, from the oppressive regime that we used to have, I say
that Miami is a landmark for us. And I'm sure you remember last year, when we
had our celebration. We did have some problem and victims, and being a
doctor, and believing in prevention, I'm coming to you, to ask your help,
because February 7 is coming, and it is going to be the first year of
celebration of our second independence, and Haitians are very happy about it,
and they would like to celebrate it, and I would like your help, in terms of
trying to give us some protection, so we won't have any problem.
Mayor Suarez: Do we have any... do we fund anything like this, even remotely
similar to this, in the Haitian community?
Mr. Plummer: We did the Haitian Festival.
Mayor Suarez: Was that a Miami festival?
Mr. Plummer: Yeah. Yeah, we did the Haitian Festival.
Mrs. Kennedy: But how often does a group of exiles have the opportunity to
celebrate independence day the same year that they have gained independence
from a new oppress... from an oppressive dictatorship? I know that if this
had happened to the Cubans, I would have been very happy that the City
Commission would have given us... this to us.
118 January 22, 1987
Dr. Hall: I appreciate your help.
Mayor Suarez: You're making that in the form of a motion?
Mrs. Kennedy: I'm going to... yes, I'm going to move to grant it.
Mayor Suarez: I'll second it.
Mr. Plummer: There is a motion made and duly seconded...
Mrs. Kennedy: (COMMENT IN FRENCH)
Mr. Plummer: ... that this matter be approved, I assume at the level of
$10,000. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-102
A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$10,000 FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS, CONTINGENT
FUND, IN SUPPORT OF A CELEBRATION TO BE HELD ON
FEBRUARY 7-8, 1987 TO MARK THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF
THE SECOND LIBERATION OF HAITI; SAID ALLOCATION BEING
CONDITIONED UPON SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF
MIAMI ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. APM-1-84, DATED
JANUARY 24, 1984; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CLOSURE OF
DESIGNATED STREETS TO THROUGH VEHICULAR TRAFFIC
SUBJECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF PERMITS BY THE DEPARTMENTS
OF POLICE AND FIRE, RESCUE AND INSPECTION SERVICES AND
ASSURANCES THAT THE CITY WILL BE INSURED AGAINST ANY
POTENTIAL LIABILITY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Mayor Suarez, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you.
Dr. Hall: Thank you very much.
33. ALLOCATE $20,000 IN CONNECTION WITH "SECOND ANNUAL LEAGUE AGAINST CANCER
FESTIVAL" IN WATSON ISLAND.
Mayor Suarez: Item 33.
Mr. Odio: That's the...
Mayor Suarez: I'm sorry, 32, Liga Contra el Cancer.
Mr. Odio: Yes, they are requesting $25,000, to cover City services, for a
festival on Watson Island, on February the 6th, 7th, and 8th, of 1987. We are
recommending that they do hold the event. I... just before, about a half an
hour ago, I proposed to them that we use the same formula we used for the
Puerto Rican Festival, in that we get beer... we get part of the concessions
119 January 22, 1987
to cover City expenses, and then they get all the profit. But they turned us
down on that, and so I have to deny... I have to recommend denial of any funds
for this.
Mayor Suarez: Under your proposal, they would get all the profit, is that
what you said?
Mr. Plummer: Except beer - beer and wine, we would sell.
Mr. Odio: We would get the concessions from beer and wine.
Mayor Suarez: We would get beer and wine, and they would get...
Mr. Odio: And we would cover City expenses out of that, and then they could
take the rest.
Mayor Suarez: They would get food, presumably, and what else?
Mr. Odio (OFF MIKE): I don't remember - what else is the...
(INAUDIBLE DISCUSSION OFF MIKE)
Mr. Carollo: Well, let me say in the record. The difference between this
particular affair and some of the others, is that this is a nonprofit
organization. It goes to the curement and the helping of people that are
stricken with cancer, in the City of Miami and Greater Miami. I think the
City of Miami has had a record, for years now, in helping, through this
organization, the residents of Miami, and I think it would be a shame if we
didn't, again this year, extend that help. I think there are many areas here
that could be taken out completely, so it would not be that expensive, and I
think we should make every effort in making sure that this would be one of the
City's contributions, so that they could receive the maximum funds, not for
themselves, but in helping the sick, that are stricken with cancer, of this
community.
Mrs. Kennedy: I agree the tradition of service that Liga Contra el Cancer has
is very long, and it's an horrendous disease. It is, really, the kind of
organization that I wish would get more recognition in our community.
Ms. Lourdes P. Aguila: Can I...
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute. You're about to get your third vote; you'd
better quit.
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, it's...
Mr. Plummer: This City has a partnership with the League of Cancer, that we
have not been able, at this point, to fulfill, and that is a dedication of a
piece of property on which to build a hospital. Hopefully, that will still
come to a conclusion, and to a successful conclusion. The monies which they
would derive from this and other fund-raising events would be, in fact, used
to build that hospital on City -owned property. I think that if, in fact, we
are going to express good faith, that we do want to see this facility in this
City, we do want this facility to be here, that we can all be proud of, I
don't know how, if we don't help them raise the funds, that they're ever going
to be a success. So, as far as I'm concerned, I'm going to, not only vote - I
assume a motion, whoever makes it - to grant this, because we are, basically,
in joint partnership, but I would also ask for an updating of where we stand
with the commitment of this City about the piece of real estate - not
necessarily... I'm not asking for it today, but I am asking for it at the next
meeting. So, basically, I will be voting with a favorable motion for this
granting of today, and ask for an updating of where the City's obligation is
to granting a parcel of property, be brought back to us in written form for
the next meeting.
Mr. Carollo: I so make that motion...
Mrs. Kennedy: And I second.
Mr. Carollo: ... to approve the funding request.
Mayor Suarez: So moved, seconded, thirded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
120 January 22, 1987
0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Carollo, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-103
A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$20,000 FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS, CONTINGENT
FUND, TO COVER THE COST OF CITY SERVICES AND FEES IN
SUPPORT OF SECOND ANNUAL LEAGUE AGAINST CANCER
FESTIVAL TO BE HELD FEBRUARY 6 THROUGH 8, 1987 IN
WATSON ISLAND; SUBJECT TO AND CONTINGENT UPON
COMPLIANCE WITH SUCH CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS AS MAY
BE PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Comment made during roll call:
Mr. Plummer: I hate to make it seem so easy, but they're such a great group
of people, I vote yes.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you.
Ms. Aguila: On behalf of the patients of the League Against Cancer, I want to
express our gratitude to Mayor Suarez and City Commissioners for help in this
cause. Really, Liga Contra el Cancer, in this moment,... Lourdes Aguila,
General Coordinator of the League Against Cancer. And, in this moment, I can
tell all of you that the League is in a very critical financial situation, and
we have to raise more than $3,000,000 in the telethon May 3rd. We need to,
because if not, we have to close, and there are thousands waiting for us -
that's why we need a lot of help, and God bless you all. Thank you.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Lourdes. God bless you too, in your work.
34. SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED RENAMING OF THE
MIAMI BASEBALL STADIUM.
Mayor Suarez: Item 33.
Mr. Odio: We received a request from the Miami -Amateur Baseball Association,
to request renaming of the Miami Stadium to the Bobby Maduro Miami Stadium. I
think I should put on the record who Bobby Maduro was, if you want me to. I
think we all know him, but in 1953, Bobby Maduro acquired the Havana Cubans,
the Florida International League, Class C, the Miami Marlins were members,
and they played in Miami Stadium. In 154, Bobby Maduro converted the above
club to the Cuban Sugar Kings, of the International League, triple A - they
also played in the Miami Stadium. In 1961, after leaving Cuba, he appeared
before the Miami Commission, Robert King High, Mayor, to bring to Miami the
Jersey City team, triple A. From 1966 to 1978, he was director of the Latin-
American Office of the Commissioner of Baseball, located in Miami. In 178,
founded the Interamerican League, Miami Amigos, Puerto Rico, Panama,
Maracaibo, and Caracas. In 1980, he was baseball supervisor to the City of
121 January 22, 1987
Miami, until his death in October of 1986. I definitely recommend that we do
this, if you to choose.
Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, as the Manager has just expressed, Bobby Maduro is a
great baseball legend. He dedicated his life to baseball, both in Cuba and
the United States, and he dedicated his life to the youth. I think this is
very appropriate, and I would like to move... I think it has go through a
public hearing, right?
Mr. Plummer: Yeah.
Mr. Odio: I think you...
Mrs. Kennedy: Madame City Attorney, when do we schedule this?
Mr. Odio: OK, so, you order me to have a public hearing.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, and so I move.
Mr. Odio: OK.
Mayor Suarez: So moved, to have a public hearing, with the favorable
recommendation? (NO RESPONSE) No recommendation. By the way, I want to
recognize Mr. Maduro's son in the back, with former Miami City Commissioner
Manolo Reboso. Good to have you here. Moved. Do we have a second?
Mr. Carollo: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-104
A MOTION DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE A
PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE PLACE AT A FUTURE MEETING IN
CONNECTION WITH REQUEST RECEIVED FROM REPRESENTATIVES
OF THE MIAMI-AMATEUR BASEBALL ASSOCIATION TO RENAME
THE MIAMI BASEBALL STADIUM.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
35. LEAVE TO MANAGER'S DISCRETION REQUEST FOR FUNDS RECEIVED FROM "CARIBBEAN
UNITED FIESTA 187 - GRANT CLOSURE OF STREETS FOR SAID EVENT.
Mayor Suarez: Item 34.
Mr. Odio: They are requesting street closure, plus $15,000 to cover City
services, for a Caribbean celebration, to be held March 7, 1987, on Northwest
54th Street. They are requesting also, of course the street closure, and it's
$15,000. We are recommending for the street closure, and denying of the
funds.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask - and this is maybe unfair to you: it was my
understanding that this Commission took an absolute policy, in relation to
festivals, when we allocated the $200,000, and we named the eight different
122 January 22, 1987
R
organizations, that we would not entertain any further - is that correct? I
mean, is that the same understanding that the rest of this Commission had?
Mrs. Ktnnedy: Um-hmm.
Mayor Suarez: That's my understanding of the policy.
Mr. Plummer: And if it is, I am then questioning why this matter is even
before us.
Mr. Dawkins: It's before us because, as you say, we do have a policy, but
these individuals came to my office, and as public citizens, they're
requesting to come here and be put on the agenda, so I put them there.
Mr. Plummer: OK. I mean, if you requested it; but, here again,..
Mr. Dawkins: Uh-huh.
Mayor Suarez: Also, the policy goes up to a point, and then we adopt the
particular event, if we think that it's worthy of it in the City; it becomes a
City event, and then we fund a lot of times, if we find the money for it. So,
I mean, the policy has its - exceptions, let's say.
Mr. Dawkins: They said that they wanted to come before the Commission, and I
put it on the agenda.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: Although I know the policy and you know the policy. OK.
Mayor Suarez: Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Joe Celestin: Commissioner Plummer, if you... this is... we're not
asking, first of all, for the City to fund our festival, and if you want to
see it that way, first of all, we're like... my name is Joe Celestin, and I'm
a businessman in Allapattah, 36th Street. First of all, I'm here in the
behalf of the Caribbean United Fiesta. The City gave out $200,000.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Celestin: And now, nothing was given to the Caribbean or to the Haitians.
It was all to the Calle Ocho, it was to the Goombay, or Three Kings Parade,
which is a Cuban affair, but nothing - we've always been the second class
citizen; we were excluded this year, of the services. The City financed our
festival, but this year they give out money and they take us out.
Mr. Odio: I'm sorry, sir, but the Goombay festival covers the Caribbean.
Mr. Celestin: The Goombay was strictly the Bahamas.
Mr. Odio: Isn't that part...? OK, that's...
Mr. Celestin: That's only one island. What we have now, we're trying to make
a trade with the City of Miami. We're not asking for money just for that
purpose. Our idea is to unite the Caribbean with Miami - that's our idea.
We're spending money, we're giving out seminars, to let you people know about
ourselves, because you are in the community with people... 80 percent of us
here, our heritage is from the island. I'm sure everyone of us here from the
Caribbean, and yet the City officials does not know anything about ourselves.
Because what my organization is trying to do, it's giving out seminars and
bring City officials... we've been working with the Police Department,
bringing in police officers, telling them about ourselves, and we're serving
them food, we give them cultural, fine arts, all that - that's free. We're
spending $105,000 - money from the City... from the sponsors, Caribbean
business people, just to pay for those things, and we want the City to provide
just police officers for that meeting, and all our sponsors are paying the
major part of it, and we can't ask them for anything else. And we're giving a
seminar, one -week seminar, free to all public officers. We're serving food to
the City of Miami Police Department, and we'd also, you know, like for the
Mayor and Commissioners to come with us, on that day of the fiesta, to
celebrate the Caribbean United, because this City... we're trying to do this,
and bring this City together with the Caribbean, because everybody has a
123
January 22, 1987
negative thing: the Haitians apart, the Americans don't like them, and it's
all a division type thing. We want to let them know about ourselves, and get
together with them, to make a better Miami.
Mrs. Kennedy: How long has your organization been in existence?
Mr. Celestin: About six months ago. As you know right now, all of us will
have our citizenship. We're going to have the right to vote in the upcoming
election. And our idea is to just unite with all Black people in the City and
to make things happen. And I assume that if... you people from the Caribbean,
you know the carnival will bring great attraction to the City, and since it's
all the Caribbean together, we're anticipating over two to three hundred
people to come over, because we have: Jamaica is coming over, we have people
from Santo Domingo, we have the Queen from the Bahamas is coming in. I mean,
we have an X amount of people coming in, and we can't turn down all the money
the sponsor paid to tell him, "Look, we're giving your money back, because we
can't get in -kind services from the City." We can't do that. We have Johnny
Ventura; we have Al Gunn coming from Puerto Rico; we have Tabu coming,
who's coming in from Haiti; we have the marching band from the Bahamas is
coming in, people from Jamaica - we can't tell them "no," because we can't get
in -kind services.
Mayor Suarez: Don, are you here on this item?
Mr. Donald F. Benjamin: Well, I would certainly lend my support. I think
it's an extremely good idea. You may know that one of the finest
international festivals comes from Trinidad and Tobago.
Mr. Celestin: They're also going to be there, too.
Mr. Benjamin: It's carnival. Next to the Carnaval in Rio, you can have an
extremely good and exciting time in Trinidad. But I would suspect that
supporting this festival would be an attempt to bring the Trinidad carnival
here. And if you think that Calle Ocho is fantastic, wait until you get a
taste of Trinidad carnival. It's an extremely useful tourist attraction, and
I would certainly strongly recommend, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, that you
make some effort to support this.
Mr. Celestin: It's a celebration of the City of Miami, because in the years
to come, everybody's going to come over to see that attraction the City will
get from that, and the main idea, it's... we're spending our money, the money
that we have now, to tell the Miami people about ourselves. I have
experienced a police officer take a person to jail for not knowing the idea.
We want them to know the key words, how to ask a Haitian person for your
license, or for your insurance. We want to school them, that's the idea, let
them know about the thing.
Mayor Suarez: Let me make a motion. I'll move to refer this matter to the
City Manager, with the recommendation that within his discretionary authority
of $4,500, he determine to what extent the City can help you in putting
together the fiesta, and otherwise lessen the impact of our in -kind services.
Mrs. Kennedy: Why don't we also move to close the street?
Mayor Suarez: And, of course, to give you the permits that would go along
with it. If he's...
Mrs. Kennedy: I'll second.
Mayor Suarez: ... satisfied, you can put it on.
Mr. Plummer: Is there a second to the motion?
Mrs. Kennedy: I second.
Mr. Carollo (OFF MIKE): What is the motion, again, please?
Mr. Plummer: The motion is, at the discretion of the Manager, up to $4,500,
including the closure of the street.
_ Mr. Dawkins: OK, I'm going to say this, Joe. I don't know what the Manager's
going to do, but we have $200,000 for festivals. J.L. said that each year
124 January 22, 1987
we're reducing the funding by 20 percent, and I would hope that you would get
in - 1 don't care what happens - that you get in touch with us, so that if a
new festival... and like you say, the Haitians do not have one,...
Mr. Celestin: We do not have them, and this is all the Caribbean.
Mr. Plummer: Any further discussion? Hearing none, call the roll.
Mr. Carollo: Are you saying, Miller,...
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me.
Mr. Carollo: ... that you're in favor of this, or not?
Mr. Dawkins: No, I'm...
Mayor Suarez: No, he was about to suggest that for next year's funding, as
we...
Mr. Carollo: That's what I tend to agree with. See, the reason we
established the $200,000 per year for festivals, was so that we would not be
faced with 100 different groups...
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
Mr. Carollo: ... wanting money for festivals.
Mrs. Kennedy: Um-hmm.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly. Any further discussion? Call the roll.
The following motions were introduced by Mayor Suarez, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-105
A MOTION REFERRING TO THE CITY MANAGER REQUEST
RECEIVED FROM REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CARIBBEAN UNITED
FIESTA 187 IN CONNECTION WITH THE HOLDING OF THEIR
EVENT ON MARCH 7, 1987; FURTHER LEAVING UP TO THE CITY
MANAGER'S DISCRETION FUNDING OF SAID EVENT UP TO
$4,500.
RESOLUTION NO. 87-105.1
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE CARIBBEAN UNITED FIESTA TO
BE CONDUCTED BY CARIBBEAN UNITED FIESTA, INC. ON MARCH
8, 1987 AUTHORIZING THE CLOSURE OF DESIGNATED STREETS
TO THROUGH VEHICULAR TRAFFIC SUBJECT TO THE ISSUANCE
OF PERMITS BY THE DEPARTMENTS OF POLICE AND FIRE,
RESCUE AND INSPECTION SERVICES AND ASSURANCES THAT THE
CITY WILL BE INSURED AGAINST ANY POTENTIAL LIABILITY;
CONDITIONED UPON THE ORGANIZERS PAYING FOR ALL COSTS
OF CITY SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH SAID EVENT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motions were passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Comments made during roll call:
Ms. Hirai: Mr. Plummer?
125 January 22, 1987
Mr. Celestin: Mr. Mayor,...
Mr. Plummer: Wait, wait, wait a minute - I've got to vote "no," because we
have a policy, and in, you know,...
Mr. Dawkins: Wait a minute, the motion was, to refer it to the Manager.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry) 1 vote "yes."
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, and the closure... to close the street.
Mr. Carollo: Just to refer it to the Manager.
Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry. I vote "yes."
Mr. Dawkins: Where are you, anyway? You here, or where?
Mr. Plummer: I was asleep.
Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, on...
Mayor Suarez: There's also the suggestion, made by more than one of us here
on the Commission, that you begin to apply right away for next year's funding.
We will have an additional $40,000 in funding next year, for festivals, and
yours sounds to me like - and to all of us here - as one of the important ones
to fund, because it has the Caribbean flavor.
Mr. Celestin: How about...
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner?
Mr. Celestin: ... we're requesting a personal appearance, so you can come
over, and the whole Commission, on that day of the festival.
Mr. Dawkins: We'll be there.
Mayor Suarez: We accept the invitation. Thank you.
Mr. Celestin: OK.
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: Item 35 (Alicia Baro's report on the "Committee on the
Status of Women") was rescheduled as the first item under Personal Appearances
for the next meeting.
36. DIRECT ADMINISTRATION TO SCHEDULE WORKSHOP FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON THE
PROPOSED ELIMINATION OF ALL TRANSITIONAL USES - DRAFT ORDINANCE AND BRING
BACK IN 30 DAYS.
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Dawkins reminded me that we had promised a time
certain on an item that is scheduled for 6:00 P.M., which is the transitional
uses, and I think a lot of you out there are waiting for this item to be
heard. We have it here as being after 6:00 P.M., but I know that it was
promised for exactly 6:00 P.M. last time around. It's the least we can do,
since we pushed you over from the previous agenda, is to handle PZ-14.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor,...
Mr. Carollo: What... what...
Mr. Plummer: ... it was I that brought this matter before,...
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Commissioner?
126 January 22, 1987
Mr. Carollo: What - 11Z-14, now?
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: ... in meeting with Sergio, they have come up with an acceptable
substitute, which I think is reasonable, and as far as I'm concerned, I will
favor their substitute idea, not to eliminate completely, but I think it's
called "transitional limitations," and I hope he will make that presentation,
and, as such, I will support that, rather than the complete elimination.
Mayor Suarez: I fully agree with you, by the way, but I'd like to hear that
presentation, because I have a feeling it's going to make a lot more sense
than the total elimination.
Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: The Commission instructed us to eliminate completely
the transitional use concept from the ordinance. We believe that transitional
uses, by themselves, offer negative impact on residential areas, because of
the intrusion that they create. At the same time, transitional limitations do
offer some protection to the residential areas. The transitional use concept
is one by which, in cases where you have residential zoning adjacent to
commercial zoning, in the residential area you can put some nonresidential
uses, like parking, and offices, and so on. We are recommending that that be
eliminated from the ordinance. At the same time, in the cases where we
have...
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, wait a minute.
Mrs. Kennedy: I didn't hear - that what be eliminated?
Mr. Plummer: Would the policemen out in the back remind everybody that we ask
you either to come in and have a seat, or to go outside of the doors. We
would like to give the courtesy to the speaker, to be able to hear him. There
are many seats available up front; we don't charge any more than the seats in
the back.
Mayor Suarez: Proceed, Sergio.
Mrs. Kennedy: That what be eliminated, Sergio?
Mr. Rodriguez: The transitional uses that would be otherwise allowed, under
the existing ordinance, in the residential area - that they would be
eliminated. Meaning, under the present ordinance, if you have a residential
zone adjacent to a commercial district, the commercial district usually
applies for a special exception, or for a Class C permit, for a special
permit, to put parking in the residential zoning area.
Mrs. Kennedy: Right.
Mr. Rodriguez: We are recommending that that will be not permitted any more.
In the future, if people want to do that, they will have to come through a
zoning change, like they have done recently, for example, with Kaufman &
Roberts, and Salman, and one case that you have here today. They will go for
a full zoning change, and in that case, the Commission can make a decision,
after two hearings, whether they will agree with that or not. At the same
time, though, we have "transitional limitations," and in transitional
limitations, the area which is adjacent to the residential area, in the
commercial district, we have a band of about 50 feet, in which certain uses
are not permitted, such as drive-in facilities, bars, taverns, rescue
missions, etc.. We recommend that that limitation be kept, and in addition,
other limitations that we have, that protect the residential area, be also
kept, such as the setback that you have in those areas, and some of the
limitations on light planes, and so on. I have to mention, though, that when
we presented this to the Planning Advisory Board, the Planning Advisory Board
recommended denial of our recommendation, unanimously, and they would like to
keep the ordinance as it presently exists. One more point that I would like
to make: under the existing ordinance that we have, to use the transitional
area, the applicant doesn't have to go through the series of hearings and
tests, that you otherwise have to go when you have a change of zoning, and for
that reason it offers less of a protection to the residential area. For
example,...
127 January 22, 1987
1
Mayor Suarez: That's under the existing transitional zoning?
Mr. Rodriguez: Under the existing that we have now. For example...
Mayor Suarez: How would it change, under your proposal?
Mr. Plummer: It would have... it would invoke a hearing.
Mr. Rodriguez: In the proposal, we eliminate that, and they would have to
come before you for a zoning change, and they have to conform to the
comprehensive plan...
Mayor Suarez: It would always reach the Commission?
Mr. Rodriguez: It would have to go to the Commission,...
Mr. Plummer: Yeah.
Mr. Rodriguez: ... and there would have to be two readings, and there would
have to be 30 days after that, to be in effect.
Mr. Plummer: Basically, as I understand it, it would not be a matter of
right; it would be a matter of the Commission making a decision, and the
homeowners in the general area being notified, and of having the right to come
forth. I think we have seen some areas of this community, in which
transitional uses have been absolutely devastating, and we have seen other
areas in which transitional use (AN INDIVIDUAL APPLAUDS) could be...
Mayor Suarez: Please.
Mr. Plummer: You are obviously not my brother-in-law. (LAUGHTER) And we
have seen other areas where transitional uses, as provided, could serve a
purpose. Under the present existing law, there is no provisions for this
Commission, or the Zoning Board, for a review, for a look at, for the
neighbors to have input, and all I am saying, I agree with t•ie department,
that I think it is a good thing. The problem comes about with that old 9500
ordinance, or the new 9500. In the old ordinance, under "Conditional Uses,"
we could place any conditions that we wanted to place. We no longer have
that. I think that they have come up with a very good compromise. All it is
doing is saying, "Hey, this Commission and the Zoning Board is going to have
the right to take a look, and we're going to have the right to make a
decision, whether or not we feel it is detrimental or to the best interest of
this community," and that's all that we are proposing, in this which they are
presenting. (SILENCE) No one wants to speak? I'll make a motion. Oh. The
silence was deafening.
Mayor Suarez: Does that complete your presentation, Sergio?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mayur Suarez: OK.
Mrs. Kennedy: Guess it does.
Mayor Suarez: How many people are going to want to speak in favor of
retaining transitional zoning? OK. How many people are going to want to
speak in favor of eliminating transitional zoning?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mr. Plummer: No. No, no, no, no. No, no, no, no, no, no.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, no, not here,...
Mayor Suarez: Just elimination...
Mrs. Kennedy: for... just wanting to speak.
Mayor Suarez: OK. All right, how many have considered the alternative being
proposed, and are disposed to be in favor of that? OK. Just to get an idea.
Bob?
128 January 22, 1987
Mr. Robert Traurig: Mr. Mayor, I don't know whether or not the alternative
being proposed is something that is subsequent to what was submitted to you on
October 30th. That's what the fact sheet contains, and if there's something
different, we haven't had an opportunity to see it.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio? Hah? What? Ask your question again, Bob.
Mr. Traurig: I'm sorry. Sergio, I was asking whether or not you have made
changes since the Planning Advisory Board meeting, which have not been
distributed to the people here who have expressed interest.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's what they were bringing to my attention. This is
exactly... what I'm presenting is exactly conforming to the planning fact
sheet that was presented to the Planning Advisory Board. The problem, from
what I have been told now, is that the ordinance that is before the
Commission, because the Planning Advisory Board recommended against what we
proposed, the one they have in front of them now is only the one from the
Planning Advisory Board, that is making a recommendation to them.
Mr. Plummer: I'm lost.
Mr. Rodriguez: The ordinance that is before you now reflects the action of
the Planning Advisory Board. The action of the Planning Advisory Board, which
is recommending to you, didn't follow our recommendation at all. They
recommended denial of what we proposed. So the ordinance before you, as it
has done always, reflects the P.A.B. recommendation.
Mr. Plummer: Well, did the P.A.B. hear a scenario that said "the complete
elimination," and that is what they voted on?
Mr. Rodriguez: No. No.
Mr. Plummer: Or did they vote on your project, as the proposed scenario, and
voted on that?
Mr. Rodriguez: We presented both possibilities to them, and then we showed
them the alternative, as we have in the fact sheet, in which... what we
represented to you today, of eliminating the uses, but keeping the
limitations, and based on that, they recommended denial, and keeping things as
they are now.
Mr. Plummer: Madame City Attorney, where are we?
Mrs. Dougherty: I would suggest that... we don't have an ordinance before you
that he's recommending. I've never seen the ordinance; I don't have it to
read, so I'd suggest that you discuss it, and if you all concur that that's
the way that you want to proceed, that we set it for first reading next
Commission meeting.
Mrs. Kennedy: Sergio, before we get into your... into this modification - how
many people are here, that favor keeping the transitional use?
Mr. Plummer: As it is.
Mrs. Kennedy: As it is. OK. And those who want to change it?
(BACKGROUND HUBBUB)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Excuse me - we don't understand the wording
of it. We have a confusion here.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK. Those who want to eliminate transitional use, can I see
you with a show of hands?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: No, that's...
Mrs. Kennedy: No, no, no. You all...
Mr. Plummer: No, that's not it. No, no, no.
129 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: I asked the question in reverse.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask the question.
Mrs. Kennedy: Those who favor transitional use as it is? OK.
Mr. Plummer: You want it to remain as it is presently? (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND
REPLIES) OK.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, all right, that's...
Mr. Plummer: Now, how many people want to change it, and make it a hearing
before this Commission, as proposed by the Planning Department?
Mayor Suarez: Or eliminate it altogether, if you want to get all those who
are opposed to it.
Mr. Plummer: OK, so it's half and half. OK. (INAUDIBLE COMMENT) I
understand, sure.
Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor and Commissioner Plummer - Vice -Mayor Plummer...
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): Sir, sir...
Mr. Dawkins: Come to the mike.
Mayor Suarez: Well, you know,...
Mrs. Kennedy: You'll get your chance. I just...
Mayor Suarez: ... we're not taking a vote, necessarily. We'll eventually
hear from all the different groups.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): I still don't understand - I had my hand up
both times! I don't understand the wording!
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, I just wanted to get a feel of the audience.
Mayor Suarez: We'll get a feel - we'll...
Mr. Plummer: You were just elected mayor!
(LAUGHTER)
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER (OFF MIKE): OK! Then please pick up my garbage - they
didn't do it today. Or Monday.
(LAUGHTER)
Mayor Suarez: Well,...
Mrs. Kennedy: Oh, well.
Mr. Carollo: I thought it was only Ferre that didn't take care of that.
Mayor Suarez: Bob, did you want to complete a presentation on this?
Mrs. Dougherty: Mr. Mayor, before you proceed,...
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Madame City Attorney.
Mrs. Dougherty: ... let me just tell you and Vice -Mayor Plummer, that in the
package is both ordinances. So, you can consider Sergio's ordinance on first
reading tonight.
Mayor Suarez: The alternative is also before us. We could consider it today,
and the alternative does not... well, eliminates transitional uses, but keeps
the same or similar limitations, and forces the matter, each time, to come
before the Miami City Commission for final approval.
Mr. Plummer: Both - both the Zoning Board and the Commission.
130 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: And the Zoning Board.
Mr. Traurig: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. There are to many
speakers, I'll try to simplify this, but I would call to your... My name is
Robert H. Traurig, 1401 Brickell Avenue. I have appeared before this
Commission often, in connection with conditional uses and transitional uses -
the conditional uses under 6817, dealing with parking, and also under 9500,
dealing with parking and other transitional uses. What the Planning Director
is suggesting to you, is that we no longer have what used to be a conditional
use, to permit parking in the back of a major street; for example, Coral Way,
Northwest 7th Street, Southwest 8th Street, 27th Avenue, Douglas Road. All of
us have seen situations where it was desirable for a building to be able to
have parking in the back of the building, in what was a residential zone, but
contiguous to the existing building. I have appeared before you often, in
connection with the strip along Coral Way. I appeared before you - and, Mrs.
Kennedy, I don't want you to have to abstain on this, but I appeared before
you in connection with a major transitional use hearing, involving Terremark,
on Douglas Road, which was approved. Terremark doesn't own the property; it
has been sold...
Mrs. Kennedy: When I was not a part of this Commission.
Mr. Traurig: Pardon met
Mrs. Kennedy: And I was not a part of this Commission.
Mr. Traurig: And you were not a part of the Commission, and you would not
have a conflict now,...
Mrs. Kennedy: No.
Mr. Traurig: ... because Terremark doesn't own the property. But the point
I'm making is, that there are a number of situations in which there have been
benefits to the... not only to the development committee, but to the City
generally,...
Mr. Plummer: We agree.
Mr. Traurig: ... by having either the conditional uses or the transitional
uses. To have eliminated conditional uses, and to say now that we won't have
the equivalent of conditional uses, to permit parking in the rear of those...
Mr. Plummer: We're not saying that.
Mr. Traurig: ... major streets on which major buildings have been built, you
know, I think would do a great disservice to the people of Miami. If you look
at Coral Way...
Mr. Plummer: We're not saying that.
Mr. Traurig: ... there are parking lots between...
Mayor Suarez: I keep hearing...
Mr. Traurig: OK.
Mayor Suarez: ... if I may interrupt you, because I keep hearing Commissioner
Plummer saying we're not saying that.
Mr. Traurig: Well, what... what... what...
Mr. Plummer: Bob, Bob, we're not doing that!
Mr. Traurig: But Mr. Rodriguez was saying, is that if we want...
Mr. Plummer: What we're saying...
Mr. Traurig: ... if we want to park in the back, we ought to go for a zone
change.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
131 January 22, 1987
Mr. Traurig: And what...
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. No, no - if you want to go into the transitional
area, you're going to have to. If you're going to encroach into a residential
section - yes.
Mr. Traurig: But...
Mr. Plummer: We're not... there is no proposal...
Mr. Traurig: All right, I'd like to address that. Often I have heard the
staff say that they don't support a zone change, because if the zoning is
changed back to the next street, then the properties on the other side of the
street would be adversely affected by that, and they don't want that to occur,
and I'm...
Mr. Plummer: But that's not the Commission.
Mr. Traurig: I think that that's what is being proposed, and I don't have the
current ordinance, because what is in the kit is not what Mr. Rodriguez is
talking about.
Mayor Suarez: Sergio, you're shaking your head; why is that not what is being
proposed?
Mrs. Kennedy: We don't even have that, Bob, don't feel...
Mr. Rodriguez: Well, first, it's in the ordinance that's in the packet. It's
called Attachment B, and it's Ordinance B; you should read it in your packet.
And second, the Commission has found, on different occasions, that to avoid
the situation, they have left a strip of one foot, or ten feet, unzoned, so
that that change will not go to the other side.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
Mr. Rodriguez: Following the recommendation precisely, Coconut Growers...
Mr. Traurig: I understand it. It's worked in Mr. Salman and Kennedy, and
Kaufman & Roberts were recently given that opportunity, to develop in that
manner, but it changes the dynamics, and it creates a much more difficult
situation from .he standpoint of the justification for the zone change, for
the very reason that I have just indicated. If you take 22nd Terrace as an
example, the property owners on the south side of Southwest 22nd Terrace are
often concerned about what occurs on the north side. I happen to be in favor
of zoning back to 22nd Terrace. This Commission has expressed itself, and
voted in favor of zoning back to 22nd Terrace. But I only use that as an
example. That same situation occurs between Northwest 6th Street and 7th
Street. I've had that situation. It occurs on Douglas Road. It occurs on
other major arterials of the City. I think that to deny the opportunity to
ask for either the zone change or, in the alternative, the transitional use,
would be difficult to comply with, and it won't be in the best interest of the
City. Now, I ask you to consider that.
Mr. Plummer: We're... in no way are we denying the right... are we denying
the use of a transitional. All we're saying is, that this Commission
continues to have the right to say when it is good for an area, or when it is
not.
Mr. Traurig: That's what's in there now.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, that's what we're...
Mr. Traurig: No, that's what's in there now.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio?
Mrs. Kennedy: Sergio, can you explain the difference?
Mr. Rodriguez: Under the present system, I, for example, can give a Class C
permit that will allow certain uses in the transitional area, and the only way
that that will go before you, if it is appealed to the Zoning Board, and then
that decision is appealed to the City Commission.
132 January 22, 1987
Mr. Traurig: Well, I would...
Mr. Rodriguez: Another example is, in a special exception. Parking is
allowed through a special exception. The decision from the Zoning Board is
final, unless it is appealed to the City Commission, and then the Commission
can act, on one reading, by resolution, and that will be the end of it.
Through the proposal that we have before you, the applicant will have the
opportunity, but it will go before the City Commission, it will be an open,
direct use of that area, and it will require a zoning change, and that's it.
It's a simple...
Mr. Plummer: No. No, no, that... no, no, that's...
Mayor Suarez: It's a procedural safeguard, for the residents not to have to,
in each case, make sure that they appeal the Zoning Board's recommendation, or
your department's.
Mr. Plummer: No, it goes one step further, and let me tell you that important
step further, that's not being discussed by Sergio: when they come before
this Commission, if we grant it, we can apply any stipulations to that
granting that we want, or feel fair, and if they don't comply, they lose the
right. In other words, if we say, "You've got to have landscaping," and two
years from now, they come back, which happens a lot of times, and the
landscaping dies; they don't take care of it, they don't maintain it - OK? -
we can say, "All right, you are not living up to the condition that we placed
upon this transitional granting, and, as such, you have now lost it."
Mayor Suarez: Right, does it effect that? Does it effectuate that?
Mr. Rodriguez: In reality, what happens is that the applicant voluntarily
proffers a covenant that will do certain things, and they do...
Mayor Suarez: Knowing that the Commission might not otherwise go along.
Mr. Rodriguez: The Commission, otherwise, will deny it.
Mr. Plummer: And right now, we don't have that right.
Mayor Suarez: Semi -voluntary.
Mr. Traurig: Well, I'm going to sit down, but say one last thing. We
certainly think that the Commission should have knowledge of, and control
over, the granting of applications that you think have a serious effect upon
the development of the City. It may very well be that we need a workshop, to
discuss this more fully, because I didn't understand that, and perhaps others
didn't understand it, and maybe we have to do some in-depth discussion. Thank
you.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, Bob. Herb?
Mr. Herbert Lee Simon: Herbert Simon, I'm a realtor, and currently chairman
of the Planning Advisory Board. I guess it's been... (INAUDIBLE COMMENT OFF
MIKE) OK, yeah, it's on the record, OK, after we get it straight. I think
I'm still chairman, until you pass the disclosure ordinance, but at the
moment, I'm chairman.
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Plummer: It depends on what you say.
Mr. Simon: Yeah. Thank you, J.L. I guess the matter's been pretty well
cleared up. The Planning Advisory Board understood it very well when they
voted for denial of the Planning Department's application. This is... Mr.
Traurig has also stated it very well. It would totally change what at least,
I, as a realtor - I'm speaking now as a realtor and as a property owner -
consider to be good for the City. As far as what J.L. - pardon me,
Commissioner Plummer - said a few moments ago about control over the
landscaping, you already have that, even under the transitional use, because
when you make a parking lot, when you get a permit to develop a parking lot,
even if its' under transitional use, you have the control over the
landscaping, and its maintenance.
133 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Not continuous. We do at the time of granting the site
approval, but there is nothing presently contained therein, that says in two
years, if they don't maintain it, that we can take that right away from them.
Mr. Simon: I'm glad to know that I don't have to maintain all my lots, then.
No, the City...
Mr. Plummer: No, if you don't, we will get you.
Mr. Simon: The City has an ordinance now - you have a landscape ordinance,
right?
Mr. Plummer: Correct.
Mr. Simon: Are you telling me, though, that you can't enforce it, once
that...
Mr. Plummer: No, but...
Mayor Suarez: No, no, he means when we impose special conditions, in
conjunction with a special use permit, or whatever,...
Mr. Plummer: And...
Mayor Suarez: ... not in the normal landscape ordinance.
Mr. Plummer: ... Herb, you are well aware - OK? - you're well aware that
there are other conditions; landscaping is one, ingress and egress to the
residential area is another, lighting and security is another, drainage is
another.
Mr. Simon: They're all covered under the present ordinance.
Mr. Plummer: No, but the difference is, when you have the transitional use,
it is... could be used by a second party, who is not bound by the first party.
OK?
Mr. Simon: No, you lost me.
Mr. Plummer: OK, let me restate it.
Mr. Simon: No, wait - all right, just a moment. If I have a piece of
commercial property - a building...
Mr. Plummer: Right.
Mr. Simon: I have a residential building adjoining it. That next 100 feet, I
can currently use for transitional use is a parking area.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no. If there is a second owner... if you own a
commercial piece of property, that is contiguous to a residential piece of
property, - OK? - that first 100 feet enjoys the benefit of one step up in
zoning.
Mr. Simon: Correct.
Mr. Plummer: OK? So, the second piece can be from a different owner. It
doesn't have to be the same owner. On 22nd Terrace, is the prime example,
where you have it in the back, the commercial property is in the front. If
you rezone the back portion of it, then that transitional goes across the
street, to the owner of the residential property.
Mr. Simon: All right, but what I'm saying is, the transitionally used lot
still comes under the current ordinances that you have regulating parking
lots, relative to lighting,...
Mr. Plummer: But we're not talking necessarily about parking. You keep
referring to parking. There are other uses in transitional.
Mr. Simon: All right. Well, in my opinion, the transitional uses have worked
very well; I know you disagreed with that, Commissioner Plummer, but I think
134 January 22, 1987
it's worked very well since ordinance 9500 was enacted. I don't, personally,
know, not a lot of, but any of these problems, that you have indicated have
coda ab:.-t - _ :i1sG Al i,
Mr. Plummer: Well, we've had three in...
Mr. Simon: It...
Mr. Plummer: ... we've had three of these areas, in which Commissioner
Dawkins was very, very concerned, that where they were passed by the Zoning
Board, and to protect the residential areas on Coral Way, we did, in fact,
make a buffer of one foot, to eliminate the transitional use continuing over
into the residential section. So, if you're not aware of it, you should have
been, because you sit on the Planning Board, and, as such, those same items
should have come before you. Now, Commissioner Dawkins, if I'm stating it
incorrectly, please correct me...
Mr. Dawkins (OFF MIKE): You're correct, J.L.
Mr. Plummer: ... but those are the areas that brought about this concern. If
we did not put in that one -foot buffer, that transitional would have included
across the street. That's what we're trying to eliminate.
Mr. Simon: I would have no problem with that, but it's with the property that
is contiguous to existing commercial property, that is giving me a problem,
because in a great many instances, old homes or duplexes have been totally
remodeled into attractive offices, which I think you'll agree, being used by
attorneys, accountants, and other professionals. They generally make it much
more attractive than the house that was there before the transition was
accomplished, and the exterior has been greatly improved, not only for the
person that occupies it, but for the neighborhood in general, and also point
out to you, it helps to increase the tax base of the City of Miami; there's
usually no more homestead exemption there, where it's offices.
Mr. Plummer: And possibly destroys the residential community.
Mr. Simon: Well, all right, J.L., we...
Mr. Plummer: At the expense of the...
Mr. Simon: ... I could show you...
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Please. Please.
Mr. Simon: I think the applause was for you, not for me. Where the
transitionally used lot is for parking, it does provide additional offstreet
parking, that this City sorely needs, especially in some of the older areas,
some of which Mr. Traurig mentioned, where stores and offices have been built
many years ago, where we didn't have the offstreet parking requirements, and
this does keep many cars off the street, which is not only an advantage to the
owner/operator of the business, but also to the City of Miami. As an owner of
a considerable amount of commercial property in Miami, and as a realtor for
more years than I want to count, I can tell you that I think that transitional
use is a rare tool, that is beneficial to both the City and the property
owner. And you know the old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"? - I
don't personally think it's broke, I hope you won't fix it, and if I don't win
in this case - and I don't know which way it's going to go, at the moment - I
would at least like to Pee you defer it until ordinance 9500 is totally
revised, and I think this is in the offing - aren't you, the Commissioners and
Mr. Mayor, considering appointing committees to revised ordinance number 9500?
Mr. Plummer: We've talked about it.
Mayor Suarez: Walter, I see you shaking your head, and we were told that we
were, and Serge is going like "this," you're going like "that" - this is...
Mr. Walter Pierce: I was only addressing one aspect of what Mr. Simon was
saying. Yes, we are already in the process of reviewing it, and we will be
getting to the committees.
135 January 22, 1987
Mr. Simon: Then I suggest to you that you defer this, and not try to work
this out piecemeal, but defer it until, at least, we revise the entire
ordinance. Thank you.
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Please. Please. Thank you for your presentation. Truly,
we're hearing from you again?
Ms. Truly Burton: Yeah, twice in one day. My name is Truly Burton; I
represent the Builders Association of South Florida. Our offices are at 15225
Northwest 77th Avenue. This morning, I was just made aware of how important
this issue is to our folks, so our legislative committee has not had an
opportunity to look at it; however, I believe that a workshop session, as Mr.
Traurig suggested, or, perhaps, as part of the revisions to 9500, which are
either going to take place or are in the process of taking place, is the
appropriate place for this one. If it does need reworking, for protections to
the neighborhoods - well, that's appropriate, but let's do it in a separate
session. Thank you.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would agree with that, that between the first
reading and the second reading, that such a workshop be held, and let
everybody come and air their grievance, and air their... whatever they want to
be heard on, but do it between the first and second reading.
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Mrs. Kennedy: I agree that that's probably the best solution. Transitional
use has been abused sometimes, and others it has served as a buffer between
the highly commercial and the residential properties.
Mr. Plummer (OFF MIKE): Exactly.
Mrs. Kennedy: Maybe a workshop, Mr. Traurig, as you suggested, is just what
we need, to get the input of everybody.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, I move to...
Mrs. Kennedy: I second.
Mr. Dawkins: ... go with the recommendation of the... Mr. Planning
Department, and that a workshop be held between now and the second reading.
Mr. Plummer: You're moving it on first reading now?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, on first reading.
Mr. Plummer: I second the motion.
Mayor Suarez: Moved on first reading, and seconded, with the proviso that...
Mrs. Kennedy: With the workshop.
Mayor Suarez: ... a workshop be held. Does that imply that you want a little
longer than the usual 30 days between first and second reading?
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, I don't.
Mr. Plummer: No. No.
Mayor Suarez: No?
Mr. Dawkins: No.
Ms. Laura Tindall -Howell: I would just like to ask, you're doing a first
reading on which proposal now?
Mayor Suarez: I presume it's on the alternative presented by the...
Mr. Plummer: That recommended by the department.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: On the alternative?
136 January 22, 1987
r�
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: And the alternative is to bring transitional uses before
the...
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Normal procedure.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: ... for public hearing.
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: When I...
Mr. Plummer: We're not eliminating.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Because when I read this Attachment B, I don't really see
that, in this proposed ordinance.
Mayor Suarez: Let's clarify that. Is that contained in Attachment... I mean,
the alternative contained in Attachment B, Sergio?
Ms. Tindall -Howell: At least the one I have.
Mr. Rodriguez: In Attachment B, what you have will be clear. We are saying
transitional uses are eliminated, and from now on, if they want to use the
property in the back, they have to go through a zoning change.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: But that's not what I'm reading here. Maybe I don't...
Mr. Plummer: No, that isn't what I understood. Now, Sergio, - and I'll work
it out with you at the same workshop - my understanding is, that transitional
uses would still be allowed,...
Mrs. Kennedy: Right.
Mr. Plummer: ... but they would force a hearing before the Zoning Board and
this Commission, in which there could be stipulations applied as to their use,
if granted.
Mr. Dawkins: If granted,...
Mr. Plummer: If granted.
Mr. Dawkins: ... and they also said that we could deny it.
Mr. Plummer: That's exactly correct.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, all right, no problem; I've got no problem with that.
(APPLAUSE)
Ms. Tindall -Howell: OK.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's not what you have before you, though. Let me make...
Mayor Suarez: I thought we had both ordinances before us.
Mr. Rodriguez: No. The first ordinance was what you instructed us to do,
which was eliminate them completely.
Mayor Suarez: Right, we got that.
Mr. Rodriguez: "A."
Mayor Suarez: Nobody's heading in that direction right now.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right. "B" is what we propose, which is eliminate
transitional uses,...
137 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: But?
Mr. Rodriguez: ... and keep transitional limitations. If you eliminate
transitional uses, any time that a person wants to use the property in what
you call now "transitional area," they will have to come for a zoning change,
and go through the whole procedure,...
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
Mr. Rodriguez: ... as I mentioned before.
Mayor Suarez: But the criteria for that decision would be as you have
described?
Mr. Rodriguez: No, two different things.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: You're talking about, then, deleting transitional uses.
Mr. Dawkins: That's what I'm voting onl
Mr. Rodriguez: You are deleting the transitional uses as you have now...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Hmm?
Mr. Dawkins: I am voting on eliminating transitional uses,...
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Dawkins: ... that's what I'm voting on.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's what I presented.
Mrs. Kennedy: Well, that's not what I understood.
Mayor Suarez: OK, go ahead, Sergio, one more time.
Mr. Dawkins: All right, let's get it clear, then.
Mr. Rodriguez: One more time. What we're doing with this is, in that area
which is adjacent to the commercial area, in the residential portion, instead
of...
Mayor Suarez: Right - the same number of feet and the same...
Mr. Rodriguez: ... instead of allowing, within the 100 to 125 feet area,
transitional uses, through special exceptions, and so on, you eliminate that
completely, and if a person wants to use that, an applicant, in the future,
for commercial or nonresidential use, they will have to come before the City
Commission, and ask for a zoning change, and the examples I used was Kaufman
and Roberts, and Salman, and so on. They came before you, they asked for a
zoning change, and you granted it. And they had to go through a whole
process...
Mayor Suarez: But we felt our discretion was a lot more limited, because of
the existence of transitional uses, in the areas in which they were asking for
what you call a zoning change.
Mr. Rodriguez: In that case, they came for a zoning change, and that was all,
and you, in those zoning cases, you agreed with the applicant, and you granted
that, except you left a buffer of ten feet, between them and the next zone.
Mayor Suarez: We created the buffer; what are you proposing now?
Mr. Rodriguez: You eliminate that, and each case will be judged on its own
merits,...
Mr. Dawkins: And if you want to get...
Mr. Rodriguez: ... and you'll have the applicants and you'll have the
neighbors in the area coming to each case, and presenting their position to
you, and you'll decide on each case, but you will have to go... the applicant
will have to go through the full process.
138 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Oh, I see what he's doing.
Mr. Rodriguez: it's a rezoning, basically.
Mr. Plummer: What he is proposing, to the complete elimination of the
contiguous to the residential area.
Mr. Rodriguez: Uses, right.
Mr. Plummer: I see what he's... that's...
Mayor Suarez: And you're leaving it totally discretionary to... you would
leave it totally discretionary to decide on a zoning change, based on the
usual criteria for zoning change, and...
Mr. Plummer: Well,...
Mr. Rodriguez: ... and will come before you, will come before the Zoning
Board, before the City Commission, on first and second reading, and so on.
Mayor Suarez: Because my... at least my concern is, were preventing the
"domino effect," as we did with the buffer, in those particular cases,
procedural safeguards for the neighbors, so that they don't have to be on the
lookout for each one of these as they go through the zoning process and get to
us; it will automatically get to us, and they can catch it here, and from our
perspective, automatic oversight - we get a chance to see them, in each case.
Those are the three things that I was looking for.
Mr. Plummer: Then you vote for what he's recommended.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mayor Suarez: I thought there was an automatic buffer too, by the way, and I
guess there isn't, necessarily. We don't necessarily have to put in a
buffer...
Mr. Plummer: You don't need a buffer.
Mayor Suarez: ... when we agree to the zoning change.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
Mayor Suarez: And the ability to exact certain concessions, or to have them
voluntarily proffered, I thought would be a nice icing on the cake, too,
but...
Mr. Rodriguez: See, otherwise, what you have now is, as I mentioned before,
I, as Planning Director...
Mayor Suarez: But you're going like this - you're nodding your head - are we
accomplishing all of that?
Mr. Rodriguez: If you follow my recommendations, you are accomplishing it.
What I'm saying is, you have to go... they will have to go, the applicant,
through zoning procedures all the way through, and then you can do what you
have been doing in zoning cases, and protect the residents as well.
Mr. Plummer: What is your motion, what they recommend?
Mr. Dawkins: Follow the recommendation of the Planning Director.
Mr. Plummer: On first reading.
Mr. Dawkins: First reading.
Mr. Plummer: And I second it, still.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded.
Mr. Plummer: I second the motion.
139 January 22, 1987
0
(BACKGROUND VOICES: "Didn't hear the motion." "What is the motion?")
Ms. Tindall -Howell: What was the motion?
Mr. Plummer: The motion is, to follow the recommendation of the Planning
Director.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Suarez: Well, the reason I haven't asked each one of you who support
that concept, to get up to the mike, is that we have this thing here, about
not losing momentum, and I think that when it was initially made, it was
seconded and thirded at the same time, so it sounded like you had three votes.
Ma'am?
Ms. Tindall -Howell: I didn't enter my name into the record,...
Mayor Suarez: Please.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: ... which I'd like to do first, and then I'd like to say
something else about what Mr. Rodriguez is saying.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: My name is Laura Tindall -Howell, Tindall -Howell
Consulting, 2481 Trapp Avenue, and I'm just here as a concerned resident of
the City of Miami, and I still don't see, unless there's another ordinance,
which I haven't seen, I don't see what Sergio's talking about.
Mr. Rodriguez: Um...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: And, by the way, what he is talking about is still
deleting transitional uses, and going for a zoning change.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's exactly what I'm saying!
Mr. Plummer: That's what he's saying.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: So, he's still really talking about a zoning change.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's exactly what I'm saying.
Mr. Plummer: That's what he's saying.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: So we have no transitional uses. In effect, that's what
he's saying.
Mr. Plummer: That's what he's saying.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's exactly what I'm saying.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Then, when you're throwing people into a zoning change,
you're throwing them into higher intensities, and the whole bit that goes with
the new zoning.
Mr. Rodriguez: That's...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Whereas in transitional use, you are not.
Mr. Rodriguez: That will be a decision for the Commission on each case, on
its own merits.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: OK, so, again, you may be eliminating a step down, from a
higher -intensity commercial district, to some sort of buffer.
Mr. Plummer: Well, we still would have the buffer...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: If you rezone.
Mr. Plummer: We would have the right to create the buffer, by the action of
this Commission, Laura.
140 January 22, 1987
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Of a certain dimension, yes, but not...
Mayor Suarez: On a case -by -case basis.
Mr. Plummer: On each basis...
Mr. Rodriguez: The Commission can... the applicant can, by covenant,
voluntarily say that they will not use the whole site for zoning, and they
will use only a floor/area ratio.
Mr. Carollo: Well,...
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me also put on the record, because I asked the
question: I think it's enlightening to know that Dade County, according to
Mr. Pierce, has no transitional use facility at all, in their zoning. I think
it's interesting to note.
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Carollo?
Mr. Carollo: I should think that you have to leave some flexibility. There
are times that you want to approve something, but you don't necessarily want
to approve the complete zoning change, for some of the reasons they've been
stating here. Maybe the reason you're approving it, for that particular site,
to be used one way, but if you change the complete zoning, there's no way that
you can prevent it in the future, from being turned into another type of
business, or development. So that's why I think that the transitional use has
been a good thing to have. Now, whether we want to further refine the way we
go about it, is something else, but as far as eliminating it completely, I
can't go along with it right now. I think that we would be hurting the City
more than instead of helping it, because then you only have the choice of
either approving a zoning change, cr not approving it, and I think in the long
run, it's going to hurt the...
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you a question, Sergio, because maybe he's raised...
Mr. Carollo: ... neighborhoods more than helping them.
Mr. Plummer: I think he's raised a good point.
Mrs. Kennedy: I agree.
Mr. Plummer: Are you saying... (APPLAUSE) Are you saying...
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Please. Please, please, please.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Absolutely.
Mr. Plummer: Are you saying, Sergio, that under your proposal, that the back
portion which is not zoned as the front, commercial portion, would have to go
before a zoning hearing, to be zoned exactly as the front would be?
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, no. I can't vote for that.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: That's what he's saying.
Mr. Plummer: No way. (APPLAUSE) No, no, no.
Mayor Suarez: Please, please, please, please, please, please. You know, we
don't have a meter here that measures applause.
Mr. Plummer: Unless... now, unless...
Mrs. Kennedy: See, Sergio, it was presented so confusing.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, unless... now, excuse me. If you make that area a
designated classification - call it what you may - OK? - but that it does not
extend beyond that, after a hearing before this Commission. In other words,
if you want to take a commercial piece of property, that is in the front, and
141 January 22, 1987
they have property in the back that they want to use for parking or something
else, that that can be called "classification ABC," and that that can be
considered by this Commission, to say yes or no - I agree with that. But let
me tell you the danger of what you're doing. What you're, in effect, in my
estimation, doing, is taking a commercial piece of property, and changing the
back portion, and, as you know, once you make a change in zoning, you cannot
condition it,...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Yeah.
Mr. Plummer: ... and they can build on the whole damn property, and go get
off -site parking somewhere else.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Exactly.
Mr. Plummer: I can't go with that. All you're going there is increasing the
amount of commercial area. That is not what we're trying to do. I think
we're talking to the back, just to use an example - if you have a parcel of
property here, and you have in front part, this is commercial and the back is
residential, which now is, in fact, the transitional, that is what we're
speaking to, as to whether or not it can be used as a transitional, not to
rezone it to a commercial.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Yeah.
Mr. Plummer: No way. Sir, Mr. Pierce.
Mr. Pierce: A moment ago, you referred to me as having made a statement about
Dade County, but just for the benefit of the Commission, and the citizens in
attendance: the County does have two procedures, where something like what
Commissioner Carollo pointed out, and what you just spoke to, can happen. One
is called an "unusual use," which requires a public hearing to permit parking
on an area that's not zoned commercially.
Mayor Suarez: Is that the name of it?
Mr. Pierce: That's specific...
Mayor Suarez: An "unusual use."
Ms. Tindall -Howell: "Unusual use."
Mr. Pierce: It's an "unusual use."
Mayor Suarez: Wow.
Mr. Pierce: It requires a public hearing. The second way they do it, is to
approve a use variance, which requires a very specific legal zoning hardship
test, and which, in effect, is a de facto change of zone. But both of those
require... can be approved by the County Zoning Board, with appeals made to
the County Commission. Each one of those versions can be conditioned by the
Hearing Authority, and those conditions are in force and effect, but they
still meet that goal, that Commissioner Carollo mentioned, and Commissioner
Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: Walter, what we're trying to do is to protect the residential
intrusion of commercial. Now,...
Mr. Pierce: That, I believe, would do that.
Mr. Plummer: ... I am not trying to eliminate transition, because, as I said
in my opening remarks, there are times when it can be used to the advantage
of, not only the developer, but the City. But I think what we're... what I
was talking about, was that area in the back, contiguous to a commercial
parcel, that could be used, and even could include across the street - that's
what we're trying to eliminate, or I was trying to eliminate. And as far as
I'm concerned, the residential portion of that property, to be granted a
transitional use, would invoke a hearing before the Zoning Board and this
Commission. Never was it my intent to make more commercial zoning.
Mr. Pierce: That's exactly what the "unusual use" procedure that the county
uses,...
142 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: I cannot go in any way, I cannot go along with increasing the
amount of commercial property. I can't do that.
Ms. Tindall -Nowell: That's what he's talking about.
Mr. Pierce: That procedure does not increase the commercial property.
Mr. Plummer: No, I can't... I can't agree with that, I'm sorry.
Mr. Rodriguez: If I may address that issue.
Mayor Suarez: It's... you know, I have to say...
(APPLAUSE)
Mr. Rodriguez: if I may address that issue.
Mayor Suarez: ... that the initial idea of having a workshop first...
Mrs. Kennedy: Exactly.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Be...
Mrs. Kennedy: That is what I was going to suggest.
Mayor Suarez: ... and then the first reading, is beginning to make more and
more sense to me, because I thought that there was an alternative that was
built into the statute, so that you would know in advance that this was an
allowable use...
Mrs. Kennedy: Have your workshop, Sergio, and come back to us.
Mayor Suarez: ... permissible, not permitted, use; you know, subject to the
procedural safeguards.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I understand we're arguing in semantics, if what I'm
understanding is true - that we can make all transitional areas, exceptional
uses, and as such, we can place any conditions, and it automatically kicks in
a hearing,...
Ms. Tindall -Howell: You can do that.
Mr. Plummer: ... and that's what I wanted to accomplish from the beginning.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, then everything has to come before us, and we decide.
Mr. Plummer: Exceptional use.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: You can do that very simply, but that's not what this
ordinance does, and that's not what Mr. Rodriguez is proposing.
Mr. Rodriguez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: No, well then, I...
Mrs. Kennedy: Well,...
Mr. Plummer: ... you see, Sergio, it was never, ever, my intent to increase
the size of the commercial zoning. Never. Because you know, and I know, and
we've seen it so many times: once you grant that change of zoning, a
developer can turn around, redesign his building, and be very detrimental to
the area. If we can take... (APPLAUSE) If we can take...
Mayor Suarez: Please, please, please, please, please, please.
Mr. Plummer: ... that area which today is considered a transitional use, and
i call that, from this point forward, an exceptional use,...
I
Mrs. Dougherty (OFF MIKE): Special exception.
i
143 January 22, 1987
r 4�
Mr. Plummer: ... special exception, which does, in fact, kick in the two
hearings, and allows this Commission to place on it any stipulations that they
want - that's what I'm looking for, exactly.
Mr. Pierce: All right. Mr. Plummer...
Mr. Rodriguez: May I address you one second on this?
Mr. Plummer: Sure.
Mr. Rodriguez: First, you don't have to grant any zoning changes, that you
don't want commercial. So you have that choice always. Second, when you
grant the zoning change, you can extend the line as far as you want to, or as
short as you want to, for any uses. Now, addressing specifically what you're
talking about, at present the existing ordinance allows a special exception.
Mr. Plummer: But it doesn't...
Mr. Rodriguez: And the special exception goes to the Zoning Board. What
you're saying is...
Mr. Plummer: But it doesn't automatically kick in now, on transitional uses.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: No, it does not.
Mr. Rodriguez: Some of them will.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but there are cases... I'm saying that every one of them
has to go as an exceptional use - is that the terminology?
Mrs. Kennedy (OFF MIKE): Special exception.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: OK, exceptional use, that would, in fact, kick in the both
hearings, and allow us to place conditions - or allow us to deny it.
Mr. Dawkins: Mrs... Mr....
Mr. Rodriguez: What you are saying, the test that you have to follow in
special exception, is a much more weaker case than you have to follow in a
zoning case.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Rodriguez.
Mr. Rodriguez: In a special exception...
Mr. Plummer: Yeah, but I... I can't vote to in...
Mr. Rodriguez: In a special exception, what you do... what you're saying is,
a special exception, subject to the approval of the City Commission, that's
what you're saying.
Mr. Plummer: But...
Mr. Rodriguez: That's what you're saying, now, because it would require a
hearing before you. There is no test, in that case, that the change has to
conform to the comprehensive plan, for example. It's a very simple... it's a
simpler test to follow through.
Mayor Suarez: It's an easier test to pass.
Mr. Rodriguez: Much easier to pass, and it requires less of a... it would
provide less of a protection to the neighborhoods.
Mayor Suarez: Less safeguards, is what you're saying.
Mr. Rodriguez: Yeah.
Mr. Dawkins: But when you brought that to my office, didn't you tell me, and
if I'm in error, please correct me, that by going to this extended
limitations, extended limitations, that if that shaded area was allowed
144 January 22, 1987
f 4�
transitional use, it could not carry on into the unshaded area - didn't you
tell the that?
Mr. Rodriguez: The shaded area is already commercial.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, no, no.
Mr. Rodriguez: I didn't follow your question, that's why I'm trying to see if
I understand.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, all right. Forget what it is,...
Mr. Rodriguez: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: OK? - and let's look at the shaded area,...
Mr. Rodriguez: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: ... whatever it is, and if a transitional use is granted under
the new procedure that you're outlining, didn't you tell me that if we granted
it only to the shaded area, that the nonshaded area could not automatically go
the same way?
Mr. Rodriguez: Under my procedure, you cannot grant any transitional uses.
Under my procedure, the one I proposed, the applicant would have to come for a
zoning change.
Mayor Suarez: But you have the equivalent. Don't say you can't...
Mr. Dawkins: OK, well, all right, if he comes for a zoning change now - OK?
Mr. Plummer: That's a different story.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, well, if he comes for a zoning change, and this Commission
changes the shaded area through the zoning - does it automatically carry over
into the unshaded area?
Mr. Plummer: Today it does.
Mr. Dawkins: I mean, under this plan you've got.
Mr. Plummer: Under his plan, no.
Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, I'm ready to make a motion.
Mr. Rodriguez: The shaded area...
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Kennedy.
Mrs. Kennedy: Not to take any decision today, to hold the workshop.
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Please, please, please, please, please.
Mrs. Kennedy: Get everybody involved, and then come back to us in 30 days,
and so move.
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mr. Dawkins: I appreciate applause, but it's not going to change my mind, if
you hold ten workshops. I'm going to vote the way I'm voting today.
Mr. Plummer: Well,...
Mr. Dawkins: OK? I mean, I'm just saying, I mean, they're entitled to the
workshop,
Mrs. Kennedy: It's OK.
145 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: You understand?
Mrs. Kennedy: Yeah, it's all right.
Mr. Dawkins: But I'm just saying that, you know, we can have ten workshops,
OK?
Mr. Carollo: Let's bring it to a head, to see where we stand.
Mrs. Kennedy: I would try one.
Mr. Carollo: I make a motion that we approve it.
Mr. Dawkins: I second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Wait, we had a motion to...
Mrs. Kennedy: I have a motion...
Mayor Suarez: ... have a workshop.
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
Mr. Carollo: I make a motion that we...
Mayor Suarez: Was there a second... wait a minute, wait a minute,
Commissioner - was there a second to that motion?
Mr. Carollo: Let's bring it to a head.
Mayor Suarez: Wait a minute, Commissioner. Was there a second to your
motion? All at once.
Mr. Carollo: Commissioner Dawkins seconded.
Mayor Suarez: Going once, going twice, going three times. OK, we have a
motion now, to... what - to eliminate transitional uses?
Mr. Carollo: To approve it.
Mr. Dawkins: Yeah, to go along with his recommendation.
Mayor Suarez: Approve the recommendations of Sergio. We've heard, I think,
from most of the people who are against that. Do you want... we have a motion
and a second.
Ms. Miriam Alonso: I really think... My name is Miriam Alonso, and I'm
speaking on behalf of the Association of Investors and Contractors of Greater
Miami, and I think that before this Commission votes on something that will
affect the City of Miami; I understand that it does effect certain areas of
neighborhoods, and we have to protect that. How can we assure that will
protect that? If we have the transitional use, but we have public hearings,
and if the public cares, and they don't want this in their neighborhood, they
can come in front of this Commission, and they can express their desires, and
it will be denied. But...
Mr. Plummer: No, that's not...
Ms. Alonso: ... if it's something... excuse me,...
Mr. Plummer: That's not true, Miriam, they can go today and get a Class C
permit, and the neighbors don't know about it, and this Commission doesn't
know about it.
Ms. Alonso: I'm saying... I'm saying, make it a condition...
(APPLAUSE)
Mayor Suarez: Wait, please, please.
Ms. Alonso: I'm saying, make it a condition that they have to have a public
hearing, and also set standards for approval, but what you're doing tonight,
146 January 22, 1987
to eliminate transitional use from the City of Miami, it is a mistake, and
it's damaging the City of Miami, and I think it's something that you have to
look to the future.
Mr. Carollo: Miriam, that's exactly what I said before, and the reason I'm
making the motion to approve it, so we could defeat it, you know, and start
afresh. That's why I made the motion, you know, that... you could make a
motion and vote against it, and that's what I intend to do, so we could kill
it once and for all, and then start afresh, since the other motion was not
seconded, to have a workshop. So, I just wanted to bring it to a head, and..
Ms. Alonso: But the problem is this, too - let me say something else. Also,
as Mr. Walter Pierce has said, the City of Miami is studying the 9500
ordinance. We are defeating the entire purposes. We are seeing here, in the
City of Miami, that you are taking out part... today, you eliminate
transitional use, and tomorrow you come and you eliminate cluster homes, and
tomorrow you come and do something else. Let's face reality. Let's study
9500 once and for all, and then make a proper decision for the City of Miami.
We are taking by pieces, and doing things that is affecting the construction.
If you don't want to think of the future of this City - and I'm thinking about
areas that are real ghettos, in the City of Miami - no nice neighborhoods.
I'm thinking of the areas that anything that approves the appearance of that
neighborhood, it's important for us, and I pledge to you to think this twice,
before you meet to vote, of killing the transitional use. Thank you.
Mr. Dawkins: All we're saying, Dr. Alonso, is that at the second hearing - it
will be a public hearing, it's supposed to be - but, as Joe said, we keep
going, and I agree with you, we keep going - each time we meet, it's something
different. Now, if we don't have a vote today, and then we have a public
hearing, then we've got to come back and we're going to have two more
hearings; and then when you look, somebody's going to ask for a continuance,
because they don't have enough information, and here we go, for another
hearing. So, all all of us is trying to do up here is bring it to a head,
and, who knows, at the second hearing it may be voted down; we don't know.
There's no guarantee that at the second hearing everybody is going to vote
like they vote today, even if they vote to deny it.
Mr. Simon: Mr...
Mr. Dawkins: Between now and then, we may... either one of us up here may get
information that changes our mind, and we may vote differently.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, Mr. Mayor, I'm going to...
Ms. Alonso: Also, may I...
Mr. Dawkins: Um-hmm, go ahead, go ahead.
Mayor Suarez: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait...
Mr. Simon: Mr. Mayor,...
Ms. Alonso: Also, may I add something?
Mrs. Kennedy: Miriam, one second,...
Ms. Alonso: Yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: Let me go back and make another motion. I'm going to stick to
the workshop,...
Mr. Plummer: There's a motion...
Mayor Suarez: Yeah, she's making a substitute motion. Go ahead.
Mrs. Kennedy: It's a substitute motion,...
Mr. Dawkins: I withdraw my second. Go ahead.
Mrs. Kennedy: ... to have the workshop, and then come back to us in 30 days.
We'll get the input from everybody here, we're going to get an ordinance
that...
147
January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: I'll second it.
Mrs. Kennedy: ... everybody agrees.
Mayor Suarez: I'll second your motion.
Mr. Simon: Mr....
Mr. Odio: Wait.
Mr. Carollo: The...
Mr. Plummer: All right, excuse me, there is two motions on the floor.
Mr. Dawkins: I withdraw my... there's only one;...
Mr. Carollo: I think the...
Mr. Dawkins: I withdrew my second. There's only one.
Mr. Carollo: I think the purpose of the workshop should be to also get input
from the public, in that workshop.
Mr. Simon: Mr...
Mrs. Kennedy: It will.
Mr. Plummer: All right, there is a motion now... the substitute motion has
become the main motion.
Mr. Dawkins: There is no substitute motion - I withdrew my second to the
first motion.
Mr. Plummer: I said the substitute motion has become the main motion.
Mr. Dawkins: Oh, OK.
Mayor Suarez: The only one.
Mr. Plummer: Is there any discussion on the main motion? By Commissioners?
Mr. Carollo: No, Commissioner. Again, in the main motion we're including
that the workshop be open to the public.
Mrs. Kennedy: That is correct.
i
Mr. Plummer: Yeah, of course.
Mr. Carollo: That's fine.
Mr. Plummer: Call the roll.
Ms. Hirai: Roll call. Mrs. Kennedy?
jMrs. Kennedy: Yes.
f
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, before you do, do you want to just set a date for
the workshop, Sergio?
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Mr. Plummer: So everybody has the knowledge of when.
Mr. Rodriguez: February 17th.
Mr. Plummer: February 17th. What time?
Mr. Rodriguez: Nineteen eighty-seven. Five o'clock.
Mr. Plummer: Where?
148 January 22, 1987
Mr. Rodriguez: Here.
Mr. Plummer: In these chambers.
so people can get off work?
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes.
May I suggest you make it at 6:00 o'clock,
Mr. Rodriguez: Six o'clock sounds good to me.
Mr. Plummer: OK, so the def inite date of the workshop is February the 17th,
at 6:00 P.M., in these chambers. Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-106
A MOTION SETTING THE DATE OF FEBRUARY 17, 1987 AT 6:00
O'CLOCK P.M. IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS, AS THE
DATE OF A WORKSHOP TO BE HELD TO SEEK PUBLIC INPUT ON
THE ISSUE OF PROPOSED ELIMINATION OF ALL TRANSITIONAL
USES; FURTHER DIRECTING THE ADMINISTRATION TO DRAFT
THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE AND BRING IT BACK IN 30 DAYS
FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION.
Upon being seconded by Mayor Suarez, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Comment made during roll call:
Mr. Plummer: I'm going to vote "yes," but I want to go on the record, that
what I'm looking for, I think, is that all transitional parcels today will
become "special exceptions" tomorrow. I'm voting "yes" for the workshop.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you, and I think if we have established one thing, it's
that this is a controversial issue, that's going to require a great deal of
attention, and we really were not prepared today to consider this, totally at
least, but I assume we'll keep getting citizen input, as we got today.
Ms. Tindall -Howell: Thank you very much.
37. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: REQUIRE FULL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FROM
OFFICIALS, ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEES, BOARDS AND COMMITTEES IN THE CITY OF
MIAMI.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Planning and Zoning Item 1.
Mr. Plummer: No, we've still got something back there, don't we?
Mr. Dawkins: No, no, we've got some more items over there.
Mr. Carollo: We're not in...
Mayor Suarez: OK, Item 36.
149 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Item 36.
Mr. Carollo: How about 35 - Alicia...?
Mayor Suarez: She wasn't...
Mr. Plummer: She had to go home, Joe.
Mr. Carollo: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: She couldn't wait, Joe.
Mr. Carollo: Let's wait about a minute, before the place gets cleared up.
Mayor Suarez: Could you please, on your way out... there's plenty of space,
all the way outside, to have further discussion, and consideration, and plot
strategies, and... whatever. Let me enter into the record, Madame City Clerk,
the letter from... I guess this is...
Mr. Dawkins: Arthur King. No, I don't see...
Mayor Suarez: I guess this is John Blaisdell, representing the views of the
Sports and Exhibition Authority in reference to Item 36, and Arthur King,
chairman, City of Miami Heritage Conservation Board.
Mr. Carollo: There's a letter there.
Mayor Suarez: Also have that inserted into the record, and if anyone can find
any other inputs we've gotten on this issue, make sure that the record so
reflects. I guess we have a resolution from D.D.A., alsop - make sure the
record reflects that.
Mr. Plummer: One more good reason to eliminate D.D.A.
Mrs. Kennedy: Mr. Mayor, before we start, let me again, make my position very
clear, I was adamant about this when we voted the last time, and I am still am
adamant about it. I think that we have a lot of good people serving on
boards, I think we are going to lose a lot of these good people, and I don't -
think that they should be subjected to this kind of scrutiny. I think that we
as public officials have to do it. We chose to do it when we ran for office,
but I don't think that we should have our people who give of their time to
serve on our boards to go through this. In essence, it will hinder more than
it will help. I just wanted to put my views again on the record.
Mr. Carollo: If I may...
Mayor Suarez: Commissioner Carollo.
Mr. Carollo: Miller, are you coming or going?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mr. Carollo: You are coming or going for this item.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mr. Carollo: Are you staying, or going for this item? All right, this was
your idea, Mr. Mayor, back in mid 1986, if I recollect, when it first came up,
and as I've stated on the previous occasions, I think you should be an
example, if you so much believe in this, and give your disclosure of how much
you made in 1985 and 1986, then I think it will give a little more credibility
to how much you claim to really believe in this. That is my position, Mr.
Mayor, if you want to answer me, you could, if you don't want to, I certainly
understand.
Mayor Suarez: Herb.
Mr. Herbert Simon: OK, I am Herbert Simon, back again, chairman of the
Planning Advisory Board, and as I just left with you ladies, and gentlemen, I
would like to read into the record, a resolution of the Planning Advisory
Board, number 987: "A resolution opposing the inclusion of the Planning
Advisory Board, in the financial disclosure ordinance, and delegating the
150 January 22, 1987
a ro
chairman as spokesman to express this resolution," and following discussion of
the P.A.B. public meeting on January 21, 1987, the resolution is moved by Mr.
Asmar, seconded by Mr. Benjamin, the vote was eight to one for approval and
you have the names listed there. Some members of the Planning Advisory Board
had expressed very definitely, including myself, whether it is a threat or a
promise, that we would resign from the board if full disclosure was required.
I lived in Coral Gables for about 25 years and I served on a number of
committees of the City of Miami, because my business is in Miami, my
investments, for the most part are in Miami. My heart has been in Miami, but
my body was in Coral Gables, so I could serve on some committees, but I could
not serve on the Planning Advisory Board, or the Zoning Board, which has
always been my desire. About four years ago, I moved into the City of Miami
and about a year, year and one-half ago, I was appointed to the Planning
Advisory Board. I would hate to leave it. Mr. Mayor, I sit in your seat
twice a month, Wednesday night, and it is very nice, you keep it warm for me.
I enjoy serving on the board, and all of the other members do, of course I am
not speaking for the other boards, they can speak for themselves, but on the
Planning Advisory Board, for instance, we have realtors, architects,
developers, engineers, as well as other business people and lay persons, and I
think you have got an excellent board. I've only had experience with it the
last couple of years, but sometimes, let's face it, on politically appointed
boards, why they are just political appointees. They may not be the best
suited for the board. In this case, I think that they are great. I think
that you have got a diverse board, intelligent thinking people who really are
trying to do their best for the City. We get paid $80 some bucks every two
weeks, which is enough, I don't know the exact amount, but that is about
enough to buy our dinner, and it is not quite as much as you all make, I think
you get $6,000 a year, but it is enough to buy our dinner...
Mayor Suarez: $5,0001
Mr. Simon: $5,000 a year, excuse me, sir - less than your income tax.
Mr. Plummer: You all make $200 less than we do.
Mr. Carollo: $5,000, plus a City issued semiautomatic pistol.
Mr. Simon: I thought I would get a rise anyway. I am glad everybody was
awake: But, of course, it is very little pay, just about enough for us to get
to the meetings, I think that all of the people that I know on the board are
dedicated people, and I would, you know, hate to lose them as well as I,
myself, would like to remain on the board and...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Simon.
Mr. Simon: Sir. Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: We have already established the fact that you are compensated.
I think we also need to establish on your particular board that you do make
decisions affecting the pocketbooks of the people of this community in final
form. Am I correct?
Mr. Simon: All of our decisions, Mr. Plummer, are subject to approval of this
City commission. So, all we are is a recommending body. We are not even in a
position to take anything under the table, or whatever you may call it. It
all comes back to this Commission.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, we are not speaking of under the table. I think what the
Mayor originally proposed is honesty in government, open government, and I
can't for the life of me, understand what is trying to be hidden. If you have
to make a disclosure to let the people of this community have confidence in
the members who are appointed to this board, to the members of this
Commission, it just seems to me to be consistent that you have to go
completely throughout. You cannot sit and pick and chose. I am not
necessarily, and I want you to understand that because somebody reduces
something to writing, if in fact, he was dishonest in the first place, because
he is reducing it to writing, is in fact going to be honest when he reduces it
to writing, because I heard the other night that the I.R.S. presently has
183,000 cases pending in court. Now, you know, I have no qualms whatsoever on
financial disclosure. I was successful in inserting, and I think which is
fair, that you have an alternative. If you don't want to make financial
disclosure, then, you have the alternative of submitting your income tax
return, and I just don't know why people would have an objection to that.
151 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: And if you don't want to do that either, you have the option to
resign from the board.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly.
Mrs. Kennedy: ...which is what we don't want.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know...
Mr. Simon: J.L., if I had that flag down here, I'd wave it. Forgive me, but
it sounds great) I pay a substantial income tax. I am an honest person. I
know everybody says I am an honest person, and the more you say it, perhaps
the more you are not, but you have known me yourself for a great many years,
and I pay a lot of income tax. I do not wish to disclose my finances to the
press, to the public, to the crooks that are out there, like stole the Mayor's
car the other night. I mean, they took, as I read in the newspaper, they
didn't want the car, they wanted the gun and the radio and all that was
inside, and then left the car.
Mr. Carollo: Well, I don't know, some of them think they might have wanted
his memoirs for the book he is writing.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but you see Herb, why are you different than me?
Mr. Simon: Wait a minutel I am not different than you. I don't think
anybody should have to disclose, but I am speaking for my board. As far as I
know, J.L., you are honest also, and I've known you for a long time. No,
seriously, I don't think that anybody should have to disclose. Those that do
make disclosure, if, those that are not, let's say honest, if they want to
hide something, they can do it, they can put it in their wife's name, or
somebody else's name, there is a way of hiding it. You are only picking on
the people that are honest, and make them disclose, and a great many of them
are going to quit your boards. I know you can replace them. I don't think
you will replace them as well, including myself, but I really think it is an
imposition on the boards to ask them to disclose, where we place our families
in danger, ourselves up to ridicule, or whatever, by the press, there is no
such thing as confidence in records. I've dealt with confidential records
before and there are always people that can get to those records, so unless
you have some questions, of me, you know, I beg of you not to do it.
Mayor Suarez: OK, thank you, Herb. Mariano.
Mr. Mariano Cruz: My name is Mariano Cruz, I live at 1227 N.W. 26th Street.
I serve on the Community Development Advisory Board, elected representative
for Allapattah and the reason I stay here, I have already changed my mind,
because before I was opposed, at first reading, I was opposed to the
ordinance, the total financial... but after seeing something, things that
happen in the community, I am for it, total financial disclosure. If you
serve full time or part time, in any public service, the word public service -
means "public," there is no private record there, so I am for total financial
disclosure, because I myself, I have nothing to hide, no conflict of interest,
or nothing whatsoever. If the people don't like to serve, I think there are a
lot of people out there that they will be willing to serve the public. I don't
get paid, and I am not a political appointee. I am elected by my community
and as long as they want me to serve on the board, I will be on the board, not
by appointment, but because the people in the community want me to represent
them here. If that makes me to have a financial disclosure, fine, I go along
with that, because that goes with the job. That will be one of the parks,
meaning "fringe benefits" of the job, but I will serve regardless of what you
vote.
Mayor Suarez: Sort of a negative fringe benefit.
Mr. Cruz: Yes, right.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you Mariano. I will move attachment (B) which excludes
boards, and applies to the other groups.
Mr. Carollo: There...
152 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, there is a motion of exhibit (B), is there a second?
Is there a second? Is there a second? The motion dies.
Mr. Carollo: Commissioner Kennedy, you seconded that motion the last time
around.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I asked three times now. Do you want to restate it, Mr.
Mayor?
Mayor Suarez: I move attachment (B) which applies to the Commission on
unclassified employees, but not to boards.
Mrs. Kennedy: I would like to stick to (C).
Mayor Suarez: Is that a motion?
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute. Wait a minute.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, no.
Mr. Plummer: Is there a second to the Mayor's motion?
Mr. Carollo: Well, he said (B), she said (C), do we have an (A) or...
Mrs. Kennedy: Let me second for discussion.
Mr. Plummer: Seconded for discussion on (B), and you must contain your
discussion to that.
Mrs. Kennedy: I don't have my book in front of me, I was just asking for one.
It excludes the board members, but leaves the unclassified positions?
Mayor Suarez: If you have any problem with that, and you want to move (C), I
will second (C).
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, I would like to move (C) as the alternate.
Mr. Plummer: There is a new motion on the floor made by the Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: I withdraw my initial motion.
Commissioner Plummer:..... attachment (C), and seconded by Commissioner
Kennedy. Discussion on item (C).
Mr. Carollo: If I may, if I could have a look at Item 7 (C).
Mrs. Kennedy: (C) excludes everybody.
Mr. Plummer: (C) is just the Commission, only.
Mrs. Kennedy: Right, and that is my motion.
Mr. Plummer: OK, I hear that. Discussion among the Commission on item (C).
Do you want a minute to think about it. Is that what you want?
Mr. Carollo: OK, now, as I understand it, both Xavier and Commissioner
Kennedy want to approve (C), that it is only the Commission.
Mr. Plummer: That's...
Mr. Carollo: And if I recollect the statements of Commissioner Plummer and
Commissioner Dawkins made the last time around, the only way they would vote
upon it, if it includes everyone, unless they have had a change of heart.
Mr. Plummer: That is (A).
Mr. Carollo: Right, (A).
Mr. Plummer: I am still with (A).
Mr. Carollo: Are you still with (A), Miller, or is that the only way you
would vote on it?
153 January 22, 1987
}
Mr. Dawkins: No, I am voting for (A). If anything else is voted, I am voting
against it.
Mr. Carollo: OK.
Mr. Carollo: That is just what you said, you would only vote for (A).
Mrs. Kennedy: So, you...
Mr. Plummer: OK... wait a minute now, Commissioner Carollo has the floor.
Are you finished, Commissioner?
Mr. Carollo: Not yet, but you can proceed.
Mr. Plummer: Commissioner Kennedy is recognized.
Mrs. Kennedy: I don't have anything. I stated my, my...
Mr. Plummer: Ex -Manager Odio. Do you wish to be heard?
Mr. Odio: No.
Mr. Plummer: Further discussion from the Commission on (C)?
Mayor Suarez: Not by that title, huh?
Mr. Carollo: Just one additional statement.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir.
Mr. Carollo: What is being requested of the Commission and/or any other board
member or City employees is that we submit a financial disclosure.
Mr. Plummer: That's not the motion, Commissioner.
Mr. Carollo: I know, the motion is strictly Commission.
Mr. Plummer: (C), Commission only. That is the motion.
Mr. Carollo: Only.
Mrs. Kennedy: Right.
Mr. Carollo: But, what I am saying is, J.L., and the different actions that
we have, is that either the Commission, and, or, other members of boards, and
other employees, such as the City Manager, the City Attorney, Clerk, so on...
Police Chief, be required to submit a financial disclosure to the extent that
no other City in the State of Florida is doing. We have requirements
presently, that every City in the State of Florida has, that we submit certain
financial disclosures. I really question the reason of why the City of Miami
should be the only City that is going to be different. I think that if we
should implement a law like this, which I really have no objections to, it
should be done so, however, including all the cities in the State of Florida,
not just the City of Miami. At the same, I can not comprehend how the
originator of this idea so much wants this on one hand, but refuses time and
time again to show what he made in 1985 or 1986. I cannot comprehend that and
I know Xavier does not want to answer me why. I understand, so I have nothing
further to state at this point in time.
Mr. Plummer: All right, further discussion?
Mrs. Kennedy: Yes, under discussion. Mr. Cruz mentioned a minute ago, he
talked about the conflict of interest, of existing conflict of interest.
Madam City Attorney, isn't there a conflict of interest regulation already in
existence?
Mrs. Dougherty: There are three conflict of interest regulations. There is a
State law... we are really talking about financial disclosure. There is a
variety of conflicts of interest, voting conflicts...
154 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: No, I am talking about conflicts of interest, people on boards
who vote on a conflict of interest situation without...
Mrs. Dougherty: People on boards also have a conflict of interest, but this
ordinance is a financial disclosure ordinance, which they have to comply with
the State law which requires them to file sources of income statements, and a
County ordinance, which also requires them to file a source of income
statement, or their financial tax returns.
Mr. Plummer: Any further discussion?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, Mr. Vice -Mayor.
Mr. Plummer: Commissioner Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: I feel that sometimes you have to vote your convictions,
regardless of what is said. Every member whom I appointed to any board, either
called my office, wrote a letter, or personally dropped by to tell me that if
full disclosure is asked for, they will resign from the board. I respectfully
respect their right to do that, but by the same token, when this began, I too,
felt that we should adopt the same criteria that the State had, or the County
had, but nobody wanted to hear that. Then, we get in the middle of this, and
now, you don't know where, but I feel that if an individual in America who has
a right to a choice feels that he or she does not want to abide by rules and,
regulations that are set up, then they don't have to; so therefore, I am
voting for full disclosure, and when I no longer want to disclose... if I get
to the place where I can't disclose anything, I'll get off the City
Commission, if I am not defeated at the polls before that.
Mr. Plummer: Any further discussion? Item (C) is the matter before us.
Mr. Dawkins: Everybody, that is what I am doing!
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Dawkins: I mean, if that comes up, that is what I am voting for.
Mr. Carollo: Yes, if...
Mr. Dawkins: If it doesn't, I'm voting against whatever it is.
Mr. Plummer: Call the roll on alternative (C).
THEREUPON, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD, BY
TITLE ONLY.
Mr. Plummer: Don't you delineate the (C)? did you delineate the (C) portion
alternative?
Mrs. Dougherty: (C) is only City officials, certain City officials.
Mr. Plummer: OK, all right. Well, the...
Mrs. Dougherty: The City Mayor and City Commissioners.
Mr. Plummer: Elected officials.
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: That's... OK, just so it is clear. Motion understood, call the
roll.
155 January 22, 1987
r
MOTION FAILED:
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 2-309 ENTITLED
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE TO CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA AS AMENDED; SETTING FORTH
REQUIREMENTS OF AN ANNUAL DISCLOSURE BY CITY OFFICIALS
OF INFORMATION RELATED TO FINANCIAL STATUS OF SAID
OFFICIALS AND CONTAINING PENALTIES, A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Mayor Suarez and seconded by Commissioner Kennedy and
was DEFEATED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
Mayor Suarez: OK, we have no motions pending. Commissioners, what is your...
Mrs. Kennedy: Well, I would like to move something else. I would like to move
alternative (B).
Mayor Suarez: Seconded.
Mr. Plummer: There is a motion to try (B). We are getting to (A) eventually.
Mr. Carollo: I...
Mr. Plummer: Under discussion for item (B).
Mr. Carollo: For the record, I will be voting against item... what is it?
Mr. Plummer: (B).
Mr. Carollo: (B) also, for the reasons that I stated.
Mr. Plummer: OK, any further discussion? Call the roll. Excuse me, do you
have to read the ordinance again?
Mrs. Dougherty: Now this one applies to City Commissioners and all
unclassified City employees.
THEREUPON, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD, BY
TITLE ONLY.
Mr. Plummer: Motion understood. Now, do we understand that financial
disclosure still contains the alternate of either financial disclosure, or
your income tax return?
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: OK. Any further discussion? Call the roll.
Ms. Hirai: Need a move and a second, Mr. Vice -Mayor.
Mr. Plummer: It was seconded by the Mayor.
156 January 22, 1987
r
MOTION FAILED
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 2-309, ENTITLED
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, TO CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; SETTING FORTH
REQUIREMENTS OF ANNUAL DISCLOSURE BY CERTAIN ELECTED
OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF INFORMATION RELATED TO THE
FINANCIAL STATUS OF SAID OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES;
CONTAINING PENALITIES, A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy and seconded by Mayor Suarez and
was DEFEATED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: I think this same as (C) and (B), this is a watered down and it
just guts the provisions out of it, and if we are going to have total honest
open government, let's have it all the way. I vote no.
Mayor Suarez: OK, what is the Commission's pleasure?
Mr. Carollo: For the record, I will also be voting no on (C) for the reasons
so stated.
Mrs. Kennedy: We are on (B).
Mayor Suarez: You mean (A).
Mr. Dawkins: We already voted no on (C).
Mr. Carollo: Which of the others here are left, (A)?
Mayor Suarez: We haven't considered (A)?
Mr. Plummer: (B) and (C).
Mr. Carollo: (A).
Mayor Suarez: Do I have a motion?
Mr. Carollo: See, you actually have four choices, (A), (B), (C), or (D), none
of the above!
Mayor Suarez: None of the above, and you have chosen none of the above, is
what you stated, right?
Mr. Carollo: Mr. Mayor, let me say this to you. I will show, next time
around, how much I have made for this year, and I have no problems as I
stated to you, to show how much I have made in 1985 or 1986. It appears that
you are the one that has the problem to show what you made in 1985 and 1986.
Mr. Plummer: All right, are you then making a motion, Commissioner, my
understanding, to add a (D), and that is that nothing?
Mr. Carollo: Well, no, I just stated for the record that I am voting no, for
this last one also, (A).
Mayor Suarez: He is just stating how he is going to vote if somebody moves.
Mr. Carollo: Anyone is free to make any additional motions.
157 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: If somebody moves (A), attachment (A).
Mr'. Plummer: I will move (A).
Mr. Dawkins: I will second (A).
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion?
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 2-309, ENTITLED
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE, TO CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; SETTING FORTH
REQUIREMENTS OF ANNUAL DISCLOSURE BY CITY OFFICIALS
AND EMPLOYEES OF INFORMATION RELATED TO THE FINANCIAL
STATUS OF SAID OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES; CONTAINING
PENALTIES, A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner
Dawkins and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mayor Suarez: Ah Ha.
Mr. Plummer: Finally! I want to remind the Mayor, if you can't eat all of
the cake, get at least half. (LAUGHTER)
Mayor Suarez: I'll vote yes. Let everybody declare, and we move on to item
37.
Mr. Odio: Can I ask a question?
Mayor Suarez: That includes you.
Mrs. Plummer: Excuse me, that is on first reading.
Mr. Odio: No, but I wanted... can I do then, a clarification at this point?
Mrs. Dougherty: That is on first reading. No, that is on second reading.
That was on second reading.
Mr. Carollo: I...
Mr. Odio: On the unclassified people, there are a lot of unclassified
personnel in the City of Miami, that are really secretaries and...
Mayor Suarez: Because they happen to work for City Hall, or whatever?
Mr. Odio: Because they are going to... executive privilege, or whatever, and
I feel that to put them through this, burden... well, I want to clarify
before the second reading.
i
Mr. Plummer: Well, is this second reading, or not? This is first reading?
Mrs. Dougherty First reading, it has not been...
Mr. Carollo: No, no, this is second reading.
158
I
January 22, 1987
Mr. Odio: Might, this is second reading.
Mrs. Dc::gher:,. It ..._pposed to be second reading, but we didn't have time
to advertise it.
Mayor Suarez: Wait a minute, she is saying it is first reading, then.
Mrs. Kennedy: We didn't have time to advertise, so it is first reading.
Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, you make the legal decisions. Is this
first or second reading?
Mrs. Dougherty: First reading.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you!
Mr. Carollo: All the board members and City employees and all others that
want to resign, they can send their correspondence to Xavier, he will accept
them.
Mr. Dawkins: It may not pass on second reading, don't nobody, anybody do
anything yet.
Mr. Odio: Since we do have the chance Commissioners to come back, if we could
consider the possibility of removing or excluding those unclassified people...
I don't mind me or the top staff, but to put secretaries and clerks and...
Mayor Suarez: It absolutely will be considered, in fact, also the removal of
all unclassified employees, if we have a vote change between now and the
second reading.
Mr. Carollo: What I don't understand is, that is supposed to be second
reading, because it couldn't be, because we didn't advertise it in time, then
why the heck did we discuss it today for? Boy, it wouldn't have happened if
Maurice was here.
Mayor Suarez: First reading, Madam City Attorney?
Mr. Plummer: It is what she rules.
Mayor Suarez: OK, your observations and your suggestions are noted. I
totally agree with that, as to those employees, even other employees who are
not paid... who are paid
Mr. Dawkins: If you are on the prevailing side at the next meeting.
Mayor Suarez: That is right.
Mr. Dawkins: Just make another motion.
Mayor Suarez: Item 37.
Mr. Simon: Yes, sir...
Mayor Suarez: No, no, we are just on first reading, Herb, so....
Mr. Plummer: That is first reading, you get another bite of the apple, Herb.
Mrs. Kennedy: You get another, Herb.
159 January 22, 1987
38. DECLARE CITY OF MIAIAINNIVERSITY OF MIAMI/JAMES L. KNIGHT CENTER LEASE TO
BE IN DEFAULT; NOTIFY LEASE HOLD MORTGAGEE AND MIAMI CENTER ASSOCIATES -
INSTRUCT CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE APPROPIATE LEGAL ACTION.
Mr. Odio: I'll let Lucia continue after what I have to say. This Miami
Center, as you know is our partner in the Knight Center, favorable partner in
the Knight Center, and they are at this moment...
Mr. Carollo: What are you talking a about?
Mr. Dawkins: 37, Joe.
Mr. Carollo: Are you talking about the Knight Center, or Miami Center?
Mr. Odio: Knight Center. This is Worsham Brothers.
Mayor Suarez: What is the story? Can we negotiate it, or can we not?
Mr. Plummer: The Knight Center, or the Miami Convention Center?
Mr. Odio: The University of Miami/City of Miami Knight Center.
Mr. Plummer: I don't know where you are talking about. If you are talking
about the Miami City Convention Center, I know what you are talking about.
Mr. Odio: Fine, that one sounds good, that one!
Mayor Suarez: Otherwise known as James L. Knight, otherwise known as all the
other things. Go ahead.
Mr. Odio: They are technically in default of their agreement wit.t: the City.
They have not paid the money owned to us, and I am asking from you that you
instruct us to pursue the law.
Mayor Suarez: Legal remedies. This applies to all of the rental space?
Mr. Odio: That applies to and the monies that they agreed to pay us... what
was the amount... $430,000 and some dollars.
Mayor Suarez: But, I mean, in the event of a default, what lease are we
talking about, what lease space are we talking about?
Mr. Odio: They own most of the... well, the retail space, they own the
concession rights, they own the hotel tower, and we would like to ask you to
send it to the Law Department for her to pursue it.
Mayor Suarez: What rights would the sub -tenants have?
Mr. Odio: We have to find out.
Mayor Suarez: If we were able to prevail against...
Mrs. Dougherty: They would have the same rights they have now, but also, if
we declare them in default and had the rights to throw them out of the Center,
or to declare the lease invalid at that point, the lease hold mortgagee has
the right to step into their posture. What we are asking you to do is two
things: authorize me to send the appropriate letters both to lease hold
mortgagee and to the Miami Center Associates declaring this lease in default;
asking, also to take into the appropriate legal remedies, either to sue on the
contract itself, or to have them declared in default, depending on what the
Manager decides, after we advise them of the full possibilities of default.
Mr. Plummer: So moved.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
0
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 87-107
A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO SEND THE APPROPRIATE LETTERS BOTH TO THE LEASE HOLD
MORTGAGEE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI-UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI
JAMES L. KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER AND TO THE MIAMI
CENTER ASSOCIATES DECLARING THE LEASE FOR SAID
FACILITY IN DEFAULT; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY
ATTORNEY TO TAKE THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL REMEDIES EITHER
TO SUE ON THE CONTRACT ITSELF OR TO HAVE IT DECLARED
IN DEFAULT.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
39. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 9500 (OFFICIAL SCHEDULE OF
DISTRICT REGULATIONS ENTITLED "PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES") BY
INSERTING PROVISION UNDER RO-3 THAT "USES" INCLUDE RG-3 AND USES
PERMITTED GENERALLY OR PERMISSIBLE BY SPECIAL PERMIT IN THE RO-2
DISTRICT.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Planning and Zoning number 1.
Mr. Rodriguez: Item 1 is a second reading. It is a...
Mrs. Kennedy: So moved, it is just to correct a scrivener's error.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Anyone from the public
wish to be heard for or against? Let the record reflect that no one has
stepped forward. Read the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED,
THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BY AMENDING
PAGE 3 OF THE OFFICIAL SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT
REGULATIONS, ENTITLED "PRINCIPAL USES AND STRUCTURES"
BY INSERTING A PROVISION UNDER RO-3 RESIDENTIAL OFFICE
THAT USES INCLUDE RG-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL) AND USES
PERMITTED GENERALLY OR PERMISSIBLE BY SPECIAL PERMIT
IN THE RO-2 (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE) DISTRICT; CONTAINING
A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of December 11,
1986, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed
J and adopted by the following vote-
161 January 22, 1987
FA
r
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10210.
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.
40. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE 9500, ARTICLE 20 ("GENERAL AND
SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS") BY ADDING "CBD STORAGE FACILITY"; ETC.
Mayor Suarez: Planning and Zoning item 2.
Mr. Rodriguez: Item number 2 is a second reading. I would like to offer a
floor amendment. You have in front of you a copy marked in yellow, in which
we are striking the words "files documents and" because in a way, that is a
redundancy, and we have this covered by another ordinance. Other than that,
it is a second reading on the proposal you had before.
Mr. Dawkins: Moved and seconded.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Anyone from the public
wishing to be heard on it? Let the reflect no one has stepped forward. Call
the roll.
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED,
THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, BY
AMENDING ARTICLE 20, ENTITLED "GENERAL AND
SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS," BY ADDING A NEW SECTION
2039 ENTITLED "CBD STORAGE FACILITY", BY PROVIDING FOR
A DEFINITION AND LIMITATIONS FOR CBD STORAGE
FACILITIES; AND AMENDING PAGE 5 OF THE OFFICIAL
SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS BY ADDING A NEW
PARAGRAPH 7 TO CBD-1 CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
PROVIDING FOR CBD STORAGE FACILITIES BEING PERMISSIBLE
ONLY BY SPECIAL PERMIT; CONTAINING A REPEALER
PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of December 11,
1986, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Dawkins, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10211.
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.
162 January 22, 1987
0
41. UPHOLD ZONING BOARD'S AFFIRMATION OF PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY
CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT (3
DUPLEXES) AT APPROXIMATELY 2816 S.W. 3 STREET.
Mayor Suarez: Item Planning and Zoning 3.
Mr. Guillermo Olmedillo: PZ-3, it is an appeal to a denial for a class C
permit for a cluster which is located on S.W. 3rd Street between 27th and 29th
Avenue. The application was denied by the Planning Director, on the basis
that it did not provide for enough parking, and one of the provisions by
which the class C is considered, is exactly that, and the Public Works
Department has commented that the proposed parking lot does not provide safe
and convenient parking, which would result in cars backing out into the right
of way. The Planning Director denied the class C for the cluster, the Zoning
Board, under the appeal, voted to uphold the decision of the Planning
Director, on a 7 to 2 vote.
Mr. Plummer: So, this is the appeal of the applicant?
Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: OK, let's hear from the applicant.
Ms. Dixie Suarez: My name is Dixie Suarez, I am at 910 S.W. 43rd Avenue, I am
one of the owners of the property at 2016 S.W. 3rd Street. We are here to ask
you to favor our petition of the six clusters that we are applying for the
class C permit, because we feel that we are within the ordinance of the
parking, according to what we.. the size of the lot that we have, and
according to the zoning ordinance, or the cluster zoning ordinance. We have,
we are within the 1.5 that is required in the books of the cluster zoning
ordinance.
Mr.
Plummer:
Do you own both parcels?
Ms.
Suarez:
Yes, we do. It is two lots, 50 by 100 each.
Mr.
Plummer:
Who is Benigno Pereda?
Ms.
Suarez:
He is our architect - Benigno Pereda.
Mr.
Plummer:
Well, how can he be the applicant?
Ms.
Suarez:
No, we are the applicants.
Mr.
Plummer:
I'm sorry, on my agenda, he is the applicant.
Ms.
Suarez:
He is representing us as the architect, in case
any questions can
come
up.
Mayor
Suarez: It shows here as being the president of the
corporation, that
is
the applicant. Is that correct, too?
Mr.
Plummer:
Miami Design and Associates.
Ms.
Perez:
Miami Design and Associates is the firm that is
representing us in
the
design of the plans.
Mr.
Plummer:
OK, how long have you owned these parcels?
Ms.
Perez:
A year.
Mr.
Plummer:
One year?
Ms.
Perez:
Yes.
Mr. Plummer: When you bought them, were you aware that they were zoned for
duplex?
163 January 22, 1987
Ms. Perez: When we bought them, yes, we were aware, and we also, prior to our
purchasing the land, we went to the Zoning Department, and my husLa,,d spoke to
one of the representatives, and they told us according to what we have, the
size of the lot, we can definitely build six units, otherwise, we would not
have invested our money.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you could definitely apply.
Ms. Perez: And to thereafter, we started getting all kinds of problems from
the Zoning Department.
Mr. Plummer: Does anybody else have anything to say? I move that item PZ-3,
we uphold the Planning Director's decision.
Mayor Suarez: So moved. Going once, going twice.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded.
Ms. Perez: I would like to see what reasons you are basing it on, because as
it stands right now...
Mr. Plummer: We don't... I will give you my opinion. I can't speak for
others. My opinion is, that that is duplex zoning, and as such, it should not
have six units, it should have four. That is the way you bought it, and that
is what you are entitled to, and no more.
Ms. Perez: That is what we bought it at. According to the zoning book, it
says that every 2,500 feet, we can build one unit, plus one unit behind. We
have 15,000 square feet. According to our architect and according to studies
done by the book of the zoning, we can build, actually, a duplex of one lot,
50 by 150, and one unit behind it, but we want to reorganize the order of the
six units, because we feel that it would enhance the design. The design would
be much better as we plan it, than it would be as one duplex and one unit, one
duplex and one unit, and we have, you know, we can actually build it. I am
sure there is somebody representing the Zoning Department here that could back
up this, what I am saying.
Mr. Plummer: For the record, is that a correct statement from the Zoning
Department? Is that a correct statement?
Mr. Olmedillo: Do we have anybody from Zoning here? There is nobody from
Building and Zoning here. However, the ordinance does provide in the RG-1/3
district that you may have one unit per every 2,500 feet. Now, what I'd like
to add to that is, when you are treating a cluster, one of the findings is
that it would offer a better distribution of open space and improved level of
amenities and creative design to a greater degree than a development by on a
lot by lot basis. What you see in the transparency is the submittal by the
applicant as the site plan for the property.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let's ask the Planning Director why he turned down their
class C permit.
Mr. Rodriguez: Because as mentioned in our record, they don't provide the
amenities that we feel should be provided above what regular development can
provide. We require specifically, even when it is not in the ordinance, that
they provide two parking spaces per unit, because otherwise, we feel they
would have an impact on the immediate area. We mentioned it to them, told
them that, asked them to redesign to take that into account. They didn't
agree with it, I denied it.
Mr. Plummer: My motion stands, Mr. Mayor.
Ms. Perez: May I say something else?
Mayor Suarez: Stand a little closer to the mike, please.
Ms. Suarez: Yes, I'd like for him to read what he bases the 1.5, as opposed
to the two parking lots that we are asking. We are asking for 1.5, which at
the time that we made the application for the zoning, reorganizing what we
164 January 22, 1987
pant, instead of two duplexes and one unit, two duplexes and one unit, at that
time, the ordinance existed. OK, somehow, during the time of our application,
there has been a year, the cluster ordinance has been declared null, or
whatever it is called, and I think that is what he is basing it upon, but at
the time of the application, we were within our rights, or within the zoning.
Mr. Plummer: No, you were within your rights to ask.
Ms. Suarez: To ask, correct and may I say something else? I have talked to
all the neighbors, we have sent them letters. We have only had one
opposition, and we have distributed letters to three or four blocks
surrounding the area. They all think that we are doing a terrific job, that
we are providing for low income housing, that neighborhood is not a... you
know, it is a middle class, more likely a low middle class, and that is
exactly what we are providing, or proposing to do, and it is a beautiful
project. We have shown it to all of the neighbors that have requested to see
it. None of them have any opposition. We feel that we are within...
Mayor Suarez: Let me check on that real quick. Is there anyone here that
wishes to address P-Z item three in opposition? I move approval of your
application.
Mr. Plummer: My motion is already on the floor and seconded.
Mayor Suarez: Oh, we have got a motion and seconded.
Mr. Plummer: My motion is to uphold the Planning Director's decision.
Mayor Suarez: OK, any further discussion from the Commission?
Ms. Suarez: I would like to ask based on what reasoning?
Mr. Plummer: Because we don't feel that it is appropriate for the
neighborhood.
Ms. Perez: There must be a reason, a logical reasoning?
Mr. Plummer: It doesn't fit in with the character of the neighborhood.
Ms. Perez: But, if we... why doesn't it fit in with in the character? Have
you been by the neighborhood, because we have...
Mr. Plummer: No, I don't have to go by the neighborhood when you are asking
me to put three duplexes where two are allowed.
Ms. Perez: I am asking you just to rearrange, to consider a reorganization.
We can actually do two duplexes there, and with two units behind, now that is
going to look pretty crummy in a nicer neighborhood - the neighborhood that is
trying to grow. We have had new buildings on the corner of 27th Avenue, S.W.
3rd Street, We had new... the University of Miami has a very nice building on
the other S.E. corner of 27th Avenue and S.W. 3rd Street, and all that we are
asking is for reorganizing these units in those two lots. We can actually go
ahead, without your permission, and build one duplex on the 50 by 150, and one
unit behind it. We can build another duplex and other unit behind it. All
that we are asking is to let us reorganize ourselves in a much better home and
model, in a much pretty design than building a duplex and a unit behind, a
duplex and unit behind. It will be six units all together, exactly the same.
All we are asking is your permission to build something that we feel is very
nice looking, something that instead of distracting from the neighborhood, is
going to add to the neighborhood. None of the neighbors have come to
complain, on the contrary, we have talked to them, they feel it is a very nice
project.
Mr. Plummer: You are being repetitious.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, you told us that already, thank you.
Ms. Suarez: I am sorry, but you know...
Mayor Suarez: No, you have made all the same arguments.
Ms. Suarez:... I want to see what he bases his opinion.
165 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Ms. Suarez: It is for the greater of the community, not just one person's
opinion.
Mayor Suarez: OK.
Mr. Plummer: Public Works.
Mr. George Campbell: If I may add, we were asked to review this also as far
as the parking goes. If you will note on the transparency here, to the left
is where the street is here, and as you come in, of course these little pods
that stick out are part of the parking for the units, and then down at the
very extreme right, is the remaining parking. The way this works out, because
you can't see the dimensions on there, but dimensionally, it is not feasible
for the vehicles at the extreme right to be able to back up and turn around,
turn around to exit onto the street. They would then, they would be forced,
or almost required to back up the full length of that driveway in order to get
out, or back into one of the pods there that you see, and to turn around to
get out, so you would have this... the parking is not acceptable, as was in
the recommendations.
Mr. Plummer: Call the question.
Mr. Benigno Pereda: My name is Benigno Pereda, I want to make a comment and
to answer the question that he said.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, are you a registered lobbyist?
Mr. Fereda: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: You have registered with the Clerk?
Mr. Pereda: Yes, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Make it quick, please.
Mr. Pereda: OK, the point that I wanted to make is, in the parking area that
he says would be... let me check here.
Mayor Suarez: You can take a hand held mike with you and get a little closer
to the screen, there is a little mike on the screen there, on the wire.
Mr. Pereda: This portion here is where he is talking about, right?... that we
can back out into here, but if I move this parking lot up front here, we will
be able to back out and go out here.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Pereda: Fine, sir, but he didn't bring it up the last time, so how were
we to change it?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Pereda: The last time you didn't bring that out.
Mr. Campbell: It was brought out at the Zoning Board meeting, sir.
Mr. Pereda: You didn't bring it out, sir.
Mr. Rodriguez: I remember bringing it up.
Ms. Suarez: At the last...as a matter of fact we were the last... that were
petitioning here on the last board, and our diagram was not even up on the
board, and I thought that we were discriminated because of that. We didn't
even have a chance to have our diagram up on the board, and that you can check
on the record.
Mr. Rodriguez: I just have to add for the record that the drawings were on
the record. The Zoning Board had to take this into consideration, and
further, I have to add that at the meeting, there was one neighbor that had
166 January 22, 1987
raised questions about the parking situation in the residential area, right,
Ms. Fox?
Mayor Suarez: OK, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-108
A RESOLUTION UPHOLDING THE ZONING BOARD'S AFFIRMATION
OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY CLASS C
SPECIAL PERMIT, FILE NO. C-86-467, FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF
THREE DUPLEXES TO BE LOCATED AT 2816 SOUTHEWEST 3RD
STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA; AND ADOPTING AND INCORPORATING
THE FINDINGS OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mrs. Kennedy: I am going to go ahead with the Planning Department's
recommendation and vote yes.
Ms. Hirai: Commissioner Carollo, this is a vote on PZ-3. Were you listening
on that?
Mr. Carollo: Was that vote for approval, or disapproval?
Ms. Hirai: It is upholding the Planning Department's decision.
Mayor Suarez: It is disapproval.
Ms. Hirai: Denying the appeal.
Mr. Carollo: Denying the appeal, yes.
Ms. Hirai: And upholding... yes, thank you.
42. APPROVE IN PRINCIPLE THE BRICKELL LOTH STREET PROMENADE DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
S.W./S.E. 10 STREET BETWEEN S.W. 1 AVENUE AND BRICKELL AVENUE.
Mayor Suarez: Planning and Zoning item 4.
Mr. Plummer: I hope all the people at Brickell Avenue, when they see this
plan, and understand that this is a nice plan, that this is the kind of
improvements that impact fees are talking about, and before we do any
implementation of this promenade, I think we ought to have an assurance from
the people of Brickell, that they are in fact, going to cooperate and pay
impact fees if they want these kinds of improvements in their areas.
Mr. Rodriguez: The presentation will be made by Jack Luft of the Planning
Department.
167 January 22, 1987
Mr. Jack Luft: This was a plan that was originally conceived in the Brickell
Transit Station area plan approved by this Commission in 1979, and we hired
the consulting firm of Rodriguez, Khuly and Quiroga, to prepare a design that
we are very pleased with. We would like to have Raul present this to you.
The idea is to take this design if the Commission approves it, and as
Commissioner Plummer has suggested, back to the development community, to the
property owners, and in effect, challenge them to support this with special
assessment districts, and impact fees so that it can be built for the use of
the people of the City and the development community. Raul.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you this. Have the community people seen this plan
yet?
Mr. Luft: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: And over all, has it been well received?
Mr. Luft: It has been extremely well received.
Mr. Plummer: And is there any conversation about their special assessment,
and impact fees as it...
Mr. Luft: This department has made it abundantly clear from the beginning, in
private and public meetings, that we expect a project like this could only be
built with the direct financial support, and substantial support of the
development community, that it would not be built with public dollars, other
than the basis things we would normally do, such as sewers and curbs.
Mr. Plummer: And what does a project like this, basically, your ballpark
figure, what is the cost factor?
Mr. Luft: The ballpark figure is $3,000,000 for the over all project as you
see it there. That includes about one-half million dollars of private setback
area that would be strictly private property owners, and it would include
about one-half million dollars of public sewer, storm sewer improvements. The
rest would be all private dollars from special assessments, or impact fees.
Mr. Plummer: Whoa. Where would the money from the sewers come from?
Mr. Luft: That is part of an over all improvement. That whole area is about
50 years old, and Public Works is slated to rebuild all of the streets with
new sewers.
Mr. Plummer: But, would there be sufficient monies from the impact fees to
pay the half million dollars for sewers?
Mr. Luft: No, the sewers would come from street improvement bond funds that
have already...
Mr. Plummer: No, no. Who is the beneficiary of this, basically?... the
people of Brickell!
Mr. Luft: All of the streets and Brickell, yes.
Mr. Plummer: Who you heard stand here today, who are not really... they don't
like the idea they might have to pay impact fees. So, you are talking about
one-half million dollars of sewers, and how much for the right-of-way?
Mr. Luft: About $2,000,000.
Mr. Plummer: $2,000,000?
Mr. Luft: For the public street. $2,000,000 for the public street, $500,000
for the utilities, and $500,000 for the private setback area.
Mr. Plummer: Then, of the $3,000,000 project, what would be expected from the
private community?
Mr. Luft: $2,500,000.
Mr. Plummer: And the other $500,000 could come from impact fees?
168 January 22, 1987
n
Mr. Luft: Yes, it could.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mayor Suarez: Any questions? Raul.
Mr. Raul Rodriguez: Well, I'll be happy to just answer questions. If you
want me to, I could take you quickly through the plan. It is your pleasure.
Mr. Plummer: I move that we accept it in principle, and that we send it back
to the community, asking them if they want to put their money where their
mouth is.
Mr. Dawkins: Second.
Mayor Suarez: And for the record, I received a letter, just today. I think we
all received it, and I want to make sure that the record....
Mr. Plummer: It is from Allen Morris.
Mayor Suarez: Right, from Allen Morris Company in favor, congratulating the
City on your fine design. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-109
A RESOLUTION APPROVING, IN PRINCIPLE, THE BRICKELL
10TH STREET PROMENADE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
SOUTHWEST/SOUTHEAST LOTH STREET BETWEEN SOUTHWEST 1ST
AVENUE AND BRICKELL AVENUE; A COPY OF WHICH IS
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 Dawkins, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: I want to say for the record it looks like something that would
be a tremendous asset to the Brickell area. I hope that the community feels
the same, and that also that the community realizes that they are going to
have to come up with the bucks to do it if they want to improve their area, as
well as the impact fees. I vote yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: Well, I want to say wonderful things about it, because I met
with Jack and I saw it, but due to the time and the vote, yes, I vote yes.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you. Thank you, Jack.
169 January 22, 1987
0 4PPOINT JOHN HALL, HUGER PARSONS, JR., AND MONTY TRAINER TO THE MIAMI
RIVER COORDINATING COMMITTEE TO SERVE SPECIFIED TERMS (See label #28)
Mr. Walter Pierce: Mr. Mayor, is it possible we could deal with the Miami
River committee at this time.
Mayor Suarez: What item?
Mr. Pierce: It wasn't an item. It was where you had to designate the terms
for the members already appointed.
Mayor Suarez: Oh, did we get that, did you do that?
Mr. Plummer: Oh, yes, here. You mention a name, and Rosario will pull a
number. What is the first name?
Mr. Pierce: Monty Trainer.
Mr. Plummer: Monty Trainer. Pull... don't look in there: There might be a
stone crab. How many years did he get?
Mrs. Kennedy: Three.
Mr. Plummer: All right, next name.
Mr. Pierce: Huber Parsons.
Mr. Plummer: Pull out the next one. Who is the third name?
Mr. Pierce: John Hall.
Mr. Plummer: We know what he is going to get.
Mrs. Kennedy: Two for Huber.
Mayor Suarez: Three, two, one, you got itl
Mr. Plummer: Huber... three, two, one.
Mr. Carollo: I would ask for a recountl
Mr. Dawkins: I think I should, Joe.
Mr. Plummer: If that ain't the cheapest damn election I ever went throughl
(LAUGHTER)
Mr. Dawkins: Especially with those two over there, I mean, Monty Trainer's
friends over therel
Mayor Suarez: Incredible coincidence.
Mr. Plummer: I so move the designation of three years for Monty Trainer, two
years for Huber Parsons, and one year for John Hall.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll.
170 January 22, 1987
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-110
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO THE
MIAMI RIVER COORDINATING COMMITTEE TO SERVE SPECIFIED
TERMS OF OFFICE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
.ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Dawkins: I didn't see the numbers, but I'll vote yes!
Mr. Carollo: (OFF MICROPHONE) .... Even though there might have been something
funny going on with the numbers, I vote yes.
44. DISCUSSION REGARDING BEST POSSIBLE USE OF SHORELINE PROPERTY ON BISCAYNE
BAY BETWEEN McARTHUR AND VENETIAN CAUSEWAYS - INSTRUCT PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO LOOK INTO ALTERNATIVE POSSIBLE PUBLIC USES FOR SAID
PROPERTY.
Mayor Suarez: Herb.
Mr. Herbert Simon: All right, this is a Planning Advisory Board item again,
and Mr. Plummer, before I get on this one, if that disclosure ordinance
passes, on the second reading, would you make it December 31st, so I can serve
the rest of my year out?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mr. Simon: I know you are here to speak on this too. You have in front of
you the Planning Advisory Board resolution which, as you know it was a close
vote, but as chairperson, I am here to represent the committee. There is
another member of the committee here, the board, that would like to speak to
you, I am sure, but it was five to four, and if you will notice, I was absent.
If I had been here it would be five to five, but the objective of it was that
some members of the Planning Advisory Board felt that the area that is now
occupied by the Miami Herald has not been put to its highest and best use to
benefit the City of Miami, and as I understand it, I say that, because I
wasn't here, again, the idea that the Herald can occupy it, of course, as long
as they wish, but that at such time as the Herald no longer occupies it, they
feel that we could put that waterfront property to better use, and they have
asked that you instruct the Planning Department to make a further study, and
that is really all I have to say. I know there is another member of the board
that would like to speak, unless you have some questions.
Mr. Plummer: I thought there was some discussion, Herb, about the City
condemning the property...
Mr. Simon: Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Plummer: ...and acquiring the property.
171 January 22, 1987
Mr. Simon: Oh, yes, that is in here also. It costs, what was the estimate
$350,000,000 to $500,000,000, I think something of that sort.
Mr. Plummer: $350,000,000 to $500,000,000?
Mr. Simon: Oh, it is in here... I'm sorry...
Mr. $35,000,000.
Mr. Simon: When I am speaking in the millions, it doesn't make any
difference! $32,000,000 to $50,000,000, yes.
Mr. Plummer: That is why we want financial disclosure! OK, I was not present
at the meeting. I don't know any more about it than you know. Mr. Armesto-
Garcia was...
Mr. Plummer: Well, did either board, or both boards take a firm stand and do
they offer to us a resolution of proceeding, not to proceed, or what? What we
have, is discuss the best use.
Mrs. Kennedy: It say that the vote was five to four...
Mr. Let me explain, let me explain the whole sequence...
Mr. Simon: Yes, I know. Mr. Armesto-Garcia was...
Mr. Kennedy:... for approval.
Mr. Plummer: On the agenda, it says, a discussion item, and what the
discussion is, is the best possible use of the shoreline property located
between Biscayne Bay and McArthur and Venetian Causeways.
Mr. Simon: They wanted the Planning Department to make that study, but once
again, Mr. Armesto-Garcia was the maker of the motion, I think he can better
tell you of his intent.
Mr. Carollo: Maybe an amusement park would go good there, with everything...
Mr. Plummer: What was the vote?
Mrs. Kennedy: Five to four.
Mr. Plummer: In favor?
Mr. Eladio Armesto: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is Eladio Armesto.
I have been on the Planning Advisory Board since 1983, and we passed two
resolutions, two motions. The first one was eight to zero unanimously where
the Planning Advisory Board request from the Planning Department, the way to
best use the land located south of the Venetian Causeway, and north of the
McArthur Causeway.
Mr. Plummer: You mean that commercial venture?
Mr. Armesto: Right, that commercial venture that pollutes the water of the
Miami Bay, Biscayne Bay... that use the water of Biscayne Bay as a
transportation means for big boats carrying newspaper wheels and everything,
that obstructs the view of the citizens and the view of the bay shore, and
abuse the power given to them by some former City Commissioners, or elected
officials.
Mr. Carollo: If I may interrupt you for a minute, Mr. Armesto...
Mrs. Kennedy: Do you have something to do with this, Joe?
Mr. Carollo: No, he is not my appointee, but I recollect that, in fact, it
was the Miami Herald that lead a big campaign to tear down the old library
building because it obstructed the view to the bay.
Mr. Armesto: Right, and I recollect the Miami Herald...
Mr. Plummer: Can we put Japanese lanterns around the Herald?
172 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Kennedy: Another Bayfront Park?
Mr. Carollo: Somebody did suggest they want in there!
Mr. Armesto:... editorial board making big editorials about how to save the
water and the features of Biscayne Bay and let the people not to develop
Watson Island because Watson Island has to be kept for the future, and also
requesting from the Legislature the help from the Legislature to the City of
Miami Beach to re -acquire the land on the beach and give that land back to the
citizens of Miami Beach to use every time they want, free access to the
beaches, no? They have two policies, one for and one for the known
stockholders of the Miami Herald. Anyway, this is nothing to begin with,
against the Miami Herald, or free enterprise or something. This is anything,
or everything for the people, and in benefit for the people. If we want to
develop the Omni area as the Commission has instructed us to study about the
redevelopment of Omni area, from 6th Street to 20th Street, and from North
Miami Avenue to bay, we have to take into that study of redevelopment of the
Omni area, the situation of that land, of that building, which is an integral
part of that land and the whole Omni area. We have to think, as in the
future. What we want is from the Planning Department, authorized by you, the
Commissioners and the Mayor, to make a deep study what will be the best use of
this land, for the benefit of the people, and the benefit of the citizens of
Miami, and the benefit also, of the whole renovation of the Omni area. Mr.
Plummer spoke about acquisition. The acquisition will be a maximum of
$35,000,000, but I am not talking, that was not our intent to talk about that.
Our intent is, we want you to think that the Miami Herald owns today a land
with a permit for an industrial and commercial venture, as Mr. Plummer said.
It is a commercial and industrial venture. If they want, tomorrow, they can
sell that land to another commercial and industrial venture, and we can have
there a Belcher Oil Company, processing oil, or a brewery, making beer, or a
liquor distillery corporation, any kind of industrial business. What we would
like to see is that the Miami Herald uses the land and the building and
everything, and when they decide to get out of there, because they have grown
so much, and the building is obsolete and they want to go west of the
Palmetto, or someplace else, that land cannot be used more for industrial or
commercial use. Now, the industry, or commercial use that they have right now
is for them only. They cannot in the future build there any other industrial
or commercial venture, unless they remain over there with the land, unless
they remain over there, with the publishing, the Herald and the News over
there if they want; but when they finish there and they move outside there,
they cannot sell that land for any industry, or a commercial use anymore.
Mr. Plummer: are there. How many acres does that Herald building
take up, including parking?
Mr. Armesto: It is about three acres, I think.
Mr. Plummer: How much?
Mr. Armesto: Three acres.
Mr. Plummer: No, it is more than that.
Mr. Pierce: It is about seven acres.
Mr. Plummer: About seven acres?
Mr. Armesto: Oh, altogether with the parking spaces, and the street, they
condemned it...
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Armesto: I mean, the public street, they closed it.
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Armesto: The whole thing is close to seven acres.
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Mr. Carollo: That is...
173 January 22, 1987
6, 0
Mr. Plummer: You know what is maybe hot so crazy, because a lot of people are
laughing, but you know, it is not too far out of bounds when you stop and
consider what we paid for the F.E.C. tract, to have a park for the people, and
you stop and realize that in fact, half of the tract of the F.E.C. was water!
Now, you know, maybe this is comical, and maybe it is not, but I think we have
to take into consideration that the final approval of whether or not this
would be condemned for City use and City park is going to be ultimately a
referendum.
Mr. Armesto: Correct.
Mr. Plummer: We will not make the decision, other than to say to the
Department, if the City were to acquire this parcel, what could be the best
use in City park kind of a situation? And then, if that were to be the case,
if they were to do such a study, it would have to go to a referendum, do the
people of this community want to vote to tax themselves to purchase it or not?
Mr. Carollo: Let me understand what you are saying, Commissioner, you are
saying that once the Planning Department researches that and gets some input,
then you want to put it in a referendum at the next election?
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I am not necessarily saying that. What I am saying is,
if they do any kind of a study, you can't do anything without a study, and I
would say, have you done any kind of a study, what would be the highest and
best use of this thing?
Mr. Pierce: The answer is yes, in the Omni redevelopment plan.
Mr. Rodriguez: In the Omni plan that was approved by you recently, we
recommended that the whole area be rezoned for a new classification called
SPI-6.1, that is very similar to SPI-6, the area of the Omni, except that we
will reduce the floor area ratio to 3 as a base, and allow the increase of
density if they were to provide on site housing, or contribution to off site
in another place. This is a plan, a long range plan that was prepared. It
was before you, and that is the recommendation that we have. We feel that if
the area were to be developed, or redeveloped in the future, and there were to
be a movement of the Miami Herald from the location into another location, the
land should be used for either residential, or something that would be of more
attraction to residents of the City.
Mr. Plummer: You, know, they, the Herald, might just want to consider moving
out to a location around Palmetto, or somewhere, where they could have better
accessibility to the expressways and to the transportation of rail. I wonder
if we should appoint a committee of Commissioner Carollo to go down and
discuss the matter with them.
Mr. Carollo: Are you making that in the form of a motion? (LAUGHTER)
Mrs. Kennedy: This is what you have been waiting for! (LAUGHTER)
Mr. Armesto: Mr. Plummer, I think that...
Mayor Suarez: Mr. Armesto, would you wrap up your suggestions, or comments,
or recommendations?
Mr. Armesto: Yes, I think that we cannot give the salami at once, we have to
slice that. I mean, if we are going to compensate the Miami Herald today for
what they want, $35,000,000, it is mainly because they have a land use permit
that allows any other venture to come after them and build a huge
manufacturing outfit over there, a paper mill, a brewery, a chemical plant, an
oil company, anything, what we should do is, in my opinion, and that we
request from the City Commission is to allow them to operate under that
permit, but when they cease and desist to operate, and they move, that permit
is not valid to be sold to another company. It is a nonconforming use, to
restructure them to a nonconforming use. They are grandfathered there and
doing that, the worth of the land will come down to maybe $20,000,000, or
$18,000,000, who knows!... because then, the buyers cannot use that for what
they have been using today.
Mr. Carollo: I think number one, that one of the steps that we should
probably take is, have the Planning and Zoning departments give us a history,
so we can further analyze this, of that property. What I am talking about
174 January 22, 1987
is, a history of how many streets were closed. My understanding is there were
several that were closed and just given to them by the City, City property
that was given, how many variances that they received. My understanding
again, was that they received quite a few variances. In fact, back in those
days there was a tremendous amount of variances t►t -c-- ved. 1c there a 50
foot setback there?
Mr. Armesto: No, sir.
Mr. Carollo: I don't believe there is. You know, so all of those wonderful
things they write about in their editorials, blasting other people about, you
know, they have it there. I think before we could make some final decisions,
we should look at all that so that it could be brought into perspective. I
think some of the things he says are definitely in line. Frankly, I didn't
know what he was going to be talking about, or what the recommendations were
from the Planning Board, but, I think that with the present use that they have
there, if they were to sell out, if someone else comes in, you know, we might
have a situation where we might get something there that is going to be
completely, completely out of line. with what we are wanting for the area, so
I think that is something we can look at, and again no one is saying that we
are going to move them out, or anything like that, it is...
Mr. Plummer: Sergio... I'm sorry, are you finished?
Mr. Carollo: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Sergio, let me ask you this question. I think it is really an
important factor. Would it be much time or expense if someone in your
department were to devise a plan that would say that if that property was
acquired by the City, what could be put there for the benefit of the citizens
and how, if any, would it tie contiguously to Nugouchi Park, F.E.C.,
Bicentennial, and that individual situation there.
Mr. Armesto: And Bayside.
Mr. Plummer: Well, of course, that is part of the plan. Would that be a hell
of an ordeal?
Mr. Rodriguez: We are here at your pleasure.
Mr. Plummer: No, but hey, if you are telling me it is going to cost $20,000,
$30,000 to do something like that, then I would say, you know, maybe it is not
worth while, but if you are telling me that I don't put a time constraint on
you, that someone in your department could maybe come up with innovative ideas
that how that property, if the City owned it, could be used for the benefit of
its citizenry, and if in fact it does tie in to the rest of the park area, I
think it would be a good thing to give us some ideas. Maybe after we see it,
we would say, "No, that is not really the best thing for this community."
But, I would appreciate that, I'd like to see it.
Mr. Armesto: I would volunteer to help. I would volunteer personally to
help.
Mr. Plummer: That scares mel
Mr. Dawkins: Madam City Attorney, we have addressed everything but what Mr.
Armesto said about, for the lack of a better term, taking back the zoning,
once the Herald decides to move, if it ever decides to move. What would be the
procedure for doing that, and is such a thing legal?
Mrs. Dougherty: Commissioner Dawkins, after the Planning Board... let's
assume for a minute that the Planning Department and the Planning Board make
an in-depth study of this particular piece of property and decide that it
ought to be down -zoned to something else that is more appropriate than
whatever it is now, and I don't know what it is now. The procedure would be
to rezone the property to a lesser, or to a more restrictive use, and you
could do that now, but make no mistake about it, you are not doing it for the
purpose of buying it cheaper, because that is not going to work.
Mr. Plummer: No.
175 January 22, 1987
Mrs. Dougherty: You are going to pay the same amount of money, no matter what
you're zoning is. All you are doing is down -zoning it, because if they chance
the use at some point, they are going to have to comply, or they abandon their
present use, they are going to have to comply with your down -zoning.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, that is what I had in mind. I mean...
Mrs. Dougherty: You are not going to buy it cheaper because you do it.
Mr. Dawkins: ... and this is still America and you are going to pay what
people want for their property, I mean, we understand that, but I want to
know, I mean, I follow his logic, and I agree with what he says, and downtown
is closing in...
Mrs. Dougherty: If a more intense zoning, or a more...
Mr. Dawkins: The downtown area is closing in on the Herald. The Herald may
decide to go any day out.
Mr. Plummer: But, you know, the Herald was the very one who came before this
Commission about two years ago, or three years ago, who said they were busting
at the seams, they didn't have the room, they needed more expansion, and this
Commission granted them another floor...
Mr. Armesto: Another floor, right.
Mr. Plummer: ...or two floors, I don't remember what it was.
Mr. Armesto: Two floors.
Mr. Plummer: Well, maybe they are in that category again, and you know, what
I was thinking is, that we maybe send the City Manager to discuss. They
might... who knows, we might be surprised, they might want to talk about the
possibility of relocating to their advantage.
Mr. Carollo: I agree. Probably, for what they could get for that property
from the City, they could buy something for half somewhere else. In fact, as
I understand, most of their circulation is in Broward now, or Palm Beach. Who
knows, they may even want to move to Broward.
Mr. Armesto: Right.
Mr. Rodriguez: Mr. Mayor, if I understand correctly, you are asking me for
our recommendation?
Mayor Suarez: I'm not asking you for anything.
Mr. Rodriguez: No, I mean the Commission. Let me see if I understand what
you are saying - a recommendation as to the type of zoning. We have one
already. I think you are asking me to go beyond that and look at alternative
possible uses, public uses only, and at the same time, incorporate a history
of some of the actions that the City has taken in the past in this area.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that is correct, but I would also like Mr. Odio to contact
whoever the appropriate party is, and ask them if there is any interest on
their part to be considered, that they would like to enter into some kind of
discussion, negotiation, or what, for the possible event of the City acquiring
that property for public parks. They can say no, we are not interested, or
they can say, well maybe, and submit us a proposal, and you know, there is
just that possibility.
Mr. Armesto: For a marina, a marina there, what the people...
Mayor Suarez: Mr. Armesto, please, just...
Mr. Plummer: Well, I think that what we are looking at is, is that this thing
at this point, has been unilateral, and I think there needs to be a broach on
our side, to see if there is any interest, and who knows, there might just be,
and we might just go to a referendum and people might just vote it, and we
might have a gorgeous waterfront.
Mr. Armesto: Right.
176 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Now, if they, the Herald says no, we are strictly not interested
in any way, shape or form, then we will address that when you come back, the
Manager comes back.
Mayor Suarez: So far it is a request, I don't know that he has made it into
the form of a motion, it is a request you're obviously going to comply with.
Mr. Plummer: Is it necessary? I don't think is necessary.
Mayor Suarez: No, it is not. OK, thank you, Mr. Armesto.
Mr. Armesto: One question, if I may.
Mayor Suarez: You have given us food for thought.
Mr. Armesto: One question, if I may, to the City Attorney, is can the people
of the City of Miami, how many signatures do they need to get from the City
Commission to request a referendum?
Mrs. Dougherty: A referendum for what?
Mr. Armesto: For anything!
Mr. Plummer: Well, you always have the right of petition. You can request it
of the Commission, or you can do it by petition.
Mr. Armesto: By petition. OK, thank you, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Thank you.
45. GRANT VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE 9500 TO PERMIT AN EXISTING ADDITION TO A
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONED CR3/7 AT APPROXIMATELY 1253 N.W. 35 STREET.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Suarez: Planning and zoning item 6.
Mr. Olmedillo: This is an appeal by the applicant of a denial of a variance
for a setback. The property is located on 35th Street, it is in a CR-3/7
district, and the case was brought to the attention of the board and the
Planning Department, because they were cited by the Code Enforcement Board for
having built without the benefit of a permit, building permit, and they built
a structure not setting back the required five feet from the rear. In the
overhead, you see that the plans submitted by the applicant, the portion on
the top is the building which was recently completed without the permit, and
they encroach within the five feet of the setback. The Zoning Board denied
the variance by a vote of five to four.
Mr. Plummer: What is the property zoned?
Mr. Olmedillo: The property is zoned is CR-3/7. That is a
commercial/residential, with a high intensity of 1.72 intensity.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I think important to the Commission is, what is
immediately behind it?
Mr. Olmedillo: As I remember there is a used car lot in the rear of that
property, facing on 36th Street.
Mr. Plummer: Was this matter resolved by the Code Enforcement Board?
Mr. Olmedillo: They were cited by the Code Enforcement Board. I understand
that the Code Enforcement Board gives them a grace period in order to get in
compliance, or get a variance, obtain a variance from the Zoning Board.
Mr. Plummer: Did they impose a fine?
Mr. Olmedillo: I will find out. Not yet, sir.
177 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Who built the structure?
Mr. Olmedillo: From the past the applicant stated that he had built the
structure.
Mr. Plummer: He did the entire construction?
Mr. Olmedillo: Right.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, are you stating on the record, that you built this entire
structure without any help from anyone?
Mr. Jose Martinez: Me and my son.
Mr. Plummer: You did all the plumbing, all the carpentry...
Mr. Martinez: No, there is no plumbing.
Mr. Plummer: No, no. Who did the plumbing, the carpentry, the roofing, the
air conditioning, who did that?
Mr. Martinez: Nobody, it does not... it is not going to have plumbing or air
conditioning. It is just...
Mr. Plummer: What is the addition?
Mr. Martinez: It is for parking the cars, so they won't be in the front and
for storage.
Mr. Plummer: It is a garage?
Mr. Martinez: And for storage.
Mr. Olmedillo: It is an open structure.
Mr. Martinez: Right.
Mr. Olmedillo: The one that is showing there, without...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but we know around here how fast those open structures get
closed, and suddenly there is a meter on it, and there is another family
living there. What is your occupation, sir?
Mr. Martinez: Right now I am not working. I am going to go to school and be
a computer programmer.
Mr. Plummer: What did you do before?
Mr. Martinez: I was a driver.
Mr. Plummer: Are you stating for the record, sir, that you didn't realize
that you had to take out a permit?
Mr. Martinez: Not if it was not going to be for nobody to live there. If I
was going to build a shed, or something.
Mr. Plummer: How big is that shed?
Mr. Martinez: There was a shed there before, a wooden shed, like...
Mr. Olmedillo: Like 40 feet.
Mr. Martinez: By 23.
Mr. Plummer: It is 40 feet by 247 That is a pretty big shed!
Mr. Martinez: No, it used to be there, it is another one before, made of
wood, and I took it down, but it is the same size.
Mr. Plummer: So if we make you hold your feet to the fire you are only going
to be cut down to a 40 feet by a 19...
178 January 22, 1987
Mr. Martinez: What?
Mr. Plummer: Which is still a pretty good sized shed.
Mr. Martinez: Yes, but I have to take out in the back.
Mayor Suarez: What did you say Walter?... so we have it for the record.
Mr. Pierce: I was simply remarking that looking at the elevations of that, it
looks like a three car garage, with three overhead roll -up doors, and we had
some photos here.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know, we either are going to uphold the Department, or
let's change the law, one of the two.
Mr. Martinez: It is already done, as you can see, it is made of blocks,
and...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but of course sir, it is done illegally. Is there any one
of the opponents who wish to speak? I move to uphold the Planning Department
and the Planning Board.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mr. Carollo: You vote to uphold the Planning Board?
Mr. Plummer: Uphold.
Mr. Carollo: Uphold?
Mr. Plummer: Right, basically to deny the appeal.
Mr. Carollo: To deny the appeal.
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mr. Carollo: (OFF MICROPHONE)
Mr. Plummer: We are denying the appeal. My motion is to deny the appeal.
Mr. Martinez: You know, I built that, I have been doing that since 1983, you
know, there is time That is not something that I did over...
Mayor Suarez: Going once...
Mrs. Kennedy: I can empathize, and I know how bad you feel, but we have a
procedure and you have to comply, so I have to second that motion,
unfortunately.
Mr. Martinez: Yes, that is what I am try to...
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion from the Commission?
Mr. Carollo: That was built in 1983?
Mr. Martinez: Yes.
Mr. Carollo: How come it is here now? Was it the Zoning inspector saw it, or
a neighbor complained, or...
Mr. Martinez: No, but one of the inspectors that was doing some work across
the street, or something, I don't know, he came, he told me.
Mr. Carollo: What are you using it for now?
Mr. Martinez: What?
Mr. Carollo: What are you using it for?
Mr. Martinez: Well, right now, I am using it for storage and to park the cars
in front, because in that area I had a lot of...
179 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Next week it will be an apartment.
Mr. Martinez:... I had five people live with me, and four of them drive, and
there is a lot breaking into the cars in the front, and I want to keep them in
the back.
Mr. Carollo: I tell you what I see is the way you have it here now, if it is
like this, it will be a fire hazard. It has got all sorts of junk thrown in
there, that one match goes in there...
Mr. Martinez: No, that is from the building, that is cement... what do you
call that...
Mr. Carollo: Yes, the structure is, you know, C.B.S., but I am saying all the
junk you got in there is not C.B.S.
Mr. Plummer: Well, the building was obviously never inspected.
Mr. Carollo: Neither is the roof. The roof is not C.B.S. It is wood.
Mr. Martinez: I know what I have is...
Mr. Plummer: Boy, when you guys start inspecting regular homes, what you are
going to find!
Mrs. Kennedy: What you are going to find)
Mr. Carollo: What do you want to do with that? Are you going to leave it like
that, are you going to finish it, or...?
Mr. Martinez: I am waiting, you know, to see what is going to happen. I
don't know.
Mr. Carollo: What I am saying is if your request is approved, what would you
do with it?
Mr. Martinez: Well, I would finish it, put the roof on it and the floor.
Mr. Plummer: First, you would take out a permit.
Mr. Martinez: Yes, oh yes. Of course.
Mr. Plummer: You realize, if that were to be granted, because I want you to
understand, if that application is to be permitted by this Commission, you
first take out a permit, and then second, you must comply with the South
Florida Building Code.
Mr. Martinez: Right.
Mr. Plummer: Now, can I tell you something? You would be cheaper to tear it
down and start anew, from what I'm seeing in those photos. We would not be
doing you a favor to grant this application, because to comply with the South
Florida Building Code, from what I see here, is going to cost you twice as
much as to comply and abide by the setbacks. The South Florida Building Code,
under no circumstances, would allow that structure to stand as it is.
Mr. Dawkins: You are unemployed, sir?
Mr. Martinez: Right now, yes.
Mr. Dawkins: You have a wife, sir?
Mr. Martinez: Yes.
Mr. Dawkins: Is she employed?
Mr. Martinez: Yes, sir, Southeast Bank.
Mr. Dawkins: How many children do you have?
Mr. Martinez: Three.
180 January 22, 1987
Mr. Dawkins: Truthfully, what are your plans for this building?
Mr. Martinez: Well, truthfully, my house is made of frame, and it is old, and
I am going to use it for storage, and put the furniture, while I try to, you
know...
Mr. Dawkins: All right, OK, you say you are going to do is move back there,
while you...
Mr. Martinez: No, no.
Mr. Dawkins: While you tear down the front part.
Mr. Martinez: No, no, I am not going to move back there. No, I am going to
put like my furniture, things that I have in the house right now, for storage,
and...
Mr. Dawkins: And what was there before you put this there?
Mr. Martinez: There was a wooden shed, same size, just made out of wood.
Mr. Dawkins: Fully of roaches and rats, and everything, and you tried to...
Mr. Martinez: What?
Mr. Dawkins: Fully of roaches, rats, and everything, and you tried to clean
that up, right?
Mr. Martinez: Yes, I did. It took me a long time to do it too.
Mr. Dawkins: You know, I don't know how the vote is going, but if you were
somebody who could afford Bob Traurig, or some of those others, you would have
no problem, OK?... but the mere fact that you are a homeowner, who made a
mistake, the same as the other people who make mistakes who come in here and
buy a piece of property that you can put a one/third building on, and they
made a mistake when they bought it because they wanted to put six stories on
it, then they get a high priced lawyer and come here, and then that lawyer
gets what they want. Now, as Plummer said, it is going to be very expensive
to bring this up to code, but that is a decision, when they tell you what you
have to do, you have to make. Now, as much as I regret, I am going to vote
with you, OK? I don't know how the vote is going to go up here, see, but, by
the same token, like I said, if you could afford one of those high priced
lawyers, it wouldn't be no problem.
Mayor Suarez: Meanwhile, Bob Traurig comes back and takes a seat again, and
after being alluded to!
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Suarez: That is right. Mariano is suggesting that you take this as a
pro bono matter.
Mr. Dawkins: No, no.
Mayor Suarez: But, not after the fact, that is the one thing. OK, we have
got a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Mr. Dawkins: One other thing about Mr. Traurig. Now, he will take it before
the fact, but he is not going to come after the fact.
181 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: OK, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?
Call the roll.
MOTION FAILED. MOTION TO UPHOLD RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND TO DENY THE APPEAL FAILED BY
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: None
CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON ROLL CALL:
Mrs. Kennedy: I have to ahead, even though I really do feel sorry, and I have
to say for the record that I have voted against Mr. Traurig when I have so
deemed it necessary. I am going to vote yes.
Mr. Carollo: That is a tough one. I'd like to personally go over there and
see what it looks like, see just how safe, or unsafe it might be. It is hard
to tell from that picture. Could we...
Mayor Suarez: Do you want to give an opinion on that, Guillermo?
Mr. Carollo: ...call time out and...
Mr. Pierce: No, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: You can't, because the safe, or unsafe implies compliance...
Mr. Pierce: There is a liability problem inherent in that. We didn't inspect
it, we never saw it until we cited it. We don't want to be in a public
position of saying whether it is safe or unsafe, at this point.
Mayor Suarez: OK, well, that would be something that would take place if the
variance was granted after the fact anyhow.
Mr. Pierce: No, sir, we would still not certify it. We would require him to
go out and get an engineer to certify it, because we don't need that
liability.
Mayor Suarez: That is what I mean, so that would all take place, I mean the
determination of safety, or unsafety, would... if that word exists.
Mr. Carollo: Well, I would like to see it, but I know they want to get a
hearing on this. I will vote no.
Ms. Hirai: Continuing roll call - Mayor Suarez?
Mayor Suarez: No. I'll entertain a motion to grant the variance now, since
the...
Mr. Dawkins: You don't have to do anything.
Mayor Suarez: I'll entertain it.
Mr. Dawkins: It is already granted if you denied the...
Mayor Suarez: No, I don't think so.
Mr. Plummer: No, no, this is an appeal to.
Mayor Suarez: We have to move it. We have to move it.
Mr. Plummer: It takes a motion to override the appeal, right?
Mr. Dawkins: Now, to grant this, air, we may be putting you in a financial
hardship that you can't deal with, but that there again, that is your
decision, see. I am going to move to grant the variance, but it has to come
182 January 22, 1987
s
back to the City and meet all of the standards of which, as J.L., says, the
South Florida Building Code requires, and I move it that way.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mr. Carollo: Can we put in a time frame on that?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes, if there is a second, I don't have no problem with it.
What would be a reasonable time, Mr. Pierce, to give him to do this in?
Mr. Pierce: I would suggest, at this stage, considering the life of this,
that two weeks should be adequate time for him to go in and get permits.
Mayor Suarez: Two weeks?
Mr. Pierce: Yes, sir, two weeks to make his application for permit, with two
weeks after that to provide certification as to the compliance with South
Florida Building Code.
Mr. Carollo: No, I don't think that realistic, Walter.
Mr. Pierce: It gives him a total of 30 days.
Mr. Carollo: He is a layman. He is not going to be able to hire anybody to
follow the steps that need to be followed.
Mr. Plummer: Why are you even putting a time frame on it? I mean, if the man
is granted the variance, he can't do anything until he produces, one, an
application for a permit, and second, compliance with South Florida Building
Code. If he doesn't hurry up, he doesn't get his permit. He... you know.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, it would be in his interest to move as quickly as possible
on that, but there is no need to put a time limit.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, excuse me, are you indicating, Commissioner Dawkins, that
if he doesn't do something, let's say, within three months, that the variance
is null and void, is that what you are saying? Is that the reason for the
time frame?
Mr. Carollo: Well, that is where I was heading to.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, OK.
Mr. Pierce: Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Carollo:..I don't know what Miller had in mind.
Mr. Pierce: I am advised that there has to be a minimum time period of 90
days, three months, and a maximum of six months for the variance... of one
year, I am sorry, for the variance.
Mr. Carollo: I will go along with that.
Mayor Suarez: Who was the movant?
Mr. Dawkins: I moved, Joe seconded.
Mayor Suarez: Do you accept the...
Mr. Pierce: You have to set the life of the variance.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded with the modifications. Any further
discussion? Call the roll.
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait, let me ask this question.
Mr. Pierce: How long is the variance valid? Is it three months, he has from
three months...
Mayor Suarez: You just gave the limitations, the minimum and the maximum, we
were going to accept that.
183 January 22, 1987
Mr. Pierce: You have to pick on, anywhere from three to twelve months.
Mr. Carollo: I'll make it a year.
Mr. Pierce: OK.
Mr. Plummer: Now, question, and I am only asking this because of your
previous discussion. Madam City Attorney, from what I am seeing, this matter,
is going to be approved, the variance. My question is, between the time that
this is now approved, and the time that he actually takes out permits, have
we, the City incurred any liability if somebody gets hurt in that structure,
prior to his compliance with the South Florida Building Code?
Mrs. Dougherty: No.
Mr. Plummer: You don't feel that we need to have an indemnity of the City
against anyone getting hurt in that structure?
Mrs. Dougherty: I don't think we would be liable.
Mr. Plummer: OK, fine. Just asking a question because of the previous
discussion.
Mayor Suarez: Any further discussion? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 81-111
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM ORDINANCE NO.
9500, AS AMENDED, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS,
PAGE 4 OF 6, CR COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL (GENERALLY),
MINIMUM OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, TO PERMIT AN EXISTING
ADDITION TO A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE; ZONED CR-3/7
COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL (GENERALLY), LOCATED AT 1253
NORTHWEST 35TH STREET, ALSO DESCRIBED AS LOT 10, BLOCK
1, WEST END PARK AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 6 AT PAGE
142 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS
PER PLANS ON FILE, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT OWNER
MUST MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA
BUILDING CODE WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM DATE HEREOF, WITH A
1.71' REAR YARD (5' REQUIRED) SETBACK.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mrs. Kennedy: I have to stick to the no vote.
Mayor Suarez: You understand now, we are not, in any way implying, or telling
you that that structure is safe, or sound, or in compliance with the South'
Florida Building Code, or that you don't need to do a variety of things to get
it to comply with the code, so don't go away with that impression, pleasel
184 January 22, 1987
46. RESCIND PREVIOUS RESOLUTION PLACING LIMITATIONS UPON THE LENGTH OF
UNINTERRUPTED MEMBERSHIP SERVICE OF ALL BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND
COMMISSIONS CREATED BY RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE.
Mr. Plummer: Can I bring this item up, which I am told is clarification?
There was a motion made, Mr. Mayor, to reverse a decision previous of the
Commission. Let me read it, and maybe it will explain itself. (NOTE: AT
THIS POINT, Commissioner Plummer reads ordinance into the public record, See
hereinbelow) Now, that was in fact, rescinded by a motion, but not by
resolution. It does affect some of the prevailing appointments that have been
made, for example, Gloria Basila. This here, according to the City Attorney,
has to be done in a resolution to make that appointment legal. I so offer.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none, call the
roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-112
A RESOLUTION RESCINDING IN ITS ENTIRELY RESOLUTION NO.
80-143, ADOPTED FEBRUARY 28, 1980, WHICH HAD DECLARED
THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO PLACE LIMITATIONS
UPON THE LENGTH OF UNINTERRUPTED MEMBERSHIP SERVICE OF
ALL BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS CREATED BY
RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
DISCUSSION ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Carollo: What was that about J. L.? I'm sorry.
Mr. Plummer; Joe, it is to make the appointments... you remember, there was
the Rockefeller amendment to say you couldn't serve so many years, that was
passed.
Mr. Carollo: Right, right.
Mr. Plummer: Then we rescinded that by a motion. We did not do it by
resolution. The City Attorney said we had to do it by resolution.
Mr. Carollo: OK.
185 January 22, 1987
47. REQUEST BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF tASTERN AIRLI1ES THAT THEY NOT MOVE THEIR
HEADQUARTERS TO TEXAS; FURTHER EXPRESSING HOPE THAT COMPANY DIFFERENCES
WILL SOON BE RESOLVED; FURTHER EXPRESSING THE CITY'S SUPPORT TO SAID
COMPANY (See label #10)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Dawkins: Let's do the one on the Herald, please
Mayor Suarez: Oh, what on the Herald.
Mr. Dawkins: On Eastern, on Eastern.
Mrs. Dougherty: On Eastern Airlines. He is asking to read the resolution
that codifies that which you passed this morning. (NOTE: AT THIS POINT, City
Attorney reads resolution into the public record. See hereinbelow)
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll on that resolution.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-113
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION URGENTLY
REQUESTING THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF EASTERN AIRLINES
THAT THEY NOT MOVE THEIR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS TO
TEXAS; FURTHER EXPRESSING THE SINCERE HOPE AND
EXPECTATION THAT THE COMPANY WILL SOON RESOLVE ITS
DIFFERENCES WITH COMPANY EMPLOYEES; ALSO INFORMING THE
SAID BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WILLINGNESS OF THE
MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO MEET WITH
EASTERN AIRLINES EXECUTIVES IN ORDER TO LEND THEIR
SUPPORT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
48. ESTABLISH PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF NO SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION
& AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT ORDER AND MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR THE
1221 BRICKELL PROJECT.
Mr. Walter Pierce: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Walter.
Mr. Pierce: May I ask one favor, please, sir, because we kind of messed up.
We didn't include something on the agenda, and that was the item that I just
passed out about 1221 Brickell. We really need to set February 22nd at 3:30
P.M., as a public hearing, to deal with a development of regional impact
development order.
Mr. Dawkins: So moved.
186 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Seconded. Any discussion? Call the roll on that scheduling.
Scheduling public hearing on that.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-114
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 3:30 P.M., THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 26, 1987, OR A RECONVENED MEETING, AS THE
DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF A
FINDING OF NO SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION AND AN AMENDMENT
TO EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS OF FACT NUMBER 1 OF THE
DEVELOPMENT ORDER (RESOLUTION 84-589, MAY 24, 1984)
AND MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT (RESOLUTION 84-723, JUNE
28, 1984) FOR THE BRICKELL PROJECT, LOCATED AT 1221
BRICKELL; AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT, AMERISWISS
ASSOCIATES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
49. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE DESIGNATION OF AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY
S.W. 1 ST., S.W. SOUTH RIVER DR., S.W. 2ND STREET AND S.W. 5 AVENUE FROM
MODERATE -HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO SPECIAL USE.
Mayor Suarez: Planning & Zoning item 7, Magic City Enterprises.
Mr. Rodriguez: Items number 7 and number 8 are second readings...
Mayor Suarez: I'll entertain a motion on the modification of the
comprehensive master plan.
Mr. Dawkins: Move it.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
Mayor Suarez: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Read the ordinance.
187 January 22, 1987
0
•
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY AN AREA GENERALLY
BOUNDED BY SOUTHWEST 1ST STREET, SOUTHWEST SOUTH RIVER
DRIVE, SOUTHWEST 2ND STREET AND SOUTHWEST 5TH AVENUE
(MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY CHANGING
DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM MODERATE HIGH
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO SPECIAL
USE; MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of December 11,
1986, was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Dawkins, seconded by Commissioner Kennedy, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: What is this on? - I'm sorry.
Ms. Hirai: PZ-7, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Magic City Enterprises, amendment to the Comprehensive Master
Plan.
Mr. Plummer: I vote yes.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10212.
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.
50. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ATLAS OF 9500 - APPLY HC-5;
COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL HERITAGE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO AREA
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY S.W. 1 ST., S.W. SOUTH RIVER DRIVE, S.W. 2 STREET
AND S.W. 5TH AVENUE.
Mayor Suarez: Planning & Zoning item 8. That is the companion item.
Mr. Dawkins: I second.
Mayor Suarez: The zoning atlas. Moved and seconded, any discussion? Read
the ordinance.
188 January 22, 1987
AN ORDINANCE -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE
NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, BY APPLYING THE HC-5; COMMERCIAL -RESIDENTIAL
HERITAGE CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO THE AREA
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SOUTHWEST 1ST STREET, SOUTHWEST
SOUTH RIVER DRIVE, SOUTHWEST 2ND STREET AND SOUTHWEST
STH AVENUE (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN);
MAKING FINDINGS; ADOPTING AND INCORPORATING BY
REFERENCE THE "DESIGNATION REPORT"; AND BY MAKING ALL
NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 36 OF THE ZONING ATLAS;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of November 25,
1986, vas taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Kennedy, seconded by Commissioner Dawkins, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, I'm sorry.
Ms. Hirai: PZ-8, sir.
Mr. Plummer: I've got to look at. This is second reading. I've voted yes
before, I vote yes again.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 10213.
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. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 364-466
N.W. 26 AVENUE; 373-457 N.W. 27 AVENUE FROM SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, CULTURAL
TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL.
Mayor Suarez: Planning & Zoning item 9. Steve, that was a brilliant,
eloquent, presentation, brief.
Mr. Olmedillo: PZ-9 and PZ-10 are companion items. This is, 9, is a
Comprehensive Plan amendment from school, churches and cultural to liberal
commercial and 10 is a zoning change from RG-1/3 to CG-1/7. This is on 27th
Avenue, the property located on 27th Avenue between 3rd and 6th Streets,
northwest. There is an existing church building there. The applicant, who
purchased this property has the problem that the zoning line is dividing the
building itself. The Planning Department has recommended approval of the
rezoning and the plan amendment, minus the eastern 10 feet, in order to
protect that neighborhood, residential neighborhood, which is to the east of
it. The applicant has submitted a covenant, voluntary covenant, which
contains provisions for a six foot wall, ten feet within the right-of-way so
that the ten foot buffer is there... the landscaping, permanent maintenance
of the landscaping in that area - the Zoning Board approved the application
minus the eastern ten feet. The Planning Advisory Board also approved, or
recommended approval of the rezoning, minus the ten feet. You had a question?
189 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: What is presently on that, is that the church?
Mr. Olmedillo: That is the church, with a pointed steeple.
Mr. Plummer: And what is it to be used for? I mean, I know it is sin, but
what are they going... is it going to be a studio?
Mr. Olmedillo: Part of it is a studio, and part of it is the offices of the
Bayside...
Mr. Dawkins: I approve it as with the recommendations made by the Planning &
Zoning Department.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Seconded.
Mayor Suarez: Anyone present wishing to be heard against this application?
Let the record reflect that no one has stepped forward. Any discussion? Call
the roll on PZ-9.
THEREUPON, THE CITY ATTORNEY READ THE ORDINANCE INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD, BY
TITLE ONLY.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll.
Mr. Olmedillo: Just one second. One thing that I have to clarify and this is
for practical reasons. On our comprehensive plan, we have that area as blue,
which is cultural, churches, and schools. Now, if we were to leave a ten -foot
strip, it is going to be very difficult for us to, when we make the
impression, when we print the comprehensive plan, to include a ten -foot strip
of that scale. We recommend that in addition, instead of having a ten foot
strip of blue shown there, that we have the yellow, which is what corresponds
to the residential run against the new colors, which is a red color, which is
going to have on the...
Mayor Suarez: Isn't that for P-Z 10, the atlas?
Mr. Olmedillo: That will be for the atlas, for the plan amendment.
Mrs. Kennedy: Guillermo, are we getting any covenants from them?
Mr. Dawkins: Move 10 with the recommendation.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll on 9 first.
Mrs. Kennedy: Wait, wait. Perhaps you can answer that.
Mr. Robert H. Traurig: There is a covenant. It has been delivered, yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: Can we get any child care?... any money for child care centers?
Mr. Plummer: Are we going to defer this item?
Mr. Traurig: We will talk about it at second reading, because I haven't had
an opportunity to discuss that with the client.
Mr. Carollo: We're still on first reading.
Mayor Suarez: Now, do you need that modification you wanted, Guillermo, for
PZ-9, or is it for PZ-10, for the atlas, right?
Mrs. Kennedy: 9.
Mayor Suarez: OK, even there you need it, huh? OK, all right, the change of
colors is built into the motion. Is that acceptable to the movant and to the
second?
Mr. Carollo: Hold on.
Mr. Plummer: I don't think I like those colors)
190 January 22, 1987
Mr. Carollo: Well, the... is the same property Bob, that came to us in the
past for...?
Me. Traurig: No, sir. This is the church property on 27th Avenue, the east
side of 27th Avenue. The other property was N.W. 7th Street.
Mr. Carollo: That is right, you are correct. OK.
Mayor Suarez: Any further discussion On PZ-9?
Mr. Carollo: What are they going to do with that property, exactly?
Mr. Traurig: To use as corporate offices and just general administration.
Mr. Carollo: Corporate offices? OK, how large of a project can you build
there, then?
Mr. Traurig: They are going to just convert the existing church into offices.
Mr. Carollo: OK, what is the church that is there now?
Mr. Traurig: What is the name of the church?
Mr. Carollo: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: It was Church of God.
Mr. Traurig: I'll give it to you in a moment.
Mr. Plummer: That was the name of it, Church of God.
Mr. Carollo: Church of God?
Mayor Suarez: Broad enough.
Mr. Carollo: I am trying to picture where it is at, I just don't remember.
How many lot are there altogether?
Mr. Plummer: A whole lot.
Mr. Traurig: There are four lots that are the subject of this hearing. Those
are the four lots in the back. No, excuse me, it appears that there are more
than four.
Mr. Plummer: Eighteen lots, eighteen, total.
Mr. Traurig: Well, most of the lots that you see there, are already zoned CG-
1/7 on the east side of 27th Avenue. The lots that are really the subject of
the hearing are the lots in the back, which front on 26th.
Mayor Suarez: There are eight of those.
Mr. Traurig: And I guess there are eight lots there.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Olmedillo: The yellow ones are the ones for the zoning change.
Mr. Plummer: I see that there are two objectors on lots... is it 17 and 16,
or 17 and 18? Are they objectors? Does this in any way impair their rights
to their property?
Mr. Traurig: No, sir, Mr. Plummer. I read a letter from a lady that is in
the file, that says she was concerned about the width of the alley in the
back. We are not doing anything to change that alley. I don't know whether
or not she is truly an objector, but she expressed her concern about the width
of the alley and trash.
Mr. Carollo: What is the frontage that you have there now, Bob, do you know?
Mr. Traurig: The frontage on 27th Avenue?
191
January 22, 1987
Mr. Carollo: Yes.
Mr. Traurig: Those are...
Mr. Plummer: It has got to be...
Mr. Olmedillo: About 500 feet, sir.
Mr. Plummer: ...450 to 500.
Mr. Traurig: 50 foot lots, and there are ten of them, 500 feet.
Mr. Carollo: And the width?
Mr. Olmedillo: It goes to about 300 feet from 27th Avenue to 26th Court.
Mr. Carollo: And there is only a church there right now?
Mr. Traurig: Yes.
Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Church and parking lot.
Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, church and the parking lot around it.
Mr. Carollo: That's a heck of good sized property.
Mr. Plummer: Are we going to defer it, or are we going to vote on it?
Mr. Carollo: I'll make the motion to approve it, if...
Mr. Dawkins: It has already been...
Mayor Suarez: We have a motion and a second.
Mr. Carollo: Oh, it has been made?
Mr. Dawkins: ... a motion and second to approve it already.
Mr. Carollo: OK, based on what I have seen, I don't have any additional
questions at this point in time.
Mayor Suarez: Any further discussion from the Commission, PZ-9?
Mrs. Kennedy: One last discussion, Bob will you strongly consider for the
money to go into a child care facility.
Mr. Traurig: Yes, Ma'am, I will discuss that. I will speak to Mr. Blaya and
others about it.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll on PZ-9.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 364-466 NORTHWEST
26TH AVENUE AND 373-457 NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, (MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY CHANGING DESIGNATION
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM SCHOOLS, CHURCHES,
CULTURAL TO LIBERAL COMMERCIAL USE; MAKING FINDINGS;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote-
192 January 22, 1987
0
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
Mr. Dawkins: Well, we went from black olive trees to day care centers!
Mrs. Kennedy: See what a woman on the Commission does?
52. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY
364-466 N.W. 26TH AVE. FROM RG-1/3 TO CG-1/7.
Mayor Suarez: Planning & Zoning item 10.
Mr. Dawkins: I will move it with the same approval.
Mayor Suarez: Moved.
Mr. Carollo: Second.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE NUMBER
9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 364-466 NORTHWEST 26TH AVENUE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, FROM RG-1/3, GENERAL RESIDENTIAL, TO CG-1/7
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL, BY MAKING FINDINGS AND MAKING ALL
THE NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGES NUMBER 34 OF SAID
ZONING ATLAS, MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 9500 BY
REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION AND ARTICLE III, SECTION 300
THEREOF, CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Carollo and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and
to the public.
193 January 22, 1987
53. ESTABLISH POLICY TO BREAK FOR LUNCH AT THE CONCLUSION OF ITEM BEING
CONSIDERED AT NOON AND ADJOURN AT THE CONCLUSION OF ITEM BEING CONSIDERED
AT 9:00 P.M.
Mr. Carollo: If I may, based upon the policy that this Commission has had for
several years, I made a commitment with my family to be somewhere by 9:15 P.M.
I have to leave here today, that is why I made the statement that I did. If
the majority of this Commission would like to proceed, that is up to them, but
I was going by the policy that this Commission had established.
Mr. Plummer: Well, may I... and I don't know if I am out of place, or out of
order, I will stand corrected by the City Attorney. Mr. Mayor, we had a
policy of this Commission, which I understood to be the prevailing policy,
until a three/quarters or majority vote of this Commission overrode it. Now,
so that we don't have to go back to that, I will offer a motion at this time,
and that motion is, that we have a policy that as... as the Metropolitan Dade
County, that the last speaker at noon, is the last speaker, and the last item
at 9:00 p.m. is the last item, with a proviso that at any time, this
Commission, by a majority vote, can extend that position. I am saying...
Mayor Suarez: You don't need a policy. See, you can do a variety of
things...
Mr. Plummer: But, if we have a policy...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait. You can either move to adjourn at any time, and if
you have a majority, you get to adjourn. If you have three that agree, you
can just walk out, or you can try to put it in the form of an ordinance, to
supersede what is already in our code as far as procedure here, which is
Mason's Rules of Procedure. Now, if you want to try to do that and make it
into the form of an ordinance, you may so move at this point, I...
Mr. Plummer: Well, I will rely on the City Attorney. I think what I am
trying to say, Mr. Mayor, is that we have to establish policies. A business
is open. It is known to be open to a certain time, and after that, the
business is closed. Now, I think if you don't have those kinds of policies in
place...
Mayor Suarez: It has been the practice of this Commission, since I have been
Mayor, and I know it wasn't the practice with the prior Mayor, to only go as
close to 9:00 o'clock as can humanly possibly be done, with deference to the
people who have been waiting all day, and I have stuck to that policy, and I
have deferred to your request at all times...
Mr. Plummer: I understand that.
Mayor Suarez: And you want to impose this as a policy. Now, you can do it in
the form of an ordinance, you are welcome to do that.
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Commissioner Dawkins.
Mr. Dawkins: The other Mayor is the reason we had the 9:00 o'clock, and the
reason we had it is, like Plummer says, and like you are saying is to let the
public know what we are doing.
Mr. Plummer: Exactlyl
Mr. Dawkins: All right now, and the reason it was done, Mr. Mayor, is because
people would come and not know what was happening, and at 10:00 o'clock at
night they would leave, and then...
Mr. Plummer: Or 11:00 o'clock, or 12:00 o'clock.
Mr. Dawkins:... no wait, I am talking about 10:00 o'clock... and then between
10:00 and 10:15, 16 items are passedl
194 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: And all you've had to do in the past, since I have been Mayor,
is to let me know...
Mr. Dawkins: Hold on now, hold it, hold itt Let somebody else talk some,
bK?... and the reason it was done, and we voted on it as a policy... that is
all we are trying to say is, that a policy was established.
Mayor Suarez: You don't mean by this Commission?
Mr. Dawkins: Well, what is three members of the Commission?
Mayor Suarez: Well, if you can find in the transcript where we voted, I mean,
you correct my memory, but I haven't voted on that policy.
Mr. Plummer: All right then, I am going to give you the opportunity.
Mayor Suarez: And anyhow, it should be an ordinance. If you want to make it
into the form of an ordinance, we will always stop at 9:00 P.M., that will be
fine. People will have notice.
Mrs. Kennedy: I think perhaps what we should do is, let the people know,
perhaps, in the form of advertisement, or some kind of notice...
Mr. Plummer: The policy...
Mrs. Kennedy:... that this Commission... exactly!
Mr. Plummer: That is all I am trying to say...
Mrs. Kennedy: The policy that we have.
Mr. Plummer:... is to establish a policy. I left at the very end, that any
time three members or the majority of this Commission want to extend it by a
three to two vote they can do it. Now, Madam City... good morningt... I will
be governed by yours. Does it need an ordinance? What is necessary, and if it
fails, it fails, but what, in your opinion, is necessary to establish this
policy now?
Mrs. Dougherty: It takes three votes to establish a policy.
Mr. Plummer: I then offer a motion that this Commission establish a policy
that the last speaker at noon is the last speaker, and that the last item at
9:00 p.m. is the last item, except by a majority vote of this Commission to
extend either one, and I so move.
Mr. Carollo: Second.
Mrs. Kennedy: And let the people know that they might have to go at 9 p.m. so
that this....
Mr. Plummer: Well, I think...
Mrs. Kennedy:.... doesn't happen, I feel very sorry for everybody sitting here.
Mr. Plummer: Exactly, you know now, hey, I want to tell you something. As
far as I am concerned, I will stay to hear these people, because they have not
known, OK?... and I will stay to hear these because it is only two more items,
but I think we have got to establish our policies, and you know, I was around
here when we stayed until 1:00 and 2:00 o'clock in the morning, OK? I am not
saying it was right, but that is all I am saying. I shut up!
Mr. Carollo: I apologize to some of the people who have waited here, but
going on the policy that we had established, I have made prior arrangements.
I have some out of town guests that I have an appointment with, and my family,
so I have to leave, as I stated. If anybody would like a deferral, however, I
would be more than happy to have it put it into the record, and hear it at the
next meeting, whenever the items we have left come up.
Mr. Plummer: May I suggest in my motion... Joe, you seconded it... that this
be printed as the policy on every agenda.
Mr. Carollo: Absolutely.
195 January 22, 1987
0
Mrs. Kennedy: Right.
Mayor Suarez: So moved and seconded. Any discussion? Once again, just to
clarify for your edification, if not for anything else - there has been a
practice of trying to finish at 9:00 o'clock, and I have worked awfully hard
at carrying that out, and I have always, in addition to that, listened to my
fellow Commissioners, when they had a special need and they had to leave and
otherwise tried to adjust to their schedules.
Mr. Plummer: And I would hope, Mr. Mayor... I would hope...
Mayor Suarez: There has been no policy, and there has been nothing with the
force of law to require that we end at 9:00 o'clock. If the Commission
chooses to end at 9:00 o'clock tonight, or 9:06 p.m., the Commission can so
choose by a majority vote, or by just walking out. If it chooses to pass it,
what I think has the force of an ordinance, I guess, they can do so also. I
am going to vote against it, because I would like the flexibility, as
chairman, to consult my fellow Commissioners, as I have been doing for fifteen
months, and try to get to your items as we get to the end of the day, but I
will, of course, abide by the will of the majority of the Commission.
Mr. Carollo: Before I go, well, we have to vote on this, I'll make a
statement and can you call the roll.
Mayor Suarez: As I said that I will abide by the will of the majority of the
Commission, wherever it may be.
Mr. Carollo: I am afraid you have no choice but to abide by it, Xavier. Call
the roll, Madam Clerk.
Mr. Plummer: Should I insert in there, Madam City Attorney, effective the
next agenda, so that we don't have to immediately vote on a waiver?
Mrs. Dougherty: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: All right, I make this effective... I can't see that damn thing
up there.
Mrs. Dougherty: The 12th.
Mr. Plummer: That this be effective as of February 12, 1987 agenda, forward.
Mayor Suarez: I think you have just increased the chances that it be a legal
motion. With that proviso, is that accepted by the seconder of the motion?
Mr. Carollo: Well, if it is going to be legal, I'd like to hear from the
person we pay to be the City Attorney, not from a rookie on it.
Mr. Dawkins:
(OFF MICROPHONE)
Mayor Suarez: We have a motion. Does the second...
Ms. Hirai: Yes.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, I didn't second it, Carollo did.
Mayor Suarez:.. agree to the proviso?
Mr. Carollo: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: Call the roll.
196 January 22, 1987
0 0
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-115
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE POLICY OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION THAT UNLESS OTHERWISE SUPERSEDED BY A
MAJORITY VOTE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION,
LUNCH RECESS WILL BEGIN AT THE CONCLUSION OF
DELIBERATIONS ON THE AGENDA ITEM BEING CONSIDERED AT
12:00 NOON; FURTHER, THAT COMMISSION MEETING WILL
ADJOURN AT THE CONCLUSION OF DELIBERATIONS ON THE
AGENDA ITEM BEING CONSIDERED AT 9:00 P.M.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on
file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Carollo, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Joe Carollo
Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Dawkins: I vote yes, and I have to say that the Mayor has tried to get
out at nine he has let me have my emergencies and that perhaps prolonged the
meeting, but I vote yes.
Mr. Plummer: Let me state for the record, that I would hope the same
prevailing thought, Mr. Mayor, on your part would be, that at no time, was
this in any way other than to establish a policy so that people when they came
in in the morning, pick up...
Mayor Suarez: You can do that any time, that is fine, you can do that any
time.
Mr. Plummer: ...pick up that agenda, they know that the basic policy of this
Commission.
Mayor Suarez: Fine, and I would very much go along with it as a general rule,
and as a policy.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, OK.
Mayor Suarez: I want to make sure we do it legally, but that is...
Mr. Plummer: Fine.
Mayor Suarez: ...but you can announce a policy that doesn't exist. That is a
practice that we have had, and that was not kept, by the way, by the prior
Mayor. It has been kept fairly well by this one. OK.
Mr. Carollo: If I may say before I leave, I always like to make sure that my
point is understood, and there is no misunderstanding. Even the Mayor is
trying to give the impression that those that are here, which is practically
everybody that is up here, on item 13, if I understand it, that he wants to
sacrifice his time to stay and hear those that are present for that item,
which is the majority of the people that are here, that is not so. The real
reason he wants to stay here, until tomorrow, if we have to, is because items
11 and 12, which are together, are items that again, his former law partner,
Tony Zamora, and some of the people involved in the Watson Island Development
Corporation, Alfredo Pernas, and Humberto Pedrica, have a heck of a rezoning
item that he is very interested in. That is the real reason he is staying,
not for you people here.
197 January 22, 1987
Mayor Suarez: Either that, or that is the real reason that Commissioner
Carollo is all of a sudden trying to close the meeting without following
procedures, because he doesn't want to get...
Mr. Carollo: None, whatsoever, Mr. Mayor, none whatsoever.
Mayor Suarez: 1 let you finish... because he doesn't want to get to items 11,
12 or 13, but I will be here as long as I've got two Commissioners to handle
all three of the items.
Mr. Carollo: You know real well, if that is the case, all I had to do is ask
for a deferment, and I'd get a deferment.
Mayor Suarez: I've voted against most of your deferments anyhow. OK.
Mr. Carollo: And still gotten them, didn't I?
Mayor Suarez: Sometimes you did, and sometimes you didn't. Have we called
the roll on that? We have.
NOTE FOR THE RECORD: COMMISSIONER CAROLLO LEFT THE MEETING AT 9:10 P.M.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
54. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY AT 3621-3631 S.W.
22 TERRACE EXCEPT FOR ONE -FOOT BUFFER STRIP FROM LOW MODERATE DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USE.
Mayor Suarez: Item PZ-11.
Mr. Dawkins: Move it with the approval.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, I said let's move... oh!
Mr. Plummer: You move item ll?
Mr. Dawkins: Yes.
Mayor Suarez: PZ-11 has been moved.
Mr. Dawkins: With suggested...
Mr. Plummer: Can I hear first from the Department who has recommended denial?
Mr. Dawkins: They are not... denial, wait a minute!
Mr. Olmedillo: Of the application, and we are recommending minus the one foot
as we did for the Kaufman and Roberts and Kaituma, which are...
Mr. Plummer: But that is on item 12. Let's hear why you recommend...
Mr. Olmedillo: 11 and 12 are companion items.
Mr. Plummer. Excuse me. My agenda says that the Planning Department
recommends denial.
Mr. Dawkins: OK.
Mr. Plummer: My agenda says item 12, the Planning Department recommends
approval.
Mr. Dawkins: OK, my agenda says, item 1, "Recommendation, Planning
Department, denial of a change of plan designated the general commercial;
however, the Planning Department would recommend approval"...
Mr. Plummer: That is the backup.
Mr. Dawkins: ..."of the requested plan if a one buffer strip were retained,
and low moderate density." So, I say, I move with this modification, if they
want to accept, I'll move it; if not, I don't move it.
198 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Well, I don't find that on 11.
Mayor Suarez: Is this similar to all of the other ones that we have granted
on Coral Way to Kaufman and Roberts, and...
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, is item 11 recommended or not?
Mr. Olmedillo: We recommended denial of the application. We recommend
approval of the change, minus the southern one foot.
Mr. Plummer: Are you recommending... I see that you recommend 12 minus the
one foot. Are you recommending 11, or are you recommending denial?
Mr. Olmedillo: We are recommending denial of the application, and on the site
we are recommending approval of the...
Mayor Suarez: With the modification for the one foot buffer, are you
recommending...
Mrs. Kennedy: Have they agreed to it?
Mr. Dawkins: I am moving... I am confused, J. L.
Mr. Plummer: You are confused? No wonder you are confused, we are getting
nothing but double talk. Item 11, in my agenda, and like God rest his soul,
Father Gibson says is in the King's English. Let me read it to you briefly)
"Planning Department recommends denial." Just that simple! Now, no double
talk. Do you recommend denial as so stated my agenda, or do you recommend
approval?
Mr. Rodriguez: We recommend denial, but the agenda is...
Mr. Plummer: That was
Mr. Rodriguez: ... there are some mistakes on the agenda, and I want to put
it for the record. Among the mistakes that we have, it shows Planning
Department application, which is not true. It is not our application, neither
one of them, and I want to put that on the record.
Mr. Plummer: So you recommend denial on 11 and you recommend approval on 12?
Mr. Olmedillo: If you read on page two...
Mayor Suarez: Are you recommending approval subject to the one foot buffer,
as we did in the other cases?
Mr. Plummer: Hey, no, no. Let me tell you, I move that this item be
deferred...
Mr. Pierce: Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute. I move that this item be deferred and you guys go
straighten this damn thing out. Now, this is hogwash! I'm sorry. Let me tell
you, this is what you advertised to the public, OK? This is what I read.
Now, if you guys can't put it in simple, clean, English language, then let's
defer it and let's get it straight. This is crazy!
Mr. Pierce: Mr. Vice -Mayor, may I sir.
Mr. Plummer: Sure.
Mr. Pierce: The recommendation on PZ-11 should have read very similar to the
recommendation of PZ-12, where as requested, it is recommended for denial, but
with the modification, reserving the one foot strip, as we have done elsewhere
on 22nd Terrace, Kaufman and Roberts, and one other application, it should
have been to just leave a one foot strip.
Mr. Plummer: Are you saying then, that where you are demanding a one foot
strip in item 12, you are demanding the same one foot strip in 11, and if they
provide that, then you are recommending approval?
199 January 22, 1987
Mr. Pierce: Right.
Mr. Plummer: What did the Zoning Board do?
Mr. Olmedillo: The Zoning Board approved it, recommended approval.
Mr. Plummer: Subject to the one foot strip in 11?
Mr. Olmedillo: To the one foot strip, right.
Mr. Pierce: Right.
Mr. Plummer: And they approved... no, the Planning Advisory Board denied it
nine to zero.
Mr. Olmedillo: No, no, let me back up. The Planning Advisory Board, but we
are talking about the two boards. The Planning Advisory Board recommended
denial. The Zoning Board recommended approval without the one foot.
Mr. Plummer: I don't have that here. I have Planning Department recommends
denial, which you said you recommend approval if the one foot strip is there,
OK? Planning Advisory Board recommends denial nine to zero.
Mr. Olmedillo: Denial, nine to zero.
Mr. Plummer: Males replied in favor, three. Males replied against, one.
Mr. Olmedillo: Zoning Board...
Mr. Plummer: Nothing in here about the Zoning Board.
Mr: Olmedillo: No, in 12...
Mayor Suarez: Because the Comprehensive Plan application goes through P.A.B.,
whereas...
Mr. Olmedillo: P.A.B. only.
Mayor Suarez: ... OK, the Atlas goes through Zoning.
Mr. Olmedillo: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: How did the Planning Board hear it, with the one foot strip, or
without it?
Mr. Olmedillo: The Planning Advisory Board heard it with both, the
applicant's position and the Planning Department's position, and they voted.
Mr. Plummer: Was their denial based on the one foot strip being included?
Mr. Olmedillo: On the application, they just denied the application.
Mr. Plummer: You know, that doesn't surprise me. If they are as confused as
I am...!
Mayor Suarez: Is this the same posture that all the other ones on Coral Way
, in which the other ones
Mr. Olmedillo: Similar cases and would...
Mayor Suarez: Yes, but I mean, is this the same posture, as far as our
P.A.H., and our Zoning Boards? It is the same recommendations?
Mr. Olmedillo: No, sir. In the past the Planning Advisory Board had
recommended the changes for the Kaituma and the Kaufman and Roberts.
Mr. Plummer: OK, I am going to move that this item be deferred, and that it
be back before us in cleaned up language so that it is understandable, and
there is no disputing on anybody's part. I can't speak for the other members
of this Commission, but with all, I am confused.
Mrs. Kennedy: Did the Planning Department know about the one foot strip?
200 January 22, 1987
Mr. Olmedillo: We were the ones who brought...
Mayor Suarez: The Planning Advisory Board.
Mr. Olmedillo: The Planning Advisory Board.
Mr. Plummer: He said they heard it both ways.
Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, when we presented the case before the Planning Advisory
Board, we presented both positions. First, they reviewed the application as
requested by the applicant, and they voted no on that one.
Mrs. Kennedy: Refresh my memory. What is the difference between this and the
Kaufman and Roberts and Salman.
Mr. Olmedillo: The only difference is that the applicant in this particular
case did not provide for the one foot buffer, which is not to be rezoned.
That is the only difference, for this case.
Mrs. Kennedy: And they still have not agreed to it?
Mr. Ramon Irizarri: We have agreed to it, and we will abide by the
recommendations. In other words, we will put in the one foot buffer zone.
Yes, Ramon Irizarri, of counsel for Osvaldo Soto.
Mr. Pierce: Just for clarification.
that the applicant puts in.
Mayor Suarez: Something that we...
That one foot strip is not something
Mr. Pierce: It is used, it's the way you zone it, as the Commission.
Mayor Suarez: Yes.
Mr. Irizarri: At this point, we will abide by the recommendations and we will
amend our petition to be in conformity...
Mayor Suarez: Give us your name and address. We didn't get that in record, I
don't think, did we?
Mr. Irizarri: Yes, we did.
Mayor Suarez: OK, I am sorry.
Mr. Irizarri: So, that we will abide by the recommendations and the requests
of the Planning.
Mayor Suarez: Did we check on the registered lobbyist ordinance?
Mr. Irizarri: No, I did not. I am of counsel t.- Osvaldo Soto. I am an
attorney at law, I am not a lobbyist.
Mayor Suarez: He is registered. Just make sure that he is registered.
Mr. Irizarri: I will.
Mayor Suarez: I'm pretty sure he has, because he has told us in the past that
he has.
Mrs. Kennedy: You want to ask a question if he getting paid, and if he has
registered...
Mayor Suarez: No, he is getting paid, he is of counsel to Soto.
Mr. Irizarri: I'm of counsel to Osvaldo Soto.
Mayor Suarez: But, it is a law firm, and I think Soto has filed, I think he
has. We ought to check to be absolutely sure.
Mr. Plummer: Well, he... that is another point now. Are you saying he
doesn't have to register?
201 January 22, 1987
Mr. Irizarri: No, that is...
Mayor Suarez: if it is a law firm?
Mr. Irizarri: Osvaldo Soto is registered.
Mr. Plummer: is he being paid to represent a client?
Mr. Irizarri: I am...
Mayor Suarez: Does every member of a law firm have to register?
Mr. Plummer: That's a damn good question.
Mayor Suarez: Does every member of a law firm have to register?
Mr. Irizarri: No, my understanding is that...
Mr. Plummer: Madam City Attorney, you better get your nose up here.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: Who has to register as a lobbyist?
Mayor Suarez: See, if it is true, then you ought to register yourself
individually.
Mr. Irizarri: If that is a requirement, I will do so for my next appearance
before this Commission.
Mrs. Kennedy: You have to do it for this one.
Mayor Suarez: No, you have to do it for this one.
Mr. Izizarri: I will do it then, with the permission of the Commission, nunc
pro tonc my registration.
Mayor Suarez: Just don't try Latin on us, you know, it gets a little
confusing, nunc pro tunc, first time here. I will be disposed to, if you want
to table the matter for the moment. I am not going to vote to defer, so I
don't know how the rest of the Commission is going to vote. I'd like decide
this just like we did all the other ones on Coral Way. To me, if seems just
like it is exactly the same.
Mr. Olmedillo: It is a similar case, sir.
Mrs. Kennedy: Now it is, with a one foot buffer.
Mr. Plummer: Is there anybody of the public here that wishes to be heard on
this item?
Mayor Suarez: Is there anybody who wishes to be heard for or against PZ-11 or
PZ-12?
Mr. Plummer: I assume the rest of the people are here whiskey store.
Mayor Suarez: Right.
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mrs. Kennedy: You want us to sit here with us?
Mayor Suarez: Do you want to vote? We have an empty space over here.
Mrs. Kennedy: Do you want to sit here?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Suarez: What is the Commission's pleasure?
Mr. Plummer: You all do what you want. I've expressed my desire.
202
January 22, 1987
Mr. Juan Berry: Mr. Mayor, my time is Juan Berry, and I just presented my
application for a lobbyist for the City.
Mayor Suarez: OK, go ahead, Juan, tell us your address, and tell us what you
want to say about this matter.
Mr. Berry: My name is Juan Berry, my address is 1519 Cecilia Avenue, Coral
Gables, and...
Mr. Dawkins: Mr. Berry, I am not going to put you through this. Like we
said, we approved the other two. I move that we approve, just like I said
before, 11 and 12, with a recommendations of the Planning Department, for the
one foot buffer. That's the same thing we did for Selman... who else did we
do it for?
Mayor Suarez: Kaufman and Roberts.
Mrs. Kennedy: Kaufman and Roberts, and everybody else. That's my motion.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Kennedy: Why do you need more time?
Mr. Plummer: Only for the legality, that is all I am concerned about.
Mrs. Kennedy: What legality?
Mr. Plummer: The legality is that the agenda is wrong.
Mayor Suarez: No, as applied, the Planning Department recommends denial. As
modified, you recommend approval on 11, right?
Mr. Olmedillo: Yes, sir. If you see item 11 on page two of the package, you
will see the recommendation of the Planning Department is...
Mayor Suarez: With the modification, the recommendation is positive.
Mr. Olmedillo: With the modification its approval.
Mr. Dawkins: I will read from the record. "Denial of change of plan
designation to general commercial. However, the Planning Department would
recommend approval of the request plan designation change if a one foot buffer
strip were retained in low moderate density resident plan designation on the
east, south and west side of the property", and I move with that modification.
Mayor Suarez: So moved.
Mrs. Dougherty: Is there a second?
Mrs. Kennedy: I will second, and let me ask you, or let me, rather, put on
the record, I asked you yesterday if the covenant would go into a child care
facility, and you agreed to that.
Mr. Irizarri: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We don't have any objections.
Mr. Dawkins: Again?
Mayor Suarez: Wow, we are going to have a lot of child care facilities. What
is the next thing we are going to start asking for, you know what I mean?
There is just so many kids. Any further discussion from the Commission?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I am going to vote against the motion and I want my
negative vote to be registered. If this matter is cleared up prior to the
second reading, I will vote in favor, but that is the only way I am going to
be assured that the language which is admittedly improper on the agenda. I
can be assured that way that I can raise holy hell, and remind me at the next
meeting.
Mayor Suarez: Read the ordinance.
s 203 January 22, 1987
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI COMPREHENSIVE
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND ADDENDA (SEPTEMBER 1985); FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3621-3631 SOUTHWEST
22ND TERRACEo (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) BY
CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
EXCEPT FOR A ONE -FOOT BUFFER STRIP OF SAID PROPERTY
FROM LOW MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL USE;
MAKING FINDINGS; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
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.
FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Dawkins: I am voting yes and I am going to agree with J. L., I want it
cleaned up, and I also going to put on the record for the Manager I hope he is
somewhere in this building listening. This is about the fifth time sir, that
you have got people working for you who are not doing what the hell they are
supposed to do, and I can't evaluate them, but I do evaluate you, and they are
going to make you get a negative evaluation, sir, by taking us through this
kind of foolishness.
Mrs. Kennedy: That is the second time today!
Mr. Plummer: Bad boyl
Mrs. Kennedy: If I were you, I would start worrying.
Mr. Plummer: Where is the Miami Sound Machine? We are going to get you to be
the lead singer of Bad Boyl
Mr. Odio: I wouldn't mind that at all. You know, they are driving Rolls
Roycesl
Mr. Plummer: Yes, we want you to be in a a Rolls Royce, but that is why we
want the financial disclosure.
Ms. Hirai: Continuing roll call - Mr. Plummer?
Mr. Plummer: No, I vote no, to remind me.
55. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY
3621-3631 S.W. 22ND TERRACE, EXCEPT FOR ONE FOOT BUFFER STRIP ON
SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE FROM RG-1/3 TO CR-3/7.
Mayor Suarez: PZ-12.
Mr. Dawkins: Move it with the same modification.
Mayor Suarez: Moved, with the same modification by Commissioner Dawkins.
Mrs. Kennedy: Second.
204 January 22, 1987
0
Mayor Suarez: Seconded with the same modifications, reservations by
Commissioner Plummer. Any further discussion? Read the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ATLAS OF ORDINANCE
NO. 9500, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
FLORIDA, BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 3621-3631 SOUTHWEST 22ND TERRACE, MIAMI,
FLORIDA, (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN) EXCEPT
FOR A ONE FOOT BUFFER STRIP ON THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY
LINE OF SAID PROPERTY FROM RG-1/3 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL
(ONE AND TWO-FAMILY) TO CR-3/7 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL
GENERAL BY MAKING FINDINGS; AND BY MAKING ALL THE
NECESSARY CHANGES ON PAGE NO. 42 OF SAID ZONING ATLAS
MADE A PART OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500 BY REFERENCE AND
DESCRIPTION IN ARTICLE 3, SECTION 300, THEREOF;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE.
Was introduced by Commissioner Dawkins and seconded by Commissioner
Kennedy and was passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: No, for the reason so stipulated.
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.
56. APPEAL BY OBJECTORS GRANTED: REVERSING ZONING BOARD'S SPECIAL EXCEPTION
WHICH PREVIOUSLY GRANTED PERMIT FOR A PARKING LOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
DENNY'S LIQUORS AND MON PETIT CLUB LOCATED AT 3198 N.W. 7 STREET.
Mayor Suarez: PZ-13, finally!
Mr. Olmedillo: Item 13, this is an appeal to a special exception granted by
the Zoning Board. The present situation is that there is a liquor store on
the southeast corner of 7th Street, and N.W. 32 Avenue. That package store
and night club, has parking facilities across the street on the southwest
corner. They have been creating certain parking problems into the residential
neighborhood, and they came for an application for special exception to have
off -site parking. The Planning Department recommended approval with conditions
by which they will have to buffer the parking area around it so as not to
impact into the residential neighborhood, no ingress or egress into the
residential streets, but through the lot, and also the approval was subject to
landscaping and cleanup of both lots, the present lot that they use for
parking and the one which is the one under the application to the south of it.
The Planning Department recommended approval of the special exception. The
Zoning Board approved the application on a six to three vote, and it was
brought to you as an appeal.
Mr. Henry Amoon: My name is Henry Amoon, I have my offices at 123 N.W. 12th
Avenue, Miami, Florida, appearing on behalf of the appellee in this particular
case. When we appeared before the Zoning Board, we pointed out to the Zoning
Board that the white area that you see on the drawing before you, is a
legalized, property approved parking lot, sanctioned by the City of Miami, in
full compliance with all of their regulations. A parking problem existed in
the area, my client having a night club across the street from the white
parking lot. In order to alleviate the parking, my client acquired the area
that is marked in green, on the left side of the particular plan.
205 January 22, 1987
Mr. Pierce: Mr. Mayor, excuse me, sir.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, Walter.
Mr. Pierce: With all due respect, this is an appeal by property owners. They
should be first.
Mayor Suarez: OK, how many property owners do we have here? Have you
organized yourselves into some kind of an organization so that we don't have
to hear individually from each one of you? There are some that speak for the
rest of the group? OK.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Amoon, while they are doing that, have you registered as a
lobbyist, sir?
Mr. Amoon: No, I have not, Mr. Plummer, ...(INAUDIBLE, OFF MICROPHONE)...
Mr. Plummer: You are not being compensated? All right, sir. You are not
being compensated with champagne inside?
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir.
Ms. Margie Molinet: My name is Margie Molinet, and I am here representing
most of the residents of the community, as well as my grandmother, who lives
in the adjacent lot, at 3211 N.W. 6th Street. I'd like to say that at the
last hearing, the issue was confused. The main issue appeared to be that most
of the owners were complaining about people parking in front of their homes.
That does occur, and it has been a problem. However, we as a community, feel
that that can be solved by other means, rather than providing this parking lot
for these people. We can post signs, saying that parking is not allowed in
front of these homes, we can take other measures. If you look at page ten of
the packet, you will see what our complaints were. What we are saying is that
we are not against the business, we are not against the prior, preexisting
parking lot. What we are against is them moving into our area, our
residential area. I am sorry, I wanted to thank you, I mean, get back to
this, I wanted to thank you all for staying here, we really appreciate it,
because I know it would be really hard for all of us to have these people
here, so I really want to thank you, and I think the rest of us feel that way.
Now, to get back to where I was anyway - like I say, we are not against the
bar and that was existing there, and even though there were problems before
when they had the other parking lot, those problems were basically affecting
few homes, or few people. My grandmother was one of them, but it wasn't as
much as it is now. Now, that they are using this lot which had a house on it;
you know, when they bought the lot, it had a house, and they went ahead
knowing that this was residential, they went ahead, they bought the house,
they demolished the house, and then they started parking illegally. As you
see in the packet, they have a whole bunch of different citations against
them. They, you know, didn't really consider the neighborhood. They didn't
consider the residents, their feelings, they didn't take any of those things
into consideration. They just went in and did what they wanted to do at the
expense of whatever it had to be, and this has made us very angry, because not
only have, you know, our rights been violated, also, our life-style has
changed. These people, most of these people, as you can see here, are senior
citizens and they have invested their life earnings in these homes. They have
upgraded their homes, they have remodeled, and they want to live now
peacefully and quietly, in a neighborhood where they feel safe. This does not
happen anymore. At night, there are fights, it doesn't happen every night, but
many nights there are fights, and these fights, when they were only affecting
the other people, now have gone into the neighborhood. I have some pictures
here that I will pass around for you to see, of a fence that they put up, a
wood fence, and about a week ago, or so, a week and one-half ago, there were
loud voices in the middle of night, they fought apparently woke up many
neighbors around the different area, then the person, or the individual, got
in the car, and drove away, but in the meantime, while driving away, he ran
into the fence, and I have pictures here to show that. I also have the
pictures from inside of the parking lot, and from my grandmother's house.
Where the car is, is where my grandmother's house is, and the other, where
there is no car is , where the parking lot is, inside of it.
206 January 22, 1987
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, which lot is in question? does the present
owners already have the blue lot above it?
Mr. Pierce: (OFF MICROPHONE)...the blank lot there.
Mr. Plummer: The blank lot.
Mr. Pierce: (OFF MICROPHONE)... the white lot...
Mr. Plummer: So, in other words, they are already using the blue lot for
parking at the present time.
Mr. Pierce: Yes, air.
Mr. Plummer: Is that properly landscaped and everything?
Mr. Olmedillo: The condition that we have put in it , the Planning
Department, was that that parking lot would also be in compliance with the
requirements, which is not right now.
Ms. Molinet: No, right now, as you can see, and I have another photo,
everything is very badly taken care of. Their grass is just growing all over
the place. Sometimes there is some beer cans, there is trash, and their
attorney, I think, also has things to show this.
Mrs. Kennedy: I can vouch for that, because I went and I saw it and it...
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask the neighbors one thing, because obviously they
are already on whatever, I guess that is lot eight, there is presently a
existing parking lot there. Now, you say that is not well kept, and not well
maintained.
Ms. Molinet: OK, they do have the preexisting lot, I mean, that was just a...
yes, that is legal, and that was there. They had a fence, which they tore down
and they went into lot nine.
Mr. Plummer: OK, the question, I guess, that I really want to ask of the
neighbors, has there been any consideration? - because I know the area, that
if you don't provide parking, they are going to park all in your front yard.
Ms. Molinet: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me my dear, I am asking if any consideration has been
given to the fact, that if this were to be granted, you can control it from
the aspect of landscaping, fencing, lighting, security, and things of that
nature. Is there a possibility, that you the neighbors, by allowing this
other lot to be included, having full control, would be better off. Now, we
can place stipulations that if for example, that we want a six foot fence, we
want landscaping, no lighting that would go into there, we could put a one
year review, there is many, many things that we can do if that is what you
want to consider. Other than that, if they are denied, they are going to keep
on in this one lot, they are going to be parking all over your neighborhood,
as they are obviously doing now, that's... I am just asking, have you
considered that?
Ms. Molinet: Well, we have thought about that, but we had thought that maybe
if we can get some signs posted in the homes where these cars do park, and I
have gone by there late at night, and 7th Street is desolated, I mean, there
is nothing there. I don't see why they can't park further down, and walk a
couple of blocks, or they possibly couldn't have invested their money in
another lot, there is like a garage of some sort, that you know, looks really
run down next to a station, or something like that.
Mr. Plummer: OK, look, the point I am trying to make is that this lot, from
these photos give an appearance that it is not something that the neighborhood
would be proud of.
Ms. Molinet: Yes, definitely not..
Mr. Plummer: We, the Commission cannot do anything to force them, other than
to comply, OK?... on this lot, unless we hold the lever their head with
something else. Now, maybe that is not what you want, OK?
207 January 22, 1987
0 0
Ms. Molinet: Well, what we really felt was that, you know, we are zoned
residential, and these people do not want them starting to park in the parking
lot, and their residential area is ruined. There was a house there that was
in perfectly good condition, and you know, they just demolished it and went
ahead and you know, just went ahead over anything, or any feelings or any...
Mr. Plummer: OK, hey, I am merely...
Ms. Molinet: You know, and we feel that we have a real right to have, you
know, to keep our neighborhood residential, and this is something that, well,
as you can see, all these people that are here and a lot of them couldn't make
it, they felt that the issue was going to be heard way before it was, and you
know, I really feel that in this situation, they could have gone out, and they
have the amount of money, either to create and build a bigger place somewhere
else, with the amount of money that they bought this house with, or go ahead
and find something else somewhere else, why do they have to come into our
area, and you know, why do we have to be awaken in the middle of the night
sometimes?
Mr. Plummer: OK.
Ms. Molinet: The nature of this business is not the nature of a store, it is
not the nature of any type of business like that. The nature of this business
is a place where people drink, and they walk out and they have fights and...
Mr. Plummer: OK, but you see, what I am trying...
Ms. Molinet: And the parking is really not even the issue. It is just
like...
Mr. Plummer: It is the issue, if it gives you some control, all right?
Ms. Molinet: OK, it does, and I agree with that. I think that is an
excellent idea.
Mr. Plummer: Now, what I am saying to you is, if we deny this application,
they are going to continue, they have got their liquor license, I am assuming,
with the amount of parking, and whatever they need.
Ms. Molinet: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: And if we deny it, you are going to have what you have got there
now, with nothing that this Commission can do to improve the situation.
Ms. Molinet: OK.
Mr. Plummer: If we consider, with your approval, the other lot, the lot nine,
we can place all kinds of restrictions to the point, "Gentlemen, you have got
to fix up lot eight, you can't exit onto 32nd Avenue..."
Ms. Molinet: Right.
Mr. Plummer:..."You have got to put up a fence and maintain it, you have got
to put landscaping, you have got to put a sprinkler system, you have got to
put lights that don't shine in our neighborhood, or in my bedroom window. You
have got to put security fences up when it is not being used. You are going to
have to be subjected to a one year review..." All these things we can do,
only if it is considered for the second lot. I am not trying to talk you into
it.
Ms. Molinet: Yes, I understand. I understand and everything sounds, you
know, it sounds very...
Mr. Plummer: I'm saying, do you want the thing to stay as it is, or do you
want this Commission to consider having some control? That is all I am saying,
and I am asking, did you consider that? That is all I am asking.
Ms. Molinet: OK...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
208 January 22, 1987
1 0 0
Ms. Molinet: Also, they are also concerned, another issue has been that the
people who have property in this area are having now a difficult time selling
their property. There is a house right across the street from this lot, that
has been on sale for a long time and they cannot sell it because every time
somebody comes around and sees that, they are always asking, you know, what is
going to stay there?
Mr. Dawkins: What is the asking price?
Ms. Molinet: Excuse me?
Mr. Dawkins: What is the asking price of the lot, house to be sold? It could
be priced out of the market.
Ms. Molinet: Well, it is possible.
Mr. Dawkins: I mean, you know.
Ms. Molinet: I really don't know, but I know that my grandmother's house,
well, at one time, when this whole situation happened...
Mr. Dawkins: No, I am not...
Ms. Molinet:... she considered...
Mr. Dawkins: I am not saying.... I am just saying that the person that didn't
buy it may not want to pay what they want for it, you know, but there again,
if this lot is making the area deteriorate, then I hear what you are saying.
(COMMENTS IN SPANISH)
Mrs. Kennedy: Let me say that I can see Commissioner Plummer's concern,
because you could have a problem with all the cars in the neighborhood, in
front of your houses, but it is a residential neighborhood, and that bothers
me. This really does not belong in the area. I think it could...
Mr. Plummer: But, it is there, that is your problem.
Ms. Molinet: And it is, it really is, making things worse for the neighbors.
I mean, I understand the parking, and I understand all of that, but what
happens when that is extended into the residential area, and we have things
like we had that night, and that happens often, and people...
Mrs. Kennedy: Right, and worse than that...
Ms. Molinet:... you know, need to work, and people need to rest and people to
need to feel safe within their household, and a fence, a six foot fence, might
help some, but it is not going to help at all, because you are still going to
hear the voices, and you still are going to hear the fights, and is still
going to be bothering, and these people have invested their lifetimes, and it
is not like me, I can move on and go somewhere else. You know, they are
retired people, you know like you can see.
Mrs. Kennedy: I know, but worse than that, what bothers me, is that this
could establish a precedent, if we grant it, and it could create a domino
effect. How can we do it for one group, and not do it for the others? I just
don't see it.
Mr. Plummer: What did you base your approval on?
Mr. Olmedillo: The issue as we saw it was that parking was intruding into the
residential neighborhood, and we saw this as a better situation than the one
that was existing, if we provided with some measures, such as a wall, such as
landscaping, such as no access...
Mr. Plummer: Same things that I said, OK. No, hey, that isn't what they
want. Personally, I think they could be better off, OK? Because if one of
the reasons the house across the street, which she brings out won't sell, is
because obviously, people are looking across the street at a junk yard. Now,
this lot that is in question now, I understand is being used illegally, and I
am sure it is not in any way paved, or anything to it, it is a junk yard!
Now, if they don't want it, hey, you know, that's...
209 January 22, 1987
Ms. Molinet: Well, I think that really, what we want is to remain with our
neighborhood the way that it was, and we want to continue that. We want those
neighbors, and we...
Mr. Plummer: And you have that right!
Ms. Molinet: Right We feel that we rightly have the right to feel safe in
our neighborhood and to keep our homes the way we kept them.
Mrs. Kennedy: I move to deny the request.
Mayor Suarez: Move to deny the request.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, a minute, excuse mel
Ms. Molinet: Right, wait.
Mrs. Kennedy: Oh, that is right. We didn't hear you, I'm sorry.
Mr. Plummer: I think counsel, even though he is not paid, has the right to be
heard.
Mrs. Kennedy: I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Mayor Suarez: No, I also at some point, would like once more, Sergio, or
whoever, to give us the standard, by which we are supposed to determine in
this case, what are the criteria by which we are supposed to decide whether to
accept or not the application? Restate them for me.
Mr. Olmedillo: What you have before you is an appeal.
Mayor Suarez: Right.
Mr. Olmedillo: Right, this special exception can be issued with any
conditions that you want to apply on it. The...
Mayor Suarez: Just as far as accepting, or not accepting, what are the
criteria that we are supposed to apply in this kind of an application.
Mr. Olmedillo: Excuse me one second, so, I can read into the record the...
Mayor Suarez: Thank you.
Mr. Angel Franco: Mayor Suarez, may I state just one thing, please? My name
is Angel Franco, Jr. I'm sorry...
Mayor Suarez: Wait for a second, Angel.
Mr. Franco: OK.
Mayor Suarez: We have been listing to the applicants for the opponents to the
project, and in all fairness... we have even got a motion, we haven't even got
a second yet, but we haven't heard from the... You know, you can paraphrase
it for me. Is it the usual standards, Sergio?
Mr. Olmedillo: The considerations generally standard findings and
determinations required, you have ingress and egress, off-street parking and
loading, refuse and service areas, signs and lighting, utilities, drainage,
control of adverse effects, generally, which includes everything into
the neighborhood.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but there is one big thing here that you are not talking
about, and that is, they will no longer be able to exit or enter, except on
7th Street. It eliminates the 32nd Avenue ingress and egress, but that is not
what they want. I have to respect their opinion, but I think they would be a
hell of a lot of better off.
Mr. Dawkins: And I would have to agree with J.L., but it is your neighborhood
and we are going to abide by your wishes, but regardless of what we do, unless
we put that wall up and make them maintain it , it is going to still be used
illegally.
210 January 22, 1987
i
Mr. Plummer: You are still going to have the night club, and you are still
going to have the noises at 2:00 o'clock in the morning. That is not going to
go away.
Mayor Suarez: And do we have the usual standards of compatibility with the
neighborhood and everything else, that we apply?
Mr. Sergio Rodriguez: It is implied. If this application were to come before
you with a use, we would have recommended against it, but the use is already
established there, and the use exists, and you have a problem already there.
We are trying to face that reality with this, that is all.
Mayor Suarez: Can we sort of post facto apply criteria that would have been
applicable if that use wasn't already there?
Mr. Rodriguez: You can impose conditions on the special exception if you
approve it. You can even...
Mayor Suarez: But, not the same standards that we would have applied as you
know, compatibility with the neighborhood, and so on.
Mr. Rodriguez: Well, you have unfortunately here, which is a catchall, which
says...
Mayor Suarez: Which is that?
Mr. Rodriguez: "Due consideration shall be given to potentially adverse
effects, generally on adjoining and nearby properties, the area, the
neighborhood, or the City, or the usual occupancy as proposed, or its
location, construction, design character, scale or manner of operation." So,
with that, you can use it to condition, or deny it.
Mayor Suarez: Do we get to hear from...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT)
Mayor Suarez: Yes, please! We have a motion, did we ever get a second, just
so we have it on the table?
Mr. Plummer: No.
Mayor Suarez: Good, we will hear from you.
Mr. Amoon: Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to show these photographs...
Mr. Plummer: You have got to go to the microphone.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, and give us your name and address and everything,
counselor.
Mr. Plummer: Here, let me have them, and I will start the circle with them.
Mayor Suarez: Angel, we can always get back to you on rebuttal, so there is
no...
Mr. Amoon: I have handed Commissioner Plummer photographs, which were taken
since Christmas, which shows the property as it appears today. Ladies and
Gentlemen of the Commission... (OFF MICROPHONE)...
Mr. Dawkins: Here is a hand mike.
Mr. Plummer: Take the hand held mike.
Mayor Suarez:... wire mike there that you can...
Mr. Amoon: This is the existing legal parking lot. There is no requirement
for us to landscape this lot, to my knowledge, or do anything more than
basically maintain it. What we are proposing for this neighborhood, is to
landscape the entire portion. The experts of the Zoning and Planning
Departments suggested, and we acquiesced to a sodded five foot setback, a
concrete block wall, painted on the inside, and on the outside, landscaping
211 January 22, 1987
• 0
extending all around the both lots. We have agreed to close off the ingress
and egress on 32nd Avenue and have it exclusively on 7th Street. If you look
at the map, what we have proposed is in the best interest of the neighborhood.
Admittedly, my client gains additional parking. You have to power to preclude
this. You do not have the power to preclude this. If you preclude this, as a
matter of fact, and as Mr. Plummer aptly stated, these people are going to
park, if not on 7th Street, which would suit the neighbors, in the
neighborhood, which would bring them a great deal of chagrin and
unpleasantness. We would like to avoid this. We can give them basically a
park within their neighborhood, with no ingress or egress... well, it will
appear to be that way, as compared to the photographs that you have before
you. I cannot see the logic of them saying that they want this 125 foot and
65 foot lot to remain as it is. You have photographs as to what it appears to
be. I believe you will be doing them a disservice if you grant them the
appeal. You will be doing them a service if you allow this area to be
properly landscaped, under the control of your City departments, subject to
review, with no traffic exiting except onto 7th Street. The alternative is to
grant their appeal, preclude any parking here, which will drive the parking
from here, to here, and throughout the neighborhood. I really and sincerely
believe that you would be doing them a disservice by granting them their
appeal. There is no question that we can do it here. The night club is
located here. The argument that if we stop this parking, if we not preclude
this parking, that the parking will somehow go and disappear to some other
neighborhood, is a fallacy. The parking is going to be within the area of the
night club and since we will have this wall, all of the ingress and egress on
7th Street through the existing legal parking lot, they have received a
landscaped buffer. That is what they are going to get, and I request that you
grant this request, because although these neighbors appear to be against
this, my client is a neighbor in this neighborhood too, he owns commercial
property and pays taxes. I ask that you allow him to provide the parking with
any safeguards that the City wants to impose. If they want a five feet fence,
concrete block, we will make it. If they want a six foot fence, we will make
it, a seven foot fence, we will make it. You have but to name it, and we will
do it, properly landscaped under the control of the City experts. I ask you
to follow the decision of your experts and allow this to go through.
Mrs. Kennedy: Somebody in this Commission lives next to an eight foot fence.
Mr. Plummer: It doesn't bother me.
Ms. Molinet: Excuse me, what is the nature of what is parking behind the
eight foot fence that you live next to? Is it a parking lot?
Mr. Plummer: Yes, no question it is a parking...
Ms. Molinet: Yes, what type of a business is that?
Mr. Plummer: No, no, there would be no business in there.
Ms. Molinet: No, business, OK. No, no, but I mean, the parking lot is an
access to what type of business?
Mr. Plummer: Only to that business, to the bar.
Ms. Molinet: No, I am saying the eight foot fence... who lives next to the
eight foot fence? You said that you live next to an eight foot fence, is that
what I heard or no?...
Mr. Plummer: Then if you want...
Ms. Molinet:... and it doesn't bother you?
Mr. Plummer: Look, if you want a six foot, he is willing to say that he will
put a five, a six...
Ms. Molinet: OK, now, let me...
Mr. Plummer: Hey, let me go on the record, OK?
Ms. Molinet: OK.
212 January 22, 1987
I � •
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Amoon is my friend, and has been and I hope will continue to
be, because I am going to vote against him, all right? Now, let toe tell you
why. I think that as long as I have been on this Commission, I have never,
ever really allowed a commercial intrusion into a residential area, unless, it
benefited the residential area, and the citizens...
(INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTS)
Mayor Suarez: Wait, wait, that...
Mrs. Kennedy: Waitl
Mr. Plummer: I said, if it didl
Mrs. Kennedy: He is with you.
Mr. Plummer: If it did, OK?
Mrs. Kennedy: (Comment in Spanish)
Mr. Plummer: Nov, in my personal opinion, this would enhance the problem.
Enhance it, I think there is a chance of beautifying it, but you guys don't
want it, OK? I think you are making a mistake, but, I have always sided with
the neighbors if you live next door. I think that what you are doing to
yourself, is continuing to allow an excess on 32nd Avenue, I think you are
going to have a dirty lot and you will have no chances of upgrading it. I
think that this offered you that opportunity. If you don't want, fine, but I
think you are making a mistake)
i
Mrs. Kennedy: Now that I have my second, I move to deny it.
Ms. Molinet: Excuse me, I want...
Mayor Suarez: Wait, I think it is to approve the application, isn't it?
Mrs. Kennedy: To approve the... nol
Mayor Suarez: The appeal?
Mr. Plummer: No, to deny it.
Mrs. Kennedy: No, to deny the request.
Mayor Suarez: It is to...
Ms. Molinet: To deny the request of what?... our request or their request?
Mr. Plummer: To reverse the Zoning Board.
Mayor Suarez: But, this isn't an appeal? You have to approve the appeal.
Ms. Molinet: Yes, this is an appeal.
Mrs. Kennedy: OK, all right.
Mayor Suarez: To approve the appeal.
Mrs. Kennedy: To approve the appeal.
Ms. Molinet: OK, I would like to also say something.
Mrs. Kennedy: Don't...
Mayor Suarez: It could hurt your chanceal
Ms. Molinet: Oh, OK, I don't really think so, I think this wouldn't hurt my
chances. I think that by allowing something like...
Mrs. Kennedy: At 10:00 o'clock at night?
Ms. Molinet: OK, I won't say anything.
213 January 22, 1987
Mrs Kennedy: It may.
Mayor Suarez: Well, let me tell you, most of the time we like to quit, yes,
we like to end at 9:00 p.m. and it is 9:52 p.m., and you have got a motion and
a second!
Ms. Molinet: OKI
Mayor Suarez: You know it takes three votes to overcome that. Any further
discussion from the Commission? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Kennedy, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87-116
A RESOLUTION REVERSING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD
AND THEREBY DENYING THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AS LISTED IN
ORDINANCE 9500, AS AMENDED, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, PAGE 1 OF
6, RG-1 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL (ONE AND TWO-FAMILY),
TRANSITIONAL USES, STRUCTURES AND REQUIREMENTS AND ARTICLE
20, SECTION 2018, SUBSECTION 2018.4 FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 3201 NORTHWEST 6TH STREET, MIAMI, _
FLORIDA (MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AS PER PLANS
ON FILE, SAID PROPOSED PARKING LOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
DENNY'S LIQUORS AND THE MON PETIT CLUB LOCATED AT 3198
NORTHWEST 7TH STREET, SUBJECT TO: PROVIDING LANDSCAPE ON
SUBJECT AND ADJOINING EXISTING PARKING AREA WITH PLANNING
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AND TWO-WAY INGRESS -EGRESS ON
NORTHWEST 7TH STREET ONLY, WITH NO ACCESS THROUGH 32ND
AVENUE (ANY EXISTING ACCESS MUST BE CLOSED); ZONED RG-1/3
GENERAL RESIDENTIAL (ONE AND TWO-FAMILY).
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here
and on file in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Miller J. Dawkins
Commissioner Rosario Kennedy
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Xavier L. Suarez
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Joe Carollo
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: With regrets, I vote yes.
Mayor Suarez: Yes, you see why it is not a good idea for you to speak at that
point?
Ms. Molinet: Thank you very much.
57. VICE MAYOR J. L. PLUMMER TO SERVE AS MEMBER OF THE CONSORTIUM BOARD.
Mr. Plummer: Are you going to do that thing on the , and I am not
pushing it.
Mayor Suarez: Just to inform the Commission, I don't really think that we
need Commission approval, but after much discussion yesterday with the Bureau
of Business and Conventions and so on, it was established that they will be
inviting the Consortium Board members to all the meetings of the executive
committee. I am a member of the Consortium Board. The inter -local agreement
says I can designate someone, and I have asked Commissioner Plummer if he
214 January 22, 1987
0
would like to serve in that capacity. Does the Connission have any problems
with that? And he has accepted, he has loaded himself up with patience to
handle that.
2%KRR BRING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO CO!ffi BEFORE M CITY
COMMISSION, TOR MEETING VAS ADJOURNn AT 9M P.N.
ATTEST:
!fatty Hirai
CIT! CLERK
Valter J. Foemaa
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
Xavier L. Suarez
M A T O R
1�Y OF
w r
•
1 NCO IiI' ORATED
CITY OF MIAMI
DOCUMENT INDEX
.
Wmmm MAM.
JANUARY 22, 1987
PAGE 1 OF 3
DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST CONDOLENCES TO THE
FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF CHARLES E. GOTTLIEB UPON
HIS DEATH.
APPOINT INDIVIDUAL TO SERVE ON THE CITY OF MIAMI
HEALTH FACILITIES AUTHORITY TO FILL THE REMAINDER
OF AN UNEXPIRED TERM.
DEEPEST SYMPATHY AND SINCEREST CONDOLENCES TO THE
FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF MARILYN F. REED, UPON HER
DEATH.
APPROVE PREPARATION OF AN UPDATED SANBORN'S 1972
CITY OF MIAMI ATLAS FROM THE SANBORN MAPPING CO.
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE DATA INC. FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF PLANNING/PROPOSE COST: $184,335.00.
AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES WITH
LUTHER E. LONG IN CONNECTION WITH THE BAYFRONT
PARK REDEVELOPMENT AND ADJACENT PROJECTS/ONE YEAR
PERIOD COMMENCING FEBRUARY 1, 1987 THROUGH JANUARY
31, 1988.
DESIGNATE MELROSE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, INC. A
NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION, TO UNDERTAKE THE DEVEL-
OPMENT -LOW -DENSITY SALES TOWNHOME COMPLEX AFFORD-
ABLE TO FAMILIES OF LOW INCOME.
CORRECT SCRIVENER'S ERRORS IN SECTION 1 RESOLUTION
NO. 86-277, ADOPTED APRIL 1, 1986, TO REFLECT JULY
17, 1985 AS THE BID OF COBIA BOAT COMPANY -FURNISHING
PATROL VESSELS -ALLIED EQUIPMENT.
AUTHORIZE/DIRECT THE DONATION OF SIX SURPLUS MOTOR-
CYCLES TO THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC FOR USE BY THE
NATIONAL POLICE OF THAT COUNTRY.
ACCEPT APPRAISAL PROPOSAL OF EDWARD M. WARONKER,
PROPERTY CONSULTANT, INC. ($5,000.00) TO APPRISE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 250 N.W. NORTH RIVER DRIVE.
ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED: JEFFERSON GROVE, AND DEDICA-
TIONS SHOWN ON SAID PLAT/DIRECT CITY MANAGER CITY
CLERK TO EXECUTE THE SAID PLAT; ETC...
ACCEPT PLAT ENTITLED RAFA SUBDIVISION, A SUBDIVISION
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI, AND THE DEDICATION SHOWN
ON SAID PLAT/DIRECT CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK TO
EXECUTE THE PLAT; ETC...
APPROVE TRANSMITTAL TO THE SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL -APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROV-
AL (ADA) FOR THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMU-
NITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AS A DEVELOPMENT
OF REGIONAL IMPACT.
87-73
87-74
87-75
87-76
87-77
87-82
87-85
87-86
87-87
87-88
87-89
87-90
DOCUMENT INDEX
PAGE? . OF
ALLOCATE $15,000. FROM THE 1986-87 OPERATING BUDGET
OF THE SOLID WASTE DEPARTMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE
"KEEP DADE BEAUTIFUL, INCORPORATED"/AUTHORIZE AGREE-
MENT WITH SAID ORGANIZATION.
RATIFY/APPROVE VENDOR LICENSES ARE NOT APPLICABLE
BETWEEN 7:00 A.M. & 7:00 P.M. ON FEBRUARY 28 &
MARCH 1, 1987 FOR THE MIAMI GRAND PRIX EVENTS (CITY
CODE SECTION 39-13).
DIRECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT THAT IN THE PREPARATION
OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR F.E.C. & BICEN-
TENNIAL PARK SHALL INCbRPORATE THE PRESENT GRAND
PRIX RACE TRACK COURSE.
DESIGNATE CODEC, INC., A NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION
OR ORGANIZATION TO UNDERTAKE -DEVELOPMENT OF A LOW -
DENSITY SALE TOWNHOME COMPLEX (CIVIC CENTER SITE)
AFFORDABLE TO FAMILIES -INDIVIDUALS OF LOW -MODERATE
INCOME.
AUTHORIZE SUBMIT AN APPOVED APPLICATION CALLED:
HOMELESS ASSISTANCE PLAN, TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT/REQUEST $41,000
FOR EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT PROGRAM.
EXPRESS INTENT/POLICY OF THE COMMISSION THAT THE
PROCUREMENT NEEDS OF THE CITY FOR GOODS, EQUIPMENT
& SUPPLIES NOT BE MET USING ANY COMPANIES OR SUPPLI-
ERS WHO THROUGH THEMSELVES OR THROUGH WHOLLY -OWNED
SUBSIDIARIES EITHER DO BUSINESS WITH THE GOVERNMENT
OF ANGOLA OR WITH THE MARXIST-COMMUNIST MILITARY
GOVERNMENT FORCES OCCUPYING THIS NATION.
ACCEPT BID: RADIANT OIL COMPANY FOR FURNISHING
SPECIFIED LUBRICANT ITEMS/FIRST YEAR COST: $12,360.
ACCEPT LOW BID: ROSS CORPORATION FOR FURNISHING
SPECIFIED LUBRICANT ITEMS/ESTIMATED FIRST YEAR
COST:$28,057.71
ACCEPT BIDS: FLORAL OIL COMPANY; SALA INDUSTRIAL
SALES CORPORATION & CONSOLIDATED OIL COMPANY FOR
FURNISHING SPECIFIED LUBRICANT ITEMS/ESTIMATED
FIRST YEAR COST: $3,067.50
AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF FUELS ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS
FROM LOWEST BIDDER/ESTIMATED COST: $1,596,298.00
APPOINT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO SERVE AS MEMBERS
ON THE ZONING BOARD OF THE CITY OF MIAMI.
ALLOCATE $10,000 IN SUPPORT OF THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY
OF THE SECOND LIBERATION OF HAITI TO BE HELD ON
FEBRUARY 7, 8, 1987.
ALLOCATE $20,000. TO COVER COST OF SERVICES & FEES
IN SUPPORT OF SECOND ANNUAL LEAGUE AGAINST CANCER
FESTIVAL (FEBRUARY 6-8, 1987) IN WATSON ISLAND.
RETRIEVAL CODE NO.
87-91
87-92
87-92.1
87-93
87-95
87-97
87-98
87-99
87-100
87-101
87-102
87-103
DOCUMENT INDEX
PAGE.., 3 OP
AUTHORIZE PERMITS TO CONDUCT THE CARIBBEAN UNITED
FIESTA TO BE HELD ON MARCH 8, 1987/CONDUCTED BY
CARIBBEAN UNITED FIESTA, INC.
DENY CLASS C SPECIAL PERMIT, FILE NO.C-86-467-
ESTABLISHMENT OF A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING
OF THREE DUPLEXES LOCATED AT 2816 SOUTHWEST 3RD
STREET, MIAMI.
APPROVE THE BRICKELL LOTH STREET PROMENADE DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR
THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SOUTHWEST 1ST AVENUE
AND BRICKELL AVENUE.
APPOINT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO THE MIAMI RIVER
COORDINATING COMMITTEE TO SERVE SPECIFIED TERMS
OF OFFICE.
GRANT VARIANCE OF ORDINANCE NO. 9500, AS AMENDED
SCHEDULEOF DISTRICT REGULATIONS, PAGE 4 OF 6, CR
COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL.
RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 80-143, ADOPTED FEBRUARY
28, 1980, WHICH HAD DECLARED THE INTENT OF THE
CITY COMMISSION TO PLACE LIMITATION UPON THE LENGTH
OF UNINTERRUPTED MEMBERSHIP SERVICE OF ALL BOARDS,
COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS CREATED BY RESOLUTION
OR ORDINANCE.
REQUEST BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF EASTERN AIRLINES
THAT THEY NOT MOVE THEIR CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
TO TEXAS; EXPRESSING THE SINCERE HOPE THAT THE
COMPANY WILL SOON SOLVE ITS DIFFERENCES WITH COMPANY
EMPLOYEES.
ESTABLISH 3:30 P.M., THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1987
OR A RECONVENED MEETING -DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
TO AMEND EXIBIT A -FACT NO.1-RESOLUTION 84-598-
MAY 24, 1984 SPECIAL PERMIT RESOLUTION 84-723,
JUNE 28, 1984 FOR THE 1221 BRICKELL PROJECT AS
PROPOSED BY AMERISWISS ASSOCIATES.
ESTABLISH POLICY THAT THE CITY COMMISSION LUNCH
RECESS WILL BEGIN AT 12:00 NOON; FURTHER, WILL
ADJOURN AT THE CONCLUSION OF DELIBERATIONS ON THE
AGENDA ITEM BEING CONSIDERED AT 9:00 P.M.
REVERSE DECISION ZONING BOARD/DENY SPECIAL EXCEPTION
LISTED ORDINANCE 9500 AS AMENDED -ZONING ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI SCHEDULE OF DISTRICT REGULA-
TIONS PAGE 1 OF 6 RG-1 GENERAL RESIDENTIAL -PROPERTY
LOCATED: 3201 N.W. 6 STREET, MIAMI/DENNY'S LIQUORS
& MON PETIT CLUB, LOCATED:3198 N.W. 7 STREET, MIAMI/
SUBJECT TO: PROVIDING LANDSCAPE AND ADJOINING EX-
ISTING PARKING AREA.
RETW A,L CODE NO,
87-105.1
87-108
87-109
87-110
87-111
87-112
87-113
87-114
87-115
87-116