Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem #05 - Discussion Iteme 491 lo► nri ti0A^• r. Mr. Joseph Grassie City Manager, City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, Florida 33133 Dear Mr. Grassier.' Executive Offices: 6915 Reed Road, Suite 220 I I t) Coral Gables, Florida 33143 Nl`•I r.t • .3 , L v September 27, 1979 We are in receipt ofyour letter dated September 25, advising us that the dates requested'. for the Miami Power & Sail Boat Show at the Marine Stadium are not.. available, and ' are in conflict with an existing booking. We therefore would like to :change our dates to avoid any ';conflict. The new dates we are request- ing are as follows: 1980. 1981 1982. 1983 1984 Move -in Dates June 25,26 June 15 , 16 July 14,15 July 20,21 July 18,19 ShowDates .;:.June 27,28,29 June 17 18,19 July 16, 17, 18" July 22, 23,24 July 20,21,22 , I • Move -out Dates June 30 July '1 June 20, 21 July 19,20 July, 25, 26 July. 23, :; 24 Thank you for your cooperation in this matter; we •look forward to receiving confirmation ;;of these dates as soon as possible. inco cly, L Marry P&r"l; President LP/ys • c.c. The Honorable Maurice Ferro,.. Mayor: of Miami'. Mr. Bob Jennings, Director of Public Facilities S(?whs Lamest P'orucers Cr ir9CI? an(1 C.`.r1.umer Shc.v . 'nc'uti r'q • FT. LAUL.EH011LE SPFi,h(i NONE SNOW • MIAMI INTERNATIONAL CAMPING Ah0 HEC-V SNOW I RANI NONE SNOW • MIAMI FOREIGN £ CUS1 ON AUTOS CYCLE SNOW FT. LAUCthL'AL: FALL NONE StI,)U • MIAMI °INNER AEY 50AT ShC h • NOVEMbER HCME SHOW •. .. &c i .Y Q•`•v3W' .nF..c•nv ,. mot. . rvomrroi..ldie'N:..'�A•.t�'�r�!r�•�..p'!`� �s�"'�'!�•°P'T.r"�" �.s!.�+7 w,��.,+, :.c^#••r!t. '.+T� ? .,jv.��.+v-t ^+w •�..�.�..�.��T';b .�. ...V/rr..ry..r—'C—.�.:�n�1iA1LM►iyr • •.�..nii.'.rtt.,tiai—"4---_:..rrir.�.r...w�'w•r:rl:+r...:..�ar'.a..�...tn...e..�•r�'rrr 7ri October 25, 1979 Joseph R. Grassie City Manager P.O. Box 330708 Miami, Florida 33133 :: I respectfully request permission to appear before the Commission, on October 31, 1979, to discuss the previous All City Protection that I was given for 'my Boat Show, originally. VIC LOGAN Pre:ic nt At this time, my contract calls for a 60-Day, before and after, Protection at the Coconut Grove Exhibition Center, only. "I was told this could be extended by __ a later date. For your convenience, 1 am enclosing,a copy of a letter sent to. George Knox by my 'attorney, Ron Lieberman. As you will note,in the case of Jacksonville,:: •the judges.' ;decision; was that cities ma.y legitimately avail themselves of governmental anti -rustimmu.it;;, to the same extent that the State of Florida would be included as a political sub division of the , State. The 1979 Miami Summer Boat. Show was definitely hurt by having another boat show in the city`:within 3 : weeks. The .;1980 Miami Summer Boat Shows' . dates are. July 11 through July 14. I have been told the other boat show, again, :wants to run in the summer, either the sane week end as ours or a week to ten days earlier. I ask to a_,pear for the purpose •of discussing the ;above, which 'would die detrimental` to our Show, and;: the Inaustr;y• Sincerely V,t.c) , . Vic Loan VL/dc Enc. cc honorable:hiaurice Ferre Honorable J...L. Tlwnrner, ^, Honorable T. R. Gibson ilonorable Rose Gordon I1onorabl'e Armando. LaCasa ,termer cL W 7210 RED ROAD • SUITE �'`'� 0 �; A ",n 2 • SOUTH "�11At�tl • FL. 33143 -` �u.:.`o...+i+. (305) 66:50515 ti ti ii LAW aarir:ct+ • !t(1NA.LD ti. t.219111CRS1AN . ,AUOls7/11[O-Oapa_ ",P fAcTlc[.... CNIIJINAL;LAW Tn1AL'r� ACTIC[ J•�IlficE HUflht "'O[NIRAL-',AC1Ct ' l�x�t�r1[ ort�nt�a 'OUNC AL'Aw cTICt- l.i()NA-L ) S. �'.:lCSil01�.ti1.1'1V OUITC 2424 WCIIT FLAGILE:R MTRI_tT MIAAtt. 117,onlnA TCLEpt-IONC'(3J5) 130.1o7o April 19, 1979 Mr. `.George Knox, Jr. City -Attorney; City_of•Miami 174 East 'Flatlet _Street Miami, Florida : Victor Logan, Positi P.ve Results, and .Miami's :Summer "Boat Show ' Inc. , `oF cOUN9L` I . t4N141.1f M.`11I•QU11 .COI !OAATION'ANO YUIIIN[SS LAW .TAT. PLANNING AND AUUINI • 'TAMATION ' Dear `:,1r. 'Knox: I have recentiv received a copy of _ Dan`: Paul's letter," to, you " dated March- 1, 1979, concerning the "alleged violations of the Anti -Trust Laws inherent in a municipality ,placing, _limitr tions on the use of_-publi.c ' facilities by competitive;-businesse,. ,The cases ci tcd byMr. Paul notwithstanding, it is my considered opinion that a municipality does not violate :the. Anti -Trust Laws when it imposes reasonable restrictions on the use of. public` facilities, for the purpose of preventing` disruptive competition. The proposed clause -in" the City's. contract with Positive Results, Inc., which would prohibit . the use'of city facilities by similar events within sixty (60) days before and sixty (60) days after theoriginal' event is somewhat analogous to the granting of ,a franchise - In Metro. Cable Company v. CATV of Rockford, Inc. ,_`:375 F. Sump. 350 (N.D.I11 1974), a Federal Couitupheld a City':.:, action in granting a. cable t.v franchise -.to one company, and denying it to another, notwithstanding, the creation of a "Monopoly" It was held that"this 'did . not constitute "monopolization", as defined. by'Section.`? of' the Sherman Act- The :Court also cited,.:_= the tiine honored,:. doctrine 'of,Par.kcr v. ';Brown 317 _U.S.,341 ; (1943) ,, _holding that, "The Sherman Act makes no hint that it was Intended to restrain State action for official action director} by a state" . • ION 5hl! a:1�O, Ltndue , lnC V Fit :.1 ili c? i1Cl/� opthc?nt F.. mil 131 (i3Lln l;� r. l970)',. u��ficilclifiy s I. right. c�C ttie S,tatci: to:.yrunt. a moiror.oly for :the •oporatlon :eL a:• public transportation system In a case more directly on point, it has :been held that the exclusive use of a city, coliseum for the presentation of wrestling matchesby a private. corporation :did..not violate the Sherman <Act. Murdock 'v.' City of :Jacksonville,. 361 F. Supp. ,.1083 (M.D. Fla. _.1973) . There the City had>' granted an exclusive lease for the, presentation ofwrestling matches P in the municipal r_oliseuin,: and had also adopted a; resolution providing that during the_ ;term of: the lease, no other :;lessee. would be permitted to use the` coliseum for' wrestling: matches.,: In granting the City.:smotion for :Summary "Final Judgment, Judge Scott held that: "The general rule is that a restraint of trade or monopolization which is the result of ; valid goverrnental: action, asopposed to private action, does not, violate the Sherman Act. Unites States v. Pock Ctoval. Co -OD, 307.;. U.S. 533 (1939)>;. '::Eastern' R. ,. Conf.-:v. Noerr Motors,-;365>U.S 127 .:(1961).;.: Alabama Po:�er Co. v. Alabama Elec. `_Co -Op,' Inc., 394 F. • 2d 672 -(5th".Cir.' 1968) . .The Court, specificall addressed the ! } . question of -Whether. governmental immunity :applies to. mun.icipaai tics`"i hnsly .; 'Since the State rarely acts: except. :through one or "more ; of its political 'subdivisions, if -,governmental- iirununity, is to have any but the most limi ted..ef f icacy- it must,' be ,available- to protect the pu1itic1 subdivisions of the, State from Anti Trust .liability. Municipal ,governi nt of Jac'.sonvi1le, being a political subdivision of;: the. _ State of`"Florida, ..may, avaj1 _itself . of :go"'ernmental~-.. Anti -Trust -immunity- to the -saint+. e\tent that the State of Florida would•be:'entitled' to :such,. immunity in this: case." The :.Louisiana _ Power decision, ,cited -by Mr. Paul, does not in any wi,tv, shape or form, overrule :these well established . precr_dents hotiisi�,na Power dcals wiLh,Jnunicipalities which commit Anti -Trust. t :UL'Lt'_n�r`S. while engaged In CbmT`etition.-with. -" private enternrise. It doesnot deal with efforts by government to. impose reasonable regulation in order to prevents the damage to the public interest which would :result from disruptive competition between private entities. c:OUrt: furlhvi noted that: .3 .111ti_conl oses • ,olvincj molc ontal Purl.) Lion ill/ , "St:at.e than necessary to eLtAla ac .f Le yoverilmpetitivo tre.ss)traint , mUst be viewed as inconsista.nt with the (Cour appt-oach.' •Furthermore, the Lousiana Politer decision dealt with a matter of obvious national interest. The Federal • GovernmE.mt cannot impose Anti -Trust laws ais abarrier to the exercise of local government function n areas that are peculiarly local, sliclias the propez-•use of publicly owned facilities. Cf. National League of Citi',s v.User, 426 U.S. 833, (1976), where it was held that: " ..the Stat.es as States (emphasis ourS) 'stand on a quite different footing from an individual or a corporation when challenging theexercise of Congress power to regulate commerce... Congress • upo'n thestates its choices as to how essential mav not exercise that powet- so as to force direct.Lv decisionsreaardina the ccpnciuct- o integrai •go(..:trnmientai runccions are to be made." F •.•.at It has never been the intention oE Victor Logan and Positivc.., Results Incorporated to gain an unreasonable nioriopoly on tho right: to conduct: boat shows in this community. T11(2,2. seek only to prel.,ent such c:ornpetit.ion is would proverlt any boat. shoi from cjaininci tht....c:onfiderlce of the industry, • which is ob,.7.1.r.Duslv necessar,,, to promote slaccesstul. The City's inte.rest. in preve..nting diszuptive competition, and thus ensuring the SLICC(.1SS of e.vc,rlts which 1ase city . sLr nelntotpLutaLion , . or thc - „ bmattut t: 1Lhc 1). at' LOg et:(11-11, L"t13' 1#‘-7. a . , . • . . overri . „ . rton,ald L1Lb(t1fl3 1 • ISL:s1c CC : Joseph C;ratsio., City liono::ab 1 0. ce 1ionorabl(-2 J. L. Pltln,,m(-!r Art:lando I-aCaszt Honorable Roso Gordon . Honorable Theoaore Gibson Victor Lo,.;an