HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1979-03-08 MinutesC!TY OF MIAMI
PJSTRIBLLTLD
COMMISSION
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD al March 8, 1979
PREPARED sY THE OFFICE OF THE.CITY CLERK
CITY MALL
RALPH G. ONGIE
CITY CLERK
IND
FORMA
ITEM ND.
SUBJECT
iti$OLUTION
INONCE O�j NO,
PAGE NO.
1
2
3
4
0
6
PROPOSED ORDINANCE: AMEND SEC.5630,CITY CODE -REQUIRE
PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT PARTITION
IN TAXICABS. (THIS ORDINANCE WAS LATER RESCINDED, THIS
SAME MEETING). DISCUSSION 1
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SEC. 1 OF ORDINANCE
8719-EATABLISH NEW TRUST & AGENCY FUND: "VERY SPECIAL
ARTS FESTIVAL -III YEAR" Ord. 8908 2
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SEC.1 OF ORDINANCE
8719-ESTABLISH NEW TRUST & AGENCY FUND: "von spEQlm
'A $ P II YEAR." V ` A ''"v `� ' Ord. 8909 2-3
SECOND READING ORDINNACE: AMEND SECTION 1 OF
ORDINANCE 8719-ESTABLISH TRUST AND AGENCY FUND:"302-
EDA PLANNING GRANT". Ord. 8910 3
AMEND CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, SECTION 90,
CHAPTER 2 OF CITY CODE: -PROVIDE THAT EMPLOYEES OF
RETIREMENT SYSTEM SHALL BE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD Ord. 8911 4
FISRT READING ORDINANCE: AMEND RULE VIII,SECS. 8 AND
9; AND RULE XIX, SECS. 3 AND 5; AND RULE XIV,SEC. 2
OF CIVIL SERVICE RULES TO CONFORM WITH NEGOTIATED
LABOR AGREEMENTS Discussion 4-5
7 CLAIM SETTLEMENT - ANN MARTINI R-79-151 5-6
8
AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXTEND THE LEASE AGREEMENT
WITH THE MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB ON WATSON ISLAND FOR A
ONE-YEAR TERM. (LATER RECONSIDERED, RESCINDED AND
DEFERRED) R-79-152 6-7
9 AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXTEND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
THE MIAMI YACHT CLUB ON WATSON ISLAND FOR A ONE-YEAR
TERM. (LATER RECONSIDERED, RESCINDED AND DEFERRED R-79-153 7
10 ACCEPT BID -ARSON SURVEILLANCE VEHICLE (FIRE DEPT)
(VENDOR:MILLER-METEOR OF FLORIDA) R-79-154 8-9
11 .CONDOLENCES IN THE DEATH OF SENATOR HARRY P. CAIN R-79-155 9
12 DISCUSSION OF THE "BALL POINT" LITIGATION -
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE M-79-156 10-33
13 DISCUSSION ITEM: CITY COMMISSION INDICATES ITS
DISPLEASURE WITH DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY'S
APPARENT NON-CONFORMANCE WITH INTENT OF CONSENT
DECREE Discussion 34
14 DISCUSSION OF FINANCIAL CONCEPT FOR CITY OF MIAMI
"CONFERENCE/CONVENTION CENTER AND GARAGE" R-79-157 35-S4
15 DIRECT LAW DEPARTMENT TO ACQUIRE FEE SIMPLE TITLE'
TO PROPERTY FOR CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE R-79-158 59-60
16 APPROVE ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL BUILDING PERM?T-
FOUNDATION WORK FOR CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER R-79-159 60-61
17 RATIFY CITY OF MIAMI'S ACTION IN EXTENDING PRIOR
AGREEMENT WITH: LANGAN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES -
SOIL INVENTIGATION AT CONFERENCE/CONVENTION CENTER R-79-160 61-62
Page N2
CI#
$ACT
�INANCE OF;
soLuTION NO.
PAGE N0,
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
e-57)
26
27
26
29
30
31
ACCEPT BID: BARTLETT CONSTRUCTION CO. -FOUNDATION WORK
FOR CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT
OF RESTAURANT CONCESSION AT BICENTENNIAL PARK
PERSONAL APPEARANCE: ROBERT GEDDES-REVISED DOWNTOWN
GOVERNMENT CENTER MASTER PLAN
OPEN SEALED BIDS: (a) CONSTRUCTION OF N.W. 20 STREET
AREA SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT B-4437; AND (b) AVALON
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5453 C & S
DISCUSSION ITEM: IN CONNECTION WITH ORDINANCE
REQUIRING PARTITIONS IN TAXICABS (TEMPORARILY
DEFERRED)
PLAQUES, PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ITEMS
AMEND ORDINANCE 8858 - FUND POSITION: "PUERTO RICAN
OPPORTUNITY CENTER" PREVIOUSLY FUNDED BY CETA
(a) RECONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE
PROVIDING EMPLOYEES OF RETIREMENT SYSTEM SHALL
BE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD.
(b) SECOND READING ORD.:AMEND CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY
CODE: PROVIDE EMPLOYEES OF RETIREMENT PLAN SHALL
BE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD
DISCUSSION OF JAMES GUNDERSON'S APPEARANCE IN
1ALLAHASSEE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE OF RETIREMENT
PERSONNEL AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING MAKING
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PENSION BENEFITS MODIFICATION
WITHOUT COMMISSION APPROVAL
MARINAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
(a) ACCEPT STUDY BY GREENLEAF/TELESCA
(b) INITIATE STUDY OF WATERCRAFT TRANSIT
(c) REFER RECOMMENDATIONS TO WATERFRONT BOARD
AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH
OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR PROSTITUTION CONTROL PROGRAM
REVIEW OUTSTANDING ISSUES WITH DADE COUNTY SCHOOL
BOARD -EXTEND FUNDING OF COMMUNITY SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR
45 DAYS PENDING MEETING BETWEEN CITY AND DADE COUNTY
SCHOOL BOARD
DEFERRAL OF CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE
TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES IN CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
RECONSIDERATION AND RESCIND OF PREVIOUSLY PASSED
ORDINANCE WHICH WOULD HAVE REQUIRED PERMANENT
INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT PARTITION IN
TAXICABS
R-79-161
Discussion
Discussion
M-79-162
M-79-163
Discussion
Presentation
Ord. 8912
• Ord. 8913
Discussion
M-79-164
M-79-165
M-79-166
M-79-167
M-79-168
M-79-169
M-79-170
M-79-171
62-64
64-67
67-71
71-73
73-74
74
75-76
77-81
81-82
82-95
97-98
98-105
106-11•
116-12
•
Page N3
rain NO.
SUBJECT
tINANCE OR
OLLITION
PAGE N0.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF ORLANDO URRA-PROPOSED USE OF
OLD FIRE STATION NO. 16
PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF GEORGE MAJOR TO REQUEST STREET
CLOSURE FOR "JUNKANOO MARDI-GRASS AND FESTIVAL"
CREATE AND ESTABLISH MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD
CONSISTING OF NINE MEMBERS
URGE DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO REJECT
PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 31 AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW ONE THEREFOR
PROVIDING FOR DUAL CITY/COUNTY REGULATION OF
"FOR -HIRE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES"
BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: FRANK ALBRITTON
AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH
JOSEPH F. RICE -COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CENTER
PARKING FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY
RECONSIDERATION AND RESCINDING OF RESOLUTIONS 79-152
& 79-153 PASSED AND ADOPTED EARLIER IN THE MEETING
EXTENDING FOR ONE-YEAR THE LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH
MIAMI YACHT CLUB 6 MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB (DEFERRED)
REJECT BID FOR UNIFORMS FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT -
DIRECT CITY MANAGER TO READVERTISE
DECLARE POLICY OF THE CITY COMMISSION CONCERNING
"BIDDING PROCEDURES"
Discussion
Discussion
R-79-172
R-79-173
Discussion
R-79-174
M-79-175A
M-79-175B
M-79-175C
M-79-176
M-79-177
M-79-178
126-12E
128-12
129
130
130
131
131-142
142-14e
149-15C
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
* * * *
On the 8th day of March 1979, 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 9:02 A.M., by Mayor Ferre with the
following members of the Commission found to be present:
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT WERE:
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
ALSO PRESENT WERE:
Joseph R. Grassie, City Manager
R. L. Fosmoen, Assistant City Manager
George F. Knox, City Attorney
Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk (ABSENT)
Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk
An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those
present in a pledge of allegience to the flag.
A motion to waive the reading of the minutes was introduced and
seconded and was passed unanimously. Whereupon the City Commission
proceeded to approve the Minutes for the February 1st and January 18,
1979 meetings.
- o -
1. PROPOSED ORDINANCE: Amend Sec. 5630, City Code- Require
PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT PARTITION IN
TAXICABS. (This Ordinance was later rescinded, this same
meeting).
Mr. Plummer: A11 right, we have some housekeeping items we can use u• 1
we get a full Commission. Item No. 5, an ordinance, second readin. City
Attorney, read the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 56-30 OF
OF MIAMI FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY REQU
TION OF A BULLET -RESISTANT PLATE 0
FROM THE REAR SEAT PASSENGER
UNDER A CERTIFICATE ISSUED B
DETAILS CONCERNING THE CO
CONTAINING A REPEALER
EFFECTIVE DATE.
T CODE OF THE CITY
G A PERMANENT INSTALLA-
ARTITION ISOLATING THE DRIVER
IN ALL TAXICABS WHICH OPERATE
E CITY; FURTHER SPECIFYING THE
RUCTION OF THE PARTITION OR PLATE;
VISION, A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND AN
Passed on its firs reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1979
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commis; •ner Gibson, seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the Ordinance was
thereupon giv- its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by e following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NONE
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
OES:
ABSENT:
0i
'MAR 8 1979
mh
Of
The City Attorney r�, the Ordinance into the public ._cord and announced
that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and to the
public.
(*NOTE: THIS ORDINANCE WAS RECONSIDERED LATER ON, IN THIS
SAME MEETING BY A FULL COMMISSION AND RESCINDED
AT THAT POINT IN TIME). (See Motion 79-171, City Clerk Report)
2. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: Amend Sec. 1 of Ordinance 8719 -
Establish new Trust b Agency Fund: "VERY SPECIAL ARTS FESTIVAL -
III YEAR."
Mr. Plummer: Number 7, it's an ordinance, second reading, Mr. City Attorney,
read the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE 8719, ADOPTED
OCTOBER 26, 1977, THE SUMMARY GRANT APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE,
BY ESTABLISHING A NEW TRUST AND AGENCY FUND ENTITLED: "VERY
SPECIAL ARTS FESTIVAL (3RD YEAR)"; AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS
FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,000; CONTAINING
A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 26, 1979
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Lacasa, seconded by Commissioner Gibson„ the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8908
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.
3. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: Amend Sec. 1 of Ordinance 8719 -
Establish New Trust & Agency Fund: "VtRY SPBCiAL_AZ8 F
II YEAR." I�ea,C� �� f cti��t4c4-,
Mr. Plummer: Item 8 is an ordinance, second reading, Mr. Attorney, read
the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO. 8719 ADOPTED
OCTOBER 26, 1977, THE SUMMARY GRANT APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE,
BY ESTABLISHING A NEW TRUST AND AGENCY FUND ENTITLED: "READING IS
FUNDAMENTAL (2ND YEAR)"; AND BY APPROPRIATING THERETO A GRANT AWARD
OF $1,250 WITH A CITY CASH MATCH OF $1,250 FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME
IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,500; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
mh
M AR 8 1979
r
•
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 26, 1979
vas taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Gibson, seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
(*NOTE: Commissioner Rose Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later requested
of the City Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8909
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.
4.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: Amend Section 1 of Ordinance 8719 -
Establish Trust and Agency Fund: "302-EDA Planning Grant."
Mr. Plummer: Item No. 9, an ordinance, second reading, read the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1 OF ORDINANCE NO. 8719
ADOPTED OCTOBER 26, 1977, THE SUMMARY GRANT APPROPRIA-
TIONS ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, BY ESTABLISHING A NEW
TRUST AND AGENCY FUND ENTITLED: "302-EDA PLANNING GRANT";
AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE OPERATION OF SAME IN
THE AMOUNT OF $75,026; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 26, 1979
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Gibson, seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8910
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.
03 J i.; 7",4
5. Amend CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, SECTION 90, CHAPTER 2
of City Code: - Provide that employees of Retirement System
shall be employees of the Board.
Mr. Plummer: Item No. 10, ordinance, second reading, Mr. Attorney read
the ordinance.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MIAMI CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
SYSTEM (ORDINANCE 2230, JANUARY 1, 1940, AS AMENDED), AS APPEARING
IN CODIFIED FORM AS PART OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, 1957, AS AMENDED, MORE PARTICULARLY AMENDING SEC-
TION 90, AS AMENDED, OF SAID CHAPTER 2, PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRA-
TION OF THE RETIREMENT SYSTEM; PROVIDING THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE
RETIREMENT SYSTEM SHALL BE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD; PROVIDING FOR
THE EMPLOYMENT AND EVALUATION OF SAID EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING FOR THE
OPTION OF A JOINT SYSTEM PLAN COMMITTEE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF
SAID EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING, SUBJECT TO COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR THE
TRANSFER OF SAID ADMINISTRATION OF FUNCTIONS TO A PROFESSIONAL
PENSION ADMINISTRATION; PROVIDING FOR A UNIFORM METHOD OF AC-
COUNTING AND ACCOUNTING REVIEW BY THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE; CON_
TAINING A REPEALER CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY PROVISION AND AN EF-
FECTIVE DATE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22, 1979
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Gibson, seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue)
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8911
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 FERRE ENTER THE MEETING AT: 9:12 A.M.)
6. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: Amend Rule VIII, Secs.8 and 9; and Rule
XIX, Secs. 3 and 5; and Rule XIV, Sec. 2 of CIVIL SERVICE RULES
to CONFORM WITH NEGOTIATED LABOR AGREEMENTS.
Mr. Plummer: Item No. 14, ordinance first reading, Mr. Attorney read the
ordinance.
mh
4
MAP, 8 1579
•
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING RULE VIII, SECTIONS 8 AND 9, OF
THE CIVIL SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, EFFECTIVE DECEMBER 31, 1961, AS AMENDED,
AS CONTAINED IN ORDINANCE NO. 6945, AS AMENDED, BY PROVIDING
THAT WITH REGARD TO THE SAID RULES, EMPLOYEES IN THE AFSCME,
LOCAL 1907, BARGAINING UNIT MAY BE ASSIGNED WORK OUT OF THEIR
CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE CURRENT
LABOR AGREEMENT, AND AMENDING RULE XIX, SECTIONS 3 AND 5,
OF THE SAID CIVIL SERVICE RULES BY PROVIDING THAT WITH
REGARD TO THE SAID RULES EMPLOYEES IN THE FOP, LODGE #20;
IAFF, LOCAL 587; AND AFSCME, LOCAL 1907; BARGAINING UNITS
BE COMPENSATED FOR UNUSED SICK LEAVE, CONVERT SICK LEAVE TO
VACATION TIME AND BE GIVEN TIME OFF WITH PAY IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE CURRENT LABOR AGREE-
MENTS; AMENDING RULE XIV, SECTION 2 OF SAID RULES BY PROVIDING
THAT, WITH REGARD TO THE SAID RULES, EMPLOYEES IN THE AFSCME,
LOCAL 1907 BARGAINING UNIT MAY BE PLACED ON AN APPROPRIATE
LAYOFF REGISTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE CURRENT
BARGAINING AGREEMENT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND
A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Mr. Plummer: I assume, Mr. Manager, that this has been passed by the Unions
for their inspection and it is in concurrence with the Unions that you recom-
mend this.
Mr. Grassie: Yes, this reflects the agreement that was reached in the labor
negotiations.
Mr. Plummer: But, in other words, this has been shown to the Unions as part
of the Agreement.
Mr. Grassie: I can't tell you that of my own knowledge but I'm assuming that
that would be reasonable. The, of course, do receive the agendas, the knew
that this item was on and they have access to it. I can't tell you, personally,
that they've received it.
Mr. Plummer: Moved by Gibson, seconded by Lacasa, any discussion? Hearing
none, call the roll.
Was introduced by Commissioner Gibson and seconded by Commissioner Lacasa,
passed on its first reading by title by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent ON ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
7. CLAIM SETTLEMENT: Ann Martini.
Mr. Plummer: Item 16, it's a resolution, authorizing the Director of Finance
to pay Ann Martini the sum of $15,000 in settlement of all claims against the
City. Anyone wishing to discuss item 16? Moved by Lacasa, seconded by
Gibson, call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Lacasa, who moved
its adoption:
of
mh
RESOLUTION NO. 79-151
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY
TO ANN MARTINI, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY THE
SUM OF FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($15,000.00) IN FULL AND
COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF HER CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI
FOR ALLEGED PERSONAL INJURIES SUSTAINED BY HER, UPON THE
EXECUTION OF A RELEASE RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
8.
Authorize City Manager to EXTEND THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
the MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB on Watson Island for a one-year term.
(LATER RECONSIDERED, RESCINDED AND DEFERRED)
Mr. Plummer: Item 21, is a resolution authorizing the City Manager to extend
the Lease Agreement with Miami Outboard Club on Watson Island for one year.
Moved by Gibson, seconded by Lacasa...Is there a problem?
Mr. Lacasa: Do you feel that we should wait until the Waterfront Board is
created or...?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Lacasa is asking a question, Mr. Manager, which I feel
should be answered. Should that be submitted to the Waterfront Board? My
opinion is "no". Mr. Lacasa, prior to your coming on the Commission there
was an agreement with Watson Island which is excluded from the Waterfront
Board, if you'll recall, Watson Island is excluded.
Mr. Lacasa: That's right.
Mr. Plummer: Moved by Gibson, seconded by Lacasa, anyone wishing to discuss
Item 21? Hearing none, Ms. Clerk, call the roll.
e following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adop •n:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-152
A RESOLUTION A sRIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
ATTACHED EXTENSION EMENT FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN CITY
PROPERTY ON WATSON IS TH THE MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB, INC.
FOR A ONE YEAR TERM EXPIRIN ='CH 12, 1980; SAID EXTENSION
SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION BY THE C UPON 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitte• - e and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution
passed and adopted by the following vote:
06
mh
MAR 8 1g7g
ont'd ROLL CALL on passage of Res.79-152)
AYES: Co ioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissio - ,ando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. •,„er, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre*
NOES: None (ON ROLL CALL)
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown voting "NO" on th = - e).
DISCUSSION DURING ROLL CALL:
**Mayor Ferre: We better wait until Rose gets here on that, I've got no problems
and I'm voting with it, okay?
Mr. Plummer: I want to tell you something, if she wants to rediscuss it she
can.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is that Item 21?
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: I vote yes.
NOTE: THIS RESOLUTION WAS RECONSIDERED
LATER ON, IN THIS MEETING, BY A FULL COM-
MISSION AND RESCINDED AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
(See related Motions 79-175-A; 79-175B and
79-176) ITEM WAS DEFERRED.
9.
Authorize City Manager to EXTEND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH
the MIAMI YACHT CLUB on Watson Island for a one-year term.
(LATER RECONSIDERED, RESCINDED AND DEFERRED)
Mr. Plummer: Item 22 is the same, only for the Yacht Club. Anyone wishing
to discuss the Yacht Club? Moved by Lacasa, seconded by Gibson. Further
discussion, call the roll.
e following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Lacasa, who moved
its ado. ion:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-153
A RESOL ON AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
ATTACHED NSION AGREEMENT FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN
CITY PROPER 'N WATSON ISLAND WITH THE MIAMI YACHT CLUB
FOR A ONE YEAR EXPIRING MARCH 12, 1980; SAID EXTENSION
SUBJECT TO CANCEL ON BY THE CITY UPON 30 DAYS WRITTEN
NOTICE.
(Here follows body of reso ion, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Cle
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gib , the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None (ON ROLL CALL)
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent ON ROLL CALL, 1 er
of the Clerk to be shown as voting "NO" on this issue).
required
NOTE: THIS RESOLUTION WAS RECONSIDERED
LATER ON, IN THIS MEETING, BY A FULL COM-
MISSION AND RESCINDED AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
(See related Motions 79-175-A; 79-175-C; and
79-176) ITEM WAS DEFERRED.
MAR 8 1c79
mh
10. ACCEPT BID: Arson Surveillance Vehicle (Fire Dept.)
(Vendor: Miller -Meteor of Florida)
Mr. Plummer: We will now drop down to 25, probably non -controversial,
an arsen vehicle for the Fire Department. Moved by Gibson, seconded
by Lacasa. Anyone wishing to discuss 25? Call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-154
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF MILLER - METEOR OF FLORIDA
FOR FURNISHING ONE ARSON SURVEILLANCE VEHICLE FOR THE DEPART-
MENT OF FIRE, AT A TOTAL COST OF $18,498.75; ALLOCATING FUNDS
FROM THE FIRE FIGHTING, FIRE PREVENTION AND RESCUE FACILITIES
BOND PROGRAM AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND THE PURCHASING
AGENT TO ISSUE THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR THIS EQUIPMENT.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None. (ON ROLL CALL)
ABSENT: Commissioner Rose Gordon*
(*NOTE: Commissioner Gordon, though absent on ROLL CALL, later
requested of the Clerk to be shown as voting "aye" on this issue).
Mr. Plummer: For the first time of the day is there anyone wanting to pull
any items between 34 and 41? Asking for the first time, is there any one
that wants any item between 34 and 41 pulled off of the Consent Agenga?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Plummer, could we have Item 41 pulled?
Mr. Plummer: You want 41 pulled. That is the request of the Department,
that 41 be WITHDRAWN. Are there any further requests? All right, Mr. Mayor,
I think that's as far as we can go. Just for your information, if you wish
to mark your agenda we have done items 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16...
Mayor Ferre: Wait, wait a minute, did you do 11?
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I'm telling you the ones we did if you want to mark
them.
Mayor Ferre: You did 12?
Mr. Plummer: No, let me tell you again: 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12 (NOTE: Item 12 had
not been passed at this time). Item 14, 16, 21, 22 and 25.
Mr. Grimm: I didn't hear of 12.
(COMMISSIONER ROSE GORDON ENTERS THE MEETING AT 9:20 A.M.)
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon....
Mr. Plummer: I'll bring her up to date.
mh
08
'r-4 3 1..1
•
Mayor Ferre: Okay. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I think....Father, you
started with a prayer and all that?
Rev. Gibson: Yes, sir.
11. CONDOLENCES in the death of SENATOR HARRY P. CAIN.
Mayor Ferre: I think now that we are all together, it might be appropriate
if this City of Miami recognized the passing away of Harry Cain, who was
certainly a member of this community that distinguished himself beyond
the call of duty, a man dedicated to the public well-being and I think his
passing will be noticed and certainly he'll be missed in the years to come.
He left an indelible mark in the fiber of this community and I think it
would be appropriate if we would all..if you say a small prayer and we would
stand in recognition of it for a few minutes and then pass a Resolution
(FATHER GIBSON SAID A PRAYER AT THIS POINT)
Mayor Ferre: All right, Father Gibson moves and Mrs. Gordon seconds that
a Resolution be sent to Mrs. Cain and the family. Further discussion, call
the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-155
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE CONDOLENCES OF THE CITY
COMMISSION TO THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF HARRY P. CAIN.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Fr:rre
NOES: None.
mh
09
NAN 81in
•
mh
12. DISCUSSION OF THE "BALL POINT" LITIGATION -
Proposed development of the site.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we are going to pick up item B first because the attorney
has a time constraint problem and is catching an airplane to California in a cou-
ple of hours so I promised him that we would take this out of turn. The way we
left this, Mr. City Attorney and Mr. City Manager, was that this matter was going
to go to appeal unless we had some advice from attorneys that were highly re-
garded and one of them, I think, was chosen by Mr. Knox and I don't know how
Edward Bennett Williams was chosen. And I understand those letters are now in
hand and they've been delivered to the members of the Commission. I guess, the
way to start is for you, Mr. City Attorney, to give us your recommendation and
then we'll let the Manager comment and then we'll hear from the attorneys.
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. As you've indicated, Mayor Ferre, we have now received
correspondence from the lawfirm of Williams and Connolly, in Washington, D.C.,
which consists of Memorandum of Law in letter form of approximately 25 pages
which analyzed the materials which were sent to Edward Bennett Williams regarding
the propriety -if you will- or the likelihood that our appeal to the Supreme
Court regarding the suit to acquire title of the Ball Point property would
in fact be heard by the Supreme Court. Succinctly, their opinion was that there
was a very remote likelihood that this matter would be heard based upon their
analysis of the kinds of cases that the Supreme Court generally hears and the
kinds of jurisdictional requirements that must be met in order that the Supreme
Court would hear a case of this nature.
I'll read into the record the final paragraph of a letter from Mr. Edward
Bennett Williams:
"It is for these reasons, therefore, that I conclude that there is
no reasonable likelihood whatsoever that the Supreme Court of the
United States would grant plenary review of either a petition for
writ of certiorari or a jurisdictional statement in this case."
And it's signed: Edward Bennett Williams. I also contacted Mr. Bruce Rogow, who
is again an esteemed constitutional lawyer and Dean of the School of Law at Nova
University and inquired of him the same information with respect to his analysis
of the likelihood that the Supreme Court of the United States would hear a case
of this nature and I'll read into the record the final paragraph of his letter:
"As I said at the outset, I cannot give you a one hundred per cent assurance
that the case will be summarily dismissed. But since any of these cases
begin with only a ten per cent statistical chance of success. I feel that
I can advise you that the odds are ninety nine to one against success."
And it's signed: Bruce S. Rogow. Taking these letters together which arrive at
similar conclusions, and based upon our own analysis and examination of the re-
cord and the correspondences which have been transmitted to the City, it would
therefore appear that while no one can accurately or adequately predict the kinds
of cases that the Supreme Court itself may determine a right for adjudication, it
does seem reasonably unlikely at this point that the Supreme Court would hear this
question, but again, these kinds of matters are not subject any sort of valid pre-
dictability. And the second thing is that I will express the same reservation
that I expressed earlier about whether or not that can be a completely accurate
assessment of one lawyer's thought processes or work product by other lawyers.
I think that what both Mr. Williams and Mr. Rogow have done is given the City Com-
mission an idea about similar cases and the kinds of information that they have
first hand about the kinds of cases that the Supreme Court historically hears.
Our case is not, in my opinion, so unique that it will represent a question of
great public interest that the Supreme Court will be more likely to hear, but at
the same time, again, we never know what kinds of questions they might entertain
and I understand that Mr. Guy Bailey is here and would like to have an opportunity
to respond because he has had the benefit of an examination of both correspondences
from Mr. Williams and Mr. Rogow.
Mayor Ferre: Guy, before we go to you. Joe, do you want to add anything to what
George said?
Mr. Grassie: I think the other side of the question that is in front of the City
Commission is really the public interest and the question of what is good for the
City. One of the provisions of the agreement that the City has with Mr. Bailey speaks
to the City's right to terminate that agreement at any time that the Commission
10
MAC081979
1
should determine thu, proceeding with this effort is . longer in the City's
beat interest and really that is the question that is in front of you. We have
a project which was to be described to you by the developer which is increasing
in cost at the level of $1 million/mo., and really we are talking about what is
the City's interest with regard to moving this project forward or allow it to
be delayed by as much as six months, nine months, who knows how long, and really
that issue is what's in front of you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Guy Bailey: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission. Can you hear this?
Mr. Plummer: No, its not on.
Mr. Bailey: Can you hear me now? I did receive this very expensive
opinion letter from a very expensive Washington law firm yesterday,
and I did receive Mr. Rogow's opinion, I don't know how much
you paid for that opinion. I wish you'd paid me that much to get started
on this lawsuit. Let me say this to you, the first thing that we are going
to have if we file this, and we are due to file it early next week, within
30 days we will have motions opposing us filed with briefs opposing this
and they will attach the two opinion letters that you have obtained from
outside people suggesting that our case is not valid. To some degree you can
create a self-fulfilling prophecy and I suspect, and I confess my paranoia
is in full -flower, I think that is exactly what we're having designed to do.
I remind you that your staff told me not to bring this lawsuit in 1974, when
the 30 years had not run, and I confess to you I am somewhat irritated at this
point. I got these letters yesterday. I was told at four that I should be here
this monring despite other conflicts. But I have reviewed Mr. Edward Bennett
Williams' opinion letter. And I have reviewed the Dean's letter. Both of them
missed the fact that in 1978 the United States Supreme Court,..
Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, I want George to hear this.
Mr. Bailey:...I have discussed this. He's heard of this decision, and I have
discussed it with him before, but it's 90H Supreme Court reporter, 2716
decision of June 28, 1978, United States Supreme Court rendered a decision
on the contract's clause, following up and elaborating and frankly in some
degree conflicting with its 1977 decision, in New York Trust Company. --
United States Trust Company of New York vs. New Jersey, and that's an April
27, 1977 decision. Now,Mr. Rogow missed both of these decisions in his discussion
and I make no criticism of that. He must have had a day or two to review this.
Mr. Edward Bennett Williams' firm obviously spent enormous hours. They missed
only the second one. Let me take, --I am reluctant to do this, --Disraeli said
"there are lies, there are damned lies, and there are statistics, in descending
order of reliability". Mr. Rogow, if I may take...
Rev. Gibson: I don't mind. You could go right on and do,...
Mr. Bailey: Thank you Father.
Rev. Gibson:...I understand.
Mr. Bailey: May I be forgiven in advance?
Rev. Gibson: Yes, I absolve him before he starts.
Mr. Bailey: Is that like an indulgence? We are in the wrong church service.
Mr. Plummer: No, it's called absolution.
Mr. Bailey: The statistics given to you by Mr Rogow, the last time we
had statistics on the Supreme Court concerning how many cases get heard.
He says 15 of 19. I haven't checked that. I told you before I don't think
anybody knows, and he said in '77 they don't know. Fifteen of nineteen
got Past summary disposition and were resolved by the Court. I think that
is 17 percent, --I don't know. You may recall if you have a very good memory,
that when we started this lawsuit, nobody said we have a better than 50/50
chance or even that much. We said there was so much involved here that
if he had any chance the City ought to proceed. And it was on that basis that
I was hired. It was on that basis that my contract was later changed some-
what. And it was, since we are talking about my contract, also on that
basis in the record, that if the City made a decision that I was not
proceeding in your best interest, that you would then convert it back to
the original contract which is $100 an hour. I do not know exactly what
that would be, --would be something like $250,000. I suppose I should be
rn.
11
3/8/79
delighted for you to be putting yourselves in the position of having to
pay me that kind of money. I don't want you to to that. I would rather take
my 1%, 2% or 17% chance to proceed. Now, Mr. Williams, who is an august
lawyer, --he's a famous trial lawyer. He owns the Washington Redskins and
he is a famous man, and his firm is excellent. I don't know why they missed
the 1978 decision by the United States Supreme Court. I can only suppose
it was deliberate, because this letter is not a dispassionate opinion and
I have asked the lawyers here for the Gould Company if Mr. Williams repre-
sents their company in Washington, -neither of them know. I don't know. But
I do know that a lawyer is a hired gun, and the gun was pointed at this
lawsuit. Now you can make that decision if you like,and I frankly have told
you that I have never been in here and taken a political position with this
City. If the City wants to build a circus on that property it makes no
difference to me. What I am trying to do for the City is to have Mr. Gould
pay the City instead of Mr. Ball the 23 million dollars, to do whatever it
is he wants to do on it. I do not believe, and I do not agree with, the
position taken last time, or suggested last time that this must be put up
for public bid in order for you to be able to agree to this contract. There
are three Florida Supreme Courtdecisions saying you don't have to do that.
I do not agree with the theory that the public interest doctrine which Mr.
Mayor,was the second aspect that you raised, does anything for you at all,
because if you make a decision that you must drop the lawsuit in order to
get them the property, and the reason you must do that is because there is
a public interest in the project in the first instance. Then it seems to
me that you are running afoul of the same theory. If you drop the lawsuit,
you've given up a public property on purpose. Is that legal? I think it
is no more and no less legal for you to do that, than for you to assent to a
contract, which would allow us to proceed. Now let me say to you first,
and I probably shouldn't be saying these things, but last time the Mayor
invoked the names of some very august citizens of this community, Mr. Hood
Bassett, --I have profound respect for him, he is clearly one of our great
community leaders. He is also somewhat associated with one of the defendants
in this case since they own some of the property we were trying to get.
Southeast Properties is affiliated with Mr. Bassett's holdings. Mr. Alvah
Chapman, one of the finest men I know, --Mr. Chapman has been an opponent
of this for some period of time. He and I had some discussion about whether
or not I could be on the Chamber of Commerce Committee for Downtown Development.
I had a conflict of interest he said since I was trying to get this property
for the City. The 1919 grant that we are attempting to uphold for you, does
not stop with Ball Point. It goes east to the Boulevard, all the way up
to Venetian Causeway. Now, I told the City Manager this, and I told the
City Attorney this. I suspect,and I don't know, and I wasn't employed to
find out, but I suspect that the Miami Herald building sits on filled property
that belongs to the City of Miami.
Mayor Ferre: Ugh oh,....
Mr. Bailey: Now, I have never said this publicly before. I have said it
to you privately. We have a political lawsuit and we never got the political
support and I submit to you that some of the things that I am now discussing
with you may have in the background been involved there. I don't know that.
I suppose that I am paid to be a paranoid. I learned my paranoia from a
great trial lawyer Bill Frates. I have never discarded it. And I suspect
everybody who is opposed to me, and I confess to you that I have no facts
and I probably am engaging once more in a political arena in which I am
obviously incompetent, because the last time I did that I got Governor
Askew and Attorney General Shevin to persuade the Supreme Court not hear
our case. We'd been in politics in every court in the State of Florida. I
say to you that I have, and I am a lawyer, --I am a craftsman, --I did go
to one of the better known law schools and I graduated. I went to the same
law school that Mr. Aurell went to which is somewhat better than the law
school that Mr. Livingston, his partner went to. They are both well known.
John and I went to Yale and Mr.Livingston went Harvard. I forgive him for that.
The problem that we have, --and I say this to you, we raised a number of points.
No one has briefed those points and said as a matter of law as legal craftsmen
that these points are wrong.The trial judge didn't listen to us. Well, the
trialjudge is no longer ajudge.The 3rd District kicked it upstairs and the
Supreme Court was persuaded by Governor Askew and by Attorney General Shevin,
that this was not an issue they should consider. They discharged certiorari.
12
rn
3/8/79
Ultimately they said we are not going to hear this case although as they
went along they made some rulings which we think are very helpful to us.
They ruled that the City must be treated just like any other person in the
State of Florida. They said the City is not a government agency. I said
that was totally contrary, I think to the intent of the statute, but they
said no, that's wrong. So they ruled against me on that legal point. They
said this is a wild deed. That means that it was given by somebody who
had not record title, and whoever took that title from him, all he had
to do was to look at the record and find out that there was in fact no
back up for that. The people who bought this property in 1944 read the
record and saw that there was no predecessor and they knew that it was
a wild deed, until this case, or until 1977 during the pendency of this
case, the Supreme Court of Florida had never ruled that a wild deed is
good, or valid or anything but void. A wild deed is where I go out and
write myself a deed to City Hall of the City of Miami,(and I think I
may do that when this is over) because 30 years from now,this preposterous
decision, this land will belong to me, and you should have known because
you should know that wild deeds count for something now, where they had
not before. Now, why is it important that we are a City, that we are a
private entity and a private person. That means that we are entitled to all
of the benefits of the United States Constitution. Why is it important
that a wild deed is involved here? It is important because a wild deed
has never been held by any other state in the United States in supporting
an act like this to be involved. Mr. Williams, in his artful decision,
says that, and the Supreme Court of Florida said, look at Minnesota.
Minnesota had held one these statutes constitutional but Minnesota did
that only because wild deeds were not covered by their statutes. They said
we must find the wild deeds which are not covered by such statutes otherwise
there would be constitutional difficulties. Let me go back to Mr. Williams'
decision or opinion letter. He says in a number of factors of likelihood
that a Supreme Court of the United States will hear something. The first
is, is it consistent with United States Supreme Court decisions? Mr.
Rogow thoughtwewere going on the trustees of Dartmouth College decision
against Woodward which I think is in the early 1800's, we are going on
two decisions in 1977 and 1978. In one of them the United States Supreme
Court in a complicated setting of justices -we had Justice Blackman, Chief
Justice Berger, Justice Ringquist, and Justice Stevens,concurred,--
I'm sorry, I'm double counting on Chief Justice Berger concurred, --we
had five supporting overturning a state statute as violative
of the contract's clause. Justice Stewart and Justice Powell did not involve
themselves in that case, and there were three dissents. 'Then we
had Sp an os in 1978. Mr. Justice Stewart wrote the opinion for the
court. The Chief Justice, Mr. Powell, Mr. Justice Ringquist and Mr. Justice
Stevens are..were all tithe majority. Mr. Justice Blackman did not par-
ticipate. And the same three Justices dissented. In the last two years,
we had the majority of 6 justices who have said that the contracts clause
which had been dormant for 40 years before that, now is to be used and
is being used to put a curve on state legislation. Three justices had
dissented but we are working with a 6/3 majority. The University of Miami
Law Review right now is writing an article on the difference between those
two decisions.It is acurrent constitutional issue that is being written about
by legal commentators and academicians, which is one of the tests I think
that you've seen involved in Mr. Williams' letter. Now, the three dissenters in both
of those cases adopted the theory that the Florida Supreme Court has adopted.
They have adopted a theory that was the one for 40 years. If there is any
reasonable basis for it, if its reasonably related to the welfare and health
of the State, then it's okay. It doesn't matter whether its good bad or violates
constitutional rights. Both of those cases reject that. In the '77 decision
they emphasize the necessity required. If a statute does something that is
related to health and welfare, is it necessary, --has it gone too far,does it
violate constitutional rights that are not necessarily violated to do this?
That test was not applied by the Supreme Court of Florida. SDanos says if you
had a complete deprivation, no matter whether it is related or not related,
then you must show that it's an emergency situation. Now, I have heard a
lot of arguments from the Florida Bar and from I don't remember how many
people have opposed us in this but nobody has suggested that in order to
do away with old title, nit picking problems that we had an emergency in
the State of Florida. I say to you that these two cases are directly con-
trary to the decision of the Florida Supreme Court. Secondly, Mr.Bennett
3/8/79
rn 13
Williams says, consistency with other Supreme Court decision, and I've
indicated to you, is inconsistent with all of them that have reached this
issue.Bis two primary points are the points we are going on in this decision.
He has artfully omitted them. I suspect him for doing that, and I apologize
for my suspicious nature. I say to you that I think that we have as good a
chance as anybody had when they took up the decision of Puentes vs.
Shevin which overturned something that had been there for years, in the
Brown vs. Board of Education or Baker vs. Clark. Everytime the Supreme
Court reaches into a new area, everybody is surprised and nobody could
have predicted. Your own City Attorney has said to you that you cannot
make a prediction, and I've told you from the beginning, I suppose our
chances are not great, but the money involved, the interest involved, and
I do not know how much money and how much value would be involved if you run all
the way up to Venetian Causeway east of the Bay, but there might be that much
value involved here. Even if we have a 1% chance or a ; of 1% chance, I submit
to you that it would be remiss of you to walk away from that chance. I've told
you from the beginning that it was tough and I've come back and I've lost
every judge in the State of Florida. But they have in my opinion violated
the United States Constitution and this City has lost an enormous amount
of land by the inaction in 1974 which might or might not be retrieved now,
but I certainly do not think that the interest of the people is going
to be served by dropping this lawsuit. Now let me tell you one further thing,
we've got to file this by --today is the 8tb,--we must file it by the 14th. They
have 30 days to respond.At that point the Supreme Court commences its review
whether we file any reply or not. We'll file one promptly. They will have
this under consideration and if we are really so terribly off base, and we
could be. I can no more predict to you that we will win than they can pre-
dict to you that we will lose, --if we are that far off base we'll know, I
submit to you by late summer, early fall. It may be that this million dollars
in cost going up every month, I don't know about that. That is another pre-
diction. It also is a fact that until you start borrowing money you don't
start paying interest so they are not borrowing money now, and presumably
are not paying interest now. So I think you are being stampeded and that's
why I'm speaking out much more strongly than I probably ought to. I have tried
to deal with you some degree of decorum but I at this point feel like I just
had to speak my mind and I have. I will now shut up.
Mayor Ferre: All right Mr. Bailey, thank you. At this time I'll recognize
the attorneys that represent Mr. Gould for a statement and then I'll open
it up to the Commission for questions and so forth. All right, Mr. Aurell.
Mr. John Aurell: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is John Aurell and I
represent Theodore B. Gould who plans to develop the Ball Point project on
Tract D of this property. I appeared before you on the 22nd of February
at which time this matter was discussed, as you will recall. At that time
I expressed some of Mr. Gould's views as to the consequences to the project
of a delay caused by an appeal by the City of the St. Joe Paper Co. liti-
gation to the United States Supreme Court. I'd like to make a few additional
comments today and at the conclusion of my comments which I'll try to keep
brief I would like our co -counsel, Bob Traurig,to take a few moments and
describe to you exactly what this project is going to be. First of all, I
think it might be appropriate to clarify one question which seems to be on
Mr. Bailey's mind, and that is Mr. Edward Bennett Williams. He inferred, or
thought or suspected that Mr. Williams might also represent our client. For
the record, he doesn't and never has. Any delay in this project whether
caulid by an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court of the St. Joe Paper Co. liti-
8ation or any other delay, I am advised, will increase the hard construc-
tion costs by approximately $1.5 million per month. This will mean a total
increase in costs -hard-costs and soft -costs- of approaching $2 million per
Routh. Now, we are talking at this point only about Tract D, which is the
(ract that we have contracted to acquire from St. Joe Paper Co. by a closing
at the end of June of this year. In order to absorb the increased costs that
I have just described we simply have to do something. What that will mean,
from a business standpoint is that the density of the project would either
have to be increased or the quality of the project and its amenities -such
as parks, the Riverwalk aspect of it, whatever- would have to be reduced.
Obviously, as the Mayor pointed out on the 22nd of February, a delay in the
ra 3/8/79
14
oft
project could adversely affect our closing and I don't know what that would
mean, but this lawsuit with a pending Lis Pendens creates a cloud on the title
of the property, it's a very, very expensive project and I can't tell you for
sure..I think we all know that this cloud could adversely affect the closing
which is scheduled by a contract to take place at a specific time. A delay
in our ability to acquire Tract D to commence this project will also adversely
affect our ability to assemble the balance of the Dupont Plaza property those
lots sitting between the Dupont Plaza and the S.E. First National Bank. We
are negotiating at the present time with South East and with the Ferre family
in Puerto Rico to acquire the balance of that property. We are trying to as-
semble all of that and we expect to conclude those negotiations successfully
in the near future. If we can do all of this, we will be in a position, and
we hope to be in a position, and we want to be in a position to cooperate
closely with the City of Miami toward solving traffic problems and the park-
ing problems that are presently existing and will certainly exist with the
future developments of the City. If we are not able to assemble quickly the
balance of the parcels we will then be relegated to be able only to develop
Tract D and we will not be in the same position to work as closely with the
City as we would like to solve the parking and traffic problems which should
be an integral part of this entire project. We believe that this is a very
important and a very substantial development for the City of Miami. We hope
you agree. It will obviously provide many, many jobs. It will provide sub-
stantial tax revenues, it will create downtown residents of this City, it
will be a major factor in the redevelopment of downtown Miami and our client,
Mr. Gould, is very anxious to close the land purchase and to begin construc-
tion as soon as possible. I don't want to get into arguing Mr. Bailey's
lawsuit pleadings I will simply say that the issues he has raised have been heard
by 11 different judges so far, they have all found against the City, not one
has found in his favor. I think that the question before you is simply this:
and that is whether the City has a realistic chance of success with an appeal
to the U.S. Supreme Court. If it does, you ought to take the appeal, if not,
I submit that all the City will accomplish by appealing to the U.S. Supreme
Court will be to delay and damage our ability to proceed with what I think
is a very important project for the public and for this City. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Well, before Mr. Traurig says anything let me, for the record,
Mr. Aurell, since you mentioned the Ferre family, be very specific. My
father bought a lot on Dupont Plaza from Mr. Ed Ball many, many years ago.
Subsequent to that, a few years later he sold half of it, an undivided
interest to my uncle, Luis Ferre. My uncle, in turn, has passed his one
half interest to his son and his daughter and to his Foundation, called the
"Luis Ferre Foundation" in Puerto Rico which basically deals with the museum
and other cultural activities for the welfare of the people in Puerto Rico.
The Banks that my father and I and our corporation were indebted to foreclosed
on all our properties, including the Dupont Plaza and we consented to that and
signed off so that my father, my sister, my children and all our families and
corporations have absolutely no direct interest in the Dupont Plaza --in any
of its properties-- at this time. However, my cousin, -my two cousins- and
a foundation in Puerto Rico, which I have no personal interest in, are involved.
For the record again, I am not recusing myself because I have no personal -
direct or indirect gain- or financial gain or loss in what happens at the
Dupont Plaza on this property.
Mr. Aurell: That's my understanding of it.
Mr. Robert Traurig: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am Robert Traurig. 1401
Brickell Avenue and I'm delighted to participate with Mr. Aurell in making
this very brief statement to you. As he indicated to you, the two firms of
which we are members are both involved in representing Holywell Corporation
and Mr. Gould in connection with this project. And I am delighted that we,
as attorneys, are also part of the major team that has been working on the
project. And I think that before you consider what action to take with
regard to the subject matter of Mr. Bailey's remarks, there should be some
remarks made to you as a Commission with regard to the scope of the project
so that you can take that into consideration and weigh it along with the
other factors. Briefly, I think this Commission knows both through the
public statements and also private meetings that I think you might have been
invited to where the details of the proposals have been submitted. You are
aware, I'm sure, that Mr. Theodore B. Gould, as President of the Holywell
Corporation is the principal in this project and the team that he has put
together includes some of the most outstanding architects and landscape
mh architects and landplanners in the United States and in the world and we
15
MAR o 8 1979
f
believe that the addition which they will make to the profile of Miami
will be such an outstanding contribution that this community will benefit
from it for generations to come. The people who are directly involved would
be as the contractors, the George Hyman Company, I don't think that anyone
who has spent any time in the District of Columbia and has ridden streets in
the District of Columbia has ever had any trip to the District in which they
didn't see a major building under construction by George Hyman. It is one of
the world's largest general contractors. The architects are Mr.Vlastimil
Koubek who is the principal architect and his office is in Washington, and he
is going in the planning and consulting role by one of the world's most out-
standing architects and best renouned architects Mr. Pietro Beluschi , who has
retired from M.I.T. and is presently in the consulting field. In the land-
scape architects and land planners who are working with Mr.Beluschi are headed
by Mr. Hideo Sasaki, who himself, is one of the world's most outstanding people,
he is located just outside Cambridge, Massachusetts, in the town of Watertown
and is on the staff of Harvard. So, we feel, that is, Mr. Aurell and I feel,
honored to have the opportunity to participate with them in connection with
this project. What we are talking about, really, is a project that consists
of 4 major structures on this tract consisting of 8.46 acres at the confluence
of the Miami River and Biscayne Bay, known as the Ball Tract. Those buildings
will be a major office building which hopefully will have 850,000 sq. ft. which
will obviously be the largest building in the downtown area. With an F.A.R. of
less than what the ordinance would permit...
Mrs. Gordon: Which ordinance? The proposed revisions or the old ordinance?
Mr. Traurig: No, we are operating under the present C-3 ordinance, Mrs. Gordon,
and that's the only ordinance that has ever been considered by this Commission.
Mrs. Gordon: I know I just wanted to ask you which one you were working with.
Mr. Traurig: There will also be a hotel structure and that hotel structure
will be operated by the Canadian Pacific entities and, as you know, if you've
travelled through Montreal and other places in Canada, The Chateau Champlain
and other hotels operated by them are amongst the world's best operated hotels
and to have them be the managers of the hotel in Ball Point will be a great
addition to the tourist accommodations of Greater Miami. And then there
would be two condominium towers, each one containing 250 units, and I think
that that is as much significant in this matter as anything else. It has been
the desire of this Commission and of all of the people who have worked so hard
to redevelop downtown Miami to get people back into the core to live there, to
spend their dollars there, to revitalize the restaurants and revitalize the
cultural programming for downtown, as anything else, and we are hopeful that
we have this opportunity to create this 500 very nice condominium units which
will supplement the units that will be developed in Ciaughton Island and Plaza
Venetia and will add to the thrust of your newest efforts to revitalize down-
town Miami and we think that if you would give consideration to the positive
aspects of this project as part of your deliberation with regard to what to do
on the subject matter which Mr. Bailey presented, that when you weigh these
things you probably will conclude that it is important not to discourage, not
to thwart the efforts of the developer. We recognize that it is very important
that the public make the effort to fully review this position, that is -the
City of Miami's position- with regards to this litigation. We concur and we
applaude Mr. Bailey in his efforts to serve you to get a determination as to
whether or not the City of Miami has title to the property, but as Mr. Aurell
has indicated, we think that that matter has been adjudicated very well by the
State courts which have reviewed the matter and that includes the Florida Supreme
Court and we urge that you give consideration to the opinions of respected ap-
pellate counsel who has been asked to independently review this and to give
advice as to their thoughts on the possible success of any further appeals. We
urge that whatever action you take into consideration the effect on the four
other blocks of Dupont Plaza which, as they are assembled, will give to one
concerned developer the opportunity to work with staff and all of the other
governmental agencies which are working on this matter of the bridge tunnel,
working on this matter of the bifurcated road system,working on the D.P.M.
so that you will have the opportunity as well as this present challenge and
so that you can utilize that opportunity to create what will be the equivalent
of a Rockefeller Center and the equivalent of all the other great downtown
plazas in the world. Mr. Gould is anxious to make this kind of a contribution
to downtown Miami throughout the start on Tract D on Ball Point's development.
Whether or not the 4 blocks will be developed is a matter of what happens in
the future on negotiations and other extraneous factors but we are saying to
you that we want the opportunity to start and we urge that you consider all of
these other alternatives and consider the effects of your action on the future
mb development of downtown Miami. Thank you.
16
MAR 0 81979
r
Mayor Ferre: I'll recognize you for rebuttal in a second but Roy Kenzie
asked if he could be recognized on this matter. Let him make his statement
and then we'll see if there is any reaction from the staff and then, Guy,
I'll let you speak.
Mr. Roy Kenzie: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Commission. My name is
Roy Kenzie, I'm Executive Director of Downtown Development Authority.
Five months ago, Mr. Ted Gould and Mr. Clark, from Hyman Construction
Company, came to our offices to inquire about possible land developed
within the downtown area. At that time we suggested three sites for them
to consider: Ball Point, Columbus -McAllister property and Claughton Island.
They looked at all three and made the determination to move ahead in the
development of Ball Point and Dupont Plaza if it was possible to acquire the
property. The Development Authority has worked with them since that point
in trying to advance their designs of plans for the downtown area and have
worked to try, and first of all, substantiate the fact that they are good
developers and are working, we feel, in the best interests of the City in
trying to develop the project in the downtown area. There was a question
raised at the last Commission Meeting about the developer and his qualifi-
cations. The developer has made an effort to meet with each of the members
of the City Commission personally and has met with three, has met with
Father Gibson earlier and was not able to meet with Commissioner Gordon.
The developer is a substantial and good devcloper and has had a very good
track record, I believe, that City Manager Grassie has distributed a memo
to the Commission in answer to Commissioner Plummer's request concerning
financing and the involvement of Bankers Life and Metropolitan in financing
the project, to indicate that it is a feasible project and is financeable
and they are considering financing the project and moving ahead on it. As
you know, the developer is intending to move ahead and develop and start
construction in July of this year. This development will do many things for
downtown which are very important to us. It will provide for us needed office
space in the downtown area. We presently have 91% of our office space occupied
downtown. Now, we are building new office buildings in the Brickell area but
we are not building new office buildings in the core of our downtown. If we
do not build buildings in the core of our downtown, it's going to drain off
additional market from the downtown area and we are going to be faced with
the problem of having competing interests in the Brickell area which are
not going to foster development of the core. This is our first and best
chance to begin to get new office buildings right in the core of the dofm-
town and to continue to establish the financial core that we worked hard
on. In addition to that, it will add needed hotel space in the core of down-
town closely related to the Convention Center and its hotel project and we
need those additional spaces to be able to serve the Convention Center de-
mand. In addition to that, the project brings for the first time in the
downtown housing which we feel is very important. In terms of the legal as-
pects of the matter which we have already reviewed, Mr. Gould when he started
into the project had two different lawfirms to review the cases to determine
whether or not it was worthwhile for him to go ahead. Their review indicated
that there was very little chance of the case represented by Mr. Bailey going
to the Supreme Court. Further, the City has asked two attorneys independently
to review the case and those attorneys both indicate there is very little
likelihood that it would go ahead. Additionally, the case has been heard by
11 different judges within the State and it has been turned down at every
time. I might mention one thing to clarify one point that Commissioner Gordon
brought up earlier in terms of the F.A.R. of the site. The F.A.R. of the
site totally developed to 6.7, which is less than the 30 that is allowed now
and less than 17, which is proposed in the new Ordinance, so in either case,
old or new, it is substantially less and 60% of the project is open space and
not covered by high -density development, so in that case the developer has
worked very hard to work under the limits of the F.A.R. allowed in the site,
he could develop much denser, and yet he has been trying to work in the best
interests of the City in providing riverwalk and other amenities and has
offered us assistance in the development of Bayfront Park, additionally, to
help in the development. In terms of the project itself and its impact on the
community, the project will provide 5,245 new jobs. It will also provide a
payroll through those jobs of between $62M and $82,000,000 million a year to
the City. It will provide taxes to the City of about $3.6 million a year -to
the City, County and School Board, excuse me-. It should be interesting to
know that 65% of the jobs that this development will create are under the
$15,000 range, which means it's providing jobs that are needed in the community
for the lower -economic range. In addition, it will provide 1,895 man-years
of construction labor, which we need also. We feel that it is in the best
mh interests of the downtown that we move ahead as quickly as possible with this
17
MAR 0 81979
project and not delay on it. Delay, as you know, costs the developer almost
$2 million a month, and if we are talking about 6-9 months delay, we are talking
about either adding substantial density and cost to the project or perhaps if
the delay is too long getting to the point where the developer may even back
out of the project. I think it is important that you consider the public benefits
of the project in terms of what it will bring to the community and to the down-
town area as you weigh this issue in legal matters. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: All right. Does anybody...Rose, George, you or...?
Mrs. Gordon: While we are on the..Mr. Mayor, excuse me, while we are on it, can
we hear the rest of the arguments and pros and cons and then have our conversa-
tion?
Mayor Ferre: Okay, that's what I'm trying to do, I'm trying to get everybody
to get through with their comments before and then get the Commission involved.
Mr. Grassie: The only thing that I would add, Mr. Mayor and members of the
City Commission, is that the City is in a particularly difficult position
because it has been assessing full taxes on this property for over 50 years,
so that even if...
Mr. Plummer: Can you repeat that?
Mr. Grassie: We have been assessing and collecting property taxes as if some-
body else owned this property for more than 50 years.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, I thought you had said full taxes.
Mr. Grassie: Full taxes, the taxes that are assessed, yes.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir, but not full value.
Mayor Ferre: Well, that's something you can discuss with the Tax Assessor, and
I might agree with you.
Mr. Grassie: The point is that any claim that we would have is conditioned by
the fact that we have been collecting taxes from private parties as if they owned
this property for many years and we have to consider that in terms of what our
real equity -even assuming at the very outside chance that we have an equity -
what that would mean to our equity.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I don't understand, are you saying that since they have been
paying taxes we would have to return the taxes?
Mr. Grassie: That's a very logical kind of position for them to take. If we
take the position that they never owned it.
Rev. Gibson: Well, who collected all that parking money that I've been paying
out all these years?
Mrs. Gordon: Would they return that?
Mayor Ferre: I'm afraid that they'd have to but I'm sure that, I guarantee you
from knowing...
Rev. Gibson: Okay, let's hear Mr. Bailey because I have something I want to say.
Mayor Ferre: All right, George, is there anything you'd like to add?
Mr. Knox: Not right now, Mayor, I may something to say after Mr. Bailey con-
cludes.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, the last point is an interesting legal argument and in
the Complaint that we filed we said that we wanted the trial judge to do equity
and if the trial judge thought it was appropriate to give a refund on those
taxes to do so. However, we wanted him to consider the income that had been
made for all of those years and I have very little doubt that the City taxed
a very large percentage. It probably taxed an even smaller percentage than
I am assessed to having the Supreme Court review my case. But that is a legal
mh point that is of such insignificant substance that of all the thousands of
arguments that were raised that one was not, because it is not the law that the
18
MAR 0 8 1979
e eh,
City is stopped from having taken that position, and the trial judge will make
the decision but it would not balance outnegative, it'd balance our positive.
Now, I apologize, I ask for forgiveness in advance, I did ask Mr. Aurell before
I came over here if,from the other side of the room this morning, if Mr. Edward
Bennett Williams represented Mr. Gould and he said he didn't know. Apparently,
he found out in the next 20 minutes. I didn't ask him whether he represent
Mr. Hyman or Mr. Beluschi , or Mr. Sasaki, or Holleywell Corporation, but I
guess it really doesn't matter.
I would like to clear a couple of legal points, Mr. Aurell said there is
a lis pendens on this property, that's a land record, a piece of paper that
says there is a pending lawsuit. By statute, in Florida, such a lis pendens
extends only for a year, unless somebody asked for it to be extended and the
minute the case was dismissed, by the trial judge in this case, that lis pendens
disappeared. I have not heard anyone say this is legally a cloud on the title.
As far as I know, it is not legally a cloud on the title, that was not the posi-
tion last time they were before you. Their position was that even though it
wasn't a cloud they had problems with title insurance. Last time we were here,
it was one million dollars a month, today Mr. Aurell said a million and a half
and the gentleman from the Downtown Development Authority said two million dollars.
Mr. Disraeli raises his ugly head in here, and I want you to know that if all those
stets that they gave to you are correct, that I would certainly vote to have this
project. But I'm not asking you to vote not to have this project. I think it's
a wonderful project. I can't imagine a better project, I've lived in Miami since
I was two years old. I would be delighted to see this sort of vigor return to the
downtown area but nobody is asking you to stop that, I'm not asking you to stop
that. All I want to do is to get to the U.S. Supreme Court in the next 4, or 5,
or 6 months to see whether the City is going to be paid by a developer for this
project or whether Mr. Ball is going to be paid by them. Incidently, Mr. Ferre
does not now own and never did own as far as I understand the records anything
that was included in the land grant. If there is any doubt about that I certainly
want to make it clear, sir, while you may have had what they are trying to buy
additional, that's not involved in the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not involve
anything that ever belonged to anybody named Ferre, so far as I know. Now, you
have two extra lawfirms representing -apparently, an excellent assembly of people
and I would not urge you for one minute to stop this project. I just don't
believe that it is necessary and I don't think you quite heard anybody say that
if you ask the Supreme Court to give us our one percent or one half percent, or
17 percent chance, whatever it is, that this project is going to go away. They
are suggesting that to you. Now, if it were an absolute certainty that if you
file a lawsuit and the thing is all over then it would be very, very difficult -
and I don't know about such things,I'm not employed to do such things, we have
a saying in law: "equity will not aid or volunteer" and you are all volunteers,
and that's your problem, that's not mine, and I don't speak to that. But as to
the lawsuit, I said when I started I have not won a judge in the State of Florida,
but it's been a political lawsuit. I do not believe that the U.S. Supreme Court
will deal with it on a political basis, at least in the scope or terms of poli-
tics as we know them in Florida. They are engaged in a reassessment of an
original clause of the United States Constitution. It was in disarray and disuse
for almost century and in the last few years they have resurrected it. That re-
surrection is directly contrary to the decision by the Florida Supreme Court. If
the Supreme Court will hear this case -and that's a big "if"- I have yet to read
in all of these opinions by these lawyers and I --Lord knows I will never have
any aspirations to be as important a lawyer as Mr. Edward Bennett Williams-- but
if they hear it, and I have not seen even that part come up with an argument
against us. The argument you are hearing is: "they probably won't hear you."
And I will say to you, they probably won't hear us, but I don't think that's a
relevant consideration. it's never been a probable chance, we are talking about
massive ownership by this City of property given to it by the State. The U.S.
Supreme Court has twice held, and including this case, and that is vested and what
is vested in a valid transfer by the State to this City and somehow or another
over half a century the City let that land slip through its finger. And I'm just
trying to get it back for you and then you can do what you want with it, you can
sell it to whomever you wish, you can have these fine people put on this project
and I want you to understand that I have no problem with the project, I have no
quarrel with these lawyers, I think it's wonderful, I just don't think we are in
the way of that project. I think it's a question of who do they have to pay and
how long it would take you to make back --I don't know how many millions of
dollars we are talking about, we may be talking about 50 million dollars of City
property. How long in taxes it would take you to replenish Mr. Grassie's coffers
I don't know but if you get it all in one fell swoop and you start earning interest
mh on that, and then you are looking at your interest that you collect. So, it seems
to me that you are being asked to give up a lot of money in the near future in the
19 MAR 0 8 en
hopes of doing what's a good thing for the City in the future when it really
isn't a conflict, because I aim for both these things.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox, do you want to comment now?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. Very briefly, you may have noted a resistance on the part
of the City Attorney from making a recommendation concerning the propriety of
proceeding and, of course, that's based on statements that I've previously
made. I think I did. I have an obligation to remind the Commission of two
things, or to remind the Commission of one thing and to suggest another. First,
this in my opinion represents kind of a classical policy conflict that perhaps
can only be resolved by the City Commission based on information that it has.
That is that there is,irrespective of the statistical likelihood of prevailing
or even having the Supreme Court hear it, I can say without equivocation that
Mr. Bailey's legal claims are not frivolous. I think that these considerations
and as from my own personal experience as City Attorney that purely legal
considerations must be balanced against the City's obligation to do those things
and encourage those activities that are in the best interests of the citizens of
the City of Miami, so on the other side of the propriety question in terms of
the legal issues, there is a question of whether or not the City Commission
should or must encourage development which would enhance the tax base, attract
tourists, attract permanent residents to the City of Miami and all of those kinds
of things that the City Commission has a profound interest in. I think I also have
an obligation to advise you inasmuch as Mr. Bailey brought up the question of
approximately $250,000 in legal fees that the record is not absolutely clear
as to whether or not Mr. Bailey may be entitled to that amount. I have examined
the minutes of all the meetings where there have been discussions, I have examined
the Resolution which authorized the agreement between the City and Mr. Bailey and
I have analyzed that agreement also and there may be some question about whether
or not Mr. Bailey is entitled to the full amount of $250,000 calculated at the
rate of $100 an hour from the time of the initiation of his representation and I
wanted to make you aware of that fact also.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Traurig.
Mr. Traurig: Mr. Mayor, if it's possible to say one more thing I'd like to do it.
I'd just like to clarify one issue. Mr. Bailey has indicated that he likes the
project and that we ought to go forward with the project and that what he is pro-
posing that you authorize him to do will not...
Rev. Gibson: Pardon, please tell Mr. Kenzie..tell him not to leave, I want to
make sure and ask you questions before you leave, maybe irrelevant but don't leave.
All right.
Mayor Ferre: Go ahead.
Mr. Traurig: I would just like to clarify whether or not the City's taking the
appeal would do violence to the project. Obviously, the answer is yes. That does -
not preclude your making a judgment to go forward with the appeal but I would
just like for you to understand the significance and the effect of what you would
be doing. Those figures about 1% increase in construction costs per month, are
real figures and if we are talking about $100 million, then l% a month is $12
million a year. That's not the key issue, it's one of the major issues. If you
did take the appeal you are not going to sell us the land if you did. I just want
you to know that, in our opinion, you can't sell us this land. The purpose of
your going to Court in the first place was to acquire title to property to add
to Bayfront Park and I think it would be a violation of your responsibility to
the public ever to put property in the market if you got title to it. So one
of the effects would be that, if you are successful, which is according to respected
appellate counsel very, very unlikely but if you were successful, you would not
only abort the Ball Point project, which obviously cannot start until determination
of all this, no one would lend money on it, no one would take the risk, but you
would also totally abort the possibility of the revitalization of the Dupont
Plaza four blocks. I didn't want that to be misunderstood so I thought it would
be important to make that statement. Obviously, you have to balance the effects
mh of your 1% or 1/10 of 1%, or 1/100 of a 1% chance, versus a lot of other public
issues.
Mayor Ferre: All right, any other statements by you?
Mr. Bailey: Yes, sir. I was not employed to make this land a park for the City.
I was employed to get ownership. I do not agree with what Mr. Traurig has just
said. I do not think that you would be precluded from selling this property.
And I say to you again, if you were, then I think any attempt to stop the lawsuit
20
MAR 0 b 19/j
to accomplish the same end would similarly be inappropriate. I really think
that doesn't help you. I think you are in a jam there either way, because if
you can't sell it then you can't give it up in order to effect the same thing
and either one would be illegal. I happen to think they are both legal.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, anything else by staff? Mr. Knox? All right, members
of the Commission, Mrs. Gordon.
Mrs. Gordon: Where is Father Gibson? I would like for him to be here.
Mr. Plummer: I think we ought to take a 5 minute break.
Mayor Ferre: Now, members of the Commission, let's take a 5 minute break for
real. It's now 19 minutes after 10:00, we'll meet here again no later than
lo:30 sharp.
WHEREUPON THE CITY COMMISSION TOOK A BRIEF RECESS
AND RECONVENED WILL ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
FOUND TO BE PRESENT.
Mayor Ferre: The 5-minute break went into 12 minutes, as usual. You have to
go catch a plane. Ladies and gentlemen...all right, would you please all take
your seats. And I would like the courtesy of silence in the Chamber. All
right, now, at this time I'll recognize a member of the Commission, Mrs. Gordon.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, this case and this issue has been before us for a
long time and through the last few years that we've been dealing with this
matter I personally have been praying that the results would be such that the
people of the City of Miami would be able to have that which rightly -in my
opinion- belongs to them but I'm not a court of law, not an attorney either,
but I am elected to sit here and make judgment on issues such as this one and
in all cases wherever I'm asked to make a judgment as important as this one is
my first concern is the trust that the people placed in me when they elected
me to serve as a Commissioner and I can't find anything that I have heard today
or that I've heard over the last several years that would permit me to vote
against the interest of the City, or the citizens of this City, and divest them
of the title to the property that was given to them by statute. I read the 25
pages carefully and I'm not even going to comment on them because I can't, I
am not an attorney but I understand them, I read enough contracts and I under-
stand all of this. I would like to have this case continue and I would hope that
whatever percentage we have of opportunity to recover that we take that percentage,
on the other hand, Mr. Traurig's comment was that we could not at any point sell
that property. What the people spoke out and said when they passed the bond issue
was that they wished to have this property for a park. If there is any validity
in the fact that Mr. Traurig says we cannot sell this property, certainly the
people could again be asked if they want to have a development on this property
or do they wish to have a park. In either case, I don't see how we have the
right to, as Mr. Traurig said, to commit violence to the public. Those are
strong words. I don't know about the violence but certainly we are not fulfilling
what we must fulfill, and that is to protect the interests of the properties which
are rightfully, by title, vested in the citizens of Miami. And that's my posi-
tion. And I understand that if we do nothing about changing what we've been
doing, that if we do no action, then we'll go to the Supreme Court, and I feel
that if this Court is not going to take jurisdiction and not going to hear it
I don't think it's going to take forever to find that out and I believe that at
that point in time it would be resolved on the negative. If, in fact, they decide
to hear it and rule in our favor I think that we will have gained a tremendous
amount of good for the City. I believe also that Mr. Kenzie when he presented
the properties available to the developer I noticed that he didn't say that he
presented the four blocks, and I'm curious about that, or any part of that, he
said just three sites and that wasn't his consideration up here today or hearing
that, you know, that the whole City is going to topple down and cave in unless we
immediately stop the U. S. Supreme Court from hearing this case. I do not dare,
I cannot dare and I wouldn't dare to stop that case at this time.
Mayor Ferre: Faher Gibson.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, there are several questions
in my mind that I need some answers for. Number one, if there is doubt as to owner-
ship I think that should be cleared up forthwith; who owns it?, who really owns it?
In this country of ours the Court of law is where you go is there is any doubt. I
want to say to everybody now what I said at a previous meeting. The State of Flo-
rida, and the County of Dade --not so much the County of Dade but the State of
mh Florida especially-- wanted to put me in jail because I wouldn't turn over the
membership list of the NAACP. I don't know how many of you remember that. Mr.
21 MAR
mh
Grassie, you weren't here, so wouldn't know that but you could have read it.
A very interesting thing, the same men --well, not the same persons-- but the
same position -men at the Florida Supreme Court wanted to put me in jail and
did say you've got to go to jail. I asked for a Writ of Certiorari --see,
laymen don't know, lawyers don't know I know that term, I see 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
competent lawyers. I asked for a Writ of Certiorari which was not a right of
mine but which was a privilege in the judgment of the court, the court says
yes, they'll take, if they don't think it's all right they will not take and
hear the case. I was in court for about 21 to 3 years. All that time I sweated
it out. One day in March, newspaper people called me and said -Gibson, how
would you like to know that you are free. What I'm implying is, the political
pressure wasn't up there. Who was it that resigned and went into private prac-
tice that wrote that decision..? Goldberg! Man, I pray for that man every day
because he freed me, he wrote the opinion. I want to say to my friends that I
have no problem with your having the property if the Supreme Court tells me it
belongs to you, more power to you. I don't oppose this project, I think it's
great but I do think also that if the property is ours and let's say if we don't
even put the project there we ought to have the privilege of maintaining title
to the property for the benefit of the people. Are you telling me I must give
it to you, let you make that bundle?...you know, .hat's the language of the ghetto,
you make a bundle, because I refused to adjudicate in the court who the property
belongs to, who owns title. I'll tell you, I'm a native, born and raised here,
I intend to defend every inch of the ground of the City of Miami for the welfare
of the people of the City of Miami. I think the prayer I gave this morning was
no accident and I hope that as all of you come here today you remember, Lord -
who said I am the truth, the way and the light, keep us on it, especially with
ourselves and hopefully with our fellowmen. Guide and direct us through this
day. Mr. Mayor, you weren't here, not that the prayer wasn't for you but I
just want to make sure that everybody understands that when I write these prayers
I mean them, I mean them. Pray for consideration. Plummer, you always have the
last..the let down, I want you to know that when I make these prayers and deliver
them, I mean them. Now, I heard one or two other things that distressed me.
I would think that if I have a right to sell it I would,well..preempt it; if I
don't have the right to the property then I can't sell it even if I wanted to.
One lawyer said -well, you know, if it's the public's good you can't sell. Well,
all right, then I won't sell but I want to make sure that I understand..it doesn't
belong to those other folks. I want to make sure that everybody understands that.
And I'm for development, you know, I love all those jobs that would come in and
I love all that money that is going to be made, but I don't love it to the point
that I give up what belongs to the people. I want :o make sure everybody under-
stands that, and for me, Mr. Bailey, I want you to proceed -for me- post haste,
so that these people will know whether they own it and they can proceed.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: Go ahead with Mr. Lacasa.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Lacasa?
22
11►AR 1919
Mr. Lacasa: Well I do agree entirely with what Father Gibson says about the
responsibility that we of the City Commission have to see that this question of
the ownership of any piece of property that the City of Miami might own be
resolved, however, I believe that we have to do here is evaluate the facts of this
situation in the best interests of the City of Miami.
On one hand, we have the question of whether or not that property is owned by the
City of Miami. 11 Judges in the State of Florida have ruled on that question against
the City of Miami. Now, we are facing a matter that is of vital interest also to
the City of Miami and that is the redevelopment of downtown. I do believe that
the salvation, the fiscal salvation if we are to keep this city alive as an
independent municipal entity lies on the redevelopment of downtown Miami.
The project that has been brought up to our attention is a major contribution in
that way. When the legal department of the City of Miami took this question of
whether or not we shall proceed with Mr. Bailey's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court
and of course this is a matter of opinion, and we have two highly capable attorneys
like Bennett Williams and the other gentleman from F.I.U., and of course, I also
take into consideration Mr. Bailey's considerations, but Mr. Bailey himself feels that
the chances for the U.S. Supreme Court to take on this case are slim. We also seem
to feel that they are slim. For how long will the City of Miami be litigating what
up to now seems to be a lost cause and what expense to the City of Miami if this
project which I feel is essential to us, to what extent can the project be
jeopardized? Consequently, very reluctantly, because I would for one like to see
this question resolved and if there is the slightest opportunity for the U. S.
Supreme Court to take on the case and rule in favor of the City of Miami, I would
of course go for that, but taking into consideration the possibilities, the very
real possibilities that we jeopardize this project and on the other hand, the fact
that the possibilities of the Supreme Court taking on the case are so limited, I
do feel that it is in the best interests of the City of Miami right now to drop
this appeal and proceed with cooperating with the developer in having this project
going on.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, and fellow Commissioners, I have heard the terminology
this morning that it has been heard by 11 judges. I guess it's like a man on death
row, he lives with the hope that the twelfth will see it differently.
I have got some questions that have got to be answered. First, Mr. Grassie to you,
the question has been raised and must be answered, is who paid this attorney Williams,
in Washington, and who paid and how much?
Mr. Grassie: The City, and we don't have a bill yet, they are billing on an hourly
basis, Commissioner. I anticipate it will run $3,000 or $3,500.
Mr. Plummer: Is Mr. Kenzie still here? Mr. Kenzie if you would step to the
microphone, please. When the developer you said came to you some 5 months ago,
and that you recommended 3 parcels to him. I am sure at that time you were aware
of pending litigation.
Mr. Kenzie: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Why?
Mr. Kenzie: I recommended those parcels because I knew...
Mr. Plummer: No, I'm only speaking to the one, Mr. Kenzie, I'm not speaking to the other
two that do not have litigation.
Mr. Kenzie: No, when I say parcels I mean DuPont Plaza and Ball Point because those
two are one package and I suggest that DuPont Plaza and Ball Point is one parcel,
Claughton Island and the Columbus -McAllister site and in going forward in the recom-
mendation the first thing that Mr. Gould got involved in was the question of the
legality of the title and his opinion from his lawyers was that this case would not
have a chance to be heard by the Supreme Court and consequently he pursued that and felt
that of the 3 different parcels we looked at, that that was the most favorable for
his development. Columbus -McAllister was too small and Claughton Island was just
not in the place he wanted to develop.
rgo
23
MAR 0 19/9
air. Plummer: In other words, that is not...I am having problems equating your
recommendation of a parcel which you knew this City had under pending litigation.
Mr. Kenzie: Well, I left it up to him to make that determination of whether or not
the litigation would go forward and whether he should proceed on it or not.
Mr. Plummer: Did you make him aware at the time of the pending litigation?
Mr. Kenzie: He knew about the pending litigation.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Bailey, I have heard Mr. Knox question or relate that there are
questions relating to your contract. I am sure you disagree...
Mr. Bailey: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: ...even though Mr. Knox did not explain what the questions were.
What is your interpretation of your contract? Since you brought the $250,000
figure out, would you give me some justification?
Mr. Bailey: Yes, sir, a brief history. I was asked to commence work on this
matter on an hourly basis and I said to the Commission at that point, if you are
going to hire me to handle the litigation, fine. I will be happy to go ahead and
proceed but if you are going to hire someone else, let them do the preliminaries
on it and go ahead and start the lawsuit. I was assured at that point --and this
isn't in transcript --no, we will proceed with you, and we are talking about an
hourly fee. While I was preparing my opinion to this Commission, the prior City
Attorney and the prior City Manager came to my office and said, we cannot agree
to pay you on an hourly basis and I said, of course, that that was there decision
but it was contrary to everything that they told me before and I said, what's the
problem? They said, we had to have a lid on it. Would you put a lid on it? I think
the first suggestion was $50,000. I said, if I do that Mr. Ball and his army will
come after me forever and I will not be able to support that lawsuit on that basis
and I have been proven right in terms of the number of hours that I have gotten in so far.
They then asked me if I would be willing to take a contingent recovery and I told
them I thought they were crazy because the amount of property and value involved
could be an enormous fee and they went back and talked and I am told Mr. Mayor
that Mr. Lloyd talked to you about it. I don't know whether he did or not.
Mr. Lloyd explained to me that he had talked to the Mayor and came back and said
would I take a guaranteed fee of $10,000 against a contingent fee of $100,000 and I
explained that it would be insane for me to do that. Then Mr. Lloyd went back and
talked to somebody over here and came back and asked if I would take a percentage of
2% of the recovery which I gathered was what you pay your condemnation counsel.
I am sure, but I think that's where that number came from.
Mayor Ferre: As I recall, it was 2% of the assessed value.
Mr. Bailey: The contract is 2% of the assessed value, that was not discussed with
me at that point. That came out in this meeting. Now, we then came back and I
said, I need some kind of cover. I am going to spend an enormous number of hours,
I have lawyers working on it that I pay, it's going to cost me money and I need
something and I came and I said, I would agree to work for $50,000 plus 2% of the
value. We did not yet discuss that. I came before this Commission and the Mayor
and I got into somewhat of a set -too because the suggestion was then made by Mr. Lloyd
that I had asked for a percentage fee. The Mayor several times, as I recall, used the
term "ripoff" with regard to that which made me quite angry since I was acceding to
something that I thought had come from the Mayor and then I was being accused of
having suggested it and after a very embarassing and very long tirade before several
T.V. Cameras and nespapers about my fee (which is something I am not used to doing)
the City agreed to pay me $25,000 to be applied against the 2% of the assessed valuation
for 1975. Then they said: "but what if we stop?", and there was a provision put in
there so if you want it in there, fine. And it was put in there and the Mayor and I
have recently read, because this has been discussed with the City Attorney, said, if
we stop you at that point, then we will pay you $100.00 per hr. that you have accumu-
lated at whatever point that is. That is on the transcript. Mr. Lloyd and I exchanged
several letters about this and I said, if I am stopped, I would seek Quantum Mauit,
what is the reasonable value of my service and I think we have agreed that is $100.00.
It might not be $100.00 but if I am prevented from earning my contingency, then the
City should under the law, at least, pay me the reasonable value of my services.
At $100.00 per hour, we would be looking at a total expenditure of time of between
$250,000 and $300,000 range. I haven't submitted a bill because it's never been
relevant, nobody asked me to do that and since I hoped I would be able to go ahead
and either win or lose on the basis of litigation.
rgo
24 MAR n 8 1979
rgo
Mr. Bailey: (Cont'd) So, I believe it's very clear that the intent of the parties
is expressed on the record and in the transcript by the Mayor, was that I would be
paid $100.00 an hour if you stop me, which of course is your perfect right as
any client can.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Know, you say there is some question. What is the question?
Mr. Knox: Again, Mr. Plummer, in the materials that were available to me was the
resolution which authorized the City Attorney to engage the -then firm of Pettigrew
and Bailey, to represent the City in this matter. It contains language as follows:
"That the firm shall be paid a retainer of $25,000 to be paid in monthly installments
billed at the rate of $100.00 per hour plus costs and 2% of the 1975 assessed value
of any land which is secured", provided that of course the securing of the land
was successful. I also examined the authority to represent and retain a contract
which is the actual agreement between the parties which tracks the language of
the resolution. I also examined the transcript of the City Commission meeting
which was held on April 22, 1976, and with your permission, I will read the
pertinent parts in my opinion into the record:
Mr. Lloyd made a statement;"I've got the bill from Pettigrew & Bailey
for the filing fees and expenses in filing the Notice of Appeal from
the adverse decision of the lower court"
Mr. Plummer: Rose will write her personal check.
Mrs. Gordon: I'll move it.
Mr. Lloyd: It's not necessary. I can do it administratively.
Mayor Ferre: I am all for it. The only thing I am worried about and
I have told you this before, John, I don't want and I am not saying
that Guy Bailey or anybody else or Pettigrew is going to backpaddle
on us, but they are through with the money they are due.
Mr. Lloyd: That is correct.
Mayor Ferre: Now, from here on, they have got to coast on their own energy.
They agreed to that.
Mr. Lloyd: That is correct.
Mayor Ferre: Let me tell you something. There is an old saying in my
hometown in Puerto Rico, that once you pay the musician, he doesn't
play as much.
Mr. Lloyd: Remember the carrot on the end of the stick Mr. Mayor, 2%
of the appraised value of that property if they are successful.
Mayor Ferre: The point is, that I hope that you stay on them so that
their job is not over and I don't want them to be coasting now that
they have gotten their pay.
Mr. Lloyd: I will have a copy of their briefs and all.
Mrs. Gordon: Have they filed it?
Mr. Lloyd: 0h yes, yes.
Mayor Ferre: How much have we paid out? This is it, the money is all gone.
Mr. Lloyd: Well, all except for the expenses that they have, that is correct.
Mr. Knox: And it was based on primarily my examination of the agreement and this
portion of the transcript of the meeting on April 22, 1976, that I concluded that
there is not an obvious meeting of the minds between Mr. Bailey and the City Com-
mission with respect to what he would be entitled to in the event that his services
were terminated prior to a review by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Mr. Bailey: May I respond to that?
Mr. Plummer: I don't think it's necessary,really. Mr. Knox thinks he has a big
lawsuit now, he might have a bigger one later.
Mr. Bailey: I would much prefer not to get involved in that one because if
I lose, I lose.
Mr. Plummer: I can appreciate that Sir. Mr. Bailey, your opinion, sir, as to
when a determination might be made by the Supreme Court, and I understand it's a guess.
Mr. Bailey: They make 2 levels of decisions. There is a preliminary decision.
Mr. Plummer: Which at that time, it can be thrown out or not agreed to hear,
is that correct?
25 MAR n R 1979
Mr. Bailey: Yes, they can. We file next week, 30 days to respond from the other
side, they must file theirs, and then they commence to consider it on a preliminary
decision as to jurisdiction, as to whether or not they have that case properly
before them. That could take 2 months, it could take theoretically 2 years. I would
guess that it would take in the 4, 6, 8, possibly 9-month period. That's my guess
from next month, from a month from now.
Mrs. Gordon: Can we withdraw Mr. Bailey? Mr. Plummer's question and mine is just
about the same, I just want to get a clarification. Any point after that 30 day
period, can we withdraw? Can you withdraw?
Mr. Bailey: Absolutely. Any time. They are delighted to have anybody withdraw
anyting that's up there, you can stop this lawsuit any day.
Mrs. Gordon: Nothing precludes that? Okay.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Knox, you heard Mr. Bailey's guess. Do you concur that that is in
the ballpark?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Anything else you want to add? The matter before us is one that
obviously like most important questions has merit on both sides. On the one
side, I understand the developers desire to proceed as quickly as possible in a
matter was not of his making and I understand his position. There is a problem
in the way this whole thing was presented. At Mr. Gould's press conference, before
the Downtown Development Authority, where Mr. Gould upon being asked by the Herald
Reporter whether or not he was aware of the pending lawsuit at Ball Point, he
answered YES. Then he was asked whether or not the pending lawsuit in anyway
affected his decision. He said NO. I think he was further asked to explain and
as I recall his answer was that he had retained counsel to analyze that for him,
I think in New York and that 2 law firms had looked upon it and didn't see any
merit and that he didn't see any problem. Now subsequent to that Mr. Gould has
come back and said there is a problem. The problem, as I understand it, is that
and to me it was specifically mentioned that there would be a cloud on the title
since there was a pending lawsuit before the Supreme Court,and therefore the
Insurance Company would not be able to properly insure and therefore the lenders
would not lend money to the project. I then asked the question as to how soon
that needed to be done since, as I understand it, the closing date is not until
June and we were then either in January or February, and this was 5 to 6 months
away. The answer was that there was an awful lot of work that needed to be done
and he didn't want to get involved in all the expenses and all the work if there
was a problem at closing and that this would delay the project and therefore
might alter his interest in the project since he in effect had other things that
he could be doind and didn't want to waste time in something what was fill of
problems. I gathered from all of this that it is a very serious concern of a
very serious bonafide developer, that unless he has a clear vision and a clear
view as to his problem he has some concern as to whether or not he should develop
this property. Now, my history in this goes back many, many years before Mr.
Gould even knew there was such a thing as Ball Point or DuPont Plaza. I well
remember Oscar Dooley coming to this community with a project to develop this and
he had gone to U.S. Steel to see if they would be interested in financing it and
had a preliminary interest, and he had a local architect prepare some drawings
and I remember not one, but dozens of conversations at the Chamber of Commerce
level with interested parties, with landowners, as to how, for example, Southeast
would go and develop this property and I remember Southeast answering that they
would not develop this property until the traffic problems were answered and
until there was a major development. I remember that Mr. Bassett told me at
one time that he was talking to Heinz, that he was talking to developers in
Houston, Texas; New York City, but never did anybody really take a serious
interest in this property.As a consequence, we've had --I wouldn't exactly call
that a blighted area because it's not --but it is the heart of downtown Miami in
my opinion and because of all these uncertainties, what we have had is no
activity, and when you go to Flaces like Pittsburgh and other major cities in this
country, and you see the 100% property being developed or having developed, you
have got to ask the question: Why doesn't that happen in Miami? Now, I will
tell you why it doesn't happen in Miami, in my opinion.
26
ism: 8 WI
t
Mayor Ferre: (Cont'd) It doesn't happen in Miami because we have a community
that usually ends up being against most things sometimes for very valid reasons.But
we don't seem to be able to look beyond the immediate problem.
Somehow, and I am not saying that Atlanta has a better way of doing it but somehow
the problems that Atlanta seems to be able to solve, we here can't solve.
A great deal of it is due to the negative press. The Miami Herald and the Miami News
have a tendency to be overzealous and they seem to think that they not only have the
responsibility of coming and giving us the news everyday, but to interpret what the
news means and to involve themselves in the decision -making process. Now,
Obviously this happens at different levels. I think the working press does a good
job of reporting things as they happen. I think sometimes, the bosses up at the top
have ideas that are preconceived with editorials prewritten and with stories based on
where the editorial is to be written and consequently pressures are put upon public
bodies to make decisions. I think that that is an unfortunate role.The problem is that
the press, the stories that emanate,go way beyond Miami and we have a history and
we have a reputation in the investment community in other parts of the country of
being a very difficult place to get things accomplished.
As a consequence, I think that's why people like Heinz and Rouse,and Portnum,and
the other people that have come to Miami and have looked have been dissuaded.
We have a couple of brave souls that have come into this community and have done
it anyway. Henry Gutierrez is perhaps the classic case of a brave man, a Cuban,
who came from Puerto Rico and decided to cast his fate and fortune with this
community. He unfortunately built the largest building in Dade County and
subsequently went bankrupt and lost it. That is no fault,I am sure,of any elected
body or the press, however, an awful lot of the negative press that Henry Gutierrez
got was responsible for the fact that while everybody else was renting, One Biscayne
Tower did not rent because of the pending foreclosure, because of the weight factors,
because the bathrooms didn't have hot water,and every little fault of that building
was p;'blicly exposed in the press. Now of course, the building was sold or is
being sold for twice the amount that poor Henry Gutierrez was asking for at one time,
and that one time was 4 or 5 years ago.
Then we have the case... Rose is always giving me the advice to be short-winded, but I
think this is too important,Rose, I am sorry.
Then we have the case of the OMNI and we have seen what Alpert is going through and
is going through. We have Earl Worsham,who came down from Atlanta and I hope that
he will have more success and I think that this community is growing up and I think that
we have seen that in the case of the whole project.
I think it is not coincidental that the name of the project is the James L. Knight,
City of Miami, University of Miami Convention Conference Center.
We have had a very strange and wonderful silence from our main newspaper with
regards to that project which I am very grateful for. I think that one of the ways
to solve these problems in the future, is to name them after either John Knight or
Jim Knight and perhaps we would have a different attitude from our local morning
newspaper.
Here we have another brave soul coming in from Washington. I want to point out to
you that all these major developers and all these major people have all come from out of
town, from Puerto Rico, Atlanta, now from Washington, Hong Kong and London, England,
in the case of Schwier. From St.Petersburg and Clearwater in the case of Chisolm.
I would like to point out on the record here that for some strange reason the people
in this community don't seem to want to go into these major projects.
Why don't people in Miami want to invest? Because there is no money here?
Well, I would submit to you that we have large corporations like Wometco, like
Southeast Banks and many many others, and I don't see that there is a big flurry
of activity to do things in this community. I don't know if it's perhaps because
they read the newspaper every morning and they are,too,burnt by it or worried about
being burnt,..I don't know. Somehow it takes people from the outside, unlike Atlanta or
Pittsburgh or San Francisco, it takes banks and developers from outside of this
community to come and venture forward. Now we have this opportunity.
The question is whether or not we are going to lose the opportunity. What we have
on the other side1of course,is that we have now asked 2 prominent attorneys that
are versed in constitutional law to give us their opinion.
I would be satisfied personally if I thought that these 2 prominent attorneys had
given us a considered answer to the main question.
What I find however is that even though 25 pages were utilized in the answer and
Bruce Rogow, who I have the highest regard for,and who is completely a distant party
to any of this, who is the Dean of the School of Law for Nova University and who is
a constitutional lawyer, has given us an opinion in a relatively short time.
rgo
27
MAR n R 1979
rgo
Mayor Ferre: (Cont'd) However, Mr. Bailey has pointed out that in Mr. Rogow's
letter he did not address directly the 1978 decision that the Supreme Court
made and which is the main vehicle and the main thrust that Attorney Bailey is going
to use if he gets before the Supreme Court. Therefore, George, my position is
this. I think we need to have a clarification of what Mr. Bailey has pointed out.
If after both of these attorneys have looked at and addressed specifically the main
vehicle that Mr. Bailey plans to use and they tell me that they still maintain their
position as they did in this previous letter, then I don't think I have any problem
with concluding this matter and dropping the case. Unless I get that however, I
must then agree with both Rose Gordon and Father Gibson, that we have to proceed.
It's just that simple. Father and Rose, to your point, I think they are valid
points and I see the thrust of them, however if we end up getting the opinions
of two constitutional attorneys that specialize in this, addressing some specific
points that Guy Bailey has pointed out, then I think that what we have to weigh is
what can we achieve and what can we possibly lose by proceeding and then at that
point I think we have to consider it on that basis. I don't think we are there yet
because I don't think the letter from those 2 constitutional attorneys addressed
the main point that Guy Bailey brought out, therefore, and now, Rose, in conclusion:
I think what we ought to do is take the transcript of Mr. Bailey's opening remarks
here, which took about 10 or 15 minutes, and submit them to both of these constitutional
attorneys, ask them to address that specific point of the 77 and 78 Supreme Court
rulings and come back on the 22nd with some kind of an answer. Obviously that means,
Mr. Bailey, that since your deadline is on the 14th and since you have said in the
past that you are ready to go to the Supreme Court anyway, that you proceed and,as
Mrs. Gordon pointed out, we can drop the case at any time in the future.
Mr. Bailey: May I add an addendum to that? Mr. Rogow didn't discuss either the
77 or 78 decision. Neither of them discussed the fact that our statute has now
been construed to apply to wild deed which is unlike any other states ruling.
If you are going to do that, ask them to do both points because they both either
dodged or missed that point too.
Mayor Ferre: Let me, Guy, so you have no misunderstanding I want to you to
understand that if they answer that --not to my satisfaction because I am not qualified
to judge, I am not an attorney --but if George Knox is satisfied that legally they
have answered that question, then as far as I am concerned, I will be ready to drop...
to vote --if there is a consensus in this Commission --to drop this lawsuit. If
they do not address that, if they cannot address that properly, then my opinion
would be otherwise.
Mr. Bailey: May I further suggest that by the time you get your transcript, I'll
also have filed? Since everybody is already briefing in the opposition anyway, lets...
why don't you just let them review what we have filed since they won't be guessing
as to what we are going to do.
Mayor Ferre: All right and I would hope that this would be concluded by the 22nd,
which I know is 2 weeks. If they cannot do it in that time, I think this is an
important enough issue that we would call a Special Commission Meeting just to
resolve this one way or the other. To you, Mr. Aurell and to your client, I hope
you understand that we are trying to deal with this in good faith as best we can.
There is a legal question that has not been properly answered and I think it has
to be answered by these 2 attorneys.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to go along and I don't want to impede progress
but I have some problems. Counsel, I would hate like the devil to have you substitute
your judgment for that United States Supreme Court. You don't sit under the same
fire that they don't sit under. Let me put it another way: You sit under the fire,
they don't sit under it. I hope you understand.
Mr. Knox: I think I heard the Mayor. My opinion would be limited to whether, in
my professional opinion, the answers to the questions that I am going to pose to
them have been provided, not as to the substance, but whether or not their response
specifically answers the questions that were asked.
Rev. Gibson: Look, I am going to let it go its course but I want to serve notice
and warning on this Commission and the public. I have problems with that.
28 MAR pr 1c 7 Q
r
Mr. Plummer: Let me tell you what I have problems with. Let's don't take the
"iffy" chance. Did they address it? Ask them to address it! There is a big
difference.
Mayor Ferre: I want to make sure we understand each other. As I understood Guy
Bailey's presentation here, he said that while 11 judges have ruled against us,
the Supreme Court and all these judges refused to take into consideration the 1977-
78 Supreme Court rulings. He is saying that he is using that Supreme Court ruling
as the main vehicle of his argument before the Supreme Court. Now, if these two
constitutional lawyers, Rogow and Williams, have not specifically addressed what
Bailey is going to use as his main thrust, then they have not done what they were
requested to do and all I am asking them to do is to comply with the request of
the City Commission in utilizing their services specifically as presented by Mr.
Guy Bailey this morning. Once we have their answers, then we will take this under
advisement.
Rev. Gibson: Let me raise the other thing. It could conceivably be that the
question that is being raised now was not addressed by the Florida Supreme Court
and terefore, unless I go through the same process, I have problems.
I am not going to get hooked into that myopic dealing business. I believe, since all
of the issues will be raised, those that have already been raised, those that were
omitted, sin of omission, will be raised. I am prepared to go to the last word
and that is the United States Supreme Court and if Miami has existed for 70 odd
years and maybe not as prosperous as some of the other cities,'God knows, I have
every faith to believe, it will exist longer.
Mr. Bailey: Mr. Mayor, may I make another suggestion, sir. Since you are apparently
asking for these opinions under the view that the only way you may be able to convey
this property or permit it to be conveyed to the developer is by dropping this lawsuit,
it seems to me that since you are having some more time spent and legal work done
anyhow, that you ought to get an opinion from the City Attorney as to whether you can-
(1) Legally sell the property if you get it back.
(2) If you can't do that, are you able legally to drop it in order to put it in
somebody else's hands?
It seems to me that is a problem that you should address as well.
Mayor Ferre: Can you repeat those two questions again, please?
Mr. Bailey: If we win the lawsuit and the Supreme Court says give back the property
that the State gave the City of Miami and the City of Miami owns the property,
can you sell it to Mr. Gould? I submit to you that insofar as I know --and I am
not an expert on municipal law, but I am unaware of anything that says that you
cannot; but if you cannot, the second question is, can you accomplish the same
purpose by dropping a lawsuit for the purpose of giving it to the private developer?
Mayor Ferre: I am going to expand this into a motion, so Plummer, I will turn
the gavel over to you and I will move you, sir, that the City Attorney be instructed
to request a clarification or amplification of the legal opinion rendered by the
law firm of Williams and Connolly, Washington, D.C. dated March 2, 1979, based upon
the presentation by attorney Guy Bailey and the contents of his brief, a copy of which
shall be also submitted to the Washington firm specifically requesting that they deal
directly with the issues contained in his brief, specifcally U.S.Supreme Court rulings
in 1977-1978, which have not been addressed to this point; further requiring the
Washington firm to deal with all pertinent parts of the verbatim transcript of Mr. Bailey's
appearance before the Miami City Commission on March 8, 1979; requesting that the City
Attorney research the following:
(a) That if the City of Miami wins the appeal before the U.S. Supreme Court and if
the city of Miami is found to be the owner of the land in question, can the City of
Miami sell the property to the private sector?
(b) Can the city of Miami sell the aforesaid property to Mr. Gould without going to
a bidding process?
(c) Would the same purposes be served by dropping the lawsuit at this time?
29
MAR 81g79
Mr. Plummer:
Mrs. Gordon:
Mr. Plummer:
Is there a second?
I'll second the motion.
The motion is seconded, further discussion? You are out of line,
but we'll recognize you.
Mr. Aurell: Mr. Mayor, in view of what has been added to the Mayor's original
proposal, I think it would be pertinent to advise you from Mr. Gould's standpoint,
our opinion as to those questions. The first question which was initially suggested
by Mr. Bailey and which was discussed at the February 22nd Commission meeting having
to do with the fact that in his judgment, the problem could be solved by the City
entering into a contract with Mr. Gould to sell the property to Mr. Gould on the
same terms and conditions as he has now agreed to buy it from the St. Joe Paper
Company, in the event the City is successful. Therefore, there would be no
difference as far as Mr. Gould is concerned and he could proceed with the project.
At that time, I believe I advised you and I advise you again, that Mr. Gould had
asked our law firm to look into that and we also were asked to advise the City as
to how we would view that. By letter dated February 1st 1979 from our firm to Mr.
Grassie, we advised the City that, in our opinion, it would not be advisable for
Mr. Gould to consider entering into that contract notwithstanding the fact that the
City might be of a different view and it takes two to make a contract. We believe
that the City would not have the power to do that and we believe that a colorable
claim, could be made to impede that contract and we would end up in another colorable
lawsuit and so
Mayor Ferre: John, I don't want to get into an argument with you or question in
any way,not your integrity because I think there is no question about that or of
your partners, but I think...does your law firm do any work for Mr. Ed Ball?
Mr. Aurell:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Aurell:
Mayor Ferre:
done nay work
.Aurell:
No, not never.
Or for the bank?
No, sir.
In other words, even though you are Jacksonville -based, you have not
for Ed Bali.
No, sir.
Mayor Ferre: I just wanted to get that unto the record.
Mr. Aurell: The second point, Mr. Mayor, as to whether the City can accomplish
the same thing as entering into a contract with us by dropping the appeal to the Supreme
Court, therfore, giving us the property. Don't forget, the City doesn't own this
property now as far as the highest court in the State has ruled. The St. Joe Paper
Company owns the property and the City is attempting to get title to the property,
but at this point in time the St. Joe Paper Co. owns the property, the party from
whom we have agreed to buy it.
Rev. Gibson: Some people don't hear me. The only person who could tell me
whether I have title to that property for the people will be the United States
Supreme Court. That's the only people who could tell me and the reason for that
is, I cite Theodore Gibson's life experience as a concrete example and I don't
want anybody to think they are going to sell me on anything differently because
I happen to know. I am a victim, living example of, what can happen to you and
anybody who is standing here who tells me that Mr. Ball doesn't have his influence
in the Florida Supreme Court got to be a fool. Don't lets argue that my
Brother, treat me with intelligence. Let's move on.
Mr. Bailey: May I make a suggestion, sir, a request?
Mayor Ferre: All right.
Mr. Bailey: Apparently, Walter, Wieckersham and Taft, and Mahoney, Hadlow and
Adams have given Letters of Opinion on all of these subjects. Since they have done
that, would they be willing to furnish those to the City Attorney so that they may
be added to all of this work product, I would certainly appreciate it myself seeing
them because if I do proceed I'd like to know what's involved here.
Mayor Ferre: Well, you can't force them to do that, that would be an option of
theirs, if you want to submit all of that to the City Attorney for his consideration
and his deliberation I cerainly would think that would be helpful.
Mrs. Gordon: It would show good faith, wouldn't it?
Mayor Ferre: Well,... and it would be helpful.
Mr. Aurell: As I just got through saying and perhaps Mr. Bailey didn't hear me,
our letter dated February 21, 1979 was addressed to Mr. Grassie, the City has it,
rgo and...
30 MAR 0 81979
Mayor Ferre: No, we are not talking about your letter, John, we are talking
about...
Mr. Grassie: His letter was transmitted to the City Commission.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, we have that, but is that the full extent of the work that
you did?..is it contained in that letter? You don't have a brief or a separate
opinion before you came to that conclusion?
Mr. Aurell: On the point of Mr. Bailey's contract idea with Mr. Gould,that is
our written opinion and you have it and I have another copy here if Mr. Bailey
doesn't have one I...
Mr. Bailey: I was not given a copy but what I'm asking, John, is would you be
willing..you issued two opinions, you issued a Mahoney, Hadlow & Adams opinion
and the New York firm of Walter, Wieckersham & Taft issued an opinion, you
referred to that last time. Would you make those available to the City Attorney
and to me in order for, perhaps, you know, if I'm wrong and if you are right,
I don't want to advise the City to do something that's incorrect but,you know)
I keep hearing about these opinions, could we see them and could we have a copy
of the other letter of opinion?
Mr. Aurell: Mr. Bailey, I'm not going to play games with you and I'd appreciate
your not playing games with me. We rendered our opinions to our client and they
are privileged and they are the property of our client and it's our client's
privilege. The City should, and as we have suggested, it has to and it has
obtained its opinions from independent counsel, Edward Bennett Williams and
Bruce Rogow and it has yours,and I am not going to give my opinions to the City
to influence the City to do anything as to the validity of this appeal. I have
advised the City on behalf of my client as to how a decision on the appeal by
the City would affect my client, that is my only appropriate role and I don't
think it's proper for me to advise the City of Miami.
Mayor Ferre: You are entitled to that, counsellor, no problems. Father Gibson.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, we are not talking about,..look -we are clouding the
issue. Any time you go to an attorney -and I went to one two days ago trying to
have a woman divested of all of her belongingsbecause of some incompetent pro-
blem, okay? You can only give me an opinion based on the facts you have and
you have to tell me how you arrived at them. Tell Mr. Bailey how..., no, wait
a minute, they are doing business with us. I'm not going to be voting in the
dark. Mr. Attorney, the only way, when you come back here, that you could ade-
quately advise me if I'm to trust you is to make available to the City Commission
the same materials...or to Mr. Bailey, that you had to draw your conclusion on.
If you come back here with anything short of that, I'm prepared to take some other
action, that's it, I mean, we are going to deal above board, or we are going to
put the matter dead.
Mayor Ferre: Well, just wait a minute, because you know...
Rev. Gibson: No, no, no, Mr. Mayor, look man, unfortunately, I went to Law School
for a day.
Mayor Ferre: Whose integrity are you questionning?
Rev. Gibson: I'm not questionning any integrity.
Mayor Ferre: It sounds that way to me, I'm sorry.
Rev. Gibson: Well, if it sounds that way to you, Mr. Mayor, this is what it
means: I want all of the materials made available, that's what I want. Doggone
it, it makes me mad!
Mayor Ferre: Well now I'd like, through the Chair...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor,...yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: ...through the Chair, I'd like to...because, you know, I think we
are dealing with sensitive matters here, we've got to be very careful...now,
I understand what Father is saying, I just want to make it absolutely clearthat
that is in no way an implication that George Knox would retain information that
is public information and not have Mr. Bailey have the opportunity to see what-
mh ever it is he has, now, that certainly has never been the way you've proceeded
31 MAR 081979
that I know of and that certainly wouldn't be your intention.
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, I'm running this meeting, Father, was that
your implication?
Rev. Gibson: No, sir, my implication...let me explain so that nobody will go
away with any misapprehension because -you know- we color the water, the only
way I believe, and if I'm to trust what the City Attorney tells me, that he
can give me an opinion that he and is he... -and rely upon what those men said -
he must say...they must say to him, based on these facts, this is how we arrived
at our decisions and conclusions. If that is not done, then you are telling me
something to the contrary. That's all I'm saying, and I want that same argument
that they used made available to the counsel who represents us who is to go
further.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Knox had asked to speak but the Commission always takes
precedent, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: I think that there are three parts to the motion that I have
made. One speaks to two attorneys that are appellate attorneys for a clari-
fication of their opinion. It has nothing to do with either these attorneys
or Mr. Knox except that I, of course, would rely on Mr. Knox's interpretation
of what the attorneys tell us because that's a language that I don't always
understand, especially in Constitutional Law, and even though I, too, am used
to seeing a lot of contracts, Constitutional Law is a very special field. Now,
to the other two points which are Mr. Bailey's recommendation. We asked Mr.
Aurell if he would be willing to give his client's --the brief that he gave his
client. Now, he said no, he's entitled to that. I respect that, I have no
problems at all with it. My question is to attorney Know, because Mr. Knox
is the City Attorney not Mr. Aurell. Now, I'm perfectly willing to have Mr.
Knox consult with Mr. Bailey, Mr. Aurell, Mr. Traurig and anybody who wishes
to submit information. Whatever information is submitted, I completely agree
with you Father, should be made available to all members of the public and to
all interested parties. We can't force Mr. Aurell to do something that his
client, or he, doesn't want to do. And that's his privilege. Whatever you
do have available, make Mr. Bailey aware of it, Mr. Knox, and also make Mr.
Aurell aware of whatever Mr. Bailey submits, and I hope that with that as a
clarification we can get on and I ask the Chair to call the question.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Knox has asked for the privilege to speak. Mr. Knox.
Mr. Knox: I just wanted to indicate on the record that I have not to this
point, nor do I anticipate receiving any information or input from Mr. Aurell
or Mr. Traurig, or anybody whose interests may be on behalf of the developer
of the project and I further can suggest with absolute certainty that Mr.
Bailey has absolutely no problem with a fear that he would not be given any
information that I receive from any source regarding the resolution of this
problem.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Bailey: Mr. Knox and Mr. Grassie have given me the opinion letters that
they relied on. The only thing that I heard about was this last letter about
which I had never been asked to render any opinions, and I've asked for it
today for the first time, but they have not kept anything from me that I know
of to date and I have no reason to suspect that they will.
Mr. Plummer: After two hours and 25 minutes, if there is anybody that feels
that there isn't enough on the record...call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner (Mayor) Ferre, who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 79-156
A MOTION THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO REQUEST A
CLARIFICATION OR AMPLIFICATION OF THE LEGAL OPINION RENDERED
BY THE LAWFIRM OF WILLIAMS AND CONNOLLY, WASHINGTON, D.C.,
DATED MARCH 2, 1979, BASED UPON THE PRESENTATION BY ATTORNEY
GUY BAILEY AND THE CONTENTS OF HIS BRIEF, A COPY OF WHICH SHALL
BE ALSO SUBMITTED TO THE WASHINGTON FIRM SPECIFICALLY REQUESTING
32
MAR 8 1979
(Continued text of Motion on the Ball Point issue- M-79-156)
THAT THEY DEAL DIRECTLY WITH THE ISSUES CONTAINED IN HIS
BRIEF, SPECIFICALLY UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULINGS
IN 1977-1978 WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED TO THIS POINT;
FURTHER REQUIRING THE WASHINGTON FIRM TO DEAL WITH ALL
PERTINENT PARTS OF THE VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF MR. BAILEY'S
APPEARANCE BEFORE THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ON MARCH 8,
1979;
(2) ALSO REQUESTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH THE FOLLOWING:
(a) THAT IF THE CITY OF MIAMI WINS THE APPEAL BEFORE THE
U.S. SUPREME COURT AND IF THE CITY IS FOUND TO BE THE OWNER
OF THE LAND IN QUESTION, CAN THE CITY OF MIAMI SELL THE
PROPERTY TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR:
(b) CAN THE CITY OF MIAMI SELL THE AFORESAID PROPERTY TO
MR. GOULD WITHOUT GOING TO A BIDDING PROCESS;
(c) WOULD THE SAME PURPOSES BE SERVED BY DROPPING THE LAWSUIT
AT THIS TIME.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mr. Plummer: We'll see you back on the 22nd. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Father.
oh VAR R e t979
33
13. DISCUSSION ITEM: City Commission indicates its displeasure
with DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY's apparent non-
conformance with INTENT of CONSENT DECREE.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor while we have..this doesn't affect you all, I'd like
for Mr. Kenzie to take the mike, because since he is a part of this thing and
I won't see him anymore I want to make sure and raise this question in his
presence. I get terribly concerned about this City, and where the City is,
and whether we acted in good faith. I want to bring this question up while
you are here, sir. I'm terribly disturbed, very disturbed that the City of
Miami would have an authority known as the Downtown Development Authority
and that of the 19 people on its staff --and remember, we are the Fathers of
Affirmative Action-- 19 people on its staff and one of the 19, which is the last
at the very end of the doggone list to be a black. This bothers me. One person,
and that person is a trainee, a clerk trainee --she, rather-- I just feel that
the Chairman of the Authority...and I just wonder if we are going through Af-
firmative Action, and Mr. Mayor, this is no reflection on you because you don't
employ the staff. If we are going through Affirmative Action and we are trying
to do some things in this City affirmatively, I wonder how doggone long it's
going to take for all of us to get the message. I went down there and I'm going
to tell you man more ice was down there than royal palm ice company sells.
Mr. Kenzie: Commissioner Gibson, as I mentioned that that's...
Rev. Gibson: Commissioner Gibson?..I don't mind being a mister, go right on,
Mr. Gibson, all right.
Mr. Kenzie: We did have until recently two additional black employees which
were involved in our CETA program on our staff, but that program expired so we
do not have them anymore. We do make every effort to try and employ black em-
ployees and go after them, when we can find them, and my charge has always been
to try and find the best qualified people we can find to fill the slots that we
can, and we try to make very effort to do that, regardless of race.
Rev. Gibson: You know?, I get very disturbed I want to speak to you direct this
morning. I am not angry, I'm disturbed. You know, I tell you what I tell Mr.
Grassie, if you are looking for black folks you don't go to Harvard, H-a-r-v-a-r-d,
you go to Howard, that's black, Howard is a black..in Washington, black and white,
but you'll find more black folk there. You are dealing with a guy who has been
in the Civil Rights Movement who'd give his life, I know the answers. I don't
like this, don't tell me you can't find them. It all depends on where you go to
look for them and this ought to be crystal clear to the public. One person out
of 19, --and notice, that person is a trainee, which means you can get rid of them all
the time and all of those other folk who are going to be there at infinitum, in
perpetuity, are other than. And I hope you got the message.
Mr. Kenzie: No, sir, that's not true sir, that's not true, sir.
Rev. Gibson: Well, let me say this, there is certainly nobody of a permanent
status who is a black on your staff, I hope you get the message.
Mr. Kenzie: And there are not 17 permanent members in my staff either.
Rev. Gibson: I don't...look, I couldn't care less whether the 17 are permanent
on there. What I'm concerned about is that there is no permanent person on that
staff, look, I don't want to get into the policy part of this.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Kenzie, I would advise you, I subscribe to everything that Father
Gibson has said and the point simply is this. We may have a lot of reasons, but
the facts remain that with the 7 or 8 permanent employees that you have, there is
not one that is black. And I think that we really,..that the Downtown Develop-
ment Authority should, without any question, set the pace and be a leader in
this and I think it is a serious responsibility and I happen to be the Chairman
of it and I feel part of the responsibilities I do here. Let me officially say
mh here, on the record, that I completely agree with Father Gibson. All right, is
there anything else?
34
wt. 8 137ir
14. DISCUSSION of FINANCIAL CONCEPT for City of Miami
"CONFERENCE/CONVENTION CENTER and GARAGE."
Mayor Ferre: Now, can we get on with Item A, please? And by the way, members
of the Commission, Items 27, 28, 30, 31 and 32 are all related to Item A.
All right, Mr. Grassie, go ahead.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Commission, at your last meeting
on this question, on December 14, you asked that the staff come back to you
with a fuller report on the financing plan for the Conference Center in Down-
town. What we want to do today is to answer a number of the questions that
you have raised in the past, speak specifically to the way in which this
project can be financed, answer your concern with regards to the position of
the Chamber of Commerce, which is the letter that is being distributed to you
right now, and speak about the possible financial liability, if any, of the
City in this project. We want particularly to make clear what the position
of the City would be if this project goes forward so with that I'm going to
ask Mr. Connolly...
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Geddes, we apologize and we are awfully sorry, I know how
limited your time is. You probably have got to catch a plane. Will you be
back later on? (INAUDIBLE RESPONSE) Well, thank you, that's fine, thank you
so much.
All right, Mr. Connolly.
Mr. James Connolly: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, at the last Com-
mission meeting we had brought before you a Financial Plan. There were several
questions that were brought up by individual Commissioners and the discussion
was tabled to this meeting. During the past two weeks we have met...
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, is that chart on this paper?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, it is.
Mr. Plummer: Because I sure can't read that.
Mayor Ferre: That really is absolutely impossible to read those figures from
here.
Mrs. Gordon: It looks like Chinese, yes.
Mr. Plummer: There is no way, that Chart is useless.
Mr. Grassie: You have the same information on the sheet and we want to work
from the sheet.
Mayor Ferre: All right, let's work off of the sheet then, go ahead.
Mr. Connolly: There were several questions raised by the individual Com-
missioners after which we met at least twice with each Commissioner going
over the plans to clarify exactly what the financial concept is for raising
$36.5 million for completion of the Convention Center, $8 million structure
in loan and the completion of the garage itself.
Mr. Gordon: What did you say totalled?
Mr. Connolly: $36.5 million.
Mrs. Gordon: Where is that?
Mr. Connolly: That is in the information that was distributed to you last
Friday.
Mayor Ferre: It's not in this sheet then.
tower
m' 35
Mr. Connolly: Yes, it is on the sheet too.
Mayor Ferre: Well, would you tell me where? Oh, I see it, yes,
Mr. Connolly: Under City of Miami, 4th item down is a base revenue bond
of $36.5 million
Mrs. Gordon: Is that a different figure from the one you showed me when you
came to my office....?
Mr.Connolly: No, the bond consists of $15 million for completion of construc-
tion; $5.5 million for a funded reserve, $8 million for the short-term money
required for the completion of the University's space, and a construction loan
of $5 million, with $3 million which we are going to get from the developer
on completion and $8 million for the garage.
Mayor Ferre: Not $3 million that we will get from the developer.
Mr.Connolly: $5.3 million. Now, basically, across the sheet we have 5 sepa-
rate entries. Three physical entries and two separate funds. The first is
a source of funds for the University is the "James L. Knight Foundation" -
$2.5 million. That $2.5 million is paid into an interest -bearing escrow ac-
count a s progress on construction goes on. 'Upon actual occupancy, that pay-
ment with accrued interest is given to the City as an advance payment of
"lease rent" for the duration of the project. The second column, under City
of Miami, there are several sources of funds which have been incorporated
into this project. Number one, is a general obligation bond of $4.2 million
which was issued 1969. Two, is the sale of the land at Virginia Key which
was done in 1975, $5.3 million. Next item is the EDA Grant of which we have
received 10% and will be receiving a 50% payment in June -now, another 40%
payment will follow in June. In addition to that, what we are asking for
a lease revenue bond as I explained for the comn1eti.on of cnnctructinn
the garage and the funded reserve. The interest
that will be accrued all over the period of the 30 months that the building
will be under construction is $4.471
project, from the City, by direct and indirect means of $54,844,000. Next
column is funds, Miami Center Associates which is SF, million anA
$26 million mortgage, totalling $36 million, $32 million,$5.3 million
will be given to the City upon completion and Certificate of Occupancy at the
hotel by the developer. We go then to the next set of figures which is....
Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, Jim, I want to make sure I understand this. The $5.3
contributed, what if they don't contribute, then what?
Mr. Connolly: It is part of the mortgage agreement the developer has with the
Mortgage that the $5.3 million is actually mortaaae funds which are aiven
to the laity upon issuance of the mortgage.
Mayor Ferre: And the mortgage...suppose the funds are not available, then
what?
Mr. Connolly: In mortgage?..the mortgage is already signed up for $26 million
fully committed .
Mayor Ferre: I guess the question is, will they keep the $5.3 in reserve?
Mr. Connolly: I don't know exactly how that would break down.
Mayor Ferre: How is the City guaranteed, how are we assured of that $5.3
million?
Mr. Grassie: Both in the agreement between the developer and the City and
also between the developer and the mortgage company, it provides for this
$5.3 which has to be paid to the City, now, it also provides that it is paid
when the building is completed.
Mayor Ferre: That's not the question...
Mr. Plummer: Who gets the interest?
Mr. Grassie: We have two documents, legally binding, which say the money has
to be paid. Now, how is that not...
Mayor Ferre: You want me to show you legally binding documents that weren't
mh
36
MAR 8 t979
lived up to? Do you want me to cite you a hundred cases? Now, come on,
on the record, Mr. Worsham, would you answer the question?
Mr. Earl Worsham: Yes, Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, the construction loan
from the Continental Illinois Bank of Chicago, will explicitly set aside
the sum of $5.3 million to be paid to the City upon beneficial occupancy.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Plummer: But who draws the interest?
Mayor Ferre: Its their money, obviously they draw the interest.
Mr. Plummer: That's not the case with the University of Miami.
Mayor Ferre: The University of Miami, as I recall, this is part of a nego-
tiated deal, is that they were going to give us $5 million and that's part
of the consideration for us to do all these different things.
Mr. Connolly: Yes, and by the way, the City Commission acted to put that
money back into the project. It's contribution to the City not to construc-
tion of this project. The City made the decision to put the money into
construction funds.
Mayor Ferre: It's their money until they give it to us, as I understand it,
and at that point, obviously, it's our money.
Mr. Plummer: Let me stop right there, Mr. Connolly. Of the $36.5, $8
million of that is the short-term, is that correct?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. Now, that $8 million is coming from the University
of Miami and from the developer.
Mr. Connolly: Yes, that's correct.
Mr. Plummer: All right. So that reduces that liability.
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: All right. Now, that $5.3...is that what that is from the
developer?
Mr. Connolly: $5.3 from the developer and $2.7, because the interest
over the 30 month period from the University will be this $2.7
Mr. Plummer: All right. So at that point the University of Miami is even
with the Board.
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: All right. The developer then subtracts his $5.3 from the
$32.
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: And that reduces the City's liability by $8 million...
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: No, $8.5.
Mr. Connolly: No, $8.0. $5.3 and $2.7.
Mr. Plummer: Is how much, Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly: $8.0.
Mr. Plummer: You are correct, all right. So then the City's liability is
reduced by the $8 million.
mh
37
LIAR g 1g79
Mr. Connolly: That's correct, from $36,500,000 to $28,500,000.
Mrs. Gordon: One question to get to the bottom of this. Okay, the revenues
that will be produced which will then be used to pay off this indebtedness -
this funded indebtedness- will there be anything left over for the City?
Mr. Connolly: After year 6, yes. There... the second sheet was... this is
the first year of operation after we go through... where... how the funds flow
go into the capitalization session and on the operating session, then we go into
the detail on the first 10 years to see exactly how the money flows.
In the disposition of funds, which is the next set of horizontal numbers,
The University of Miami Conference Center... well, let's stop in the middle,
the City of Miami, which is really the center piece of the whole unit here.
The funded reserve is set up from the revenue bond issue of $4.943 million
which is set aside here, on the right hand side. The cost of the land today
and also contemplating the two out parcels for the garage is $5,750,000.
The Convention Center itself with all hard and soft costs is $34,401,000,
and the City will pay $2.5 million from a short term bond source to complete the
University of Miami Conference Center Portion.
Mrs. Gordon: Where is that and what column you are reading just now?
Mr. Connolly: In the middle column, sort of by the middle of the page.
Mrs. Gordon: The 34 that you just mentioned?
Mr. Connolly: The 34,401 is for the Convention Center.
Mrs. Gordon: It's on here but I don't see it. (PAUSE) Oh, I see it, go ahead
I'm sorry.
Mr. Connolly: The City pays for the construction at the University's spaces
and the garate cost less the land cost is $7,250,000. That totals out
at $54.844, which is the same as the total funds available. The Hyatt Regency
House is built with the construction loan-$26.700 million. Now, that is the capi-
talization of the project.
The next set of figures... $54,844,000.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, wait, let's hold right there now. Are you indicating that
the University of Miami's contribution to this project, total, is how much?
Mr. Connolly: $2.5 million plus interest.
Mr. Plummer: All right. And you are saying that the City of Miami is going
to have to :.upplement that with a like amount of give them their space.
Mr. Connolly: On a short-term basis, yes.
Mr. Plummer: When does the $2.5 million that the City put out, when does that
come back?
Mr. Connolly: It comes at the... it comes in financially, 6 months into the
first year. That's the maximum time they have... it comes into the next set of
figures.
Mr. Plummer: Then, in effect, the City of Miami is not subsidizing the space
that will be utilized by the University of Miami.
Mr. Connolly: No, sir, it is not.
Mr. Plummer: So, in fact then, this figure is reduced of the amount of the
loan from $36.5... it is then reduced to $28.5 million.
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir, proceed from there.
Mr. Connolly: The next set of figures are the gross revenues to the City.
The first gross revenues, the hotel performance expands which is the rent that
the developer pays to the City which is by formula in the Lease Agreement
either 20% of the net operating profit or a sliding scale of percentages
of gross sales. The higher of the two is the 20% net profit in year
one, which is fairly conservative, is $285,000. The next line, is called
38
MAR 8 1979
4t
"Hotel Facility Rent". The hotel facility rent is due to the fact that the
City owns the Banquet Hall and all of the meeting rooms in this complex. The
utilization of those spaces by the hotel has to be done on a rental basis. A conserva-
tive estimate of that rent is in excess of $250,000 but approaches a year one as
an expectation of that rent. Next item is Convention Center Sales. I talked
to several Convention Centers and for a Convention Center of the magnitude we have
here they are saying that for our first year operating expenses between $375,000
to
000,000. It is the $500,000 that is the contemplated figure and also we are
contemplating no real net revenue from the Convention Center itself to the project.
It will be a wash item wherein the fee collected will almost equal the operation
and its expense. The next line, is the Garage -Retail. In the garage itself we have
a first floor which has retail involved in it and this is based upon $12.00
per square foot for the space that will be in that building in gross rent to the
City.
The next figure is Parking Garage Revenues, and is based upon using the
utilization numbers from the Off -Street Parking Authority's consultants Report
but using a market level equal to, or slightly less than, the existing private
garag es in the vicinity of the Convention Center. The garages used specifically
were Biscayne One, the neat buildings which is the old northeast airlines buildings
and the Burdines garage which all three are operated by Apcoa. We checked with
Howard Johnson's also and their rates are basically higher than our forecast.
Also where Off -Street Parking Authority had figured on 100% utilization
of their numbers from year one on up, we are starting up slowly with a 70%
utilization in year one, 85% year two, and 95% year three, and then full
utilization from there on. Gross revenues from operations are $2,138,000.
Now, if we go over to the next column on the right and we take up the
funded reserve account, in addition to $4,943,000 we have at the beginning
of 1981, the University of Miami in that year pays us $2,700,000 and the
developer's contribution to the City is $5,300,000. Those two accounts draw
interest for 6 months before we have to legally turn it back into the fund,
into the Revenue Bond, that allows us to draw $390,000 in interest just for
that money alone in 6 months. The funded reserve interest on $4,943,000
is $482,000, giving a total in funded reserve, at that point, of $13,815,000.
Coming down to the next group which...
Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, wait... I didn't..did you say $14 million?
Mr. Connolly: $13,815,000. The operating the maintenance cost to the City
for the facilities they are operating at that time is $500,000 for the Con-
vention Center, $28,000 which $4.00/foot for 0 & M and utilities, for the retail
space, and the parking garage which is directly out of the Off -Street Parking
Authority's forecast, which is $291,000, giving a cost figure.
Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, are you talking about the Conrad Study?
Mr. Connolly: Yes sir.
Mayor Ferre: Are you talking about the Conrad Study for 500 cars or for 750?
Mr. Connolly: 988 cars.
Mayor Ferre: I see, thank you.
Mr. Connolly: Now, based upon these figures exclusive of the funded reserve
account, a net revenue to the City during the year one is $1,319,000. In ad-
dition to that, it is necessary to put in $1,555,000 in order to meet the revenue
bond repayment, which is a long term repayment up to $1,874,000. In addition
to that the 8 million which was put in by the University and the Developer are
taken out at the end of the 6-month period and rapayment is made on short term.
And at the end of the first year in the funded reserve account there ramains
$4,260,000...
Mayor Ferre: At the end of which year?
Mr. Connolly: At the end of 1981, first year of operation. Over in the very
last column on the right is a bond reserve and that source is our capital
improvement fund. The Commission moved to dedicate to this project, as a
separate reserve account, $1,640,000 of capital improvement funds. The
intent is to let that money just sit and collect interest and to keep going
and only use it under.. you know, completely aside from what's forecasted
here, it is a complete set aside reserve.
39
M A R 8 1979
Mayor Ferre: In addition, what you are saying is, to the $4,260,000 we have
$1,975,000 on reserve from the CIF, plus interest derived.
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: So we would then have therefore a total of in excess of
$6 million in reserve at the end of 1981, which is the first year of operation,
is that correct?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, Now, if you turn to the second page, we have a year-
to-year review of the numbers which brings it to the tenth year. The set of
numbers across the top is a breakdown of the hotel performance rent, hotel
facilities rent, Convention Center sales, Convention Center special events
and in the special event column, it is predicated upon having a 6-week special
event season during virtually non -Convention Center operation, and that's in the
Christmas Season, December through the middle of Januray.
It is very hard to locate any Conventions. However, it's our peak tourist
season and operating this Convention Center as an entertainment complex --
we put on star attractions and other cultural events-- operating for 6 weeks
with six performances per week, with 80% eccupancy whici is 4,000 people at an
averag e of $10 a ticket and 15% of the gross going to the City, the figure
in the first year.. the income to the City is $257,000. Now, the only reason
I'm pointing that out very carefully is that, if for any reason, the Convention
Center itself starts running into the red, the season could be extended and given
additional source of revenues from actually running it; as an entertainment
production facility.
The next column is Garage Retail and Parking Garag es. Directly again using
market level pricing, and about the same utilization numbers that we had in the
Conrad Associates Study.
Mayor Ferre: Right.
Mr. Connolly: The total to teh fund goes from $2,110,000 in year one up to
$5,442,000 in year ten. In the next two columns, specifically show that this
funding does not include one dollar of tax revenue to the City from theis project.
The City's portion of the tax is based on a proforma that's been established
and is -I think clearly within the guidelines of the County Tax Assessor's
office, would be $264,000 for year one with all of that going into the General
Fund and the same thing if we assume accrues at about a 7% rate on the first
year.
Mayor Ferre: Now, I hope, Mr. Knox, this is clear that we don't -and Earl
I know we are not going to end up having a lawsuit with you- but I would want
to be sure that we in no way are implying or accepting that that is what the
expected City taxes are, that we are not bound by that, we don't end up with
-I might remind you- the Maurice Alpert situation where he said that we was not
expecting to pay taxes anywhere that.I mean, we have no control over what the
tax assessor says and $264,000 in City taxes would mean that the total taxes
for that property would be less than $750,000, and that includes county, city,
and School Board, and you know, if the taxes happen to be twice that, I don't
want this to be in any way part of any legal action against the assessor or
against the City. We make no claims, and I think we ought to make sure that
legally that that's on the record, that we are not getting involved in
precluding, or pre-empting or predicting what the taxes are going to be on this
property.
Mr. Plummer: Well, why don't you get Mr. Worshman to say that he understands
that?
Mayor Ferre: Well, that's why I asked the City Attorney to clarify that position.
Mr. Knox: The City has no power at this point in terms of assessing taxes
and, of course, they cannot be bound by any agreements which they have no
power to enforce in terms of it.
Mayor Ferre: Is that cleat to you, Mr. Worsham?
Mr. Worsham: Yes, Mr. Mayor, it is and, conversely, hopefully, from my stand-
point the taxes will be considerably less than the projections that Mr. Connolly
has made here.
40
MAR 81979
Mr. Connolly (cont'd): However, let me say that if Maurice Alpert is paying taxes
at this rate, the -you know- the county would be very happy.
Mayor Ferre: You mean, the assesor.
Mr. Worsham: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: The tax assessor, okay.
Mr. Connolly: Now, using the total from the Enterprise Fund, a 10-year period,
you would go down the second set of figures. This is the projected revenue ex-
penditures and debt service accounts for the total complex - which is the
Convention Center and the garage. The gross revenue columns again, are reflected
in the first set of figures.The Convention Center revenues... the parking garage
net revenue again, the net revenue account in the fourth column of going into
$1,319,000 up to $4,031,000.
The next column is the debt service for the complex. In the first year,
$2,244,000 for the Convention Cneter for three years is $2,244,000 that represents
interest only on the total $36,500,000. At the end of that 1981, an $8 million payment
is made into the fund to liquidate an $8 million debt. From then on, the debt
service on the Convention Center portion is $1,990,000 a year repayment -of
principal and current interest. Debt service in the garage which is an appreciably
shorter building time is interest only for the first two years which is $630,000
a year and then continuing on for 23 years for $764,000 retiring the remainder of that
bond.
The next column is the differences which is the cash flow from the project
without the funded reserve account. In year one, is a negative cash flow of
$2,874,000. The following year is $9,555,000. This, of course, includes the
$8 million repayment. From then on it was 289 --and 637 and 366 --103, and then
in 1986, it turns into black at $162,000 to the City. The funded reserve accpimt
is called upon to make up those deficits for the first 6 years.
Thereafter, it starts increasing back up again.
Mayor Ferre: It starts increasing.
Mr. Connolly: Increasing again, yes.
Mayor Ferre: I have two questions with regards to that for the record. One
is if the funded reserve account is not sufficient --and God help us-- but
supposing something does go wrong, we could then also pull in teh bonded...
the bond reserve, is that correct?
41
MAR 8 1g7g
Mr. Connolly: Yes, exactly.
Mayor Ferre: So that, for example, in the year 1985 just to pick one year,
we would at that point have in excess of six million dollars available for
any short falls. Is that correct?
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now my second question is... let's go now to the year
1990 and everything is going according to what you have predicated or what
we have before us and that we now have available between the funded reserve
account and the bonded reserve from CIF about twelve million dollars. Now,
obviously if we have that kind of a track record and we have built-up these
kind of reserves... now, what does the legal document say as to the release
of those twelve million dollars?
Mr. Connolly: In setting up the agreement that's... the reason I don't have
ten years is specifically the answer to that. In year ten we are contemplating
one million two hundred seventy-seven thousand dollars net profit for the
City over and above operation and maintenance expenses and debt service.
That gives a coverage of approximately 1.6, 1.7 to one for the City. At
that point I think that the bond indenture shoud be written.... I mean,
exceeding 1.5, that the funded reserves should be at the disposition of the
City, there is no longer any need, we are not ever going to run down below
the line again. So that, that in year ten would mass at twelve million dollars
which can be used for other purposes.
Mayor Ferre: Which can be used...
Mr. Connolly: I think the bond attachment should be written to that. Once
we reach a certain coverage factor, that the funded reserve and the bond
reserve account should be released back to the City for other purposes.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, but not for other related purposes just for other purposes
which the Commission at that time will decide how to use those monies.
Mr. Connolly: The Commission makes those obligations, nobody else.
Mayor Ferre: Then the Commission what?
Mr. Connolly: That's up to the Commission.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, well, but I mean, we could write in as to how these
funds are to be used now and that's the question that I want, that I'm asking
at this point. And I want to hear from the underwriters and from bond counsel
whether or not this is a reasonable approach and what the coverage is going
to be because I sure... I won't be here as Mayor, I hope. put whoever
is around is going to... I'm sure would be very upset to have ten or twelve
million dollars just sitting in the bank when that thing is throwing off
seven hundred sixty-four thou... I'm sorry, a million two hundred seventy-seven
and paying taxes of over a half million dollars.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Connolly, would you just... I want to find out where I can
find it on here, it's just something I'm looking for. Where do you pick up
the funded reserve account figures and the bonded reserve account figures
that are increasing numbers. From where are they taken?
Mr. Connolly: (INAUDIBLE).
gl
I0,kR 8 1979
42
Mrs. Gordon: Where is that?
Mr. Connolly: Alright, the funded reserve account is declining each year.
Alright, but if you take... let's say you take 1983, you have three million
three hundred eighty-six thousand in that account. The interest that will
draw at 9.75% interest which is the interest that we can get on the money
right now.
(COMMENT INAUDIBLE)
Mayor Ferre: Yes, she is following it.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, yes, I just wanted to know where are they coming from.
Mr. Connolly: Alright, we are drawing 9.75% interest on that account and in
addition we have a negative cash flow, alright, which is minus six hundred
fifty-seven thousand. If you take three million three eighty-six and add
three thirty and subtract out of six five seven you will come up with the
next year's account which is three million zero five nine. Alright, now
once you get to the point that you don't have the negative cash flow anymore,
we will have your account intact and you start drawing the interest which
is the next column and add that and plus the difference which is now a
positive cash flow.
Mayor Ferre: That's it, that's it.
Mr. Connolly: You've got three things occurring to the account.
Mayor Ferre: Well, the reason I asked the question, Rose is because... let
me tell you where I am leading on this because somewhere in the near future
I'm going to put into the record, the Chamber of Commerce's letter dated
March 7th and signed by Lester Freeman, Executive Vice -President. And I don't...
Is there anybody here from the Chamber of Commerce? Alright, fine. And perhaps...
Mr. Connolly: Harold Walker who is Chairman of the Convention Center
Sub -Committee.
Mayor Ferre: Harold, since I... since it's not fair really to keep you, you
have been here for three hours, perhaps you might want to get on the record.
I've got a pending question, but I will waive that for a moment, so that you
can make your statement into the record and then you are welcome to stay if
you wish, further time. But we need your name and address for the record.
Mr. Walker: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I'm Harold Walker, I'm
a CPA and I'm here representing the Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce. I'm
Co -Chairman with Mr. Lew Fisher of our Conference Center Sub -Committee of the
New World Center Action Committee. Mr. Alva Chapman and Mr. Ray Good and Mr.
Fisher are all out of town, so that's why I'm here representing the Chambers.
As you know, we have been following this project since many of you were
involved in it's borning and we continue to believe that it's a tremendous
facility. We think that the letter, that I believe has been distributed to
each of you expresses our sentiments that it is a tremendous facility, we
think that it is economically sound and we believe that it's certainly in
the best interest of the City of Miami. We believe that the financing package
has been put together as a rather innovative kind of thing and we urge you to
move forward with the project. We don't have any other things, except we
think we ought to go.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Walker, just for the record so that in the future somebody
may refer back to all of this, let me read the letter into the record and
then I want to ask you some specific questions. It's dated March 7th and it's
addressed to Mayor and members of the City Commission. "Dear Mayor and
Commissioners: On Monday, March 5th, the Convention Center Subcommittee of
the New World Center Action Committee reviewed the financial plan and the
progress of the City of Miami/University of Miami James L. Knight International
Center and Parking Garage. After a thorough analysis of the plan and program,
the Chamber agrees that it is economically sound, and we believe, in the
best interests of the City of Miami. We recommend to the Commission expeditious
action on the financing program so that the project can move forward. It is
our understanding that the Private Developer's financing is contingent upon
the City having sufficient funds with which to build the facility, and it
gl
43
would appear that these funds can be made available through this process,
Further, it is our understanding that there is an agenda item for the award
of the Foundation Work for the complex, and we recommend to the Commissioners
the award of this contract in order to maintain the continuity of the project.
The completion of this project has been a long standing policy of the GMCC;
approved and encouraged by the Board of Governors and Executive Committee at
various times. Sincerely, Lester Freeman, Executive Vice -President. Now,
my question to you is... and I think it's fortunate that you are a CPA and
that you are versed and used to dealing in presentations in numbers of this
kind. Mr. Lew Fisher is a well -know business man in this community, a former
President of General Development Corporation. Mr. Alva Chapman is the
President of the Knight -Ritter Newspapers which is a very large corporation.
And of course, Ray Good is the President of one of the Warehousers Subdivisions,
also a major corporation. All of you versed in business deals and projections
and financing and bonds and what have you. I want to just ask into the record,
it is your considered opinion and that of your associates that the financing
plan and the figures that have been presented and are being presented to the
City Commission that you have heard this morning are both reasonable and you
think that this is the best way for us to proceed. Is that correct?
Mr. Walker: Yes, sir. Yes, sir we have reviewed it and we have been dealing
with it for a number of years, a number of months. The financing plan, of
course, is not all that old, but the date of it as being presented to you,
we have also reviewed and we believe it's a rather innovative and a good way
to address the problem.
Mayor Ferre: Alright. And then Mr. Walker, you realize that up until the
year 1985 the projections are for there to be a deficit. You also know that
the coverage is about six million dollars to cover the deficit projected in
1985. The deficits might be larger and or they may continue beyond the year
1985 and you are fully aware of that, you've gone over that and you feel that
these are reasonable figures that are being presented.
Mr. Walker: We have discussed the basis on which the projection have been
made and they certainly seem reasonable to us and our Committee, yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you, sir. Anybody else have any questions? (COMMENT
INAUDIBLE).
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, while this gentleman is here, let me ask a question.
We are talking about it and I only talk in a short term because... excuse me, the long
term. The short term as far as I am concerned is a wash, you know, if they don't
live up then, we are all back at the crucifixion. The long term, what is being
pledged other than revenue produced from the complex to guarantee the bonds
as far as the City is concerned.
Mr. Connolly: There are two things, we have a funded reserve account which
is built into the bond itself...
Mr. Plummer: Which is what? Is it 1-1/2?
Mr. Connolly: No, we don't get up to 1-1/2 until year ten, at that point
I think it's more than fair to say that you would not need to have a funded
reserve account or set aside a reserve account to subtantiate the project.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, number two?
Mr. Connolly: Number two, is that if this is not adequate for the bond
underwriter, our legal counsel says that it is legal for the City to appropriate
on a year to year basis, the down side from other than advalorem taxes any
other revenue the City has.
Mayor Ferre: Well, that's part... that was part of the agreement, that's
nothing new.
Mr. Plummer: No, it's not. No, it's not.
Mayor Ferre: It was part of the agreement, Mr. Plummer, there is no question
about it in my mind at all. I have absolutely no doubts about that because...
Mr. Plummer: In which agreement, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: Of all of the agreements since the very beginning.
gl
44
MAR 8 1979
Mr. Plummer:
Mayor Ferre: Well, let the record reflect... let's get it clarified.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly?
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Crumpton, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Knox, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Plummer: Is that in the contract?
Mr. Connolly: There is no contract, we are asking for...
Mr. Plummer: Aha, you are asking for the contract this morning?
Mr. Connolly: No, we are asking the Commission to allow in the completion of
this financial content into a realizable plan that can be sold.
Mr. Plummer: Right, but there is nothing in the contract with this City and
Worsham and this City and the University of Miami about other than revenue
producing bonds. Is that correct?
Mr. Connolly: The developer and the University are not directly involved
with this revenue bond issue, they are depending upon revenues to the City
for both those entities.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, well, I just, you know, the Mayor stands corrected and
understands that. That's...
Mayor Ferre: No, wait a minute, I don't stand corrected. I understand that
this is not a full faced and credit issue, therefore, advalorem taxes are
not involved. But as I understand it... as I have always understood that the
City's credit is obviously involved in it if it has the City's name on it.
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Now, that defacto implies the City's obligation even though
not legally, certainly morally, to live up to the repayment of these bonds
as we do in any issue that has the City of Miami on the title and I think
we've got to be very careful. The reason I'm saying that, is because I think
we have a fiduciary responsibility as the Commission. And I as Mayor and you
as Commissioners to say on the record that this... we recognize that there is
no legal duplication, now but, we certainly have a fiduciary responsibility
morally and I think otherwise, you are going to scare the hell out of these
people here on the bonds.
Mr. Plummer: Well, the point that I'm trying to make Mr. Mayor, is that it
is my understanding that at this point, we, the City have agreed to nothing
more than a concept or will be asked to do such, on a revenue bond,...
Mayor Ferre: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: ... revenues generated. Now, then we come into the serious
question and that serious question is that you are proferring to us and this
is the very reason I asked for this, figures which represent to us that there
are more than ample funds. And I guess really what I'm saying Mr. Connolly,
is do you have faith that your figures are correct because if you do I'm
going to be extremely hesitant to pledge anything beyond the revenue of that
facility.
Mr. Connolly: This whole plan is based upon that, where it's saying... and
if you take a look at the coverage you've had versus the down side, if you
go from revenue into the black and you are a six and extend it out with any
set of numbers into year ten, you still are not depending upon that secondary
source. That's why it's structured this way.
Mrs. Gordon: What's a secondary source amount to, dollars? J. L., what's the
amount of the pledging that you are...
Mr. Plummer: We don't know.
Mr. Connolly: There is no dollar a pledge, it's best that the short fall
on any given year where the funds are not available would have to be made up
gl
45
MAh 6 1979
by the City Commission from other than advalorem taxes.
Mayor Ferre: There is,,,
Mr. Connolly: Now, if you take .,.
Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute. Mr, Connolly, excuse me, because you see, I want
to make sure... Mr. Walker don't sit down because it isn't Mr. Connolly's
opinion that I am interested in, with all due respects to Mr. Connolly, because
Mr. Connolly is a City employee and is representing the administration's
position which is consistent. I want to make sure and that's why I asked Mr.
Walker to step forward and to read this letter into the record and I,., which
I'm going to submit now into the record and the paper... the two pages that
have been submitted to us and that's why I asked him whether or not he
subscribed to these and whether he thought these were reasonable because it's
not Mr. Connolly's opinion that I'm interested in, but of the opinion of
Alva H. Chapman, Lew Fisher, Ray Goode and Mr. Walker. And I think he has stated
that they have reviewed this, that they are in agreement, that they think
these are reasonable and conservative figures and that's the opinion that
I'm going on.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Walker, do you representing that subcommittee understand
that any short fall would be coming from the general operation of this C{ty
other than advalorem?
Mr. Walker: That's my understanding of the information that was presented to
you and as I understand the project, that in the event that the project was
unable to pay for itself as all the reasonable projections that we see would
indicate, then that, that is a fall back position to protect the interest of
the bond holders, yes.
Mr. Plummer: I just want it on the record, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, any further questions?
Mr. Plummer:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Connolly:
Mayor Ferre:
this up again
Yes. Mr. Connolly?
Yes, I have a question that has been pending for fifteen minutes,
Ok, go ahead then.
No, you go ahead and...
May I respond directly to that previous question?
I think it's been answered sufficiently. Do you want to stir
now?
Mr. Connolly: Well, I would like to put a little more . The fact is
that our economic model is not a make-believe model, it was Omni using their
last year's average daily rate and going on a very conservative year -in
occupancy rate and capping it at 80% occupancy, where Omni had just finished
two and half years of operation and doing 91% occupancy. Our primary source
of revenue is very conservatively projected in this study and
who are the biggest CPA firm in the County that specialize in this business
have stated to us and are willing to write a report substantiating that to
be conservative nature of that projection.
Mayor Ferre: That of course, is not the question, but that as it may, let's
continue Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: Let me get to another point. You are talking about in that
column called funded reserve? Correct, sir? Tell which column represents
at the end of each year what the surplus will be.
Mr. Connolly: If you look under funded reserve account...
Mr. Plummer: Right.
Mr. Connolly: ... in any given year the center number is money you will have
at the beginning of the year.
Mr. Plummer: So what you are saying, at the end of the first year that funded
.Mh1,
( 197
account will be six million five?
gl
46
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Now, the next figure is obliterated on my piece of paper.
Mr. Connolly: That was six hundred thirty thousand. The six five forty-nine
and the six thirty are in the same year, that's in 1980.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. So then what you are saying is that in 1981 that figure is
going to rise to twelve and then from then it's going...
Mayor Ferre: Twelve nine forty-three.
Mr. Plummer: Almost thirteen and then it's going to drop tremendously to
eight and then every year as I see it here that, that unused money is going
to be no less than three million dollars?
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: Alright.
Mayor Ferre: Assuming their projections are correct.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, well, that's the point I'm coming to Mr. Mayor, I'm trying
to get to that point. And that is I would find, if in fact we are putting
faith in your figures and you are putting faith in your figures, why we are
even having to entertain a secondary coverage?
Mr. Connolly: There is a very simple answer to that, it would appreciably
lower the interest rate on the revenue bond itself which means that it will
be less cost to the City. And the City has that coverage on a year to year
basis to look at... I think the plan forecasted that we will never have to
approach that position, but the interest rate on the bonds will be appreciably
less if we have that secondary source available.
Mr. Lacasa: Ok, by how much? By how much?
Mr. Connolly: Half of a percent, one half point.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, any further questions?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Plummer: My only other question would be...
Mayor Ferre: I'll recognize you later on,
Mr. Plummer: My only other question would be to Mr. Grassie.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, based upon your great, great concerns every year
shown at budget time, that this year we had less dollars to work with than
last year, that the budget is tight, that we have no spat in the budget, where
would you say to this Commission you are going to make up any deficit that is
not originally shown?
Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, there are two considerations that we have to keep
in mind. One, in our business at any point we are at risk with at least
thirty million dollars out of a hundred million dollar budget because that's
the level at which the State and Federal Governments contribute to our
budget. What I'm saying to you is that we are a high risk operation. Secondly,
in viewing this particular project we have to view it in terms of what is
reasonable and what the experts tell us is something that we can depend on.
Now, all of the opinion that we have, expert opinion on this project is that
the level of risk that we run is very low, not non-existent, but very very
low. So in comparison to other risks that we run financially, this is a
good risk.
Mr. Plummer: You haven't answered...
gl
47
MAR 8 1g7g
Mr. Grassie; And I'm not saying to you that there is no risk whatsoever, what
I'm saying to you is that this is a very acceptable risk. Now,.,.
Mr. Plummer: Well, according to these figures there is no risk.
Mr. Grassie: That is correct. And you go one step further and you ask me
then,... let's assume the worst let's assume that in fact the project goes
completely bankrupt and that we do have an obligation that the City would
have to meet, in that case, the recourse that we have is the same recourse
we are exercising this year in which the Federal Government has dropped 2.6
million dollars out of our projections because they have cut out countercyclical,
we have to make that up in our budget and if we had that kind of problem because
of this project, we again would have to make economies in our budget until
such point as we were able to meet this obligation.
Mayor Ferre: But I might point out again on the record very clearly that, that
is an option that a future City of Miami Commission would have to decide upon,
that there is no legal obligations which is the whole thrust of what Plummer
has been trying to point out for us to utilize any other revenues to bail this
thing out should it go bad. However, we... in my opinion and if I were sitting
on that Commission making that decision feel that we have a moral obligation.
Now, that does not mean that, that future Commission can take a completely
different course. We cannot preclude a future legislative body from coming
to a policy decision on a matter effecting them at the time. All we can do
is state into the record what the thrust of our opinion would be and that's
all that we could go on. I really think that we have cover this sufficiently.
Are there any other questions on this? Father Gibson?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I'm happy to see those money men agreeing, this is
one of the few times I'm at ease and you know, I... that's unusual.
Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, Mr. Connolly, I had asked some questions which
have not yet been answered because Mrs. Gordon wanted something answered and then
from there we went on to some questions that Mr. Plummer asked and now I revert
back to my original questions, would you please answer those or someone?
Mr. Connolly: What question was that?
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Worsham?
Mr. Worsham: Mr. Mayor, I think the question really should be addressed to
the potential underwriters of the bond issue, but as I understand the question
is that the City Commission is asking that when the debt service coverage, the
income exceeds a certain level, say one point five times, would the bond
underwriters be willing to release back to the City the reserve accounts which
according to these proformas would be aonroximately seven and a hal: cc
eight million dollars at that point. I would like to introduce Mr. :ary Graham
with Smith/Barney.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr. Graham your name and address for the record and
who you represent.
Mr. Graham: Thank you, Mayor. My name is Gary Graham, I'm with Smith Barney
Harris Upham in Downtown, Miami Florida. In regards to your question, it
actually boils down to a legal question and as long as it can go through the
legal counsel and be presented in that manner the market place will absorb it.
Now, to an extent of coverage, let's say one and half being a reasonable amount
of coverage, in this particular problem I don't see any hesitancies a part of
a major institution in the debt service.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, let's be specific.
understand them, the debt service on the
this is both principle and interest on a
one million nine hundred ninety thousand
is seven sixty-four thousand. Therefore,
two million seven hundred fifty thousand
Mr. Graham: Yes.
In the figures before us as I
Convention/Conference Center is...
constant basis, beyond eighty-four is
and the debt service with the garage
between the two of them it's about
dollars. Is that correct?
Mayor Ferre: One and a half times two million seven hundred fifty thousand,
now this is debt service, would take this very close to five million dollars.
gl
48
MAR 8 jgyg
Is that correct? And since the net revenue in the year 1990 is projected at
four million dollars, that doesn't quite reach the one and a half percent,
Mr. Graham: Mayor. 1 used the one and a half coverage as a... because I have
heard it mentioned here. Your question to me is, I'm saying you can make it
subject to any coverage and a release of certain funds pass a funded
reserve account. There has to be, you Know, a reasonable amount of money, a
reasonable amount of coverage. One and a half one point six, one seven in that
area would be an average within the industry.
Mayor Ferre: I guess all I'm really trying to get is... and I know that perhaps
it might be putting the cart before the horse, but we need to have on the record
an indication of which way we are going because I don't think we can get ourselves
in the position where we have twelve million dollars of the City's funds sitting
in an account someplace that can't be released because we are at four million
dollars in net revenue when we should be at five million dollars and that there
isn't some kind of a decreasing proportion, so that we don't have those tremendous
amounts of monies sitting. In other words, I'm posing the opposite problem of
what Plummer posed, suppose these projections are correct, at what point are we
able to release these funded reserve accounts? On the bottom, is there a figure?
Mr. Graham: Well,... once again, reiterated, as long as your bond counselor
would advise you that in fact, that you can do that legally, then the underwriters
using that, you know, as a restriction in the operating would present a problem.
Mayor Ferre: Well, guess we will have to get Mr. Guandalo up then. Mr. Guandalo,
would you step forward and your name and address and who you represent for the
record.
Mr. Guandolo: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, my name is Joseph Guandalo,
with Brown Wood Ivey Mitchell and Petty, New York City. With respect to the
provisions...
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Guandalo, you represent?
Mr. Guandolo: I represent the City as Bond Counsel. With reference to the return
of surplus funds that are in this reserve account, the trust indenture can legally
be drafted to provide for the return of surplus monies to the City to be used
by the City for any lawful purpose. There will be no legal objection to that,
so long as the underwriters are satisfied with a particular figure as being
necessary as reserve for the bonds, anything in excess of that amount can be
returned to the City's coffers/
Mayor Ferre: Do you have any idea as to what your opinion would be acceptable?
Now, what I'm trying to get to, even though I know we cannot determine it today,
is what would be reasonable... could we for example, have a formula that would
decrease, as the revenues increased the reserves would decrease?
Mr. Guandolo: I think you could as a legal matter, so if the underwriters
would find that acceptable.
Mayor Ferre: And do you think that one and a half times... like which is lower
than what the Off -Street Parking Authority has, the Off -Street Parking in
this article has two. Now, I know that current...
Mr. Guandolo : Well, I think it varies with the particular type of project that
you are dealing. What is suitable, say for a water revenue project, may not
be suitable for a Convention Center, so I think that's a financial problem
rather than a legal problem.
Mayor Ferre: I realize that, but you certainly are more experienced than just
about anybody in this room in these matters and that's why I'm asking you, do
you think it is reasonable...
Mr. Guandolo: Well, I think one and a half times would be reasonable.
Mayor Ferre: Ok, thank you. I have no further questions... oh, I do have one
point, before this is finalized Mr. Grassie and Mr. Knox and Mr. Guandalo, I
would like this matter to come before the Commission with specific information
before this matter is finalized and before it's printed and we go out to market,
because I think it's a very important matter that this Commission should
deliberate on and come to a conclusion on and specifically talk about the
usage of these funds.
Mr.Guandolo: Mr. Mayor, I think it should be indicated that in the resolution
that's before you today, there is a provision there respecting the preparation
gl
49
MAR 8 1979
of a feasibility study which is essential for the underwriters to determine
what their requirements will be in order to market the bonds. I think when
you get that feasibility report and it is studied by the underwriters and the
City people, that then you will get a more definitive statement as to what the
requirements are going to be.
Mayor Ferre: I understand. Now, all I'm saying is and I'm not in any way
casting any aspersions on this or previous administrations, but sometimes
these matters become so complicated that the Commission is not fully informed
and we get a package which is five and a half inches thick and this is page
four hundred eighty-three paragraph D and unless you go through it and know
what you are looking for and know what you are reading, it's just going to
be approved as part of a total package and since I know that we are looking for
that, I'm just putting you on notice that I want that specifically brought
back to this Commission before it's conclusion.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I would find it rather desirable if that Chamber
Committee would also be looking.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir.
Rev. Gibson: You know,...
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir, I accept that completely. I agree with you. Alright,
sir?
Mr. Graham: Excuse me, Mayor. One further point I would like to capitalize
on, if I may, from Mr. Guandalo's remarks is the feasibility study that we as,
say, underwriters would receive comes back to bearing to your coverage... your
question on coverage. If it is a very good operating entity after a period of
five or six years and it continues to look that way, then let's say a one and
a half at that particular time would be more reasonable than if the feasibility
study doesn't indicate that it won't be an operating entity for ten, twelve
years or whatever, but everything comes back to that feasibility study.
Mayor Ferre: I guess what I'm saying Mr. Graham into the record is, that the
thrust of the underwriters is to be as conservative as possible, so that the
interest rate would be low and that we would have the best possible... you are
looking out in that sense. I guess what I'm saying is that the Commission is
looking out as you are, for a conservative approach, but also, well, I think
it would be very unfortunate to have substantials amount of money and by this
I'm talking about twelve million dollars, sitting in a reserve fund somewhere
when the project is making four million dollars after a few years and it has
a good track record. And I guess what I'm saying is, that when you get to
that point after your feasibility study and after your legal counsel and after
Smith Barney and everybody has had an opportunity, that you keep in mind that
we are not interested in having a very large amount of money sitting in the
bank making interest, we think that the people would like to have that money
used in other more effective ways. Like for example, improvement of parks
and other facilities that I'm sure the City will be involved in.
Rev. Gibson: Give us your name again, please, sir.
Mr. Graham: My name is Gary Graham, I'm the local representative for Smith
Barney Harris Upham.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, where do I find the breakdown of the City's thirty...
excuse me, twenty-eight five?
Mr. Connolly: In the material that was distributed as A.
Mr. Plummer: Do you have an extra copy?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: May I see it, please?
Mr. Connolly: There is a sheet that looks like this which is a projected
proforma... it's about four or five sheets down.
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, that is not what my question...
MAR 8 1979
50
Mr. Connolly: That's where the breakdown is shown.
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, that's the breakdown of how the monies will flow.
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Now, where is the breakdown of what that money is going to be
used for?
Mr. Connolly: The breakdown is at the head of those columns. The first column
is construction disbursements which is hard construction dollars...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Connolly: The second column is the consultants fees, the third column is
the administrative costs and the fourth is a contingency for fixtures,
furnishing the equipment and a preopening account reserves. Now, that amounts
,to thirty-two million seven hundred thousand dollars, in addition to that we
hav had the salvage excavation and site work contracts on site for the past, a
little more than a yeas. and wnen you duo that to it, it comes out to thirty-five
million dollars.
Mr. Plummer: But you asking for thirty-six five.
Mr. Connolly: I'm sorry, thirty-six, whatever it is. That comes to thirty-six
million five hundred thousand dollars.
Mr. Plummer: But, where is the actual breakdown? Now, I see here what you
are saying in these columns.
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: For example, how much of the City's money is actually projected
for construction of the Convention Center?
Mr. Connolly: Twenty-six million dollars.
Mr. Plummer: That's what you expect the City's portion of the contract to
be?
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: You better define that, you mean our costs? You mean our costs?
Mr. Connolly: Our prime discretion funds.
Mr. Plummer: Other than consultant fees which I see here, administration,
fixtures and preopening.
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: In other words, what we are to look at then is for the Convention
Center and the University of Miami excluding the hotel the actual cost of the
construction is approximately twenty-six million dollars?
Mr. Connolly: In discretion, yes.
Mr. Plummer: What else is there?
Mr. Connolly: Well, its money that has been spent until now on site -work contracts
and on the Salvage excavation.
Mr. Plummer: And where is that breakdown?
Mr. Connolly: I'm sorry, I don't have that with me, but I have...
Mr. Plummer: There is a big difference Mr. Connolly between twenty-six million
for construction, you know, and all of these figures here and the figure of
thirty-six five. Where is the difference?
Mr. Connolly: Just one moment. The bond is for thirty-six million, the actual
cost, if you go down to the net set of figures which is a disposition of
funds...
Mr. Plummer: Ahuh.
51
MAR 8 ig79
111
Mr. Connolly: ... that is thirty-four milllion four hurdred thousand dollars.
The summation of all of these expenditures that's shown on this accompanying
sheet is thirty-two million seven fifty. In addition to the thirty-two million
seven fifty, we have already spent the difference between that and thirty-four
four on site work and salvage excavation and some other previously paid architect
engineering fees. We have had them under contract since August of 1975.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, Now, a very important question that I hope I don't have to
remind you of later. Is the architects here? Mr. Architect?
Mr. Candella: Yes, Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plummer: How are you, sir?
Mr. Candella: How are you doing?
Mr. Plummer: Just for the record, your name.
Mr. Candella: Ilario Candella, 800 Douglas Road, architect.
Mr. Plummer: You are in the process of final design?
Mr. Candella: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Have you at all times kept uppermost in your mind the amount of
dollars that this City is projecting for construction cost?
Mr. Candella: Yes, we have and we also have as a member of our team, the
construction manager who is monitoring the cost of this project, that the firm
of Rooney Turner, the construction manager of the project monitoring the cost
on a daily basis.
Mr. Plummer: And you feel then that it is... no big surprise is coming?
Mr. Candella: We are under the advice of the construction manager that the
estimate of twenty-bix million dollars is a good estimate.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir, you are on the record.
Mr. Candella: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Is the Rooney Company represented? Is anyone here that's the
projection team, that's assisting on this daily basis?
Mayor Ferre: Rooney Turner, I think is the name of the...
Mr. Plummer: Rooney Turner?
Mayor Ferre: Yes. Is there somebody here from Rooney Turner? Would you
step forward, please?
Mr. Plummer: Same question to you, sir after you have stated your name for
the record.
Mr. Herman: My name is Gary...
Mr. Plummer: The other microphone, sir.
Mr. Herman: Gary Herman with Rooney Turner from Fort Lauderdale. The
latest estimate that we have forwarded to the City was Twenty-seven point
five million dollars which includes one point six million dollars in contingency.
That's based...
Mr. Plummer: Well, if that's the case sir, how do we come in with twenty-six
million dollars? Now, you know,... I assume you know...
Mr. Herman: That is not a Rooney Turner figure.
Mr. Plummer: Well, now, you know, you two... somebody better get together
here. I don't hear the same story coming from everywhere.
Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, I thought that,in fact you have received the
81 52 MAR 81979
the same figure. The construction contract is estimated at twenty-six million,
what Rooney is Baying is that their estimate is twenty-six million plus a
contingency which you always provide, a contingency of one point six million.
Mr. Plummer: Where is that...
Mr. Grassie: In other words, seven point six million with the contingency.
Mayor Ferre: I might point out J. L., that's exactly why I was asking him
the question of the reserves before and that's exactly why, you know, the
federal reserve... I mean, the funded reserve fund that goes up to twelve
million nine forty-three and is down in 1983 to four million two sixty, plus
the bonded reserve of two million three seventy-nine.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, I'm well
oh, excuse me, we are going
money is twenty-six million
that, that contingency fund
adequate monies.
aware, but Mr. Grassie we are taking out a bond...
to sell bonds. Now, dedicated to that amount of
dollars for construction and it would be my demand
be built into that or we are not going to have
Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, the contingency fund is built-in. If you will look
at the distibution on your summary sheet of the thirty-six million five hundred
thousand dollars you will see...
Mr. Plummer: I'm sorry, Mr. Grassie, I got four million papers and that goes
to an old theory that you can't get them with intelligence, get them with a
whole lot of papers. Where is that... give me a copy of that.
Mr. Grassie: Now, if you take mine, I'm not going to be able to tell you about
it. You've already got my other report.
Mayor Ferre: Well, what he is talking about is this sheet, is that correct?
Mr. Grassie: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: No, he is looking at another sheet.
Mr. Connolly: No, it's the same sheet.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, go ahead, let's come back to your sheet here.
Mayor Ferre: This is the summary sheet. Are you on page one or page two?
Mr. Gr;:issie: I'm on the first page...
Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, what figure are you talking about? Would you
point out what line it's on, so we can all follow it?
Mr. Grassie: If you go down from the top in the column that says City of Miami...
go down from the top about eight lines to where it says funded reserve,...
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
Mr. Grassie: ... you will see a figure of four million nine hundred forty-three
thousand which is taken from the total and moved over to the column of funded
reserves.
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
Mr. Grassie:
is being put
all of these
Mr. Plummer;
Yes.
I understand that.
Now, that is the amount of money which is being put aside and
aside from the thirty-six million for the purposes of covering
contingencies.
Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: Including the one point six.
Mr. Plummer: There is nothing more permanent around City Hall than temporary
funding. No, don't laugh. I have never seen a project come in that we didn't
have some overrun. I will recall to your attention the most recent, Downtown
the Administrative Building in which we had to send them back and tell them
that they were designing buildings that we could not afford, the Edison Little
River Building design that we could not afford and what I am hearing here this
53
gl
MAR 8 1979
II I I 1112111111111111111111 IM
4
morning is a different story between what Mr. Candella is telling me at the
twenty-six million and part of his team that is already speaking to twenty-seyen
and a half million dollars.
Mayor Ferre: Let's be very, very clear J. L., because I can just,..
Mr. Plummer: Well, I'm trying to be Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: I know, but I can just see the way this is going to be reported
by at least, you know, one source around here. Now, look, he said very specifically
that it was a twenty-six million dollar estimate with a one point six... was
it one point two or one point six?
Mr. Herman: It was one point six, sir.
Mayor Ferre: One point six contingency. Now, he said that in his opening
remarks, so it isn't... he didn't say one thing and not another, he said he
thinks it will cost twenty-six million dollars, but there is a one point six
reserve that might be the contingency, is that right?
Mr. Herman: Mayor, may I point out that this one point six million dollar
contingency is considered a plan development contingency. This estimate of
twenty-six million dollars is based on plans that are presently not 100%
complete.
Mayor Ferre: And that's why you put that one point six?
Mr. Herman: That's there is a contingency to floor plan development.
Mayor Ferre: So, in other words what you are saying is, you think it will
cost twenty-six million, but it might cost twenty-seven million six and you
are saying that it's going to be within that provided that the drawings go
the way you think they are going. And the architect said that there is no
hidden surprises and he thinks that this is reasonable and so I think we can
conclude after the Manager has pointed out that there is four point nine
forty-three million dollars in reserve to cover that one point six contingency
and it's all be disclosed and we are headed in a reasonable direction. And
furthermore, you also have from the Chamber of Commerce an opinion that this
is a reasonable way of financing this thing and that these figures that had
been presented seem reasonable. Now, what else do we...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I appreciate your delineation for your vote.
Mayor Ferre: That's right.
Mr. Plummer: I will still pursue mine.
Mayor Ferre: Go ahead.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, you have heard the difference between twenty-six
and twenty-seven and a half, your comment to that, sir.
Mr. Connolly: A couple of things. Number one, at the time that the construction
cost estimates was furnished by Rooney Turner to the City it was contemplated
that the progress and plans would take place over the next six months, so
inflation for that kind of time was built-in. We had reinstructed the architect
to work at the fastest possible pace and complete all of the documents within
three months. Number two, part of the funds that are in there are based upon
the fact that the plans are not fully completed. We have been meeting in an
executive session once a week, the instructions to bobh the architect and the
construction manager is to do everything possible to bring the job in for twenty-six
million.
Mr. Plummer: In other words,...
Mr. Connolly: In addition to that, there is a separate contingency account
and you ask the question, why would you put a contingency in there? The reason
is because they would eat it up.
Mr. Plummer: Who would?
54
VAR 8 1S7g
Mr. Connolly: The architect and the construction manager. I think that they
have to do their best possible effort to bring it into twenty-six million and that
there are decisions to be made and those decisions should be made on part of the
City and the Administration as to the disbursement of the additional one million
dollars that we had set aside.
Mr. Plummer: So what you are saying then, is that anything between the twenty-six
million, actual projected cost, anything above that comes from a hypothetical
figure which does not exist, that needs secondary funding.
Mr. Connolly: No, that's in the base fund.
Mr. Plummer: In the base fund?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, it is. If you look again at middle A, that same sheet,
you will find a column almost right in the middle. It says contingency FF&E
and preopening expense.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Connolly: Alright?
Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir.
Mr. Connolly: That's a one million dollar account, it would be under the control
of the City, it has nothing to do with the architect or the construction manager.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. When do you project...
Mrs. Gordon: Does that include the plan contingency that we just started?
Mr. Connolly: At the discretion of the City.
Mrs. Gordon: It could be either one?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, it can.
Mr. Plummer: When do you project final drawings, Mr. Candella, to be in?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: From today?
Mayor Ferre: Would you repeat that into the record.
Mr. Candella: From last week.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: What day do you expect final plans to be in?
Mr. Candella: Ninety days from March 1st, that's what I'm talking about.
Mr. Plummer: So then, March, April, May... we are looking no later than June
1st?
Mr. Candella: June 1st, right.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, after receipt of those plans... and I want you to
know I'm building a record, after receipt of those plans, how many days before
you will go out to bid?
Mr. Connolly: Well, actually we intend to at sometime in the first ninety days
advertise and have partially completed plans available for interested contractors.
Mr. Plummer: That's after the first of June or prior?
Mr. Connolly: Prior, like thirty days from now. And notify them... there will
be progress prints once every two weeks or four weeks up to the point of ninety
days from now. At that point they will have a full set of documents, but at
least we will have given them time to completely study the project to be able
to build their estimates up and get response from the City and their consultants.
Mr. Plummer: I will ask my question again, based upon your receiving final plans
55 MAR 8 197g
on the first day of June, when will you go out with final requests for bids?
Mr. Connolly: We expect to have the bids back in, in thirty days after the
issuance of the final documents.
Mr. Plummer: You are then speaking of July 1st?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir. Do the people that are doing the money figuring
agree with that and your figures coincide with that?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That appears to be a reasonable time.
Mr. Plummer: But you have that inflation factor built-in for that amount
of time?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Our estimate is based on the projected construction
schedule and when the funds will actually be expended.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Rooney Turner is the ones that just spoke for the record.
Mayor Ferre: Are there further questions? Mr. Plummer, I want to state into
the record that even though the Miami Herald and the Miami News Editorial
Boards don't think very much of you, I think you are one hell of a fine
Commissioner and a good public server and I am grateful and happy to be
serving with you. Anything else?
Mr. Plummer: I will always take your opinion over others, don't worry.
Mayor Ferre: Are there any other questions to be asked for the record at
this time?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, just let me indicate one thing on the record. I
think Mr. Connolly and Mr. Worsham and Marty Fine, know that I am all in
favor of this project and I want this project in the worst way, because I
have already seen with this just on the drawing boards, what a spark plug
this is going to be to Downtown. I... you know, here we are talking about
a hundred million dollar project on Ball Point, we are talking about eighty
some million dollars in the Convention Center, they are talking about developing
so critical in the Downtown People Mover and Rapid Transit. So, I want you
to know that I'm all in favor of wanting you to succeed, but I feel that I
have got to ask these questions because the day is going to come, as Father
Gibson said that we were born here and we are going to be buried here.
Mayor Ferre: Fine, I think that's wonderful.
Mr. Plummer: I got to ask those questions.
Mayor Ferre: Now, will somebody move item 27 which is what we are talking
about?
Mr. Fannatto: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a comment...
Mayor Ferre: Alright, Ernie, this is not A public hearing, but I'm going to
recognize you because I think this is an important junction in our history
and I'm always happy to get your opinion. Quickly though.
Mr. Fannatto: Honorable Mayor and members of the Commission, I think it's
a wonderful project, I'm a hundred percent behind it.
Mayor Ferre: Good, thank you, very much, Ernie.
Mr. Fannatto: And I think everybody should be, it's the life blood to
help the businessmen in this community...
Mayor Ferre: Now, you want to add something else to that?
Mr. Fannatto: Well, I do like to say this. I think there has been some
mistakes and miscalculation of how much capacity the hotel is going to give
56
MAR 8 1979
them. They claim they are going to get eighty to eighty-one percent capacity
in the hotels. This in my estimation, in that location and being a convention
hotel, especial the first two or three years is way off base. And when I get
through Mayor, I'm going to use you as an example, because you had the hotel
Downtown, you know what you did there in May and June...
Mayor Ferre: Now, leave me out of it, would you Ernie?
Mr. Fannatto: And you know what you did their in September, October, November.
You just can't do it. When you operate a convention hotel, you take your hotel,
you are filled up fairly well, you have to plan for the next convention, there
is a lot of slack and a lot of times you are empty, positively empty. I don't
think there are going to be more than sixty percent capacity on a year round
basis the first two or three years. And you are given an opinion and if you
think that the taxpayers and the average man that knows the hotel business
in that location... they positively are not giving you the right calculations.
They may mean good and they may have been told, but I don't think they are
experienced in this business. I have been in the hotel field... when I retired
from professional golf, I spent quite a few years as clerk, assistant manager
and manager. You are not getting the right calculation and Mayor, I'm going
to have to ask you these questions... what business did you do in these months?
Mayor Ferre: Ernie, you just make your statement and after you finish, you
sit down. I'm not going to get into a discussion or a debate with you.
Mr. Fannatto: Well, I think it's important Mayor, because if you are going
to take the taxpayers money and you are going to calculate eighty percent and
only do sixty, you are twenty percent behind.
Mayor Ferre: Ernie, we are not going on my opinion, we are going on the opinion
of a mortgage... a company which is going to lend twenty-six million dollars
and people that are going to buy thirty-six million dollars worth of bonds,
that's not my opinion. Now, would you finish your statement and please sit
down.
Mr. Fannatto: Yes, I would like to see at least an eighty percent capacity
instead of the taxpayer operation and getting lost in it. I don't believe
that they can do it and it's not right and the figures are not right in that
location. They positively won't do it and I am here to show them that the
figures are wrong and I don't have to be kidded on that. I don't think these
people are hotel people, I don't think any of them that I see are hotel people...
person here, but they are calculated... I have seen people calculating hotel
business and do you know eighty percent of the people who went into the
hotel business on Miami Beach went broke and do you know that Americana
didn't make it in their biggest hotel business on the Beach? Do you know,
the Fontainebleau was one of the biggest convention hotels on the Beach and
went broke? And do you know Mayor, you didn't do so good, not because... I'm
not blaming you because you had other problems, but you didn't do so good in
the hotel business. And Downtown you just can't make it, especially the first
two or three years when you are building up and if you think you are kidding
anybody, you're not kidding anybody but yourself.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, thank you, very much. Ernie, we are always happy to
have your opinion and believe me, we have a great deal of respect for you.
Mr. Fannatto: I have some experience in this field, Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, sir. Alright, is there anything else to come up before
this Commission? We now have item 27 before us.
Mr. Plummer: Let me understand on the record. Mr. Grassie, going through
very quickly section by section. Number one, is let you proceed to do the
work necessary, it does not give you any authorization to finalize. Number
two,...
Mayor Ferre: J. L., you got the resolution in front of you.
Mr. Plummer: I understand Mr. Mayor and that's what I'm reading from.
Section number two is to proceed with the preparation. Number three, is
only to retain the CPA. Number four, is a cause to be completed the plans.
and number five,is to renegotiate with the final terms to be brought back to
this Commission and number six, is to develop a financial concept and come
back to this Commission. Is that correct?
Mr. Grassie: Yes.
57
MAR 8 1979
Mr. Plummer:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Lacasa:
I Move twenty-seven.
Is there a second?
Second.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, it's been moved and seconded, further
the roll please.
discussion,
call
The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-157
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE ATTACHED
"FINANCIAL CONCEPT" FOR THE CITY OF
MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES L.
KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER AND
GARAGE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO PROCEED WITH THE CONCEPT AS OUTLINED
FOR THE SALE OF LEASE REVENUE OBLIGATIONS
(Here follows body of
in the Office of the
Upon being seconded by Commissioner
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
resolution, omitted here and on file
City Clerk).
Lacasa, the resolution was passed
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mayor Ferre: J. L., I don't want to hurt your feelings, but I want to just say
into the record that I am voting on the resolution the way it is written,
not on any interpretation of if. The resolution speaks very clearly for itself
and I don't think, you know,... I'm voting on the resolution and the answer
is yes.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor,...
Mayor Ferre: I'm not trying to... there are no tricks...
Mr. Plummer: ... if we are on semantics, let me read into the record so
there will be no misunderstanding. Section six, the City Manager is directed,
upon the completion of the work authorized above to bring to the Commission
the fully developed financial concept, based upon the legal requirements
and financial considerations necessary for approval by the Commission.
Mayor Ferre: Of course, that's exactly what the resolution says, you read
it accurately and that's exactly what I'm saying.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, ok. Ok.
Mayor Ferre: I agree. Anything else? Now, we have items, what?
Mr. Grassie: 28, 30, 31 and 32...
gl
58
AR 8 1971
15. Direct Law Department to acquire FEE SIMPLE TITLE to property for
CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE.
Mayor Ferre: 28. Alright, now with regards to 28. This is finding the
public need for acquiring certain properties to be used for the construction
of the Conference/Convention Center Garage, and directing the Law Department
to proceed to acquire fee simple title to this property. Mr. Connolly?
Mr. Connolly: Now, that's two out parcels required to complete the
garage which is the butler building and the lawyers building...
Mayor Ferre: Did you attempt to buy these... to negotiate these?
Mr. Connolly: We had... We had discussed it with them and both of them are
looking for us to initiate condemnation procedures.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, I see, ok, alright. Are there other questions?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Connolly, a question?
Mr. Connolly: I'm still looking for a negotiated sale, not a condemnation.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, sir, the question that I have is that there has been
some tack that the Butler Building being a historic building would in fact
be moved possibly to Lummus Park or some other location.
Mr. Connolly: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: What is the cost factor and who is paying it?
Mayor Ferre: We are paying for it.
Mr. Connolly: We have not negotiated that and I will tell you why. Ray
Butler wants us to pay him the value of the building and he in turn will
dedicate it to the Dade Heritage Trust or whoever will be.
I think they are negotiating that will at the moment, not the
Mayor Ferre: Well, you will come back to the Commission I would assume,...
Mr. Connolly: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: ... with all the facts before it's finalized and then the Commission
will have the final say on it.
Mr. Plummer: Alright.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, any further questions? Now, this is a resolution
which is before which is 28. The title, so we don't have any confusion reads,
a resolution finding and determining the public need and necessity for
acquiring the fee simple title to certain property described herein to
be used for the construction of the Conference/Convention Center Garage and
directing the City Law Department to institute and prosecute to a conclusion
all of the necessary legal actions to acquire the fee simple title to this
property as soon as it is legally possible, including the filing of a
declaration of taking. Now, is somebody going to move that?
Mr. Plummer: I'll move it, it's got to come back here for final approval.
Mayor Ferre: Plummer moves, Gibson seconds, further discussion, call the roll.
59
MAR 8 197g
f q
The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-158
A RESOLUTION FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC NEED
AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING THE FEE SIMPLE T]TLE TO
CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN TO BE USED FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE;
AND DIRECTING THE CITY LAW DEPARTMENT TO INSTITUTE AND
PROSECUTE TO A CONCLUSION ALL OF THE NECESSARY LEGAL
ACTIONS TO ACQUIRE THE FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THIS PROPERTY
AS SOON AS IT IS LEGALLY POSSIBLE, INCLUDING THE FILING
OF A DECLARATION OF TAKING.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Lacasa, Rev. Gibson, Vice -Mayor Plummer and Mayor Ferre.
NOES: Mrs. Gordon.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mrs. Gordon: I vote no, I have never been in favor of taking those parcels.
16. Approve issuance of Conditional Building Permit - FOUNDATION WORK
FOR CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER.
Mayor Ferre: Now, we are on item ##30 which is approving the issuance of
a conditional building permit for the construction of foundation work for
the Conference Convention Center. The City Manager recommends. Mr. Manager
or Mr. Connolly, excuse me.
Mr. Connolly: That's a request for temporary waiver of replatting. We have
had... We are (TNAt7DISLF) on Southeast 4th Street and we had
to change the building slightly. We have already started the platting process,
but (INAUDIBLE) ... process to go through the whole thing. In the meantime,
(INAUDIBLE) ... first foundation contract.
Mr. Plummer: This does not address itself to the garage?
Mr. Connolly: No, sir, it does not.
Mr. Plummer: I will move it.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion on 30, is there a second on item 30?
Mr. Lacasa: Second.
Mayor Ferre: Now, my packet does not have item 30, Mr. Homan.
Mr. Plummer: Your supplemental does.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, I,see. Would you give me a copy of it, please? You know,
this thing about getting supplementals the night before on these important
issues like this. Frankly, Mr. Grassie I don't see why we can't have something
as important as this at least a couple of days before. I don't... before I
vote on it I want to read the darn thing. I don't.... here is my supplemental,
I don't see it. When was it received in my office?
60
MAR 8
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Mine was received on March 7th.
Mayor Ferre: Wednesday, yesterday.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Wednesday morning.
Mayor Ferre: I think we should all take a moment to read this thing
make sure that... Ok, I have no problems. Alright, we have a motion
and a second by Gibson, are there any further discussion on item 30?
call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Vice -Mayor Plummer,
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-159
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A
CONDITIONAL BUILDING PERMIT TO PERMIT CONS-
TRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATION WORK REQUIRED FOR
THE CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES
L. KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER LOCATED AT
SOUTHEAST FOURTH STREET AND SOUTHEAST SECOND
AVENUE AS PER ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION,
SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS
SET FORTH BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND
THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF MIAMI,
AND SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT OF RECORDING
THE APPROVED PLAT WITH THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT
COURT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE
OF OCCUPANCY.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: None.
and
by Plummer
If not,
who moved
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
on file
passed and
17. Ratify City of Miami's action in EXTENDING PRIOR AGREEMENT WITH:
LANGAN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES - SOIL INVESTIGATION AT CONFERENCE/
CONVENTION CENTER.
Mayor Ferre: Now, we are at 31, ratifying the Manager's action to extend the
prior agreement with Langan Engineering Associates for soil investigation
services to the Conference Center, further authorizing the Manager to expend
no more than sixty-four thousand to compensate said firm for these services.
The Manager recommends. Is there a motion?
Rev. Gibson: Move.
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Lacasa:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
Alright, moved by Gibson, is there a second?
Second.
Seconded by Lacasa,...
What was the initial cost?
61
MAR 8 1171
Mr. Connolly: The initial cost for additional services which this is, was
not to exceed forty-five thousand.
Mr. Plummer: No, what was the initial cost?
Mr. Connolly: Approximately sixty totalled.
Mr. Plummer: Sixty- two?
Mr. Connolly: Totalled, sixty thousand dollars total. Now, out of the
twenty-five thousand that was spent and this... in the additional services
which is to come on a day to day basis and do field supervision of that
pile of dirt ana removal of the dirt and they also so additional tests for
us. I would just like to point out that this particular consultant has been
very cost effective in reducing the cost for the foundations by over seven
hundred thousand dollars.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion on item 31, call the roll.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-160
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND APPROVING
THE ACTION OF THE CITY MANAGER IN EXTENDING THE
PRIOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND LANGAN
ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR SOIL INVESTIGA-
TION SERVICES REQUIRED IN CONNECTION WITH THE
CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES L. KNIGHT
INTERNATIONAL CENTER, WITH THE EXTENSION CONSIST-
ING OF FURTHER SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AND
ONGOING MONITORING FUNCTIONS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION
PHASE; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXPEND AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $64,000 FROM THE
CONVENTION CENTER FUND TO COMPENSATE SAID FIRM FOR
THE ABOVE AUTHORIZED EXTENSION OF SERVICES.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
18. ACCEPT BID: BARTLETT CONSTRUCTION CO. - foundation work for
CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER.
Mayor Ferre: Now, on 32 Mr. Connolly.
Mr. Connolly: 32 was the foundation contract bids which came in 2 O'clock
Monday afternoon, there were two bids, the low bidder was Bartlett Construction
Company.
Mayor Ferre: Who?
Mr. Connolly: Bartlett Construction Company a local firm, for one million
four hundred thirty-five thousand dollars which is eleven thousand dollars
over our in-house estimate which is less than one percent over.
Mayor Ferre: Who was the second bidder?
62
LIAR 81979
Mr. Connolly: The second bidder was M. R.
Mayor Ferre: And what was their bid.
Mr. Connolly: One million six four eight.
Mayor Ferre: One million what?
Mr. Plummer: One million six four eight.
Mr. Connolly:
Six four eight.
Harrison.
Mayor Ferre: And how many other bidders were there?
Mr. Connolly: There were ten such sets... Valid contractors
only two responded.
Mayor Ferre: And these are the two bids?
Mr. Connolly: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: And they are
Mr. Connolly:
Mayor Ferre:
other was not
Mr. Connolly:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
bids.
picked up plans,
within the estimate which is, you know, eleven thousand...
Yes, sir, one percent.
.. within one percent and the difference between one and the
that substantial. The low bid was one million four thirty-five.
Yes.
I see, ok. Is there a motion on that?
I would like to see a copy of the other people that received
Mr. Connolly: I have a list (INAUDIBLE).
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there a motion? Do you want to wait for that?
Mr. Plummer: No, go ahead.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I'm asking for a motion. Does anybody...
Rev. Gibson: Move.
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Lacasa:
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
Mayor Ferre:
Alright, Gibson moves 32, is there a second?
Second.
Seconded by Lacasa. Do you want to see it before you vote J. L.?
No, go ahead I...
Alright, further discussion on 32, call the roll.
63
SAAR $ 1979
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-161
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF BARTLETT CONST. CO.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,435,000 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR FOUNDATION WORK
FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI
JAMES L. KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER PROJECT;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE CONVENTION CENTER
FUND; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you, very much gentlemen, good luck and I hope everything
proceeds as we have discussed. Did Mr. Walker leave? To Mr. Walker and the
Chamber our gratitude. Alright, thank you.
19. Discussion of possible amendment to Lease Agreement of RESTAURANT
CONCESSION AT BICENTENNIAL PARK.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, Rev. Jenkins now with our apologies, I hope we can
do this quickly because it's almost 1:30.
Rev. Jenkins: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, thank you, very very much for
your act of grace with consideration. Mr. Alan Porter, will address you who
is President of the Green & Porter Incorporated that has a contract with the
City. Mr. Porter?
Mr. Porter: Good morning Commissioners, we operate the concession at Bicentennial
Park. We were before you a year ago, about last July when we were awarded
the cafe. We didn't have an opportunity to speak then and now we are back with
a lot of grievances...
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Porter, I have one question before you proceed. Have you
given this list to the management?
Mr. Porter: He just got it.
Mayor Ferre: Is this the first time he has seen it?
Mr. Porter: But we have been working with Mr. Howard, Al Howard.
Mayor Ferre: Is Al Howard here? And you have not been able to come to a
conclusion with Mr. Howard?
Mr. Porter: At nothing for six months.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, when this matter first came up, I went to Mr. Bond
64
)tAR 8 1979
6
to try and get these men some relief, may be you ought to ask Mr. Bond. I1m
not so sure we really have... as a matter of fact, we have not read this.
I think out of fairness to us Mr. Bond you can address this problem.
Mr. Bond: I think we met in December initially with Father Gibson, Mr. Porter,
Talmadge Fair and myself. We recognized then that this corporation was on the
verge of possibly losing it's contract with the City and we are trying to
salvage it, particularly as a minority business. There have been some few
negotiations with... between the City management and the corporation. However,
I have not been advised of anything that has going on since that initial meeting.
I understand that the Urban League did involve itself by giving some advice in
the form of an unaudited... and I will quote to you what it says here, "the
accompanying balance sheet of Green & Porter Incorporated as of December 31,
1978 and related statements of income and deficit and retained earning for
the six months then end were not audited by me as it is signed by Earl Wallace,
Accountant. These financial statements are incomplete because they do not
include all the disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles,
including a statement of changes in financial positions. They should not be
used by anyone who is not a member of the company's management". Now, I was
made aware of the existence of this report and accompanying letter which is
dated February 6th on yesterday. Obviously the City management has not had
an opportunity to work with Mr. Porter and Mr. Green, but we are still eager
to do so. As of December 31st Porter & Green Incorporated were in the City's
debt by approximately twenty-nine hundred dollars. Now, no payments have been
received by the City since then, I know not what their debt is now. We originally
gave them a ninety day extension to make some arrangements to pay off the
debt, we have yet to receive any payment and I have yet to be further involved
in their negotiations. I think it would be appropriate for us to become more
involved in an effort to help this corporation serve the citizens who do use
Bicentennial Park.
Mr. Plummer: You know, Mr. Bond, thank God you weren't here and I can look you
straight in the eye, but Mr. Grassie, I got a problem with. I want to tell you
that, Mr. Porter or Mr. Green I'm sure will remember, one little yo yo Commissioner
sitting down here on the end explaining to certain people that the set of
specifications that were put forth really came to one sentence and I'm sure it's
in the minutes very clearly, you telling these people there any no way they can
make it. When you start delineating what degree the temperature of soup shall
be and you start delineating what the contents of a hot dog should be... I hate
to tell you, I told you so, I told you so.
Mr. Bond: Well, Mr. Commissioner, I think that the...
Mr. Plummer: Not you, you weren't here.
Mr. Porter: And may I say something. You told us so, he was right that the
place cannot make it on what is coming in the park, we are starving, we are
not making any money.
Mr. Plummer: That's a different problem Mr.... sir, that's a different problem.
Go ahead.
Mr. Porter: Well, any way let me say my case, you know, we have tried to get
on the Commission to do it the right way, but we weren't answered. Why? That's
my number one question. Why we couldn't come up like the other people and
talk and present our case. Why we were denied that? As of yesterday were
denied that. Ok, I frankly think it's a conspiracy of some sort to get us
out of the park. Although, we are taking a whipping, we are taking a beating,
ok we will settle that score. But any way the rent reduction came up to Mr.
Al Howard a month after we were in the concession. We cannot make it,
we would like a reduction. It has been prolonged until this moment and we are
going to be put out by the ninety day extension because we will be further
back in the hole and if it didn't come to the Commission, what, knock on the
door, you are evicted, non-payment of rent. That's a lie, we did pay two
thousand dollars, we strapped up two thousand dollars so they won't evict the
first time when this thing was confronted. Now, it's even further in the hole,
so we would like very much a rent reduction, so that we can continue to try to
operate the concession as a service to the citizens of Miami and there are
certain things we were told we would get to enable us to make more money which
one is on the list I gave you is rent, we would like to have that considered.
Two signs, we really need signs badly off of the Boulevard to let people know
65
00 8 179
we are down in the park and there is such a facility. We have plans for it
already from the architectures to specify what... we haven't heard anything
from them. The light bill is ridiculous, it's... we went in at about a hundred
twenty-five dollars and now it has doubled, tripled because of the other lighting
service that the Young America Boat is using in the park and that burden is on
us also. Like the security, we have no security. Anybody that runs an event
have all the Police and Park Rangers they like. When Portside Cafe want to
sponsor something, we have no security, we can't even get a Park Ranger. You
know, these are little things and really minor things that could be settled through
the City Manager's Office, but we are not heard. I have letters written to
Mr. Howard and the Manager in regards to these problems, you know. There is
a boat there renting service using the inside of the building. In the proposal
we were understanding that the place were designed for indoor and outdoor
dining. Someone else is in the building without our consent, we don't know
what they are paying, they are making money, the boat is going out every weekend,
people are paying ten to fifteen dollars and they are selling soft drinks on the
boat.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Bond, it's almost... we only have twenty minutes and it's
really not fair for the Commission to have lunch like this, so let's see if
we can bring this to a head quickly. What is your recommendation to us? You
and Mr. Al Howard.
Mr. Bond: We would like to continue to work with this corporation, if they
want to work with us. I have heard what he has had to say for the first time
today...
Mayor Ferre: Alright, would you personally get involved in this and you,
Mr. Howard? Both of you, if that's alright with you...
Mr. Bond: We are available, sir.
Mr. Porter: Well, Mr.
I'm a young man trying
with, I'm discouraged,
what are you going to.
Mayor, let me say something. I'm discouraged. Now,
to make it, you know, and the forces I have been dealing
I don't think they are going to work in good faith. So
.. we are doing a service to the park, right? Aren't we..
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Porter, I , I want to help you, I really want to
help you, but we are not going to make...
Mr. Porter: Well, I'm not too,... I'm not...
Mayor Ferre: Well, don't get discouraged. Now, you...
Mr. Porter: Really I am, we are beaten. So, what are we...
Mrs. Gordon: Alright, why don't we say, you work with them and come back in
thirty days and let us know how much progress have you made. Would that seem
reasonable Maurice?
Mayor Ferre: And then we will listen to you. If you come back and you haven't
been able to come to a satisfactory agreement Reverend, with Mr. Al Howard and
with Mr. Jack Bond, then you come back and you tell us and we will listen to
you at that time. Is that reasonable?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: Ok. Thank you, Reverend and thank you, Mr. Porter and good luck
to you.
Mr. Porter: Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Alright. Yes, sir, thank you, Deacon. Alright, ladies and gentlemen,
we are going to take a twenty minute recess now so we can quickly eat a sandwich
and then be back.
WHEREUPON the City Commission recessed at 1:40 P.M. and reconvened
at 2:15, with all members of the City Commission found to be
present.
66
IA AO 81979
Mayor Ferre: We do have an awful lot of things, we are way behind. Mr. Robert
Geddes... can we have some quite here please we are now in session. Would all
of you take your seats, that includes the Administration and the Law Department.
Now, sit down and keep quite please.
20. PERSONAL APPEARANCE: Robert Geddes - revised DOWNTOWN GOVERNMENT
CENTER MASTER PLAN.
Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, Mr. Geddes with our apologies for holding you
up this long, we realize that you have an airplane to catch and so we are
going to take you next at this time. We are now on Item (ID.
Mr. Geddes: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission,...
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir.
Mr. Geddes: ... I am pleased to be able to present to you and to appear before
you today, to present a progress report of the work that I have been doing on
the development of the Downtown Government Center and I emphasize that it is
a progress report because we are working with you and with the County and with
the staffs and with the State and so forth, to present a plan that will
continue to be developed for the Downtown Government Center. It's in no
way the final plan, it's in progress, there are lots of things that are happening
in it and I would like to, if I may, present to you today where it stands and
for your comments and review and for the review of your staffs. In doing that
I recognize that there are all sorts of problems, many of you, for example,
will know much more about some of the details than I do, on the other hand
I would like to present the general concept for your comment and review. In
doing so, if I may, I have small copies of the plan that's on the wall and I
would like to give these to you so you can look at them as well. Now, in
simplest terms, we have approach the design and the redesign in the coordinator's
role. That's the one that picks up from the existing condition and then moves
forward. Certain areas such as the precincts that have been allocated to the
City and the State, the County, the Cultural facilities, those are precincts
which were continuing to develop. We are also working with the Rapid Transit
System, the North/South System and the East/West System and we are working
with the attempt to create a coordinated set of open spaces of parks and streets
and plazas and walkways such as the Government Center can be formed together
and be useful for all the citizens who either work there or who visit it or
who are in the Downtown area. In order to do this to explain it to you, I
think I'm going to have to move to the drawings and if I may, without the aid
of the microphone, try to make the diagrams for you directly on the drawings,
with your permission I will do that.
Mr. Plummer: One of these days when we grow up and be big boys and travel
first-class, we will have a microphone that will move over.
Mr. Geddes: Thank you. 0r I can try to make this work.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Knowing the way this City operates, you are right, it will cost
a hundred fifty thousand for a thirty thousand dollar project, you are right.
(BACKGROUND COMMENTS OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Geddes: First of all I would like to show you the existing location and
some of the elements . First of all the existence of I-95. The
proposed North/South and East/West Rapid Transit Systems and then the existence
of some buildings that have already been built or are so far along in the
planning stages that they should be taken as part of planning process.
Mayor Ferre: Don't forget the parking garage.
67
'MAR g 1970
Mr. Geddes: Yes. The buildings that are drawn here are those which are
in existence or quite far along the planning process. The beginning of the
plan really was to recognize the agreement to have precincts, to have a City
area, a County area, a State area and so forth and I came quickly to conclude
that there was another advantage in trying to create a uniform harmony of architectural
style for all of them rather than seek a harmony between them, to have the City
buildings identified over the State buildings or the County buildings and not to
create in any sense of monolithic architectural style so that the precincts are
architecturally distinct, but will be harmonized by means of the overall
plan. The precincts that is now identified are City of Miami, County, State and
the cultural precincts. Now, in addition to the buildings, one of the most important
aspects of Cities and certainly of groups of buildings are the open spaces that are
formed by the buildings or the open spaces made by streets. And many of you have told
me of the importance of the landscape here, I know we have been depressed by the quality
of the plant materials, of teh effect that it has. Any of you who are on shaded streets
or know what it's like to be in a garden area, know how delightful it could be with
the help of the landscape materials. So we have been working to create as it were
a landscape plan, a plan of gardening and of walkways in the street as the framework
for design. The building themselves are made to fit into this framework, they are not
the primary element along, but they fit into it. And recognizing also, that in making
streets and walkways, that we connect to the surrouding neighborhoods, so that the
neighborhoods to the West, the North and to the South and East, in other words, can be
tied into the Government Center (INAUDIBLE)... but something the people can enter
and turn it into a walk through. So I will draw it in green with basic armatures
of the walkway system which we see and street trees and as walkways that people
can use to move through and into the Government Center. May I recognize you for
example, on the West the existence of Lummus Park and entrances on Flagler Street
and so forth. So that it would be possible to enter and move through the Government
Center and use it as part of everyday life. The central idea of the center is no
longer just a building or even a group of buildings for the central park. The park
which will be used by people at lunch time which will become the focus physically as
well as in terms of the activities of the center as a whole. Within that park there will
be a series of gardens like Viscaya, like the planting that's gone on at the airport
recently, like many examples of that type in the City. Now, with the combination of
the walkway systems and the organization of the building precincts and the two
transit lines that make the important locations for the transit station at the
Government Center stop. We recognized that the Government Center is going to have a
lot of activity in it and it will have a lot of people. There will be a need for the
parking garage and as well as transit facilities and then if will be capable of being
developed incrementally building by building piece by piece, block by block over a
considerable length of time. With respect to the City of Miami's precinct, we are
suggesting to you that the plan be phased such that the parking areas, the landscape
areas and the buildings would make a coherent whole and that they would face the
central park. In effect the City of Miami's part and these group of buildings would form
the Western side of the central park and would have the central portion on the Western
side of the park. The parking garage which would serve the City of Miami facilities,
would line on the West of all of I-95, so that in effect the cars would be taken care
of and then the buildings and then the park. In this sense we believe that the City of
Miami precinct will have a specific character in the Western where the Western side
of the entire Government Center. I know I must have skipped a lot of things that will
become important to me when you ask the questions, so I would like to, if I may, ask
for your questions to which I can respond.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, are there questions from members of the Commission.
Dean Geddes, let me ask you this questions. I notice that in the lot between
the Miami Police Department and the City of Miami's existing and future building
you have two garages, I assume those are garages. Is that correct?
Mr. Geddes: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, I also would conclude that the Miami Police Department
already has their garage and they don't need any more garage space. And the State
of Florida, I think, has covered their garage needs of their parking need for now.
Now, my question is, is it safe to assume that it would probably be good planning
practice to build the garage South of the City of Miami Administration Building
before we build the one in between the Police Department and the City Administration
Building?
Mr. Gedde: Now, just to understand the question exactly. Are you suggesting
whether it would be preferable to build this garage....
68
MAR a 1979•
i
Mayor Ferre: Yes, that's right. I... because you see, the one further South
is obviously closer to the Dade County Building, number one. Number two, it
would also serve the City of Miami and since the Cultural Center is going to
have it's own garage, it seems that, that would be a more used garage in
the beginning any way.
Mr. Geddes: We have a meeting scheduled at 2 O'clock today which I think we
will be able to do, which would...we will have it at 3 O'clock today then,
which would in fact deal with the very issues of the parking distribution
and the road system. The worse we have of that and the faking of it is one
of the key things that we will be working next. Now, I can't say at the
moment for certain in what phase it ought to be and in fact (INAUDIBLE)...
time goes along and we can find, we need to have less parking rather than
more parking. Our studies became actually the last on the Rapid Transit
System, it would be very effective, so we are hoping that what we are showing
here is the (INAUDIBLE).
Mayor Ferre: Precisely, that's the purpose of my question, that I would hope
that if we built the garage to the South rather than to the North, by the
time it comes time to build the garage in the North the Rapid Transit will
have proven that we won't need it, then therefore, that site will be either
available for more green space or for another future federal building or
other governmental buildings.
Mr. Geddes: That's certainly possible, very reasonable.
Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. Grassie, do we own fee simple to the... to that large
block where these two garages are indicated or have we pledge those to the
County?
Mr. Grassie: No, sir, we own them, they have been acquired through use of
the Police bond fund, so there is that restriction on it, but the City owns
them clear... without any encumbrance.
Mayor Ferre: We don't have any agreement with the County or anybody else
that they are going to put a garage or anything else on it?
Mr. Grassie: No, we don't. Commissioner Plummer, we are talking about the
block which is immediately South of the block occupied by the Miami Police
Department.
Mr. Plummer: That's from 3rd to to 4th Street?
Mr. Grassie: That is correct, sir.
Mr. Plummer: What is the... I can see that one is a parking structure. What
is the other building?
Mayor Ferre: Parking structure, they are both parking structures.
Mr. Geddes: The other building is an office structure.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, an office structure.
Mr. Geddes: Yes, there will be an office structure on top of the parking
structure,...
Mayor Ferre: Oh, I see.
Mr. Geddes: ... that's right, it's a combination. Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Where did that information come from?
Mr. Geddes: Which... I'm sorry?
Mr. Plummer: There is a building immediately South of the Police Department
on your drawing.
Mr. Gedde: It's shown as a potential site for a future office building. A
potential site for a future office building...
MAR 8 1979
69
Mr. Plummer: Alright, what is the building just East of the Administration
Building?
Mr. Geddes: What we are showing are potential sites in the future for office
buildings, whether for one Governmental Agency or another or shared or what
have you, but there has to be room for some future building, not an immediate
one.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, I'm just...
Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. Grassie, do we own the property to the East of the
present City Administration Building under construction?
Mr. Grassie: We own the part of that block Mayor which is shown as being
occupied by a City of Miami building, but we do not own the part which is
shown as being a formal garden immediately to East...
Mayor Ferre: Well, who owns that?
Mr. Grassie: Dade County.
Mayor Ferre: So in other words...
Mr. Plummer: You don't own that either.
Mayor Ferre: They do not own that?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, that building is 227 Northwest 2nd Street at
which I was in last evening and you don't own it, nor does the County.
Mr. Grassie: In the short run, you are correct Commissioner. The County
has an obligation to acquire that building and to give it to the City.
Mr. Plummer: We said that about Ed Ball forty years ago.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I would like to make a formal request then, of the Manager,
that at the next City Commission Meeting Mr. Manager, will you bring back a
drawing and a description of those three lots, starting with the Miami Police
Department and ending with the City of Miami Administration Building and let
us know what the status is of the property, who own it. And if the County
owns it, what their intentions are and if a private sector own it, when are
we going to acquire it and who is going to pay for it and all the information.
I think what's important out of this Dean Geddes, is that, I think you have
really solved this problem in a real classic sense and I mean that as a
compliment. And I think that you have given to this what was going to be,
in my opinion a monsterous Governmental Center a relief and a... you have
humanized it and you have made it a place where people are going to enjoy
being rather than regret being and I think you have done that in a very,
very intelligent way. You have put a cultural center at a focal point on
the South, unfortunately the State of Florida has a not to elegant building
as the focal point of the North, I would hope that our City of Miami building
will be a beautiful focal point on the West and I would hope the County
would do the same in their structures over on the East side. As I told
Father Gibson a moment ago, I think we've got the best location of all,
it's right off of the expressway, it's the first lot we get to when you get
off the expressway, it also is visible from the expressway and also it will
have the largest green area in front of it. So from every sense, I think
we are really grateful and I think this is just wonderful and I'm personally
very grateful.
Mr. Geddes: Thank you, very much.
Rev. Gibson: Let me make an...
Mayor Ferre: Father?
Rev. Gibson: Let me make an observation. I think the fact that we have that
tower dome on our building makes it stand out. I was very interested in
the comment you made earlier that... about the location of the City of
Miami property. I want to now make a further urgent. I hope that as we
develop, the State and the County and the Cultural and the City, that our
architecture will be separate and distinct, so that... you indicated in
your comment that, you know, we were not going to have one great big
conglomerate. I hope we don't get that lost in the grab process. I don't
know if I'm making myself clear. Alright, alright.
70
MAR 6 1979
Mr. Geddes: Well, let me respond to you entirely as an architect. I would
hope that each of the precincts has it's own character...
Rev. Gibson: Beautiful.
Mr. Geddes: ... and if it stands as such, then the park system and the
landscape will tie it together.
Rev. Gibson: Let me make the further suggestion. I would hope that you
will keep that ever before you and as you make your recommendations, you will
make it so that they would know thatIthat is the direction in which you
have led us to believe that you are going to be traveling because if I know
some of the Governmental people around here, soon or later they want us to
be not separate and apart from, but all, you know, engulfed in. Ok.
Mr. Geddes: Well, I'm responding as an architect and I...
Rev. Gibson: I know, I understand, but you see,...
Mr. Geddes: Let me, let me say...
Rev. Gibson: Let me add this...
Mr. Geddes: ... that Thomas Jefferson was an architect.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Rev. Gibson: Let me... no, no, let me add this. You know, that's when I
don't want to get into a quarrel with my parishioners, I say, I speak as the
Priest, you know, what I mean. So I know that language too, well. I know
that language too, well. I want to make sure, sir that as you go forth and
you will have our blessings, but make sure that the architect of the City of
Miami will continue to maintain it's own personal identity.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, thank you, Father. Thank you, Dean for your time.
Mr. Geddes: Thank you, very much.
21. OPEN SEALED BIDS: (a) Construction of NW 20 St. Area Sidewalk
Improvement B-4437; and (b) AVALON SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-
5453 C & S.
Mayor Ferre: Now, ladies and gentlemen, we have to take bids at this time
and then after that we are going to recognize some people that have been
waiting for a little while and then we will get on with the agenda. We are
now ladies and gentlemen, on Item #l4 which is the opening and reading of
sealed bids for the construction of Northwest 20th Street Area Sidewalk
Improvement B-4437. Mr. Plummer moves, Father Gibson seconds that the bids
be opened, further discussion, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Vice -Mayor Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-162
A MOTION TO OPEN SEALED BIDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF N. W. 20 STREET AREA SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT B-4437.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
71
MAR 8 1a'o
Mayor Ferre; Open the bids. How many bids do we have?
Ms. Hirai: The first one comes from J 6 J Enterprises, total bid thirty
thousand fifteen dollars. This bid comes from Russell Inc., total bid thirty-
eight thousand nine hundred sixty dollars, the next bid comes from PNM Corp.,
total bid thirty-one thousand eight hundred twelve dollars. This bid is
from T & N Construction Company, total bid thirty-five thousand three hundred
forty-two dollars. The next bid comes from New River Construction Company,
total bid is twenty-three thousand three hundred thirty-four dollars, a
bid from Marks Brothers Company, total bid forty-one thousand forty dollars,
a bid from Miri Construction Inc., total bid forty-one thousand eight hundred
dollars. These are all the bids recieved from the construction of this
first one that appears on the agenda. There is another one Mr. Mayor, that
has to be opened today, even though it was not on the agenda,
Mayor Ferre: Alright, would you tell us for the record, what item that is?
Mr. Plummer: It's not on the agenda.
Ms. Hirai: Yes. It was not on the agenda.
Mayor Ferre: No, just tell us what it is, please.
Ms. Hirai: Avalon Sanitary Sewer Improvement SR-5453 C 6 S.
Mayor Ferre: Was this properly advertised? Was this properly advertised?
Ms. Hirai: It has to have been. It has to have been.
Mayor Ferre: Excuse me?
Ms. Hirai: We received the thing from the department, it must have been.
Mayor Ferre: No, it's not must have been, I need a specific answer. Was
this properly advertised? Yes or no.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you. Alright, now, there is a motion by...
Rev. Gibson: I move.
Mayor Ferre: ... Father Gibson, second by Rose Gordon that we accept the
bids that you just read.
Mr. Plummer: No, we don't accept them.
Mayor Ferre: That we open them, I'm sorry.
Mr. Plummer: We open them.
Mayor Ferre: That we open the bids alright, further discussion, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Vice -Mayor Plummer, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-163
A MOTION TO OPEN SEALED BIDS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF AVALON SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5453- C&S.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
72
Ms. Hirai: This bid is from Roenca Corporation, total bid one million
four hundred forty-nine thousand nine hundred twenty-two seventy cents, a
bid from Giannetti Brothers Construction Corp., total bid one million three
hundred sixty-three thousand seven hundred sixteen dollars twenty-five cents,
a bid from Goodwin Inc., total bid one million one hundred sixty-three
thousand nine hundred forty-nine, a bid from Iacobelli Contracting Inc., total
bid one million three hundred forty-seven thousand one hundred forty-three,
a bid from Intercounty Construction Corp. of Florida, total bid one million
one hundred eighty-one thousand two hundred twenty-seven dollars. Mr. Mayor,
those are all the bids.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, any further questions on this, if not, thank you,
ladies and gentlemen.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: Yes, do you have a question?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: I can't hear you.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: On the last bid? Would you read the last bid?
Ms. Hirai: The last bid one million one hundred eighty-one thousand two
hundred twenty-seven.
Mayor Ferre: Ok. any further questions on these bids as are received.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: Alright, at this time we have some presentations to make.
22. DISCUSSION ITEM: In connection with Ordinance requiring PARTITIONS
IN TAXICABS (Temporarily Deferred).
Mr. Plummer: Since this request is may be going to take some time. Mr.
Manager, I would appreciate... I have received word from some of the people
in the taxi industry, who indicated to me great displeasure with that which
we passed today on second reading relating to the partition between the driver
and the passengers. I am fully aware that the department did not feel that,
that was an absolute requirement or did they feel that it was a good thing.
This Commission I'm sure acted because there were people here who purported
themselves to be representing the taxi industry as you might recall. There
are other people here who say that, that ain't true, they were representing
themselves. Now, it was my understanding that the Sergeant met with all of
these people on a number of occasions. And I would like to have, since I'm
going to ask that, that item be rebrought up this afternoon, that the Sergeant
be here and try to identify those people who came here purporting to be
representing the taxi industry because I feel I have been snookered.
Mrs. Gordon: J. L., I didn't vote on that because that was one you took up
before I got to the table,...
Mr. Plummer: Yes.
Mrs. Gordon: ... so I would then...
Mr. Plummer: Well, it was second reading, Rose.
Mrs. Gordon: ... since I didn't vote, bring it up.
Mr. Plummer: It was second reading, you know, but we... I and I'm sure the
73
I AR P 107i
rest of the Commission were under a theory that said, that these people were
here requesting it and they represented the industry.
Rev. Gibson: Right and because I'm...
Mr. Plummer: And the Sergeant indicated Father, they had met any number of
times about this problem.
Rev. Gibson: That's right.
Mr. Plummer: So I want those people here Mr. Grassie, when... you know, the
only one you can course is in-house...
Rev. Gibson: And the statement was made by me that if we didn't do anything
but save one life, it was worth every bit of it. Do you remember that?
Mayor Ferre: Alright, we are going to...
Mr. Plummer: Well, I just want all of the cards on top of the table.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, but in the meantime, it's now... we have made some people
wait about an hour, so we are going to now go to the presentations.
23. PLAQUES, PROCLAMATIONS AND SPECIAL ITEMS.
1. Presentation of a Proclamation designating Saturday, March 17,
1979 as Saint Partrick's Day to Messrs. Jack Casey and John
Shields, Co -Chairman of the Saint Partrick's Day Parade.
2. Presentation of a Commendation to the Trio Pinareno, who have
served as cultural ambassadors of Cuban folklore music throughout
the world for 50 years. The Commendation is being presented to
Mr. Ricardo Ferrer, member of the Trio.
3. Presentation of a Certificate of Appreciation to Mr. Ralph V.
Cook who is retiring after 14 1/2 years of service in various
departments of the City.
4. Presentation of a Commendation to Mr. Orlando Urra, Chairman of
the Allapattah Community Development Task Force, for his efforts
on behalf of the Allapattah Community and most especially for his
distribution of toys to needy youngsters during the christmas
season.
5. Personal appearance of Mr. Orlando Urra to discuss his proposal
for the use of Miami Fire Department's Old First Station No. 16,
74
MAR 8 19711
4
�Y.
24. Amend Ordinance 8858- FUND POSITION: "PUERTO RICAN OPPORTUNITY
CENTER" previously funded by CETA.
Mayor Ferre: 13. Does anybody have any problems on Item #13? Do you
want to move that so he can go?
Mr. Lacasa: Which one?
Mayor Ferre: 13, that's the transfer of... if it's controversial we will
put it off, but if it's not controversial let's move it.
Mr. Lacasa: I made a motion on that, on item 13.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, it's moved and seconded, further discussion on Item 13,
read the ordinance. Would you read 13?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, call the roll.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 1 AND 6 OF ORDINANCE
NO. 8858, ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 28, 1978, THE ANNUAL
APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER 30, 1979, AS AMENDED, BY INCREASING THE
APPROPRIATION FOR SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS,
SOCIAL SERVICE PROGRAMS IN AN AMOUNT OF $7,086; AND
BY INCREASING ANTICIPATED REVENUES, FEDERAL REVENUE
SHARING FUND BALANCE FISCAL YEAR 77-78 IN THE SAME
AMOUNT; FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING A PUERTO RICAN
OPPORTUNITY CENTER EMPLOYEE POSITION FORMERLY FUNDED
BY CETA; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DISPENSING WITH THE RE-
QUIREMENT OF READING SAME ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS BY
A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN FOUR -FIFTHS OF THE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMISSION.
Was introduced by Commissioner Lacasa and seconded by Commissioner Gibson
for adoption pursuant to Section 4, Paragraph (f) of the City Charter dispensing
with the requirement of reading same on two separate days by a vote of not less
than four -fifths of the members of the Commission -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Vice-Mavor J. L. Plummer. Jr.
Whereupon the Commission on motion of Commissioner Lacasa and seconded by
Commissioner Gibson, adopted said ordinance by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8912
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced
that copies were available to the members of the City Commission and copies were
available to the public.
MAR 8 1979
75
Mayor Ferre; Alright, anybody here on
Mr. Lacasa: That was passed.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there anybody here on Items 15 thru 26, raise your
hands? Alright, I see there is a lot of people that...
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: No, I'm just trying to get a feel of who is here for what,
Annette. Who is here on 15 because that seems to be the big one? 16, 17, 18,
19, 20, 21, 22, 23,... 20? 24, 25, 26? 26, alright. Alright, then is there
anybody that has to catch a plane or has an emergency that has to get out
of here, need something taken out of turn? Who is that?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC
Mayor Ferre: Excuse me?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC
Mayor Ferre: Item 15, authorizing
with outside counsel. What's your
Ms. Eisenberg: I have
Mayor Ferre: You have
Ms. Eisenberg: County
to get back
to get back
business.
RECORD)
RECORD)
the City Attorney to enter into an agreement
emergency for the record please?
to County business.
to what?
Mayor Ferre: Well, everybody has to get back to business, so that's not an
emergency.
Mr. Plummer: The County don't do no business.
Mayor Ferre: Does anybody have an emergency, a time constraint? Yes, sir?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: Alright, that's a valid... what item are you on? What item
are you on, please?
Mr. Plummer: The pension.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm sorry, I'm on Items 10 and 11.
Mayor Ferre: 10 and 11. Does anybody have any objections of taking 10 and 11
out of turn? You have an objection?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: Do you have an emergency?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: We all have business appointments and meetings, do you have an
emergency?
76
MAR g 1979
25 (A) RECONSIDERATION OF PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED ORDINANCE PROVIDING
EMPLOYEES*. RETIREMENT SYSTEM SHALL BE EYEES OF THE BOARD.
(B) EMPLOYEES OF RETIIREMENNTT PLAN CHAPTERRD.: AMEND HALBE EMPLOYE ETHE MPLOYEES OFODTHE BOARD PROVIDE
Mayor Ferre: All right, we'll take up items 10 and 11 then because he has...
Mr. Plummer: Ten has been passed, 11 was to be controversial.
Mayor Ferre: Well, you are entitled to speak on 10 and 11. Do you have any
problems with the Employees' Retirement System?
Mr. Robert Klausner: No, sir, I appeared at the last meeting when there was
a first reading and I spoke in favor of the passage and I understand that this
item was taken out of order this morning, number 10, and passed.
Mayor Ferre: Do you have any objections?
Mr. Klausner: No, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Does anybody have any objections?
Mr. Gunderson: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: You do.
Mr. Plummer: You didn't voice them this morning.
Mr. Gunderson: Oh, well...
Mr. Grassie: That's because you passed it too fast for us this morning, Com-
missioner. That argument is basically the same thing on 10 and 11.
Mayor Ferre: All right, if somebody wants to reconsider 10 I'm sure, the way
the rule stands here, that if somebody wants to reconsider this we can do it.
Go ahead. I guess we better start with you.
Mr. Gunderson: I have, Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, several basic
underlying questions relating to both of those ordinances. If you turn to page 2
of either one of them, under Section 3, at the very bottom, it says: "to ac-
complish the above responsibilities the Retirement Board is authorized to em-
ploy such City employees as required to accomplish the administrative responsi-
bilities of the Board. Said personnel shall be selected in the same manner as
all other City employees. c) Said personnel shall be responsible to the Retire-
ment Board subject to other ordinances, rules and regulations governing City
employees." Three provisions. Nothing here says that they are creating a
department. I understand that at any time that you are creating a new group
of people to work under a single function that a deparment would be a require-
ment. The other comment is in regard to 4) , right below it ,"Subject to
the approval of the City Commission, the functions described in subsection
2 may be contracted to an outside professional pension administrator." There is
nothing here or anything has been done regarding what would happen to present
City employees back in that Pension Program. There are four employees, three
permanent and 1 is a CETA employee. Secondly, there is no consideration made
in how the Accounting Department..the Finance Department is going to monitor
the accounting requirements as set forth further down in the same ordinance.
Under Section 5, below that, it says: "An administrative agreement may be
entered into between the Board and a City Department to perform the duties
subscribed in subsection 2." And it says, subsection 2: "...if any dispute
with reference to such agreement, the City Commission shall act as arbitrator
in settling said dispute." In this case, it permits the Boards to contract
for administrative services with any department, but under Section 293, above,
it permits the Board to select the employees and be responsible to the Retire-
ment Board or Boards. This is an intrusion into an operating department. If
you went outside and hired professional services you would not go out and
intrude in the professional service firms' selection of its own employees; in
this case, this ordinance permits such a latitude. Under 6, "In the event
that the Retirement System Board and the Retirement Plan Board decide to have
common employees a joint committee shall be formed to equal representation
from each Board for the selection and examination of said employees." This
permits each Board to have separate employees. This will immesurably increase
the cost of operation. The Finance Department is required to monitor accounting
methods without the benefit of having employees to perform such function. Unless
77
MAR 81%I
the function is supervised daily, the accounting function can be badly ad-
ministered without the knowledge of the Finance Department. To assure
accounting compliance it is necessary that the Finance Department have control,
and supervision and direction. My recommendation would be that of deferring
action on these ordinances until further study provides a viable alternative.
The study should include very specifically what the cost of each of these
propositions would be and the benefits to the entire Pension Program in those
terms. None of this information has ever been supplied to you upon which you
can act.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gunderson, on how many occasions was it requested?
Mr. Gunderson: I don't believe anybody has ever requested it.
Mr. Plummer: It's never been requested. You are fully aware, Mr. Gunderson,
that this was put forth, legal opinions were written, of which you were proferred
and which you wrote a legal opinion against, and you are standing here telling me
that you have never had the opportunity -you who sit on a Board- where this item
has been discussed forwards, backwards, and sidewards...
Mr. Gunderson: No, I misunderstood that question.
Mr. Plummer: ...no, sir, I understood your statement. You misunderstood my
question.
Mr. Gunderson: I said, I misunderstood your question. Let me...
Mr. Plummer: You leave the impression that this Commission is going to act
without any knowledge on the subject. I say to you, sir, if that is the case
you are very, very derelict in your duty as Finance Director of this City based
upon the premise that you have seen the legal opinion, wrote countermanding
legal opinion which...you are not the City Attorney, you sit on a Board where
this matter has been thrashed back and forth, and yet you have not written
one thing to this Commission knowing it is on the Agenda now for the second
time. You are now saying to us that you don't feel any compunction to write
such a letter exaplaining to this Commission -who might not be very familiar
as Mrs. Gordon and I, who deal with this day in and day out, for their considera-
tion. I don't understand that, Mr. Gunderson.
Mr. Gunderson: Okay, and I have an explanation.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, and I want to respond also, for you to respond at the same
time also to the fact that you made a trip to Tallahassee with regard to the
pension matters and wrote a letter to Mr. Grassie with a copy to Mr. Plummer
but not to me.
Mr. Plummer: Oh no, no, I'll get into that later, that's a different subject.
No, no, he never gave me a copy. He went to Tallahassee and testified on behalf
of the City of Miami. He never gave to you or I any copies as he did a report
to Mr. Grassie, nor did Mr. Grassie furnish copies to you or I or members of
this Commission reporting the City'. position. I happened to be embarrassed
in Tallahassee when I was asked the question: "Do you agree with what Mr.
Gunderson testified to up here before a Committee?". I said, number one, I
did not know Mr. Gunderson was here nor do I know what he testified to. I
came back to this City and had to dig to get a copy of what took place and I'll
go into that later. So, I just wanted to correct your statement, Rose, I did
not receive a copy.
Mrs. Gordon: Thank you, but the copy I looked at had your name at the bottom
and whether you got it or...
Mr. Plummer: That is correct, that is what I dug for and finally received.
Mr. Gunderson: First, in regards to the question that I misunderstood that you
asked. The review of this question has been carried on in terms of memorandums
and between myself, the City Attorney, and I've asked him to review it in light
of such and such which you have characterized as a countermanding legal opinion.
That's perfectly permissible, I guess. The point is that I proferred up Section 2.
Section 2 of both of these ordinances represent my contribution to the tire
ordinance and I would say 90% of that I wrote. So, I would indicate to you that
I did take into consideration, did offer all the people that were involved and
78
MAR R 1979
fully explained to every one the contents of what I thought should be done.
The Sections 3 and subsequent I did not participate in.
Mr. Plummer: I'm glad you delineated that. Now, aside from all of that,
Mr. Grassie, I assume I have your permission since you've asked him to speak
to question him, if not, I'll go through you, however you wish.
Mr. Grassie: You can question him directly, Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. Mr. Gunderson, you are aware of a legal opinion
from George Knox dated November 9 -Pension Administration?
Mr. Gunderson: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: All right, in there it clearly states that the general administra-
tion and responsibility for the operation of the Retirement System shall be vested
in a Board consisting of 9 members. You are aware of that.
Mr. Gunderson: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. Now, in light of that and your past subjects
how do you justify your argument against the creation of a separate entity?
I did not say a Department, I don't agree with your original statement.
Mr. Gunderson: My first comment.
Mr. Plummer: Your first comment, yes, sir.
Mr. Gunderson: ..is that I believe that under Section 19(a) of the Charter,
that the City Commission has previously followed that when you created the
Off -Street Parking Authority you created a Department in conjunction with
the creation of that by a special Act of legislation, but at each time that
you have had an operating Department, or an operating function within the
City it has always been within a Department to comply with that Charter provi-
sion. This ordinance, in my humble opinion, would be the creation of an
operating function within the City not so designated and still operating with
City employees, with all the City employees' rights, duties and regulations.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gunderson, based upon that which I just read to you from
Section 89, whose responsibility is on the line if something goes wrong?
Is it yours, the Finance Department's --and I speak of yours or the Finance
Department's as one-- or is it as it states here: "the responsibility of the
9 members of the Board"?
Mr. Gunderson: Well, I believe that you have, as this ordinance indicates,
a dual responsibility...
Mr. Plummer: No, not me, you,..as Finance Director and as a Board member.
Mr. Gunderson: No, as Finance Director, this ordinance specifically provides
that I have a certain responsibility to fulfill and that's clearly set forth
in the areas of 7, where it says: "all accounting methods, accounting records
maintained by the Board shall be kept in a manner prescribed by the Director of
Finance for all City Departments...", etc., etc. so I have a responsibility on
that.
Mr. Plummer: Wait, wait,...wait a minute, let's read that again, because maybe
you and I read something different here, it says: ...shall be kept in a man-
ner as prescribed by you, not that you shall administer, you shall prescribe
the manner in which they shall be kept, that's like setting down the rules and
the regulations which you have a full right to do and I don't have any dispute
with that.
Mr. Gunderson: Can I bring you down to the next sentence?
Mr. Plummer: Surely, please, you only read part of it so I'm speaking to that.
Mr. Gunderson: "...insure compliance with those methods..."
Mr. Plummer: I have no problem with that, sir.
Mr. Gunderson: Okay, but that's supervision.
79
MAR 81979
Fp
Mr. Grassie:
for the work.
Mr. Plummer:
an auditor.
Mrs. Gordon:
Mr. Plummer:
You can't insure compliance if you don't have responsibility
Oh, sure you can, sure you can, you serve in the capacity of
Exactly, that's the way I read it, that's exactly right.
Does not the Internal Audit come under your Department?
Mr. Gunderson: No, sir.
Mr. Plummer: They do not. Who is Internal Audit under?
Mr. Gunderson: Management and Budget.
Mr. Plummer: Which did not exist at the time this was put into the Charter.
Mr. Gunderson: No, that's correct.
Mr. Plummer: Okay. Let me conclude it, okay?, and they I'm going to shut up
and then Maurice can give his dissertation about Europe and everywhere else
and how they do it there, you know, but I'm going to shut up. Now, let me tell
you something. You've got your choice, Mr. Gunderson, as far as one individual
is concerned, okay? If my butt is hanging out on that line is one member...
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
Mrs. Gordon:
It usually is.
It usually is, and it's big and they can't miss it.
One good crack deserves another!
Mr. Plummer: I'm going to tell you that unless this is put in, I want no part
of it, because this here clearly states that I have one ninth of the responsi-
bility, and if I'm going to have one ninth of it, let me tell you something,
there is only one way I can be responsible and that's to control it, not some-
body else. Now, if they want to give the responsibility to you and take it com-
pletely away from me, that's a different ball game.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, I might remind you that I gave you the opportunity
to have one ninth of the responsibility on this Board several months and you
turned that one down.
Mr. Plummer: Which Board?
Mayor Ferre: On this Board, the City Commission.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I did not turn you down, the people who pay the tab
turned you down.
Mayor Ferre: I understand, Plummer, in other words you think it's better to
have one ninth than to have one fifth, right?
Mr. Plummer: No, sir, I didn't say that.
Mayor Ferre: All right, can we move along now? Do you have anything you
want to add to this?
Mr. Robert Klausner: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I'm Robert Klausner, I'm attorney, at
20 W. Flagler Street, Miami. I'm here representing the Fraternal Order of
Police and the General Employees, AFSCME 1907. I'd like to urge this Com-
mission very strongly to pass this ordinance. In 1976 the people of Florida
amended their Constitution to require that public pensions be actuarily sound...
Mayor Ferre: Ah,..counsellor,..I know that it is important for you to repre-
sent your clients well. I might remind you that both items 10 and 11 passed
on first reading. My guess is that they are going to pass on second reading
and unless you have an awful lot to say, you know, I'm sure that your clients
will recognize that you've done a good job.
Mr. Klausner: Well, Mr. Mayor, if I may just add a final statement. The State
legislature,effective last October 1st, mandated that all fiduciaries of public
80
MAR F 1979
funds have the authoty to control it. All that's Bing asked to be done is
to give the Board that authority.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we've already passed 10, now on item No. 11...who wants
to move second reading?
Mr. Plummer: I move it.
Mr. Lacasa: Second.
Mrs. Gordon: On number 10, which you passed this morning, before I got here,
record my vote affirmatively, please.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now, there has been a motion and a second on item 11,
call the roll, please.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF MIAMI EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
PLAN (ORDINANCE 5624 MAY 2, 1956, AS AMENDED), AS APPEARING IN
CODIFIED FORM AS PART OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, 1957, AS AMENDED, MORE PARTICULARLY AMENDING
SECTION 108 AS AMENDED, OF SAID CHAPTER 2, PROVIDING FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE RETIREMENT PLAN; PROVIDING THAT THE EM-
PLOYEES OF THE RETIREMENT PLAN SHALL BE EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD;
PROVIDING FOR THE EMPLOYMENT AND EVALUATION OF SAID EMPLOYEES;
PROVIDING FOR THE OPTION OF A JOINT SYSTEM/PLAN COMMITTEE FOR
THE MANAGEMENT OF SAID EMPLOYEES; PROVIDING, SUBJECT TO COMMISSION
APPROVAL FOR THE TRANSFER OF SAID ADMINISTRATION FUNCTIONS TO A
PROFESSIONAL PENSION ADMINISTRATION; PROVIDING FOR A UNIFORM
METHOD OF ACCOUNTING AND ACCOUNTING REVIEW BY THE DIRECTOR OF
FINANCE; CONTAINING A REPEALER CLAUSE, A SEVERABILITY PROVISION
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of February 22,
1979, it was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption.
On motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the ordinance
was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
SAID ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8913
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.
26. DISCUSSION OF JAMES GUNDERSON'S APPEARANCE IN TALLAHASSEE BEFORE
THE COMMITTEE OF PBTIREYENT PERSONNEL AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
MAKING RECOM ENDATIONS FOR PENSION BENEFITS MODIFICATION WITHOUT
COMMISSION APPROVAL.
Mr. Plummer: Now, Mr. Mayor, let me get into this other subject that Rose
broached a minute ago. Mr. Gunderson appeared in Tallahassee and testified
before a Committee on Pension. Mr. Gunderson, in his memo to Mr. Grassie,
indicates three methods of which is the City's position to rectify problems
of the Pension. I don't, at any time, recall this Commission setting policy.
I question a policy being proferred to a Committee that this Commission has
not had the opportunity to act upon. I don't know that I agree or disagree
but in one instance I definitely very much disagree. And I want to read into
the record that which was proferred by our Finance Director...
Mayor Ferre: Plummer, excuse me, I'd like to get a clarification of time, when Rt.
Mr. Plummer: This is dated February 7, 1979, and it was before the Committee c-►
of Retirement Personnel and Collective gaining,in Tallahassee, and let me
read into the record. This is a memo . Grassie from Mr. Gunderson, dated
did this all occur?
Rev. Gibson:
that's just the point, J. L., so, therefore, they had no right
to establish what the policy of the Commission ought to be, or is; that's
exactly the point I'm making, and when they are in doubt do you know who they
must ask?
Mr. Plummer: Right here.
Rev. Gibson: ...doggone right. I hope that's a clarion call for everybody
in the City's administration, and I'm through.
Mr. Plummer: May I correct the record, Mr. Mayor,...
Mayor Ferre:
J.L., we've got to...
Mr. Plummer: I've got to correct the record, I'm sorry. Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry,
Mr. Jaremko appeared at the same time you did, Mr. Gunderson, is that correct?
It is my understanding that it is exactly what Father is saying, that you two
basically disagreed with each other and left the Committee in a quandary, there
was contradictory testimony.
Mr. Gunderson: No.
Mr. Plummer: Anyhow, excuse me, I'm correcting the record that they both
appeared at the same time.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we are going to move along, now, and there was a group
of about 8 people on item C. All right, and then Mrs. Rockefeller and her group
are here on item 15, is that correct?
27. MARINAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
(a) ACCEPT STUDY BY GREE?ILEAF/TELESCA
(b) INITIATE STUDY OF WATERCRAFT TRANSIT
(c) REFER RECOMMENDATIONS TO WATERFRONT BOARD.
Mayor Ferre: Okay, let's take up item C, and then we'll take up 15.
Mr. Jim Reid: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Commission, Jim Reid, City Plan-
ning Director, I'm just going to briefly introduce the subject. John Greenleaf,
the City's consultant, is here to talk on a comprehensive Greenleaf develop-
ment study prepared by his firm. It was authorized by you in July of 1978.
We bad a progress report to the Commission in October of 1978. I'd like to
publicly thank members of the Marina Development Advisory Committee who were
asked by the Manager to help us on this study, Bob McTague is here from that
Committee, if Bob would stand up,..he's been here since 9 o'clock, he is the
citizen -volunteer member of that Committee, ve appreciated his help. We...
I'd like to call your attention to the fact that the Planning Advisory Board
did adopt this...requested the adoption of this study in principle last night
and in our memorandum to the City Commission ve have requested adoption in
principle and suggested that you should establish the Miami Waterfront Board,
you might seek their advice in bow to carry out this program, is you so desire.
One other thing I would like to read into the record is the names of the other
Advisory Committee members, who were citizen -volunteers: Alex Balfe, Thomas
inborn, Richard Cummings, Robert Fielder, Robert McTague and John Michel, and
now I turn the presentation over to John Greenleaf, of Greenleaf/Telesca.
Mr. John Greenleaf: Thank you, Jim. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the City
Commission, for giving me the opportunity of being here today. We would like
to present to you our study of the Marina potential of the various waterfront
properties owned by the City of Miami either on Biscayne Bay, Miami River or
Little River Canal. I have with me today the various team members that worked
on that study. I'm going to ask Mr. Robert Bentley, who was project manager
to make the presentation to you. I have the other team members here to answer
any specific questions that you may have regarding this study and taking into
account Commissioner's Plummer comments at the last meeting, this program has
been presented in such a way that it can be divided into small bids, and each'
bid acted upon on its own to in all a total combination package. Bob,
would you take over?
MAR 8197ir
Mr. Robert Bentley:
v�
February 7th:
"I made an appearance before the Retirement Subcommittee of the Florida
House Committee on Retirement Personnel and Collective Bargaining held
on February 6, 1979 in Tallahassee. I gave them a status report of the
City of Miami's Pension Program and offered several approaches towards
regulatory legislation to insure the financial security and solvency of
the City's plan. The measures recommended included the following:
(a) A modification of Chapter 112 of the Florida Statutes to limit
the maximum benefit under any Plan to 70% of the average compensa-
tion of the employee's last 5 years;
(b) The mandatory use of Chapter 175 and 185 Resources (1% of in-
surance premiums) to be applied to the unfunded liability of Police
and Fire Pension Systems;
(c) The adoption of assumption for mortality, normal cost and assessed
asset valuation. Establish legislative liaison with Mrs. itlice Witsen
attorney for the Florida League to follow up on proposals.
Now, this says Rose, and you are right, that I received a copy and I don't recall
getting a copy and we searched our files for it. I might stand corrected on that,
if I do I apologize. Mr. Grassie, let me just wrap this up by telling you that
I don't know of a single issue in the Police and Fire Department that is affecting
the personnel of both of those Departments with the possibility of the one percent
rule applied to insurance premiums, there is a proposal before the legislature now
to change that method of collection; here we have Mr. Gunderson, unilaterally, as
far as I know, which I'm opposed to,stating that this be changed,and I want to
tell you that as far as I'm concerned, I would like to have prepared for the next
meeting Mr. Gunderson's justification of this, I'd like this matter be brought out
on top of the table, there are rumors running rampant in the Police and Fire
Department about how the City is going to steal their money, how they are going
to take back what has been given and this only comes about because they don't
have the truth. I am hopeful, Mr. Mayor, that this matter will be brought up
before the next Commission meeting, it will be discussed and this Commission
will take a policy decision.
Mayor Ferre: All right.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor,...
Mrs. Gordon: The question also is, to Mr. Gunderson, I understand there is
another meeting of this Subcommittee taking place this month, are you...
and we are planning to go up there again on this.
Mr. Plummer: No, Rose, let me clarify that, there was a meeting yesterday,
I'm almost certain and we sent up Mr. Jaremko to represent our Board and to
testify.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to make an observation...
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir.
(INAUDIBLE COMMENT MADE OUT OF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: There is one more meeting?...Well, I'm...
Mrs. Gordon: I understand the 19th is scheduled for another meeting. Mr.
Gunderson, are you saying you are not going to go?...Your answer is no, you
are not going, you are not sending any one to represent you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there anything else? Father.
Rev. Gibson: I want to make an observation that is extremely important to
this Commission. We had a special Commission meeting n of more than two weeks
ago, or thereabouts, and I thought..I know this was done before, I thought I
indicated to the Commission what my fears and trepidations were. Every time
something like this happens, you deny me the right of telling a lie. I want
to make the observation, this is the second time a matter was referred to or
dealt within the State government thataffects people in the City, that the
Commission had one position and the Administration had another. I want to
serve warning to Mr. Grassie, what we would do in our church and our church
is built just like this government. The Bishop would call a meeting of all the
clergy and say -look, buddies this is the policy of the diocese now you have an
opportunity to either shape up or ship out. I'm not going to tolerate another
person working for the City giving a policy of the City that's contrary to what
the Commission's policy is.
Mr. Plummer: There was no policy.
83
MAR 8 1 7S
4
Mr. Robert Bentley: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, it's a welcome opportunity
that we are here today to present results of this six months study that we have
been involved with for the Comprehensive Marina Development potential of City
lands in the City of Miami. In authorizing the undertaking of this study,
I think that the City is to be commended in it's realization that it may very
well act as a catalyst in promoting the facilities necessary to serve the
recreational boating needs of the City of Miami. And for the City to reap
the benefits of the demands for pleasure boating in South Florida. Many
problems exist in providing marine facilities which by the nature of the
beast crosses many geographical and political boundaries and presently involve
numerous government agencies at every level, local, regional, State and
Federal. In many case the scope of development and operation is such that
local government, in the case of the City of Miami, must be the prime in
instigator or the prime mover for marina development and marina activity, after
which the City may lease or otherwise, contract with private enterprise to
operate management facility or create within it's own City Structure the
mechanisms by which the City is the primary operator. Typical of such conditions
may be the giant marinas in California where major restructuring of the whole
shore line to provide harbors, obviously could not have been done without the
efforts of local government. It's also true that in some areas like the City
of Chicago where dockage is desperately needed, it would virtually be impossible
to accommodation the demand for marina facilities without severe City involvement.
As recreational activities... as a recreational activity, marina development
is one of the few such activities that can be self -supportive, thus a prime
candidate for revenue supportive bonds, in addition to Federal, State, Grant
or finance programs. The economic benefits of boating extends far beyond the
pure need of recreational purposes. Dade County boaters spend an estimated
hundred million dollars every year for boating. Miami's tourist industry depends
on boating as a major element in a economic development. The tentative value
of boating in Dade County is estimated to be two million dollars if you include
the spin off related to other industrial and tourist opportunities in this
region. Again, I want to compliment the City of Miami on it's foresight in
undertaking a study of this nature as really the first step to implementing
a marine oriented recreational program for the boaters of Dade County. In
accomplishing the mandate set forth by our study, it was determined that
there was a shortage of some thirty-three or thirty-four hundred wet and
dry boats in the Miami area by 1985. Boat launching ramps in the Miami
area are operating at capacities during the summer weekend peak hours. This
demand will be increased as government regulation restricts home site storage
in the single family residential areas and apartment developments continue
which contains little or no space for providing for boats on a landside
arrangement. Marine repair and service facilities are needed to supplement
and replace those facilities that will alterndtely be dislodged by the economic
pressures along the Miami River. The redevelopment of the Miami River and
some of the recommendations by the McHarg Report, there is an indication that
ultimately other marine repair and maintenance facilities are going to be needed
at some other location. Of the thirty-five City owned sites, we made an
intensive evaluation, those sites are located on the chart over there. The
ones designated in yellow are sites that we felt had limited potential or no
great potential as far as comprehensive marine development. The ones indicated
by the orange spots some nine site, we feel are prime locations for some degree
of marine development and activity. Our participation with the staff of
several departments for the City of Miami, the Marine Advisory Board and the
Planning Advisory Board has been most fruitful in arriving at the conclusions
of our report. We have made extensive modifications to the study to incorporate
the input from these various groups. I will very briefly point out some of the
concepts that we have developed as development proposals in this study,
I won't go into them in any detail, you have the material provided with you
and should you have any questions after we finish our presentation, we will
be glad to answer them in some specific detail. We think that really there
is about three groups of projects that you might classify as by priority,
overall priority that are appropriate. Number one, is the development of
the Dinner Key area. Dinner Key in itself has for years been a focal point
of marine activity. We feel that this area still has potential for marine
development and optimization and we have suggested a program that we feel
appropriate for the development of the Dinner Key area. Associated with the
Dinner Key, of course, is a small expansion or small boat facilities in the
David Kennedy Park area. The second in this first category, would be the
development of Watson Island. The Watson Island development, of course, is
under a proposal for marine development by private enterprise in cooperation
with the City. We think extensive redevelopment, whether it be with the
theme park concepts as presently being proposed or as a separate marine development
84
VAR p 1474
4
exclusive of a theme park should that proposal not materialize, would be
appropriate. The third is the Miami Marina Bayfront Park proposal. The
Miami Marina itself from a design perspective does not appear to have major
expansion potential. However, we do think there is an opportunity for free
moorings along the Bayfront Park. This area has traditionally on a...
Mayor Ferre: Do you say three?
Mr. Plummer: Free.
Mr. Bentley: Free, free moorings.
Mr. Plummer: Well, it's not the opportunity sir, they are doing it right now.
Mr. Bentley: That is correct and I was getting to that, but periodically
there are vaga bonds moorings that is free, economically free, but the
concept we are proposing is moorings without fixed docks.
Mayor Ferre: For which we would charge, I assume.
Mr. Bentley: For which you would charge to control and operate out of the
Miami Marina Complex.
Mavf,77 Ferre: Right.
Mr. Bentley: If the Ball Point proposal proceeds through with some greater
intensity of both residential, commercial and tourist type development there,
this immediate demand for moorings in that area would be all the more
appropriate. The second kind of category that we talked about is the Virginia
Key. On Virginia Key there is an extensive land area that would be appropriate
for Marine development, both from the stand point of a marina and with some
limited moorings. There is presently a little cove that some fisherman are
using, a squatter kind of a thing. That cove we tnink ought to remain in
it's present character and tied in with an overall park plan that the City
already has under consideration. In addition to the development of the
marina in this area, we think this is a prime site for a marine industrial
park. With the phase out or the economic pressures to move out some of
commercial repair and maintenance facilities of the Miami River, we think that
some type of replacement of those activities would be appropriate in the form
of a marine industrial park located adjacent to the main marina on this site.
Mr. Plummer: The only oceanfront property that we own?
Mr. Bentley: This wouldn't be classified really as oceanfront, it faces primarily
inward towards Fishers Island, not towards the ocean. The marina itself is
towards the ocean...
Mr. Plummer: And you kept into consideration the cost of oceanfront property
and you still recommend that?
Mr. Bently: Well, let me point out that there is two proposals that is currently
on the way. One is for the development of a park or a major portion of the
island. I think park development is appropriate in relation to the waste
water treatment facility that is presently there and I think that waste
water treatment facility does limit the potential for oceanfront development
that might occur on this particular site.
Mr. Plummer: That's only ten percent of the acreage. That's a hundred ten
acres out of a thousand forty-seven.
Mr. Bentley: This particular site, however, is closely related or associated
physically with the waste water treatment facility. If the City comes up with
a better proposal and these are proposals and concepts, now if there is a
better more appropriate use for this property, we feel that at least with whatever
use this property is put to that marine activities ought to be included in
whatever proposals are there, because we think it has marine potential and the
opportunity for marine development.
Mr. Plummer: How do you get the boats in and out?
Mr. Bentley: There is a channel that does go... tie in back over into Fisherman's
85
tAt S 1979
cut and also ties in over to the Government cut.
Mr. Plummer: Did you go through that channel?
Mr. Bentley: We have been through the channel.
Mr. Plummer: How deep is it?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mayor Ferre: When the tide is up or down?
Mr. Bentley:
Mr. Plummer:
Mr. Bentley:
Mayor Ferre:
Fourteen feet.
How much?
Fourteen feet.
Yes, there is a channel there.
Mr. Plummer: There is a channel running along sort of Island, but
there is no channel over.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: That's right.
(Unidentified)There is no water around here, this is very shallow.
Mr. Plummer: Low tide you can't even ,,t across in an outboard.
Mr. Bentley: You do not have open in access from that site, we have channel
access.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: But there is no access to the island itself by anything more
than a five foot draft?
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Plummer: Four foot, yes and they dig the channel every time they go in
and out.
(BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD)
Mr. Bentley:
in terms of a
opportunities
Mr. Plummer:
orientated, I
The details of the proposal ultimately ought to be developed
detailed overall development program. We have pointed out the
and we feel this is a real opportunity.
Oh, I agree that it's an opportunity for something marine
agree with that.
Mayor Ferre: Well, let's move along because we are not going to decide that
today any way. Go ahead.
Mr. Bentley: Ok, within the second category we also have Magnolia Park and
Magnolia Park, we think is appropriate for some limited... a small marine
facility to be located at this site and there is sufficient water depth in
there and access to the inter -coastal and this would make the site for a small
marina at that location.
Mr. Plummer: That's just North of 36th Street?
Mayor Ferre: Yes, that's right South of Baypoint.
Mr. Bentley: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, I agree.
Mr. Bentley: That's correct. In the next group of sites, we have Morningside.
Morningside was presently developed for recreational purposes and has a
multi -recreational use at the present time. We don't feel that the site has
been totally utilized in terms of it's marine potential or other recreational
86
NOR 8 14"
activity potential. Therefore, we are proposing that further development of
this in terms of a marina oriented activities would be appropriate. This would
include the development of a marina for small boats, small marina for small
boats, some additional ramp space and some dry boat storage. And this could
be done as all of these proposals could be done on a phase or a basis. In
addition to the... to that site we have Margaret Pace. At Margaret Pace
site which is currently, except for you might classify it as purely open space,
it is really under utilized at the present time as a park. In taking into
consideration some of the input given to us by members of the various Committees
and Boards, the intent there is that over a period of time you are going
to have intensely and more intense landside development in terms of commercial
and residential development in this particular area. The idea is to attempt
to maintain the openness or the open feeling of a major portion or most of the
park area that exist there at the present time. This would make a good location
for a marina as well as some dry boat storage with access out into the inter -
coastal waterway and there is deep enough water there and we feel that this
would make an excellent park.
Mr. Plummer: Are you aware just to the South of there?
Mr. Bentley: Yes, we are.
Mr. Plummer: You know, when... it is my...
Mr. Bentley: (INAUDIBLE).
Mayor Ferre: Let's move along because...
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but it's my idea that your study was encompass all availability
and projections for the future and...
Mayor Ferre: No, this is City owned land.
Mr. Plummer: Were you limited just to that?
Mr. Bentley: City owned land, yes.
Mr. Plummer: Because there is a five hundred boat marina going in just to the
South which is not even shown there.
Mr. Bentley: That is correct.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, City owned land.
Mr. Bentley: This is only for City properties, was the limit of our study.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, let me ask one quick question. Did you also do the
study your firm -.for the County and their marinas?
Mr. Bentley: No, we did not.
Mr. Plummer: You did not. Did you take their plan into consideration at
all?
Mr. Bentley: We have reviewed their report extensively and utilized that as
part of the background information for preparing this study.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, fine, thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Would you wind up your presentation?
Mr. Bentley: Ok.
Mayor Ferre: Because now, I know it's an important subject, we can spend
four hours and justify it, but there are a lot of people...
Mr. Bentley: That is correct and I will try to summarize it very briefly, if
I may, there is a couple of key points I do want to make and then I will wind
it up. In addition to the specific marine potential that we have indicated,
these major sites, we feel that there is an extreme need for protected storm
moorings during hurricane or storm conditions. We have not, as a part of this
study, gone into detail of this provision, but we do recommend as a part of
our recommendations, that the City in conjunction with Dade County undertake
a study to provide refuge storm refuges during hurricanes. And the second
item is on some of the minor sites such as... well, there is a few of these
off shore islands and there is a few sites that would be appropriate to
'MAP q !aim
87
0
provide some limited mooring facilities so that you could provide a waterside
access to park areas and have a greater utilization of those parks by creating
water access to them as well as land access. Ok, the program is very flexible
it can be accommodated in phases and parts as funds and grants become available.
We feel that the program is feasible with certain conditions and constraints
as indicated by the model proformas that we have prepared as a part of our
report. In essence and in conclusion, our recommendations are that the City
establish a detailed development program, including the assignment of a
qualified project manager to carry -out... to establish and carry -out this
detailed development program and to arrange and evaluate the priorities, the
present funding and management arrangements as well as the processing and
assisting the processing of the required permits and the undertaking of the
inter -governmental activities. Second is to pursue and development of the
secondary sites in cooperation with other City departments, even Parks and
Recreation Departments. And in cooperation with the County, undertake an
indepth study of the potential for a marine transit arrangement because we
feel that as another motor transportation, that watercraft has left potential
and should be incorporated if feasible into the plans and proposals for the
various marina sites that we have here and I think that the study ought to
be undertaken by the City in conjunction with the County to determine it's
feasibility. We have... in conclusion it's been a welcome opportunity to
undertake this study and I appreciate the opportunity to participate in it
and if we can be of any assistance in the future in helping you establish a
program and carry -out your, we are available. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, members of the Commission?
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I want to commend them on this report and particularly
that part of the recommendations are the waterborne transit study because
I think it's about four years, may be five years we have been talking about
what we feel would be an alternate source of transportation for this area being
utilization of the water frontage that we have and not just within the boundaries
of the City of Miami, but in conjunction with Dade County, North and South and
Miami Beach to the East. So Mr. Mayor, what procedure do you want us to take?
I would like to move particularly the watercraft transit study as an item for
further consultation with Dade County and Miami Beach.
Mayor Ferre: Rose, I will recognize you for that, but my recommendation is,
if you will notice the resolution, I think we've got to be a little bit careful
because we are about to create a Water Board and Joe, I think what we ought to
do in my personal opinion is, that we ought to accept this report as submitted
and send it on to both the Administration and to the Water Board for them to
discuss, study, hold public hearings if they will and then come back with a
specific recommendation at which time we will then adopt a master plan for
the development of all these waterfront properties. I think for us to act
otherwise, I think would not be in keeping with what we just did several weeks
ago. So I think that would be the procedure that we should follow and I would
recommend, Rose, that in your motion you amend it to that.
Mrs. Gordon: I would accept that we receive this report and that would be
motion, that's what you asked us to do...
Mayor Ferre: Well, we can do it all together because it's not that...
Mrs. Gordon: Ok.
Mayor Ferre: Go ahead.
Mrs. Gordon: And that we in addition form a joint City Waterfront Transit,
not form, but proceed to obtain a transit study because that's something that
has to be taken care of as an individual item in cooperation with Dade County.
Mayor Ferre: But I think that's something that we should take the initiative
on...
Mrs. Gordon: That's what I'm trying to say. We...
Mayor Ferre... and if the County would like to participate and that we would
welcome that participation, but I think if they don't want to participate
on it, that should not hold us back.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, then I would move that we accept this report and that we
initiate the watercraft transit study for a feasibility of such a program
and to what extent watercraft transit should be considered in the marina
88
*MAR 8 197q
development program for the City of Miami and what roles would be played by the
public and private sector.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, how about the rest of the recommendations?
Mrs. Gordon: I thought you just wanted us to accept this report. I'm willing
to go with these recommendations because I think they are in line with what
we wanted to see happen and...
Mayor Ferre: Ok and that we also give the opportunity to our new water front
Board to study the proposal and hold public hearings and come back with a
recommendation?
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, the only thing I don't want to see us hold off is to start
working on getting a study on the watercraft transit because that in itself
will take time.
Mayor Ferre: I agree with that.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok, then I will move it that way.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is that clear to everybody what we are moving? Do
you have any questions? Father?
Rev. Gibson: Let me ask, some of the people who were involved in that Committee.
I would like to know, what does this do to you? You see, I don't want us to
take an action this way and then they will take an action... I would not be
opposed to accepting the report, turning it over to the Committee just so they
don't think we are kidding, you know what I mean?
Mayor Ferre: Well, that's the thrust of her motion.
Rev. Gibson: Is that right, Rose?
Mrs. Gordon: I should do this. We accept this report, ok, number one. Number
two,that we proceed, you know, to initiate the watercraft transit study because
that's going to take time and really it should not be held up and then, three,
that we accept the other six recommendations that are in this report and I will
read them to you so there will be no misunderstanding of what we are doing.
It's an implementation. This study recommends an implementation program for
the comprehensive development of marinas and marine oriented projects. Two,
public hearings should be held before the Planning Advisory Board and City
Commission approving in principle the Comprehensive Marina Development Study,
that's what I just said we should do, in principle. A Project Manager should
be appointed to carry out recommendations of the study. A detailed development
program should be formulated for each project, including design plans, sources
of funding, management arrangements, and permitting requirements. Programs
for seconday sites should be incorporated into the park and recreation program
to provide or improve water access to indicated park or potential park areas.
Six, a cooperative program should be entered into with Dade County to establish
storm refuge moorings in protected areas.
Mayor Ferre: And a City watercraft transit...
Mrs. Gordon: That was the separate one...
Mayor Ferre: Oh, I'm sorry.
Mrs. Gordon:
Mayor Ferre:
Rev. Gibson:
a Board... a
Mayor Ferre:
other words,
it.
Mrs. Gordon:
... was leaving that as a single item.
Ok, I got you, alright.
Mr. Mayor, you may well do this, but I find it hard to talk about
Committee just a few days ago...
That's what I just said. You see, look, I just said that. In
all we are really doing is accepting the report, they have finished
The report, right.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, we are accepting it in principle and then what
AR 8 197%
S9
we are doing is, we are turning it over to the Administration and to the Water
Board, Waterfront Board, that we have just established to hold public hearings
and to come back to this Commission with specific recommendations.
Rev. Gibson: Alright, I go that far.
Mayor Ferre: Period...
Rev. Gibson: Now, look... but that is not what she said. Read those other
things you said.
Mrs. Gordon: I'm reading from the summary...
Rev. Gibson: No, no, no, read the other things because if I'm going to accept
the recommendations, what you are asking me to do is to preempt those people.
Mrs. Gordon: Alright, here...
Rev. Gibson: And all I'm saying is I want to make sure. And you know, about
establish a project manager and...
Mrs. Gordon: Ok, Father, I read this from the report after the Mayor suggested
that we go along with those recommendations. I personally would like us to
accept this report in principle and in addition, positively proceed for a
study on the City/County watercraft transit, that's really what I would like
to do.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Rose, if you make it motion►►A►►that we receive the report
as completed and refer it to the Waterfront Committee period.
Rev. Gibson: I will buy that right now.
Mr. Plummer: Ok? Then a second motion is, that you instigate a study for
the purposes of water orientated transportation"BV period. I think that will
pass, it will fly.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok, I move that one.
Rev. Gibson: I'll buy that...
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now I want to accept these amendments, but I want to
further say that these people have been studying this... this goes back to...
as far back as I recall as Paul Andrews. This is how far back this goes and
then when Mr....
Mr. Plummer: No, no, no.
Mayor Ferre: Oh, yes.
Mr. Plummer: You are talking about water transportation?
Mayor Ferre: Water transportation goes back five or six years and God knows
longer. And this particular study I might remind you was discussed with
Paul Andrews and Paul Andrews said that "well, we ought to hold back because
the County is making the report". Was that with you? And then Mr. Grassie,
said let's hold back because the County is making a report and we have been
holding back now for two and a half years. Now, let me tell you, the City
of Miami doesn't get things done because what normally takes one month, you
know, we are like that sign you gave me Plummer about elephants, the gestation
period around here, instead of being nine months is usually two years and
just to get anything done around here it takes forever. I would... I'm going
to go along with both of you and I'm going to vote "yes" on A and vote "yes"
on B. I would hope and if not I'm going to make the motions on A, B, C and D
pursuant to the Board's quick approval of that, that those things be implemented
so that they don't have to waste anymore time and come back to us and what
have you. Because otherwise, we are just going to get... it will be another
year before this comes before us.
Mrs. Gordon: Unfortunately, that is true, that would happen, it would be
delayed unnecessarily. I will make the motion any way, I just want to get the
ball rolling. I want to move this thing along because I think we have wasted
too much time.
Mayor Ferre: Let's do it by sections to see how far we can go and I got a
MAR 8 1979
0
a feeling we may not have votes to do it all, so let's see what we can do.
Go ahead.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok, the first one was as Mr. Plummer wished it to be and that
was to accept the report.
Mr. Plummer: No, to receive the report as completed, there is a difference.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok, I will use your language.
Mr. Plummer: That's so they can get paid.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, receive the report as submitted, is there a second?
Mr. Plummer: As completed.
Rev. Gibson: Second.
Mayor Ferre: There is a second, further discussion, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-164
A MOTION THAT THE RECENT STUDY COMPLETED BY GREENLEAF-TELESCA
OF A MARINAS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI BE ACCEPTED
AS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION MARCH 8, 1979 AND THAT
THESE MATTERS BE TURNED OVER TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATION AND TO
THE NEWLY CREATED CITY OF MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD SO THAT THEY
CAN CONDUCT THE NECESSARY PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COME BACK TO THE
CITY COMMISSION WITH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mrs. Gordon: And the second one would be the City initiate the watercraft
transit study and to determine the feasibility of such a program and to what
extent watercraft transit should be considered in the marina development
program for the City of Miami and what role shall be played by the public and
private sector.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there a second? Is there a second?
Mr. Plummer: Well, wait a minute now, repeat it...
Mrs. Gordon: That's just for a study of the waterborne transit idea, that's
all.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Rose, if what you are saying is for the staff to gather
together that which will be needed so that we can know what the cost will be,
how long the time frames and everything like that, I will second the motion.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, and how it would be done.
Mr. Plummer: But I'm not giving them Carter Blanche to go ahead and do it,
just...
Mrs. Gordon: No, they can't. The study...
Mayor Ferre: Now, I would assume... they would have to come back to this
Commission and submit a proposal and somebody to do the study.
Mrs. Gordon: Somebody has to.
91
'WAR 8 1979
4
Mr. Plummer: Yes, fine, I will second that motion.
Mrs. Gordon: It's got to be done.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, further discussion on that motion, call the roll. Mem
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption.
MOTION NO. 79-165
A MOTION THAT THE CITY PROCEED TO INITIATE A
STUDY OF THE WATERCRAFT TRANSIT TO DETERMINE THE
FEASIBILITY OF SUCH A PROGRAM AND TO DETERMINE
TO WHAT EXTENT THAT PROGRAM SHOULD BE CONSIDERED
IN THE CITY OF MIAMI.
Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Plummer, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, anything else?
Mrs. Gordon: Well, there were several others that I don't believe would be
harmful if we adopted them of the recommendations.
Mayor Ferre: Well, make your motion, see if they fly. Or sail, I guess is a
better word.
Mrs. Gordon: In fact, all of them should be indicated as being items that
we are referring to our Waterfront Board for consideration, basically, I
hate to say it because you guys will probably jump on the idea as being
adverse, but I would like to say, I personally approve of them.
Mayor Ferre: Approve of what?
Mrs. Gordon: The recommendations one thru six and refer them for consideration
to the Waterfront Board.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that's what you have done in your first motion.
Mrs. Gordon: No, we just received these, we didn't say how we felt about.
Mr. Plummer: And referred the...
Mrs. Gordon: I would like to say that I, you know, would like to see these
things done subject to their approval, so therefore they don't have to come
back and forth a half dozen times.
Mr. Plummer: Write them a personal letter.
Mrs. Gordon: In other words, if the Waterfront Board does not disagree with
one thru six, then it would come into being, they would come into being, that's
what I'm saying basically.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, do we have a second on that motion and then we will
discuss it?
Mr. Lacasa: I will second that for the sake of discussion.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, under discussion, is there anybody... Well, I would
like to make a statement on this. Let me see if I understand your intentions
properly, Rose. On items one thru six or on our agenda see A, B, C. and D
with the exception of E which we have already passed which is the transit
study, we in effect would accept that in principle provided it got the green
1
92
MAR 8 1979
stamp of approval from the Waterfront Board once they are constituted. Now,
this does not speak at all to the nine locations that I like to refer to as
the Lee Hills, Alva H. Chapman, John McMullin, Fred Sherman and sam Jacobs
Marina.
Mrs. Gordon: There weren't a Maurice Ferre one either. No, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Now, don't pick on McMullin Island.
Mrs. Gordon: I'm not referring to any specific portions and I know that you
weren't name them right, but... not for posterity any way, but no as I was
just simple indicating to the Waterfront Board that no we are not, at least
I'm not, in opposition to the recommendations, if they find no opposition
to them, then they can go ahead, you know.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, but you see, there are two items and that's what I'm trying
to clarify. One is recommendations like a detailed development program to
be formulated for each recommended project including plans, funding and
management and permitting, water access would be provided or improved to
serve the secondary sites etc., etc. Now, those are items which I would
hope the Water Board would come to a conclusion on.
Mrs. Gordon: I wasn't reading this...
Mayor Ferre: Now,... let me finish. Now, with regards to the nine locations
that are specifically expressed, I would hope that the Water Board would
hold public hearings so that the neighbors and the people involved in each
one of these recommended locations could be heard and you would come up with
specific approval or disapproval with recommendations that at the Margaret
Pace Park we do such and such or that you recommend this or that, that this
other location would have such and such and recommend this or that. Now,
that's the way I understand the thrust of the motion.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I wasn't reading from the agenda which you were
referring to. I was reading from the study itself which is not as delineated
as it is in the agenda item.
Mayor Ferre: Well, the study itself... I mean, I'm sorry, the agenda itself
comes from the study.
Mrs. Gordon: It's not exactly the same way in the...
Mayor Ferre: Well, then Mr. Reid... Mr. Reid?
Mrs. Gordon: Because first of all, in the study itself there are six items
and here you only have four, you know there has been a change.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Reid, would you clarify this? What Mrs. Gordon is saying
is that the study is recommending six items and your memorandum recommends
five.
Mrs. Gordon: There has been a change there.
Mayor Ferre: Are they different? Why didn't you use the same language and
the same numerology that the study used, so that we don't get confusion?
Mrs. Gordon: I was looking at summary three, Mr. Reid, so you will know
what I was looking at.
Mr. Reid: The... I'm sorry that there is confusion between the language of
the memorandum and the detailed spelling out of the recommendations in the
study. I don't think there is anything in conflict in either of the...
either the memorandum or the stated recommendations. In other words, both
formulations of them are acceptable...
Mayor Ferre: No, no, that's not the question. Mr. Reid, are the A thru
D or thru E in your study recommendations the same as those in the study
itself?
Mr. Reid: No, they are different, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Ok, then Mrs. Gordon is right. I guess we have to get into
93
'MAR a t074
it. Tell us where they are different.
Mr. Reid: The...
Mayor Ferre: In other words, let me understand this right. You are telling
me you've gone out and you've asked for there people to make a study, they've
come back with a study that they have recommended to un, you want us in this
resolution that you presented to us, approving in principle the Comprehensive
Marine Development Study ar guide to City agencies, Boards and Departments
and directing the Manager to report back to the Commission appropriate
implementing steps. And then you are not following what they are recommending
because they've got six things and you got five and yours are different from
theirs.
Mr. Reid: We are following exactly what they are recommending Mr. Mayor. The
only thing that we have not done is suggest the public hearing should be held
before the Planning Advisory Board and the City Commission approving the
study in principle doesn't pass exactly what we did last night before the
Planning Advisory Board and that's what we are in the process of doing here
today. So there is some slight differences in the process, in terms of the
substance of the recommendations, there is no difference.
Mayor Ferre: I see, ok. With the exception of that, then they are the same?
Mrs. Gordon: Well, #t5 is different on here.
Mr. Reid: There is no difference in the recommendation, the substance...
there is difference in the language in which the recommendation is phrased.
For example...
Mayor Ferre: Do you have any objections for us to use the language of the
report?
Mr. Reid: Not at all, Mr. Mayor, we are completely comfortable with the
report.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Well, with the exception of #2 which, of course, we would
leave out, we could accept the other items that are in the report.
Mayor Ferre: Yes. Is that the way... that's the thrust of your motion?
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, that's right...
Mayor Ferre: Ok.
Mrs. Gordon: ... because I was referring to the report that came from the
consultant.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there any problem with that, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: None at all, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, we need a second on the motion. Does anybody else have
any...
Mr. Lacasa: I will second the motion.
Mayor Ferre: Does anybody else have anything else to say on this? Alright,
further discussion on this item? Joanne? Yes, sir.
Mr. Bentley: A little slight matter of clarification, Mr. Mayor. You mentioned
working with the... through the Board with the local community in developing
a plan and so forth. As a part of the recommendations, we are recommending a
development program and we think this program has to be prepared in order to
take...
Mayor Ferre: Sir, that is for you after this resolution has passed and the
Manager to come to an agreement upon, go to the Water Board that will be
created, come back to us with the final conclusion and recommendation. Joanne?
Ms. Holshouser: Joanne Holshouser, Coconut Grove Civic Club, 4230 Ingram
Highway. My concern is that it isn't that we wanted a seat on the Board, I
don't think Tigertail or Bayshore home owners or the others did either, but
we already...
94
MAR 8 tglg
Mayor Ferre; That's not for discussion here Joanne, we are going to come to that
in a moment, that's next. That is...
Ms. Holshouser: Noy... sir, since you are taking this first, if I can just
finish that.
Mayor Ferre: Go ahead.
Ms. Holshouser: We don't want to be involved on the Board, but it does concern
us that the people who are suggested for the Board, in perfect good will, none
are of them represent as far as I know Civic Clubs, that is to say the people
in the Grove and here you talk already about terming it as... the first time
we get a chance to say something is at a public hearing, what I'm asking is
if there is a chance to speed the process to make it easier?
Mayor Ferre: Absolutely.
Ms. Holshouser: Could we get involved before we have to come before you
all in an adversary position?
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
Ms. Holshouser: That's all we are asking.
Mayor Ferre: The answer is yes.
Ms. Holshouser: Thank you, very much.
Mayor Ferre: And let me further say that there is a provision for Civic Clubs,
out of the nine members one of the five is specifically that.
Ms. Holshouser: I was told before that, that was to include members or rather
people of Chambers of Commerce.
Mayor Ferre: And every other group and civic of the Northeast Improvement
Association that is involved in that. The Coconut Grove Associations involved
in that, the Black Chamber...
Ms. Holshouser: No, sir, I don't believe the Coconut Grove Association is
involved. The Grove Association doesn't get involved in politics and the Civic
Club is not involved.
Mayor Ferre: Politics, you think this is politics? Well, yes, I guess that's
true.
Ms. Holshouser: It's City business, whatever.... you know...
Mayor Ferre: Yes, therefore, it is politics.
Ms. Holshouser: Now, I'm just saying that we are not asking for a place on the
Board, but we don't like having to come and fight all of the time. Can't we
get together before hand?
Mayor Ferre: The answer is yes, you will have ample opportunity before the
Waterfront Board to discuss it and then, before the City Commission, ok?
Ms. Holshouser: Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: Now, further discussions on the motion as read, if not, call the
question.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption.
MOTION NO. 79-166
A MOTION THAT THE CITY ACCEPT ALL SIX (6) RECOMMENDATIONS
IN THE GREENLEAF TELESCA RECENT STUDY FOR MARINA
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THAT WE REFER ALL PERTINENT MATTERS
TO THE CITY OF MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD SO THAT THEY MAY
REVIEW THIS MATTER AND COME BACK WITH SPECIFIC
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION.
CIA R 8 1
979
95
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando E. Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
ABSENT: Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ON ROLL CALL:
Rev. Gibson: I will vote yes, with a question in my mind not on the paper.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, is there further discussion on that item.
N••Iw••w 41.
96
MAR 81979
0*
28. AUTHORIZE CITY ATTORNEY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH
OUTSIDE COUNSEL FOR PROSTITUTION CONTROL PROGRAM.
Mayor Ferre: We're going to take up Item 15, Mrs. Rockefeller. This is
authorizing the City Attorney to enter into an agreement with outside counsel
for legal services in conjunction with the City's Pronographic Prostitution
Control Program. A11 right, Mr. City Attorney.
Mr. George Knox: Pursuant to the City Commission's suggestion and our own
initiative, we have engaged in negotiations with Mr. Ed Gerhart who is former
Chief Assistant State Attorney in Dade County who is now in private practice,
to assist us in developing a task force concept if you will with respect to
the regulation and control of prostitution and the distribution and sale of
obscene publications and movies along Biscayne Boulevard. It may be, however,
inappropriate at this time to adopt a resolution for the simple reason that
Mr. Carhart and the City Attorney's Office have not yet agreed to a ceiling
amount on his fees. He's in the process of reviewing all the files that we
have developed on existing cases and I anticipate that within the next day or
so we will have arrived at a determination about a maximum amount subject to
further Commission approval. So it may be appropriate at this time to approve
in principle the selection of Mr. Ed Carhart as a special assistant for pur-
poses of regulating, an assistant in the regulation of pornography and pros-
titution along Biscayne Boulevard and we will have on the 22nd more specific
information with regard to Mr. Carhart's fees.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, I would so move that we accept in principle the selection
of Mr. Carhart for the specific job relating to Biscayne Boulevard.
Mr. Lacasa: I second the motion.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Mr. Mayor, can I please, may I not limit the geographic
locale, but I think the problem is to be addressed to anywhere the problem
exists which it does exist in some places other than that which was mentioned.
Mrs. Rockefeller: Yes, 79th Street and N.E. 2nd Avenue.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, we expand the geographical area to wherever it is needed,
his services, Okay.
Mr. Knox: Yes, the Resolution is not specific.
Mr. Plummer: In the City, of course.
Mrs. Grace Rockefeller appeared in support of the proposed resolution and
expressed her thanks to the City Commission.
Ms. Hirai: Mr. Mayor, there is a second portion to that resolution dealing
with the maximum compensation to be paid.
Mayor Ferre: No, we are reading now Item # 15 which has been moved by Commis-
sioner Gordon and seconded by Lacasa, now that's all we're voting on. Item 15.
Ms. Hirai: Yes, as part of the title of resolution 15 dealing with this prob-
lem there is a part dealing with the"compensation for the services subject to
the maximum payment of "and then there is a blank and I do not have
an amount.
Mr. Knox: Ok, Ms. Clerk, I indicated earlier that I would present, and I'm
asking now for a motion of intent if you will or approving the selection of
Mr. Carhart in principle then on the 22nd we'll come back with the information
regarding his fee.
9'7
"„P 8 1971
AYES:
NOES: None.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-167
A MOTION ACEPTING IN PRINCIPLE THE SELECTION OF MR. EDWARD
CARHART IN CM::UNCTION WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI'S PORNOGRAPHIC
AND PROSITUTION CONTROL PI.CGRAM TO ACT AS OUTSIDE COUNSEL.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
29. REVIE4 OJTSTANDIING ISSUES WITH DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD - EXTEND
FUNDING OF COMMUNITY SCHOOL PROGRAMS FOR 45 DAYS PENDING MEETING
BETWEEN CITY AND DADE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD.
Mayor Ferre: We've had the people from the Dade County School Board here
since early morning, we apologize to you and we'll recognize you at this time.
We'll take up Item "F". Mr. Manager?
Mr. Grassie: By way of introduction, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Com-
mission, I believe that you have in your package a copy of a letter from the
Superintendent of Schools, Johnny Jones, which touches on the five questions
that we had outstanding with the School Board and I would like to briefly
remind you of the contents of that letter and also some of the determinations
of this City Commission in the past.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, may I interject? And please, do not this, I don't
think I've had the pleasure of meeting you before, either of you. Have I
had the pleasure of meeting you, sir?
Mr. Henry Daniels: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Well, my remarks do not address to you, the two individually.
Mr. Grassie, I would like to do the same thing that the School Board did
to you and I when we appeared. Although we gave them the courtesy of send-
ing the top administrative person and an elected official they chose to
tell us in no uncertain terms - "Take it where it belongs and work it out
in the staff". Now, neither Mr. Jones who is the top administrator nor an
elected official of the School Board have had the courtesy to come here and
address this Commission as we did to them. I would like to say to you, Mr.
Grassie, and to you, Mr. Mayor, that we use the same response to them that
they showed to Mr. Grassie and I and that is take this matter to the staff
and let them worry about it and we'll talk about it later. Now that doesn't
reflect on the two of you, please. But I'll tell you I walked away from
that meeting thinking that I had wasted my time and that meeting which was
referred to staff is now some three or four months ago and the issues were
burning and critical at that time. Now, Mr. Grassie, that's the way I feel
and I want to know has this matter been completely worked out and taken to
the staff? You were there with me.
Mr. Grassie: Yes, I was, Commissioner. The question that's in front of you
really represents three policy choices plus two information items. The
three policy choices involves budget considerations. Those are things I can
make recommendations on to you but in the final analysis they will require
a budget modification and, of course, that one has to be brought to this
body and it is because of that that we have it in front of you.
Mr. Plummer: Then let me ask, are these two people here from the School
Board empowered to act on behalf of the School Board? You can sign documents
and obligate them for money? (INADDIBLE RESPONSE) Well, you see then I'm
sorry, why send you to do their job with us elected officials? They're
elected officials, why didn't they send their School Board members here?
When I went there they put me down and put this City down by virtue of that
98
MAR 8 1979
and I was there empowered to speak for this Commission. Now why should we
expect any less, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, I didn't know that there was going to be anybody
here from the School Board. This is scheduled as a discussion by your staff
with regard to this problem and while we're happy to have representatives of
the School Board here they're not here at our request.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, so they're not going to discuss the matter, they're just
here as observers? Oh, all right, fine.
Mt. Grassie: Unless you recognize them.
Mr. Plummer: Well, Ok, fine, you know.
Mrs. Gordon: I think they've been referrEd to a number of times in the pub-
lic record that, identify yourselves please and your positions.
Mr. Plummer: I would prefer, Rose, that it now be the case because I don't
want any reflection on these two individuals who have been very pleasant and
very tolerant of waiting here all day.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, their role in the government, the School Board governmental
structure, it's important that you know what it is.
Mrs. Judith Greene: Mrs. Judith Greene, Executive Director of the Division
of Operational Support Services.
Mr. Henry Daniels: I'm Henry Daniels, Coordinator for Community Schools in
the Department of Community Schools, Dade County Public Schools.
Mrs. Greene: We'll be happy to act as observers and answer any questions
perhaps after your discussion on this matter but I do rEpresent our Superin-
tendent this afternoon.
Mrs. Gordon: Thank ycu very much. Go ahead, where do we go from here, Mr.
Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission we have five ques-
tions that we want to review with you. The first of these is the School
Resource Officer Program. The City has funding for that program through the
end of March. The School Board when Commissioner Plummer and I appeared in
front of them told us clearly that they did not have funding in their budget
to support their half of the program, in consequence, it would be our recom-
mendation to you that at the end of March that that program be terminated to
the Schools. Secondly, we have the question of Highland Park. You remember
tat that was a piece of property owned by the School, they have agreed after
they have demolished the building to hold onto that piece of property and to
give the City a first right to purchase it if in some future time the School
Board should divest itself of the property. That is perfectly all right with
us since we are more interested in that remaining in public hands until it
is properly developed than we are in having it within the hands of the City.
The third question is the one of the Latin Riverfront Park, you remember that
in this case we have worked out at a staff level a trade with the School Board
which we were improving Riverside Park beside Ada Meritt School and provid-
ing for special use provisions for the School system, in exchange for that
they were going to make available to us the property that they are not now
using adjacent to our Latin Riverfront Park, some of it they own and some
of it they lease from the State, both of those parcels were going to be turned
over to the City at no cost to the City. That agreement is held up at least
until the end of March because of the uncertainty on the part of the School
System with regard to whether or not they're going to continue to use Ada
Merritt School. If they are not going to keep that school open then they
have very little interest in Riverside Park so that particular question at
this point is in abeyance. We have two other questions, two remaining ques-
tions, one the Community School Program and the other is the After School
Care Program and I would like for Mr. Bond to report to you on the finances
of those two programs before we continue discussion of it.
Mrs. Gordon: Well...
Mr. Grassie: Could we finish with the financing, just so you have a picture
of the five questions that are outstanding with the School?
99
mAg 8 1g
111111111111111111 I ■
1
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, fine.
Mr. Jack Bond: The original request from the School Board on the Community
School Program was $70,000. We funded this program, you funded this program
through December 14th, 1978 by appropriating $14,595 I believe for a balance
remaining of $55,555.00. They are requesting in their communique to Mr.
Grassie reimbursement through tomorrow which would cost the City an addi-
tional $16,513.00 which would leave a balance of $39,041.00 to carry that
program through the end of the fiscal year. The After School Care Program,
the original request was $192,017, you funded them through November 30th at
$32,004 leaving a balance of $164,013 at that time. They are requesting fund-
ing through tomorrow to reimburse them for this period which would cost the
City an additional $53,174.00.
Mrs. Gordon: Jack, I didn't follow your numbers because I'm not writing them
down but to the end of the year how much is it?
Mr. Bond: It would be $110,000....
Mrs. Gordon: Not just from today but from the time we stop paying.
Mr. Grassie: $164,000 for the After School to carry it for all of the un-
funded period and $55,550 for the Community School Program.
Mayor Ferre: How much?
Mr. Grassie: For Community Schools $55,000, for After School $164,000.
Mr. Bond: I think it is appropriate to indicate here how much money the
City has allocated to those two programs. Since 1974 on the Community School
Program a total of, if you appropriate as you were, $273,946 already to date
since 1974 at which it was entered into as a pilot project to be picked up
by the School Board the following year.
Mr. Plummer: In its entirety.
Mr. Bond: Yes, sir. And the After School Care Program you have given to
that $824,021.20.
Mr. Plummer: Nothing is more permanent around City Hall than temporary fund-
ing.
Mayor Ferre: All right, let's move on.
Mr. Bond: The next move is your's, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I'll tell you my opinion. My opinion is that I think we
have a moral commitment to both the After Care Program and the Community
Schools, I don't think we can tamper with that but I'm going to tell you
something. As far as I'm concerned I think it is time for us to take our
fine policemen and deploy them in other areas of the community.
Mr. Bond: May I speak to that issue for a moment, sir?
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir.
Mr. Bond: So that you'll know where those officers would be, it is the in-
tent, as we understand the Police Chief's staff, to assign those officers to
a juvenile Crime Prevention Unit, so they would not be out of that arena.
Mayor Ferre: Okay, that's fine.
Mr. Bond: But they would be performing less in the area of school security,
if you will.
Mayor Ferre: Well, you see, let the School Board supply school security and
let us worry about the areas that we're supposed to be involved in.
Mrs. Gordon: Juvenile crime prevention, that's right.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I would not hesitate to offer the motion that the
City proceed post haste to try and find the moneys to continue the programs,
those two programs. I believe, yes, Community Schools and After Care. I
believe that the School Board has the responsibility to maintain its order.
iWAR 8 19»
. too
We can't go in there and issue any orders and I say this very prayerfully,
they made some promises to us and this is not the time to discuss it but
they didn't keep their promises.
Mr. Plummer: Father, let me ask a question. Mr. Bond, if we do what Father
is proposing how much are we talking about in the Community Schools? How
much more are they looking to this City to subsidize them?
Mr. Bond: $55,554 approximately, sir.
Mr. Plumper: On the After Care School how much more is this City going to
subsidize the School Board?
Mr. Bond: Just for this year alone again that's a total of $164,013.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Now my fast figures tell me that that in itself is $219,000
roughly. Now Father, I hope that what I hear you saying, because I want to
tell you they're two fine programs and I have no problem with voting with
the motion for this City to subsidize but you are not, Father, going to do
that without tying this valuable piece of property of $100,000 that we're
looking for and the Latin Riverfront Park which we are looking for that
equate itself just happens to be about the same amount of money.
Rev. Gibson: But J. L., you don't have no problem with me.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but Father, I didn't hear that in your motion.
Rev. Gibson: I was going to get to that, you notice I was about to give my
little sermon about, you know, hoping that this might bring them to tie the
two together.
Mr. Plummer: To tie the one to the other. Oh yes, there shall be fairness,
ah.aen .
Rev. Gibson: I was about to talk about Highland Park land too, you know?
That isn't an impossibility.
Mr. Plummer: Proceed.
Mr. Grassie: If I could, for the information of the City Commission, a staff
person has just pointed out to me that right now apparently the School Board
is considering the possibility of leasing the land that we're interested in
beside Latin Riverfront Park for the storage of buses.
Mr. Plummer: That's called "Straight into the heart and break it off". Our
Latin Riverfront Park that we've $3,000,000 tied up - they're going to make
a bus barn out of it? Oh boy! How much insult can we take?
Rev. Gibson: Man! I would think, Mr. Manager and members of the Commission,
just so that the children don't suffer that we ought to do something about
those two programs and proceed post haste to try to negotiate the land busi-
ness. So far as the officers in the school, if they can't keep no order man
they're in bad shape. I learned in school that the first rule of ... in
order to teach you have to have order. You can't teach without order. Ok,
and if you all don't mind having disorder in the schools then you will have
to justify to the State Department that you're not teaching and I'll bet you
the chips will be down at that point.
Mrs. Gordon: You want to move your motion, I'll second it, Father Gibson.
Rev. Gibson: Let's see how we could live with this. Plummer, I want to do
what you're saying, let's say it.
Mr. Plummer: Not what I say, what's right.
Rev. Gibson: Well alright. I want the two programs cared for, now what do
I do? Tell me, Mr. Manager.
Mr. Grassie: Make a motion of intent, Commissioner, that it is the intent
of the City Commission to fund those programs in the amounts that we have
indicated, $164,000 plus $55,000, that the staff bring back to you a budget
modification to accomplish that and then whatever second thing you want to
attach to that.
SOT
11AR 6 1971
Rev. Gibson: All right, I would make that motion and then I'll deal with
the second thing, or do you want to do them together?
Mayor Ferre: I think you ought to - Plummer?
Mrs. Gordon: Look, let me say something. I don't think we should bargain
the kids away, you know.
Mr. Plummer: We aren't, Rose, this letter, did you read this letter? That
if we don't give them the money they're going to tell the parents that we dis-
continued the program. Now I don't know how you read that but read that let-
ter.
Mayor Ferre: That's nothing but a threat, I mean that's wrong.
Mr. Plummer: And they're going to park buses in the middle of my park that
I've got three million invested in? Come on!
INAUDIBLE
Mrs. Gordon: Please do.
Mrs. Greene: I have been privy to all the discussions between Dr. Jones, Mr.
Grassie and our staff.
Mayor Ferre: You're going to have to identify yourself for the record.
Mrs. Greene: Again, I'm Mrs. Judith Greene, Executive Director, Division of
Operational Support Services. This rumor, and I use the word advisedly, comes
as a shock as far as buses parking, usage of land. I was here with the same
intent as the letter to address the one particular program, that's the After
School Program, your program. You fund it 100%, it is your program.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, but you heard staff say that we funded it for one year as
a pilot to get it started with the full understanding the School Board was
going to pick it up 100% the following years. Yes, we helped you fund it,
yes, we helped you start it, no you never came through on your second year and
thereafter.
Rev. Gibson: Right.
Mayor Ferre: In other words I don't see how in the world you could morally
put the blame on the City when it is you, the School System that is falling
down on your specific promise on the record. How could you blame us?
Mrs. Greene: I'm not here to blame anyone. I'm here hopefully to see us re-
solve this.
Mayor Ferre: Well the letter blames us, see you're threatening us.
Mr. Plummer: No, she's not, Mr. Mayor, please now, not individually.
Mayor Ferre: I beg your pardon, not you, Mrs. Greene, but the letter is
signed by who?
Mr. Plummer: Johnny Jones.
Mayor Ferre: Dr. Jones is specifically threatening us by saying that if we
don't approve this he's going to write all the parents and tell them that the
City of Miami killed their program. Now the fact is that this is something
that the City of Miami did in conjunction with the School Board and with speci-
fic commitments were made that you haven't lived up to. Now how in the world
can you morally justify, Dr. Jones morally justify blaming us for something
that you haven't done?
Rev. Gibson: And let me add, I shall never forget, you remember Dr. Sheppard
coming here asking for that? And you remember when you went for that n ,ey
and didn't get it I said I found it increditable to understand how the School
Board could make a moral commitment as a teaching agency that must set the
pattern for children and yet not live up to their promise. That's in our
record and I hope you will relate when you go back. And you remember when we
went to Lindsey Hopkins to meet with one of the Assistant Superintendents,
what was his name, they were as impervious to what we were saying as night
follows day and I just don't understand. I really don't understand.
MAR 8 1979
' 102
Mr. Plummer: Father, let me offer you a suggestion. Look, I will lay right
on top of the table - I want that riverfront property which didn't cost the
School Board a dime, I want that Highland Park property which is very crucial
to the development around the Washington Heights Station which they have torn
down the building. In my estimation those two equate themselves to roughly
$219,000. You want something - I want something, let's switch, let's trade.
But let me tell you if I find out which Mr. Grassie has indicated to me as
being from his staff and I find out that it is not a rumor somebody bought a
tiger by the tail. Now all I'm saying is Father, I offer you a suggestion.
I don't want to be a mean man I want to be reasonable but I want others to be
reasonable. I think we ought to give them some time, 30 days of funding more
on each one of these programs to let them see the light. Let them see the
light.
Rev. Gibson: I have no objection because I would want the pay checks to flow.
Mr. Plummer: That's right.
Rev. Gibson: But I happen to know this: Once you get that pay check and you
know that is going to be cut off - I don't mean you I mean the School Board -
they will be so carried away with the flow of that check that they will pray
the second time.
Mr. Plummer: When you pay the fiddler he never plays as sweet a music.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I move that both programs be funded for the next
thirty days, whatever you owe pay them up and through the next 30 days and
we'll wait and see what happens.
Mr. Plummer: That's assuming that the Manager has the money.
Mrs. Gordon: May I make a better suggestion than that? You take your first
motion which was the funding for the balance of the year and condition it with
that if the School Board does not respond to your request for the Highland
Park and Latin Riverfront land then you will terminate at whatever peiod of
time, 60 days.
Mr. Plummer: Rose, we tried that on the SRO Program. My mother taught me
you fight fire with fire. This here is Dante's Inferno - they're trying to
burn us up.
Mrs. Gordon: J. L., wait a minute, everybody is getting hot and heavy on
this and I don't think that's really what you intend to do. What you intend
to do is put a club over their heads to give you the property. Okay? But
on the other hand you're ....
Mr. Plummer: It's better than being over our heads.
Mrs. Gordon: Wait a minute. You're only deciding to fund for 30 days. Now
what is their thought going to be? You don't trust us, we don't trust you?
Hell, you didn't show us you're going to fund for a year, fund for a year and
then if you do that we will.
Rev. Gibson: Rose.
Mr. Plummer: Is this not a club over my head?
Rev. Gibson: They don't trust us. My God, man, three hundred odd thousand
dollars those people owe us and they have not indicated one inch that they're
going to pay it. Now come on.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, refer it to staff. Refer it to staff.
Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, let me try to see if I can give you a
simile. Now there are some people in this country that don't want the United
States to agree to a salt agreement with the Soviets because they think that
unless the Soviets agree, for example in the case of Israel and the PLO or
in the case of Africa and other places that it is unfair for us to agree with
the Soviets if they on the other hand don't agree to stop all these little
things that are affecting us. Now that happens to be the position of people
like Scoop Jackson, Senator Monahand, I think of Senator Stone and of other
people who have brought this argument to bear. Now 1 think they call it link-
age. Now I'm not saying that I am for or against linkage in this particular
case as a final thing but it seems to me it's only fair that if the School
Board wants us to deal nicely with things that in effect are partly your re-
sponsibility then I think yLu should kind of not go out of your way but deal
103
MAR 8 1979
with us - I'm not saying that we're the United States and you're the Soviet
Union or vice versa. I am saying that I think we ought to deal with each
other fairly and I don't care whether you do it one way or the another way
but on the other hand I don't want this to be a saber rattling type of a
thing where we're threatening and then they threaten and all of that. Joe,
what's the best way to do this?
Mr. Grassie: I think that what we need, Mr. Mayor, is some contact at the
top level which means between you and members of the City Commission and
members of the School Board to try and get an understanding about the things
that you feel are reasonable the City get. I think that direct personal con-
tact can accomplish it.
Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, Mrs. Green, would you carry the message back of
good will and faith from this City Commission and love and peace to Dr. Johnny
Jones and members of the Board and that we stand ready to meet with them at
any time, any place for a summit meeting between the School Board and the
City Commission and its members to try to see if we can reach a little bit of
peace?
Mrs. Greene: All right, I will be happy to take that message and I look for-
ward to the resolving of all these issues but if I don't go back with a mes-
sage whether you fund 30 days or 10 days I need to know that as of today.
Mayor Ferre: We will fund it, yes we will. We have a motion on the floor
as amended as I understand that this be a 30 day funding, or I'm perfectly
willing to accept what Rose wanted, either way, I'll vote for either one of
them whichever the maker of the motion wants to do.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, it also my intent is that if you owe them pay them
up to and including. I mean you know if you owe a bill, let me say this:
I don't know calling the kettle balck when I'm dirty myself. Ok? I want to
keep my moral commitment. The moral commitment was that you put up that money,
Ok, we're going to put it up and pay up to date.
Mayor Ferre: But they haven't kept their moral commitment to us.
Rev. Gibson: I know, we're going to take care of them. Now we're only going
from say if it was November through now.
Mr. Bond: Tomorrow, sir. My figures are calculated through tomorrow on the
reimbursement to the School System.
Rev. Gibson: Yes, plus give them thirty days. Now if they don't come up and
deal....
Mr. Bond: That would be an additional....
Mr. Plummer: What do they say we owe them until tomorrow?
Mr. Bond: Well, we say we owe them through tomorrow an additional $16,513
in the Community Schools Program and $53,174 in the After School.
Mr. Plummer: So we owe them 69 to bring us up to date tomorrow?
Mr. Bond: Yes, sir.
Rev. Gibson: And Plus a 30 day money.
Mr. Plummer: And what is another 30 days going to cost?
Mr. Bond: It's $5,833.33 in the Community School Program and $16,001.41.
Mr. Plummer: $21,000 a month roughly, is that correct?
Mr. Bond: Roughly.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, I want to bring your attention that the Commission Meeting,
J. L., between now and the end of 30 days there will be a meeting on the 22nd
but that's it.
Mr. Plummer: Well we can always call a special meeting. I think the Latin
Riverfront Park is that important, I really do.
Rev. Gibson: I agree.
MAR 8 1979
104
Mrs. Gordon: Does the School Board meet between now and the 22nd when we
meet?
Mr. Plummer: How about April 13th, a Friday? If that don't tell them some-
thing nothing will.
Mrs. Gordon: J. L., we have to change the date of our meeting in April be-
cause it is the first day of Passover and so the 12th may not be our meeting
day.
Mr. Plummer: Well make it the 5th then.
motion to 45 days to give them so more,
Rev. Gibson: Wait a minute, I'd better
be in Iowa on the 5th.
Mr. Plummer: Make it 45 days.
Hey, Father, you want to amend your
I've got no objection to that.
find out because I think I've got to
Rev. Gibson: All right, 45 days, pay them through 45 days, make money avail-
able to them through 45 days and after that the buck stops being passed.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, you've got a sales job to do with your board.
Mrs. Greene: Yes.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-168
A MOTION TO EXTEND CITY OF MIAMI FUNDING OF
(a) COMMUNITY SCHOOL PROGRAMS
(b) AFTER -SCHOOL CARE PROGRAMS
FOR A PERIOD OF 45 ADDITIONAL DAYS PENDING MEETING
BETWEEN THE CITY ADMINISTRATION AND THE DADE COUNTY
SCHOOL BOARD.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mrs. Greene: Thank you very much.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you.
Rev. Gibson: You're welcome, you all were very lovely.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, can I just pursue one thing? Mr. Grassie, I want
to tell you something, I feel very very upset about this which you have heard
and I want you to make a determination immediately if that is true about the
parking of buses, using it for a storage area for buses after this City has
committed that much money to that area and I want you to report back as soon
as you can to each individual Commissioner.
Mr. Grassie: We're checking on it now, Commissioner.
105
•
MAR 8 1971
30. DEFERRAL OF CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE
TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES IN CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission, Item 12 is in
front of you having been read once and it is here on the second reading. It
in its form as you approved it the first time carried with it the recommenda-
tion of a number of professional organizations in the community and I believe
some of them are here to represent their point of view.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Whisenand and Mr. Pawley?
Mr. Jim Whisenand: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I am simply here
to request, ....
Ms. Hirai: Your name and address for the record, please.
Mr. Jim Whisenand: I'm sorry, Jim Whisenand, I'm with the Dawson and
firm and I was formerly the Deputy Attorney General of the State. I believe
that the file contains a letter that I had sent April 12, 1978 concerning the
subsection 5(h) dealing with the authority of the Commission to alter a recom-
mendation from the City Manager and what procedure they should do that. I
believe that Parker Thompson has had some involvement in that process. Mr.
Thompson called me last night and had to go out of town on emergency and asked
me to appear. The letter that I sent at that time in April I think is pretty
much self-explanatory. The Statute 287 simply states that the selection of
an architect or for the professional services that are provided in that statute
need to be based certain criteria. Under the ordinance that is proposed that
criteria would be applied by the Commission and by the City Manager and at
that time come before the Commission for petition. The Commission would then
have the choice of accepting that or selecting one based upon the statutory
criteria.
Mayor Ferre: Counselor, in the interst of time I think our City Attorney
yesterday or the day before yesterday had a meeting with the members of the
Commission to go over this. I don't think there are many questions, are there
on item 12? Is there any need to discuss it any further?
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, Father was the one as I.... Let me make sure of
one thing. It is my understanding that that which is proposed before us is,
in fact, the present State Statute .
Mr. Knox: Yes, it is....
Mr. Plummer: And actually what we are doing is tracking the language of the
State Statute.
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: And as such we only have the prerogative of making something
more restrictive, not less restrictive.
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Well, what are we discussing, are we trying to make it more
restrictive?
Mayor Ferre: No.
Mr. Knox: As you may recall, after the first reading the City Commission
based upon reservations whic`. were held by Father Gibson suggested that the
City Attorney, Mr. Pawley and Mr. Parker Thompson advise or apprise the City
Commission of exactly those provisions that may have been troublesome to some
of the Commissioners. Father Gibson had expressed his feeling that the City
Commission should be afforded an opportunity to rank order the suggested
architects or professionals that were recommended by the selection committee
rather than the City Commission not having a choice in terms of the rank
order that was presented to them. The reason that Mr. Whisenand is here prim-
arily is because he initiated in his capacity as Deputy Attorney General an
inquiry regarding our practice and procedure associated with specifically
106
'MAR 819T9
'A
that. Our research indicated that under the existing statute it is not
possible that the City Commission can rearrange the rank order that is pres-
ented to them by the selection committee unless the City Commission itself
goes through the entire process that was gone through by the selection com-
mittee. Mr. Pawley is here, Mr. Parker Thompson concurs in that interpreta-
tion, Mr. Whisenand who originally raised the question is here to indicate
that he concurs in an interpretation that the City Commission if it selects as
its alter ego if you will a selection committee and the City Commission would
be bound by the rank, order preferences that are indicated.
Mr. Plummer: All right, let me ask you this: Am I to understand that this
memo dated December 6, 1978 to Mr. Grassie from Mr. Kaufman, it gives the
purview to this Commission of three ways of travel: One, we can make a com-
mittee of all or a number of Commissioners, two we can appoint a selection
committee of our own or three we can direct the City Manager to appoint a
selection committee, is that correct, those are the three options we have?
Mr. Whisenand: Yes, sir.
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: Well, what's the problem?
Mr. Knox: The problem is when the selection committee however it has been
constituted comes back the State Statute requires that they give to you no
less than three firms or individuals ranked in order of preference then the
City Commission has no choice but to direct the City Manager to enter into
negotiations with the person who has been designated by the selection com-
mittee as number one. Our ordinance, however, provides that if the City Com-
mission objects to the rank order that is provided by the selection process
the City Commission has an additional three options: It can constitute itself
as a selection committee and go through the process as required by the state
statute.
Mr. Whisenand: Same as here.
Mr. Knox: Right. Number two, it can select its own committee to go through
the selection process.
Mr. Plummer: Which is here.
Mr. Knox: Yes. And number three the City Commission can direct the previous-
ly selected committee to reevaluate the firms or individuals and come back
with alternate recommendations.
Mr. Plummer: That ain't here.
Mayor Ferre: All right, further discussion on this? If not, who moves it?
Mr. Plummer; I'll move it.
Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson?
Mr. Plummer: Father, I think if you go to this memo from Grassie and you
look at Section c and you see the three alternatives to me it gives this
Commission at all times the latitude to go one of three ways and I don't
know of any other latitude that we could have.
Rev. Gibson: Unfortunately I don't have....
Mr. Plummer: You don't have the memo? I'll give you mine.
Rev. Gibson: I thought this was what, you see, I don't like it. I don't
like it. Let me say so that everybody knows where I'm coming from. Gentle-
men and lady, if there be ladies on that committee, the great danger for us
is you then do what you accuse us of, that's why this law is being enacted
because you accuse us whether you right here or statewide accuse us of you
know taking care of our friends. Let me tell you, sir, one of the things
I want to make sure everybody understands - there is a certain layman around
here to said to me that I must carry the heat and that's what I do. This is
what I think would be fair for us. If we got a committee that will go and
tell us here are three competent firms, three competent firms and then we
make a choice out of the three that gives you the opportunity to tell me that
I'm not just you know taking care of somebody who isn't competent along with
the fact once you do that I then use my own judgement. I would assume that
107
VAR 8
1979
if what you say is true you won't bring me the name of any firm that's not
competent and capable.
Mayor Ferre: Father, I agree 100% with that. My only problem is that it is
against the law.
Rev. Gibson: Well all right, then I'll tell you what, I'm not adverse to
appointing a committee and when they bring me back three names reject them
and then I'll go through the process of taking those three companies and rank
them for myself. I will sit, I don't care, I'll sit all night, man because
what happens, you pulling the strings and I'm not part of the string pulling.
Mayor Ferre: Father, again I agree with you but unfortunately it is against
the State Law.
Rev. Gibson: Then let me make, Ok, I'm ready to be on the committee myself.
The buck stops with me. I will not be opposed to being a judge of a compe-
tent architectural firm or engineering firm. Man, let me tell you I'm no
fool. Let me tell you I don't mind asking an engineering firm about who is
competent, that will be my thing then when I sit I look for what they tell me
I ought to look for and then I then go to work and do the do. The other way,
dog gone it - listen, you know what's wrong with that thing? If I appoint
the right people I could tell them how to rank them. If I don't do that the
Manager could be told how to rank them. I don't want that. I want to carry
the responsibility because when I go out here and say to the people, "Hey, man,
elect me", you know I get the burning. The Manager doesn't get the burning,
the three members of the people other than, you know, Commissioners don't get
no burning. I get the burning and I want to be the committee. That's right.
And anybody up here who tells you to the contrary listen to this - either he
or she doesn't know the facts of life - and that can't be true, because man
they know plenty of things - or they want to fool you.
Mr. Lacasa: I'd like to add to that that I do feel the same way that Commis-
sioner Gibson feels and I for one am ready to serve.
Mrs. Gordon: You do or you don't?
Mr. Lacasa: What I feel is that if we do have to take the heat we had might
as well take the responsibility for the decision so if the law does not allow
us to appoint a committee then we will have to be the committee and I am ready
to serve on that committee.
Mr. plummer: There is nothing precluding that in this ordinance.
Mr. Lacasa: Yes it does, J. L., because the problem is that it will be, once
we reject what we will have is a situation where we will be facing a recommenda-
tion by the City Manager and we'll have to reject that recommendation, the one
through three recommendation they make and then appoint the committee while
in the other situation the responsibility would be entirely ours and we won't
be in that position.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Lacasa, I beg to differ with you. One of the options in
this proposal is that a committee among the Commissioners be formed. That's
one of three.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes.
Mr. Lacasa: But that is in the event that we do not approve the list already
submitted to us - in the event.
Rev. Gibson: Lacasa, let me tell Plummer this because you weren't here. One
of the advantages of being around a little while, and the Mayor knows this,
is you remember the facts. If we don't set the policy right now that the
committee will be a committee of the Commission then we get hung up later on
when it doesn't meet the needs of some other people. We then want to change
these, these are options. I don't want the options. I want to start off
right now. This is where I am, I want to start off right now as the committee
so you know there won't be the Manager appointing no committee and you know
I'm not going to appoint no committee that I'm the committee - the buck stops
with me. And everytime from now on until the law changes that I've got to
sit .on the pot. That's right.
Mr. Plummer: Fine, approve it and you've already got your committee.
108
MAR 8 1978
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox, let me see if I understand this right. The State
Law says that we have to do things the way it has been described in these
memorandums which means that the Manager, he is set up, these committees
are set up and so on to bring to us 1, 2 & 3 in that order. Now we don't
have the choice of selecting 2 over 1 or three over 1.
Rev. Gibson: No.
Mayor Ferre: All we have the choice of saying, "Well, we reject 1" and then
it would go to to 2 and then we would reject 2 and then it would go to 3 if
that's in our agreement. Now, at that point, Father, then if we rejected all
three of them we have the choice of telling them to go do it all over again
or constituting ourselves or a sub -committee of the Commission as a board
that would then have to start interviewing everybody from the beginning to
the end. We couldn't just take those three or five or arbitrarily choose ten
or what have you. If there were 20 applicants we would have to sit as a
board reviewing that. Now, ...
Mr. Plummer: There's another option.
Mayor Ferre: The other option is for us to appoint a new committee.
Mr. Plummer: That's right, the third option.
Mayor Ferre: But I don't think that we're going to in my opinion that if
the Manager's Committee is not acceptable to us I don't think that appointing
a third committee really is going to solve the problem.
Rev. Gibson: No, sir.
Mayor Ferre: So I would, Father, let me just state once again for the record
my opinion. I think that the state law as constituted is a bad law but it is
a State law and I think that the alternative which is forcing the Commission
into becoming a board of and by itself, what they've done is they've put the
burden so heavily on us that it is black and white and I think that it would
be a much better law if there were a gray area where in effect we can have
the advice of a professional group or what have you and yet have the final
decision vested on us as we have done in the past but the state law doesn't
permit us to do that. Now, what I think we ought to do, and this is my per-
sonal otDinion since the law does not permit us to cut off and say on projects
that are more than half a million dollars we would do it and then the smaller
projects we'd go through your process, I don't think we can do that. Can we,
George?
Mr. Knox: No, sir, the threshold limit is very small, as a matter of fact it
is $5,000.
Mayor Ferre: So in other words if we adopt this policy we're going to have
to constitute ourselves as a review board for literally hundreds of proposals
or dozens anyway that come in every year and I guarantee you you're going to
have a busy busy time because it isn't something that, and what I'm saying is
there doesn't seem to be any middle ground. I would, therefore, recommend
that if we accept the law as it is we as a Commission can vote and turn down
these things and then if we have any problems constitute ourselves as a board.
Otherwise I'll tell you the time that this is going to consume is just unreal.
Now I'm just trying to be practical about. I wish there were a middle ground,
I didn't mean a gray area I mean a middle ground. I wish there were a middle
ground that we could get on but the problem is that there isn't.
Mr. Lacasa: Well you see, there are some problems here. For instance, this
resolution IFS, Competitive Selection goes Item (a), the decision to engage a
firm to provide professional services shall be made by the City Manager which
is not exactly what we are discussing now, this is a decision, Mr. Grassie, to
decide whether or not you want an outside consultant or professional services
and then if you so decide we go into the selection process. Now we have in
a specific instance right now and this is the reason for my concern today
and this is the question of the Latin Riverfront Park. I attended Community
Development Meeting about two days ago I think it was and quite frankly I
went there with the idea of supporting the City Manager's staff recommenda-
tion that the professional services instead of being retained, an outside
consultant be provided by the City staff. The question that was raised by
the neighborhood then was that this was specifically, the Latin Riverfront
Park concept called for the incorporation of the features of the Latin cul-
ture within the park and that there was no Latin professional at the City
staff level, tha. was the contention of the neighborhood. So I discussed
MAR a 1279
109
this with Mr. Fosmoen and Mr. Fosmoen explained to me that there were some
Latin people in there and that they could provide that concept but then I
went to the meeting with the idea of conveying this feeling to the neighbors
and then I found out that the other complaint was that the City staff, the
City was going to charge 70%, 17% of the total cost of the project to this
particular project which is funded by CD monies and that an outside consult-
ant would have only charged an average of 8%.
Mr. Plummer: Expensive help.
Mr. Lacasa: This is the question, and I'm not a professional in this and I
would like to have a clarification from you on this. I understand, Mr. Cassell
that you were there that night, right? And and if you don't mind, I would like,
Dick, before you go into this I would like for you to testify to this affect
and clarify some of the points that were made that night. Would you?
Mr. Armando Cassell: My name is Armando Cassell, I'm an architect. Mr. Mayor
and City Commissioners, I was present at the meeting of the Little Havana
Authority Development and the questions that were brought up were exactly
what Mr. Lacasa just said. The biggest concern is basically the fact that
this park is going to be one of the biggest parks in the neighborhood, actually
the the biggest park in the neighborhood and all the citizens were very much
concerned with the fact that they would like to have some, that the park would
be designed according to their needs and according to the idiosyncrasies of
the Latin people. Now this was one of the objections and actually there was
nobody involved in that particular project that would carry on this particular
message. The other thing that was very up -tight to the rest of the Commission,
as you see like Commissioner Lacasa mentioned before these are monies that
are going to be - I'm not very sure about the different fundings of the money
but I believe it is through the Community Development, the C. D. Money of the
different years, I think it is the 3rd, 4th and 5th years and I believe that
the money left from the 3rd, 4th and 5th years had an average of $250,000 or
$260,000. Now just like Commissioner Lacasa mentioned before the design, the
professional fee that the City staff from the Parks Department wanted to charge
Community Development was somewhere in the neighborhood of 17%. This was
discussed at length and it came somewhere in the neighborhood of either
$260,000 or somewhere in that neighborhood. Now as a professional practicing
in the City of Miami I believe that the fees for a park of that nature would
run between the 8 and 10% and to be even conservative I don't think it would
ever get to the 10%. That's basically what happened that night.
Mr. Lacasa: Thank you, Mr. Cassell. Dick, you heard the contention of the
neighbors when I went there last night, I'd like now to see what is "The
Other Side of Midnight".
Mayor Ferre: I think we have to really try to limit this as it affects Item
12 because we may be getting off to another subject.
Mr. Lacasa: Yes, but this is the reason for my concern on this particular
issue and why I am taking this position.
Mayor Ferre: It's a valid point, you brought up a specific example of why
you're worried.
Mr. Fosmoen: I think that the issue does , the questions raised do go beyond
Item 12 specifically and when we talk about percentage or a percentage fee
for design we have to be sure that we're defining what that fee covers be-
cause the 17% that was mentioned not only covers the design fee, it covers
all of the engineering costs, it covers the printing of the bid specifications,
it covers the preparation of specifications, all of the work that the engineer-
ing Department does in getting out a bid, analyzing it, it is the total cost
for getting that project in the ground and built, the total design and engin-
eering and inspection fee, etc., etc.. So you know we have to be sure we're
comparing apples with apples and not applies and oranges or it is half of the
apple with the whole apple.
Mr. Plummer: Well, what is the real figure? How much is engineering design?
Mr. Fosmoen: The real figure, Commissioner, is in all cases an estimate until
you finish the project.
Mr. Plummer: But is it around the 8% with the other stuff put aside?
Mr. Posmoen: The desig:: fees, the design cost would be around 8 - 10% with
the other stuff set aside...
110
MAR 8 1979
1
Mr. Plummer: So what you're saying is the other nine to 8• is administra-
tive costs such as advertising, engineering and that..
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Fosmoen, I think we're getting adrift of the main thrust
of the main thrust of Item 12. We can always talk about this and I would be
happy to recognize Commissioner Lacasa, I think we have to go back to address
the main...
Mr. Lacasa: Let me explore this. George, would it be according to law if
we established a procedure whereby the City Commission be the committee in
some particular instances, in some situations and go through the whole process
and the rest be done according to the provisions of this resolution?
Mrs. Gordon: According to what?
Mr. Lacasa: According to the provisions of this resolution that is being sub-
mitted to us. In other words let's say that a project such as the one that we
are discussing now, the Latin Riverfront Park comes up for the selection of
the engineer or consultant, in those particular instances, see cases like that
where the City Commission might take a different type of interest on account
of the nature of the project if in those situations we could go the whole route
and then we won't be in a position to be in violation of the law because what
the law calls for is actually that whoever makes the interviews and the screen-
ing do the ranking and in this particular case we would be doing just that.
Mr. Knox: The difficulty with that position, Commissioner Lacasa, is that the
State law provides a minimum standard. The City may only be more restrictive
than the State law. The minimum standard that has been applied by the State
Statute as springing to existence the requirement for competitive negotiations
is that for every project where a consultant's services are to be rendered
whose cost of construction exceeds $100,000 or for those plans or studies which
are engaged in by a professional whose cost would exceed $5,000 must be sub-
ject to the State Law as it is presently written so that for anything less
than $100,000, any construction project less than $100,000 or any study or
professional services whose value is less than $5,000 there is no need for
competitive negotiations in the first instance. So the only way we can separ-
ate projects is based on cost under the existing State Law.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Pawley, did you want to speak?
Mr. Charles Harrison Pawley: There are two of us who would like to speak to
that, but very short.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, could we hear from them, because I think that we
need to hear from their expertise?
Mayor Ferre: All right, either one of you, whichever wants to speak. And Jim,
if you want to talk again.
Mr. Charles Sieger: My name is Charles Sieger, the current President of the
Florida South Chapter, American Association of Architects. I'm here on behalf
of the...(INAUDIBLE) I would like to ask the Commission in lieu of, we would
not like to hold up the passage of it in any way but I would like to ask the
Commission and possibly the City Attorney if it is possible that provision for
buildings that are significant, significant buildings, whether a provision
could be added to the formulation of the selection committee because it right
now refers to only City employees being on the selection committee, if it
would be possible to add that a majority or equal amount of people - on signi-
ficant buildings only mind you, we don't want to encumber the process - that
possibly non -City employees or the public at large and preferrably professionals
could be added to that selection committee. Meaning if there were, I think
there are five stipulated in the ordinance, if say another six people could
be added to that selection committee on the significant issue and four of
those six be professionals. It would take some of the burden off the Commis-
sion in terms of the selection and it would also provide for and enhance the
profile of selecting the professional to do a significant work and the County
has seen to do this in some of its recent buildings and I think it would be
a nice thing to add to this ordinance and I don't think it is outside the law.
That's basically all I have to say.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Pawley, do you want to speak now?
Mayor Ferre: We have a question to the City Attorney, can you answer that?
111
MAR 8 1979
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir, there is a provision in the proposed ordinance which
might accomplish the suggestion that the gentleman made and perhaps even
accomplish the suggestion that Commissioner Lacasa made. It would no vio-
lence to the State Law if a threshold amount or a determination of a partic-
lar significance of a project be presented to the City Commission. Now, on
page 3 of the proposed ordinance, paragraph 5(a) reads as follows: "...the
decision to engage a firm to provide professional services shall be made by
the City Manager." It would do no violence to the existing State Law if
there were these kinds of provisions which were added in that instance. For
example, of projects which exceed $500,000 or for projects which would be
particularly significant to a large segment of the population in these mat-
ters the decision would be made by the City Commission or the City Manager
would recommend that there is a need for professional services to the City
Commission and at that point the City Commission can then determine whether
it itself would sit as a screening body or whether it would determine that
a selection committee would do the actual screening of applicants in the
full knowledge that the report of the selection committee would be binding
on the Commission.
Mayor Ferre: Let me answer you how I feel about this and other similar sit-
uations. I think this is a quote that I'm fond of and I use once in a while,
it goes something like this: "A code of ethics is always slackly enforced,
if at all, in a group that has an identity of interest. The interest cor-
rupts the code rather than the code policing the interest." Now, let me
tell you where this functions and this is another subject but when you have
a group of policemen, for example, policing themselves as we have seen be-
fore in Metropolitan Dade County and the discussion there there is a question
as to how policemen - who guards the guardian in other words? Who watches
the watchman? And I think the point I guess is that there is a lot of ques-
tions about should professionals judge professionals, should lawyers be
judges of lawyers, should architects be judges of architects, do architects
select architects. Now one school of thought says yes because professionals
are are in quote, have higher ethics - doctors are really much better you
know at judging doctors and lawyers are much better at judging lawyers you
see and that kind of stuff and we get into all these problems and I really
go back to this little quote because in my opinion you can't have architects
in the process of selecting architects.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Mayor, part of that proposal included the possi-
bility for professionals. However, we could see our way to not having pro-
fessionals on the board but just having lay people in general and not City
employees. I think that was the major thrust of the proposal.
Mayor Ferre: Okay. What you're saying is you'd feel more comfortable if it
were other than City employees. Well, of course, that's what Gibson is say-
ing. See, what Father Gibson is saying is that you know there's a feeling
that runs rampant in this community and it is fanned by the editorial boards
of our local newspaper that goes something like this: Public officials,
politicians are not to be trusted because they really are a bunch of indi-
viduals that are always conniving and not doing what's good for the public,
we know what's good for the public, therefore, our judgement really has to
be superimposed over those of elected officials. Now I might remind you
that this country went through a big discussion about that and there were
two fellows, one was named Jefferson and the other one was named Hamilton
and Hamilton had the Miami Herald's attitude. They said, you know, you have
to have educated people you have to have people who know what's right to
make decisions because the people aren't smart enough to make decisions for
themselves. Now, I think the question is this? If we are elected officials
now there are people here who question, and I've heard for example Joanne
come here on different occasions and talk about how we disregard the public
welfare and how we do this and how bad we are and this and that. You have
an opportunity every two years to throw us out of office.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Mayor, the proposal was not directed at the Com-
mission at all, actually the way the ordinance is written it specifies where
these people come from and they don't come from the Commission. The selec-
tion committee is specified as coming from other than the Commission. They
are strictly...
Mayor Ferre: But see, that's what Gibson's talking about. So I think get-
ting back to the point, and I guess Charles, maybe it is your turn to talk
and then we'll see if we can get it back on.
Mr. Charles Harrison Pawley: My name is Charles Harrison Fawley, I'm an
architect. I've worked on this committee in this particular issue for a
112
MAR 8 t979
year or more and I want to talk on the very same thing that you're talking
about, Father Gibson talked about and what I know is a concern of Rose
Gordon and this is on page 3, Item (b) on the size, five or seven members
of the committee and all of which are members of the City of Miami, or are
employees of the City of Miami. I think that is a mistake and I think that
that is one of your concerns and I think that if you will change that one
paragraph that the rest of the ordinance you have some additional options
but if you would expand that committee to have lay people, I would take it
a step further, Maurice, you were saying no architects, I would like to see
at least one architect on that committee, someone who has could
get a list of architects who are willing to serve who would not be doing
City of Miami work during that time and then the Commission could pick from
that list so that they in essence would have that choice. With that expanded
committee you would then have representation from your people and then you
would also expand it beyond where you would then have representation from
the public and from that I think we would get a fairer selection of architects
or landscape architects from the community and that might satisfy the Com-
mission as well as satisfy the professionals that are under staff and that
would be a recommendation that I would like.
Mayor Ferre: Charles, see, that's one point and that's one subject and I
understand. That does not address Gibson's main concern which is how do
you avoid, how do you not avoid the participation of elected officials in
the final decision making process in these items? If we are to be elected
to set policy and to make these decisions then how, you see, I tell you this
I somehow, this has never been tested in court, I would question the consti-
tutionality even though I'm not a constitutional lawyer of a process which
in effect takes away basic authority from an elected board which is by its
Charter and by the Constitution....
Mr. Knox: May I explain one thing in that regard, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir.
Mr. Knox: The situation is that the State Law provides of implies that it
is the City Commission that must do the selection in the first instance.
However, because of the power to delegate it implies an approval of a dele-
gation and that's why the City Commission under the law is required to ac-
cept a rank order of the selection committee.
Mayor Ferre: I see, Okay.
Mr. Fawley: Mr. Mayor, may I make one comment? You had made a very good
point earlier about if you had to sit in on every single one of these things
you would be doing nothing else as a Commissioner and you couldn't do any-
thing else because of the time that it takes. You might if you, Reverend
Gibson, you had said something about wanting to be that committee, well you
could rotate this, for example, one of the Commissioners that would be so
that all of you would not have to sit but one of you representing that Com-
mission would then be part of the selection committee and that wouldn't
have to be every time, you could do that only, see that doesn't have to be
something that you do always but let's assume you have 50 projects that
are under a million dollars, you've got a great new system here for handling
that but all of a sudden something comes up that is 2 or 5 or 10 million and
you are very interested as a Commission on how that selection process goes.
Then you constitute yourselves either as the committee or you put yourself
on that committee and go through that process. This gives you all those
options.
Rev. Gibson: Let me say this. I have no problem with the Commission parti-
cipating. What I'm trying to say to you is any commiteee that you choose
that I don't participate in I'm in trouble. Now, I want to tell you this -
I'm not willing to let the Manager choot.e the committee, I'm not willing to
let the Manager rank the firms because you know what? If the Manager decides
to give the business always to one or two firms I'm trouble from the word
go, if I do it I'm in trouble. So you know what? Since I'm going to be in
trouble anyway you know what? I'd rather be in trouble - I be in trouble, I
get myself in trouble and don't let him get me in trouble because look, at
election time he doesn't pay no price - I pay the price. And let me tell you
about me. I run a church and there are certain things about the church I
think other clergymen can do better than I. You know what? I'm never too
big nor too upity that i can't go and say man, tell me what you think about
this. And if I wanted a dog gone good architect, do you know what I'd do?
I'd go ask some people who are dog gone good architects. That's the way I
VAR R ,a e
113
run my business. I am not adverse to advice, just so you don't tell me you
take my advice or don't take it, it's you either or not. No, you know what
I mean? And if I were the committee, I think if this Commission, five of
us would rotate, three of us this time or four, if you want three of us and
two professionals I'll buy that, any such arrangement but I'll be darned if
I'm going to leave it entirely to other folk who don't have to pay no penalty,
man.
Mr. Lacasa: Mr. Mayor, I think I have, Father, an alternative here which I
already checked with the City Attorney and it is according to law. It could
say something like this: Add to Item 5(a) ".. the decision to engage a
firm to provide professional services shall be made by the City Manager.
However, the City Commission reserves the right to constitute its members
as a selection committee in its discretion, to its affect the City Manager
shall submit a list of the projects which might require outside professional
services to the City Commission so the City Commission might decide whether
or not in a particular instance they want to constitute themselves."
Rev. Gibson: My brother, beware the Athenians bearing wreaths.
Mr. Lacasa: But this will give....
Rev. Gibson: Man, I serve on this, look, you know you and I aren't arguing
because I have a position that I don't plan to change until God comes down
and tells me, "Gibson, you're wrong" because I've seen it happen around here,
I've seen it happen on the HUD board. You have to have some discretion.
Okay? What you're asking me to do is substitute your discretion. You're
human. The Mayor just got through saying you're human and if you were polic-
ing yourselves you know what you'd do? You'd get your friends. Why can't
I get my friends? Or why shouldn't I get my friends? I'm a fool if I don't
get my friends.
Mayor Ferre: Well you don't mean friends, you mean people that are....
Rev. Gibson: Well, the people that I would want to favor - that's what
politics is all about and contrary to what other folk want to believe that
politics is all holy and archangel, I know better, I've learned that. Look,
I used to think that before I got up here. I used to think that before I
got up here but since I have been up here I found out that t'ain't necessar-
ily so. ... The angels had their friends as holy as they are.
Mayor Ferre: Well, what is the question?
Mr. Plummer: Nobody's got an answer, nobody's got the question but we've
been on it for an hour.
Mayor Ferre: Well I don't know, who's made a motion?
Mr. Plummer: Well hell, let Gibson write his own ordinance.
Mrs. Gordon: I think we ought to table this until the next meeting.
Mr. Lacasa: I will move that.
Mrs. Gordon: All of us come now that we've had all this discussion with what
we feel we can live with and submit it to the attorneys and see what we come
up with.
Mr. Knox: There are two things I believe that could probably be reworked:
(1) is Commissioner Lacasa'a suggestion which in essence would suggest that
for certain kinds of projects, and we could work out standards, that the
City Manager before he makes a decision to select a professional consultant
would advise the City Commission of the nature of the project and at that
time the City Commission could in its discretion could determine whether it
itself would sit as a selection committee for that specific project. The
second component that we can probably rework within the parameters of the
State Statute is the composition of the selection committee, that is the City
Commission could then have an option or could make certain changes in the
composition of the selection committee as it would choose to do so.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, George, you just said a couple of things, you probably
could think of a couple of more alternatives so, therefore, I don't think we
can come up with anything right now and I would move to defer this to the
next meeting.
114
BAR a �a�4
Mayor Ferre: There is a motion to defer and a second, furher discussion?
I'm sorry, we just don't seem to be able to come to a conclusion on it but
I hope you understand what our problem is and I hope that we can comply
with the State Law without completely, I hope we can find some middle ground
where we can include professionals but not to be professionals that control
the whole thing but rather the voice of some outside professionals, the pub-
lic at large and not let the City Commission not completely abdicate - I
guess that's the word I was looking for. You know I remember when I started
to work my boss gave me a big lecture which I'm not going to repeat but I'll
tell you the bottom line of it. The bottom line of it, he said there's a
difference between delegation of authority and abdication and you have to
learn the difference because sometimes it becomes a very fine line but the
difference is that when you abdicate you turn over not only the authority
but you turn over the responsibility and, therefore, you know when you dele-
gate you retain the responsibility. Now I think what Commissioner Gibson is
saying is that he wants to, he would accept the delegation of authority but
not the abdication of it and I think what this thing does is it forces us to
abdicate authority or at least an abdication to a very drastic, there is no
middle ground, we have to turn down your recommendation and that's a very
difficult thing to do.
Mrs. Gordon: Maurice, I just wanted you to, for us to tell George to include
in there some professional additions even if we're constituted as the Commis-
sion as the body because I don't think that we have that particular expertise,
any of us that we could judge you know - that's what you said, Okay. I'm
agreeing with you specifically but what I'm trying to say is to incorporate
the best of two words is to keep Father Gibson's theory of using the Commis-
sion as a committee but not alone and I would like it to include some profes-
sional expertise.
Mayor Ferre: The professional expertise, I might remind you that's what we
have in the administration to render. Now I agree that we have the final say
so but to completely eliminate the administration from the process is to go
to the other extreme and I'll tell you just point blank I'm not for that. I
will not vote for anything which puts the decision making process in the sense
that it completely ignores the administration's participation. What the hell
do we need a City Manager and the administration for?
Mr. Plummer: Now that you mentioned it.
Mayor Ferre: That's exactly why there's a lot of concern around here, the
Commission not only this Commission but all Commissions have a tendency to
substitute themselves as a policy setting board in the affairs of administra-
tion. Now what we're trying to do is we're also trying to keep the adminis-
tration out of the policy setting and the selection of an architect is a pol-
icy setting matter. But I think that to ignore the administration on the
other hand is to go to the other extreme and I wouldn't be for that idea.
We're looking for the middle ground. Jim?
Mr. Whisenand: Mr. Mayor, the concerns that you have expressed and really
that all the Commission members have expressed about the ability to exercise
that policy making discretion I think are addressed to the extent they can
be without amending the State Statute by Commissioner Lacasa, I'm not sure
that was a motion but at least it is a suggested amendment to the proposed
ordinance. That would allow the Commission in any particular project or any
particular situation to simply retain the discretion to do so by the Commis-
sion or by a sub -committee of the Commission to do it and that would address
this legal issue to the extent that it can be addressed without a statutory
change.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, Mr. Shisenand, we have a motion and a second. Is
there further discussion? I think we all understand what this is, so let's
call the roll.
115
'AAR 81979
The following 4 .ion was introduced by Commissit..er Gordon who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-169
A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT
OF PROCEDURES IN CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL SER-
VICES BY THE CITY TO MARCH 22, 1979 CITY COMMISSION MEETING
AND FURTHER REQUESTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO RECOMMEND
ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you gentlemen, I'm sorry we have to make you come here
again but I hope you'll stick with so we can see it end successfully next
time. Thank ou a.ain.
31. RECONSIDERATION AND RESCIND OF PREVIOUSLY PASSED ORDINANCE WHICH
WOULD HAVE REQUIRED PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT
PARTITION IN TAXICABS.
Mayor Ferre: We're now on Item 5.
Mrs. Gordon: You already did that.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I was on the prevailing side of number 5's vote
this morning r.nd on the record I indicated that anyone wishes to discuss
the matter we would bring it back up so as on the prevailing I move for
reconsideration.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-170
A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AMENDING SECTION 56-30 OF THE CITY
CODE REQUIRING PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF A BULLET -RESISTANT
PARTITION IN TAXICABS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission, this item came
to you without the recommendation of the Police Department. The Police
Department in speaking to it was not in favor of it because the research
that they had done indicated that, in fact, what was being proposed was not
effective. In other words it represented a burden on the industry without
achieving any useful results and for that reason the department does not
endorse it. I believe that there are some members of the industry here who
want to speak to it.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: On the contrary.
Mr. Grassie: I also need to ask Sgt. Campbell whether he has net with mem-
bers of the industry and whether he wants to make a statement.
MAR 8 1g7g
116
to
Mr. Kemyatta: Before going into this, Vice -Mayor, on the contrary the re-
cord would show this
Mr. Plummer: Sir, for the record...
Mr. Kemyatta: Kemyatta„ President of the United Cab Drivers
Association. We have over 250 cab drivers and our life is on the line every-
day.
Mr. Plummer: Thank you. Now, if you'll hold your turn we'll as the Sergeant
please to answer the question that was asked of him. Sergeant.
Sgt. V. T. Campbell: Yes, sir, the industry did contact me to request to
speak at the City Commission Meeting on this, they wanted to be heard on it.
Mr. Plummer: Then for the record, Sergeant, would you indicate when you,
and I think at previous meetings you indicated that you had had a number
of meetings with the industry in relation to security problems, is that
correct?
Sgt. Campbell: Yes, sir, I have.
Mr. Plummer: And that's the total industry?
Sgt. Campbell: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir, thank you. Mr. Kemyatta?
Mr. Kemyatta: On several occasions the United Cab Drivers Association had
meetings with the Police Department to discuss the robberies and killing of
cab drivers. Last year four cab drivers were robbed and killed and we recom-
mend that a bullet proof partition be installed in all the cabs to protect
the drivers while they're on tour. We contacted the companies inside New
York, I have a brochure here to show you the record of what happened in New
York once they installed the bullet proof shields. The Police Department,
the County Police Department did a survey of all the taxicabs inside the
major cities and they say the shield is very effective and one of our drivers
was robbed about two months ago that had a shield, the only shield inside
Miami and his life was saved because he had the shield. The individual put
a 38 on him, the shield was there, he didn't realize it was a shield and he
was able to call the policemen and they put the man in jail. You know it
is a funny thing, the Police Department, most police cars have a shield in
them but the Police Department opposes a shield, they have a shield in
their car and that's contrary. I mean there is no defense in the world that
is 100%. Any defense could be penetrated.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Kemyatta, just to keep the record clear, sir, that which
the police car has is more in common terminology of a cage.
Mr. Kemyatta: It's known as a cage but there is a shield there, anything
that divides the car is more of a shield.
Mr. Plummer: But you can shoot through it if you have a gun. Well all right,
it's a partition.
Mr. Kemyatta: A partition, a shield, it's the same thing, anything that
divides.
Mr. Plumper: All right.
Mr. Kemyatta: And many years ago I took the liberty to contact Mayor Ferre,
in 1975 when Eula Holmes, a cab driver of Society Cab Co. was killed to discuss
the matter to have some type of device installed in the cabs to protect the
drivers. In 77 Cain Ballard was killed and last year four drivers got killed,
not in the street - the owners never did nothing about it, they never came
to the Commission to say, "We need some help, we need some type of defense,
we need some type of protection" but since the Cab Drivers Association pre-
sents this to the Commission and the Commission is wise enough to see where
there is need for some sort of defense, some defense is better than no
defense then they will come out and bring their cousin, their aunt and every-
body else with them to try to pursuade you to not give the cab drivers any
help. The cab industry is one of the worst industries in the country in
Miami here. There are no fringe benefits, there's no credit union. If you
get killed while you're working your family would have to pick up a donation
to bury you. If you run into trouble there's no type of system at all. If
you get involved in a wreck and if you have to get another car there's no
MAR 8 1979
117
one you can borrow the money from because they have no credit union. We
couldn't even the companies to come together to a meeting we had on the 13th
of November, Sgt. Campbell was there but the owners didn't show up, they
aren't concerned, in fact, the companies are not concerned about the welfare
of the drivers, they don't care what happens to them they figure if one driver
gets killed they can get another driver, the business continues but there is
no protection in the cab, the safe is no protection because if a person wants
to rob you with the safe in there they could come in there and rob you and
take the cab and go away with it. You've got fellows out there
minded, will rob you five dollars to buy a bag of reefers. When they rob a
cab driver it's not how much they take from it because it's easy to rob it.
They can get in a cab, say, "Well take me to Opa Locke", when they get out
there they but a 38 to his head and kill him, put him in the trunk. He has
no protection there, they can put a knife and cut him. They can do what
they want to do but when you're driving a cab if you've got the shield there
then you know that the guy can't do nothing to you while he's in the cab and
if he gets out you're not going to wait around there for him. As I reiterate,
no defense is 100%, the cab drivers need protection and the industry offers
no protection, they offer nothing. You can't borrow a dime from any of them.
If you need $25 tonight to save your life none of the owners would lend you
$25 but they would tell you they're concerned about the industry. They're
not concerned about the industry. You can't even call a meeting, we tried
to get them to a meeting on the 13th and they wouldn't even come to the meet-
ing. They've been ignoring us for four years until we decided to bring it
to the Commission and that's the reason why they're here tonight. Other
than that they wouldn't be here tonight.
Mayor Ferre: Let's bring it to a head, Mr. Kamyatta. We've heard your posi-
tion, we understand it, I understand your position, I think everybody here
does.
Mr. Kemyatta: Ok, then we have the Diamond Cab Drivers' Association, Mr.
Prince.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we'll recognize the association. Who do you repre-
sent, sir?
Mr. Gunther Prince: My name is Gunther Prince, I'm the President of the
Diamond Cab Drivers' Association. We represent 218 drivers from five dif-
ferent cab companies in Miami. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Vice -Mayor and Commissioners,
we operate in a very hazardous industry. The Miami Robbery Department claims
that we are number one in the amount of robberies percentage -wise in the City
of Miami. Last October in one month alone we had three cab drivers killed
in robberies. We feel that had the shields been in effect at least two of
those people would not have been killed, possibly all three. Mrs. Virginia
Smith, the widow of one of the cab drivers whose husband left eight minor
children behind was here during the First Reading was unable to be here for
the Second Reading. She asked me to convey this message to you that she
feels that her husband would have been alive today had there been a shield
in the cab and that even though nothing can bring back her husband she is
pleading with you to prevent future killings of other people's husbands and
she is fully behind the movement to have shields installed in cabs. Just
real quickly, in November of last year we had a mass meeting of cab drivers
that was well covered by the media and it was almost by unanimous vote that
all the drivers there present voted that they wanted both safes and shields
installed in cabs and that they felt the shields would be extremely effect-
ive in preventing further robberies and loss of life. You are going to have
here quite a few people arguing against the shields, of people who are
arguing against the shields, you're going to have strictly owners or annual
lessees, people who have direct monetary interests and unfortunately too
frequently in industry money is the only concern, not drivers' lives or
safety. In the high crime areas predominately in some of the black commun-
ities at night time people are almost unable to get cabs, they get extremely
poor cab service or no cab service. People from Liberty City have told me,
"I've called four different cab companies. The cab companies have told me
I don't come in your area." That they've waited up to several hours to get
a cab finally. We feel that with the installation of shields certain areas
of the community would be far better serviced than they are presently ser-
viced and a lot of drivers would no longer not go to areas because of fear
of hold-ups. Too many lives have been lost needlessly and we're pleading
with you to please enact this ordinance for shields. Thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, sir.
118
MAR 8 1979
Mr. Edward Steinberg: Edward Steinberg, Vice -President of Aircraft Taxi and
White Cab. There is some statements made here in regard to shields. About
three weeks ago the City of Miami Commission passed an ordinance whereby safes
were put in the vehicles and that will be effective I believe on June 1st of
this year. We have not had any time to assess what the merits of the safe
will be but I can say this, and I think it is substantiated with fact, a
shield in a car affords someone 25% protection. There are four sides to the
car, a shield only covers the back portion of that car between the driver and
the passenger. If the passenger comes out there are three other sides which
are available. We have not seen from any other cities, particularly Chicago
where shields were put in, any substantial reduction in crime or in violence.
It was in Canada and it was no reduction. We took the first step couple of
weeks ago by stalling safes. Now in regard to the taxi drivers' a-.3ciation
contacting the owners, we have the owners here of Yellow Cab Company, another
faction of Yellow Cab Company, Hurricane, Morse, Magic City, Miami,
Society Cab and all of us in the past have driven ourselves, are aware of the
problems out there. A shield today would cost approximately $400. On my
fleet that would mean $40,000 a year if it were effective throughout Dade
County. I'm not against any measure which is going to protect lives but we
have taken the first measure right now. If we put a shield in a car we have
to completely change the air conditioning system, the duct system, you will
definitely consume more gas to push that air conditioning to the back. What
are we going to do where there is a load factor of over 3 people in a car?
Now I know my fleet we've gone basically to Aspens and Volares which are small
cars, when we get three people in a car someone usually sits in the front seat.
A safe, we feel, is going to prevent crime because they're going to go after
the money, they might take the car and jack it up, take the transmission out,
they're going to go after the safe they're not going to go after the driver.
It is my opinion that there has been nothing shown with empirical data through-
out the country, nothing shown in any city that shields are an effective deter-
ent against crime and in the final analysis what is going to happen if this
ordinance passes is that you're going to have higher costs passed onto the
public, in my opinion, unnecessarily. I think anybody out there whether you're
an owner or a driver, and most people in the industry are lessees, a lot of
people have their own cars, they could put their own shields in. I don't
believe it is the job totally of government to regulate every single item
which a company does or an industry does. We can regulate ourselves. I think
if the area is critical enough it is a valid point but in this point we've
already taken the initial steps, we haven't had an evaluation and I urge that
this motion be defeated. Thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: I'll recognize you in a moment, all right?
Mr. Sigmund Zilber: Sigmund Zilber, Hurricane Taxi. A lot of things Mr.
Steinberg said I go along with but also some of the things that haven't been
brought up. Unfortunately or fortunately I guess, we're a tourist town. A
lot of people travel in this city in groups of threes and fours and fives and
what you would do is automatically make it a three passenger car if you put
the shield in because there's no sense having a shield behind the man if some-
body can get in the front seat with him. The air conditioning problem I don't
think we can take care of. They have shields in New York, they had them in
Boston, they don't have airconditioning in those two cities. I don't think we
can air condition a car with a shield in there properly enough to have the
people that are in the cars being comfortable in the back seat of the car.
It has not been proven and in New York City and in Boston the people who put
shields in are basically taking them out, they've either slid them open so
they're not being used at all so they can converse with their passengers.
Half of the cab driver's job especially in a community like Miami is being
able to talk to his customers, being able to give information to his customers,
help them out, show them different things. I drove a cab for many years before
I stopped driving, most of the men in this room are driving their own cars
now and I think if you ask them that really a good percentage of their job
is being able to converse with their people, a shield eliminates that. You
all passed an ordinance two weeks ago putting in safes, nobody from the indus-
try can down here to oppose although it's going to cost the industry 30 or
$40,000 to do it, we didn't oppose. We think it's a step, it's worked in
Chicago, we took their records and the sergeant did some surveys for the City
that's why he's recommended against this. We didn't oppose it. We are as
much concerned about our drivers and our lessees as anybody because I can't
drive 117 cabs; I need drivers to drive them. So I can't do something to pro-
tect those drivers to help them out they're not going to work but to put some-
thing in that we think is completely useless that will cost the industry just
in the City of Miami about $150,000 to install and we don't know what else it
will cost to maintain the cars because of the airconditioning problems that
won't be used, it's been proven in other cities that drivers don't use them,
we feel it would be wasted. We'd like to see the safes put in, if in six or
MAR 8 1979
119
eight months from now it's not working come back. We think it will deter
some of the problems. Thank you.
Mayor Ferret Ziggy, let me tell you what my problem is, and you know, tell
me where I'm wrong. I understand that this has not functioned well in other
parts of the country and it isn't because the industry says it but our own
department says it - I hear that. Now, if I were to tell you, if I were to
pull a gun on you and say come here, we're going to play Russian Roulette
now and the gun had four chambers and I were to tell you Okay, here's what
I'm going to do. I'm going to plug one of the chambers so that at least I
know that my chances are improved to that extent I think you'd be greatly
relieved if you knew that your chances were improved by 25%. Now all I can
say is this: I realize that the 75% still exists but do you mean to tell
me that if there is something that I can do that would increase my chances
25% and I know that I'm still vulnerable 75% I wouldn't want that if I were
driving a cab and there had been four murders in the City of Miami last
year?
Mr. Zilber: Mr. Mayor, let me try to answer that for you. A few years ago
we had a weries of robberies at the airport. We thought the airport was a
safe place because people would have to come out with luggage and if they
didn't come out with cases we were suspicious. So the people who decided
they wanted to rob us realizing this started coming out there with empty suit-
cases and on the top ramp they would walk out to the taxicab with an empty
suitcase and get in and then we had our robberies. What I'm trying to say
is people who want to rob us if you put the shield in will come in groups of
four. It's very easy to get 14 year old boys who decide now they want to
go out and rob a cab driver for 30 or 40 dollars and they'll get three in
the back and the man with the gun will get in the front seat. Now unless
you're going to change your ordinance taking us down to a 3 passenger car and
borbid us to carry passengers in the front seat which I don't think you want
to do you haven't really accomplished anything with the shield, sir.
Mayor Ferre: That's a darned good argument, I haven't heard that one before.
Well, we'll see from the other side.
Mr. Charles Stringer: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, my name is
Charles Stringer and I'm Public relations, Miami Cab drivers' Association.
We would discount most of the arguments of the owners of the taxi industry
in Dade County because even for instance we don't know where they get their
figures from but we have a brochure here which is from the Armored Guard and
Taxi Cab Partition Company. The company is based in New York, they manufac-
ture partitions, we have had conversations through telephone with representa-
tives of this company and they have consistently told us that they can arrange
a deal where taxis including first the actual item itself, the shield and
installation for windows for about $21O or less and when you go in terms of
buying in bulk or groups of petitions of 10 and 12 then you can cut it down
to another minimum. To the argument insofar as getting around the partitions,
in most instances where robberies exist, what occurs is that it is very rare,
occasions where you're going to have three, four or five individuals, youths,
whatever category you may want to put them in, want to rob a cab driver be-
cause there's not that much money involved and it's a situation where we don't
really look at the drop safe as really being that effective, we do not oppose
the drop safe because we consider whether they go along with our proposal of
having the bullet proof shield then we would not oppose the safes because we
would see that s not being any harm. But in order for it to be a situation
where you're only going to propose a drop safe then in our opinion it's only
going to be a death trap because a drop safe simple as it is is not going to
prevent a man from shooting you, is not going to prevent a man from stabbing
you or cutting you or presenting bodily harm to you. A drop safe is not
designed for that. The only thing that provides, to minimize that type of
situation occuring is where you have a shield inside the cab that separates
the passengers from the driver. That's the only thing that's really going to
minimize and cut down. We do not think that this is going to be 100%, we
know .... but we think that this offers the better of the two between drop
safes and the shields the shield offers a better degree of protection. We
do not oppose it if they are combined but if it's going to be a drop safe, a
drop safe isn't going to prevent a robber from killing you, I mean there have
been several robberies recently within the last week because they already have
cabs that operate within the City that have drop safes a:.f they have been
robbed. .... There was a fellow that drives for Society Cab was robbed and
shot at but fortunately enough he wasn't killed and he was not injured and the
drop safe was in there so that indicates that it doesn't prevent a man frr-•
shooting you. I mean it's common sense. You've got a shield inside the c4Lb,
it's bullet proof and you have a steel plate on the back of you he can't shoot
through that, he can shoot all day long, it may rickochet and hit him but
MAR 81970
120
•
if you've got a drop safe in there that drop safe is not going to prevent
him from being shot or being killed and once they know that they cannot get
to the driver himself they're not .... That's what we want to do, we want
to prevent accessibility to the driver himself and in turn by preventing
accessibility, diminishing amount is the ability of the assailant to rob
you and that means then you could have cab drivers operating in the worst
parts of the community without... that where they're going they're going to
be held up because that accessibility would not be there. So I think our
situation is very clear, I mean there's lots to support a situation that is
going to offer some degree of security. Basically the drop safe in our
opinion does not offer any security it only prevents a situation where even
in the report that was compiled by the Dade County Police Department, one
of the basic reasons why the proposed drop safe was because there were occur-
ences where cab drivers themselves made false reports that they were robbed
and kept the money themselves. So the drop safe isn't a situation where
they provide a provision where a driver ...., so if he robbed of anything
more than 3, 4 or $5 then is he responsible for that additional amount of
money that was taken and that in itself prevents false reports and this was
even in, as I said, this was in the Dade County Department of Police's
Report, they made an assessment of various cabs around the country, Los Angeles,
Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland.
Mayor Ferre: I hate to cut you short but it is now 6:00 and we have not fin-
ished our morning agenda, we've been here since 9:00 without getting up and
the Manager has just told me that in his estimation we've got at least five
hours more of work and when he says five hours I know we'll be here until
midnight. We started at 9:00 O'Clock this morning so I would be very grate-
ful if you and the future speakers would keep that in mind and let's get
right to the point. Finish your point and let's go because you've repeated
yourself an awfully lot. You've done a nice job but let's get right to it.
Mr. Stringer: I know I'm repeating myself, I'm trying to emphasize the
importance of the shield and that's basically our opposition. The shield
offers a greater degree of security and protection for the drivers than the
drop safe ...
Mr. Arnett Lee: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, I'm Arnett Lee. I'm the Manager
of the Magic City.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Lee, speak up because we can't hear you.
Mr. Lee: I say my name is Arnett E. Lee. I'm the Manager of Magic City and
Harlem Cabs and also represent Society Cabs, Mr. Williams had to leave, he
asked me to represent him also. We want to review a couple of things that
the gentleman just said. These two gentlemen happen to be in my company...
337 and 331. I'm representing 18 city cabs in my company all except the two
that are here speaking. We feel, first, we are concerned with lives. He
said that we're not concerned with lives - we are concerned, everybody is
concerned with lives. But the fact that these things will cost too much for
us to operate, the expense of these shields plus the safe, we feel that there
has a study been made that the safes have proven in Chicago that they were
capable of cutting down the robberies and we think that the safes are the best
thing for us right now so we feel that all this other money would be spent
unwisely for several reasons. Every time we change a car we've got to remove
this windshield, you've got to cut ducts and vents in your back so your air
conditioning can go through. Besides, this is a tourist town and we all must
remember one thing - that if we don't communicate with these people and these
tourists here we just don't make it. Thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: All right. Yes, sir.
Mr. Lewis: I'm Mr. Lewis, I'm from Yellow Cab Owner/Operator Association,
I'm the Vice -President. We all drive cabs, not only that we are owners, we
also drive cabs and I had those shields in New York - I'm talking to experience,
especially that type of shield that they have right there. Number one, when
you put them in the cab you reduce the passenger's seating capacity there be-
cause that thing occupies a lot of room down there and furthermore, that would
not solve the situation because they will rob you just the same. You know
they come on the outside with a gun in their hands, there are many ways they
can do it and that shield will not help you accept if they have a knife. So
as an owner/driver I'm on the street just like anybody else and I don't w-tnt
to be killed, I don't want anybody to put a knife on me or gun me and if I
knew the shield was going to do any good for me I would have put it in my car
121
MAR 81979
without anybody telling me to put it because I know they already exist.
Thank you.
Mr. John Adams: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, my name is John Adams, Magic
City and Harlem Cab Drivers. Can you hear me now? I've been robbed. I see
these things as useless - they're nothing. You get there five people, four
people, it's an awful thing to say to put this thing. Here you have Spanish
speaking people in the back of the car talking to you in Spanish and you don't
speak much Spanish but the little that you do speak you've got this partition
across there and you can't hear them and they can't hear you.
Mayor Ferre: Are you an owner or a driver?
Mr. Adams: I'm a driver. You can't understand what they're saying, you're
only confusing, the people are confused. I was behind, just last week I was
behind 620, he has a partition, along comes some Spanish speaking people from
the Everglades Hotel, they looked and saw this thing, they climbed out of his
cab and came and got in mine. He told me, "I don't understand this, he has
a jail. This town must be bad." He came down from El Salvadore. You under-
stand? So I don't see what they're doing with this thing. I think it is
crazy, these people don't even know what they're talking about. We're talk-
ing about New York but we're working in Miami. Let's work in Miami and for-
get about New York. We don't have the population New York has. Thank you.
Mr. Charles Bardacki: My name is Charles Bardacki, I'm President of Miami
Taxicab Association here in Miami. I represent 50 cabs in Miami and they're
all self -operated, just about every one of those cab operators own their own
cars. Number one, a tourist oriented community like our's, you're going to
spread a picture of doom. Most of these Latin tourist especially come
over here to shop and we're trying to upgrade our image. Number two, the
shields are not going to stop robberies, I don't care what anybody says. Now
he is speaking from a manual put out by a shield company. All the figures
he has are put out by a shield company. Their main interest is to sell shields
they're not interested in drivers. Another point about robberies, if somebody
is intent on robbing a driver there are many ways to rob them with a shield.
We had one of our Diamond drivers last year pick up a woman with baby in arms
at 3:00 O'Clock in the afternoon and she robbed him with a pistol. So there
is absolutely no safety in that. And another thing we've got to figure out,
most of our trips, I know our association, has luggage. What are we going to
do about people with luggage? You see a woman with two bags, you're going to
automatically open the trunk and tell her put the bags through a loud speaker?
It's really ridiculous. It's just really not a deterent and it's not effect-
ive.
Mayor Ferre: I really think we've... I'll let you rebut this and we really
have to bring it to a head. (INAUDIBLE RESPONSE) Well, unless you're going
to add something different or new, don't stand up and repeat anything that's
been said. You're going to repeat something?
Mr. Herbert Angulo: My name is Herbert Angulo. I drive Yellow Cab daily and
I am concerned about the security because I have been robbed four times and
the four times that I have been robbed never that thing could help me because
the first time that they robbed me I was supposed to pick up some people at
their house and the people that were supposed to go to pick up the told
me come and help me with this luggage and when I get out of the car three
people got me and they robbed me ....
Mayor Ferre: You're not telling us anything new.
Mr. Angulo: The same thing happened the three next times, therefore, I think
that thing is useless.
Mayor Ferre: Ail right, thank you.
Mr. Prince: In response to some of the statements made by the various repre-
sentatives, the shield has been redesigned .... established back in 1964 when
they first installed them in cabs in Chicago. It's been designed where it's
perforated around the sides of the shield, the plate glass part where it
allows for ventillation as well as conversation.
Mayor Ferre: You mean those little holes that are punched through the...
Mr. Prince: Right, it's perforated on each side, both sides and on the top.
122
MAR 8 mg
•
Mayor Ferre: I'll tell you I wouldn't want to be dependent if my life
depended on those little holes to get air. Have you ever seen those little
holes?
Mr. Prince: Well see, I drive a cab that has the shield in it and people who
drive passengers, they agree with me, they find no discomfort with it insofar
as the conversation or even so far as installation of the airconditioning.
So there wouldn't have to be any restructuring of the air vents or any unnec-
essary .... And the shield is so designed change over to another car it
is flexible and it is so desiggned where you can transport it to another car.
As far as additional cost, we don't think there will be any necessary cost as
far as an increase in fares or even very expensive because as I said it is
only $210. For instance, if they were to apply a surcharge, perhaps six dol-
lars on a daily basis, five six day basis they could easily come up with that
money for those shields within a two month period of time.
Mayor Ferre: All right, anything else? All right, sir, on rebuttal if you
would finish and then we'll take you and that's going to be it. No more.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Just real quick, on the ventillation, the other system
with the two hoses costs $10 and they provide adequate ventillation and heat
in the cabs. I've got in front of me here the taxicab route we surveyed which
Sergeant Campbell and the Police Department worked with. Number one,
the survey comes quite a bit from the industry itself besides the Police
Department which it makes it sort of a slanted report because they have a
financial interest in this stuff. Number two, very quickly, just one thing
here from the summary. The summary is, "... The most successful methods
employed as preventative devices used in these jurisdictions - L.A., New York
and Chicago - are as follows: (1) bullet proof protective shields between
drivers and passengers, (2) robbery alert activated light switches, (3) drop
safes, (4) use of off- duty police officers and (5) exact fare systems." In
this report, in the summary their conclusions are that the number one best
prevention for prevention against hold ups is the bullet proof shield and
they are being employed now in such major cities as Detroit, New York, L.A.,
I believe, Philadelphia, so there are some very definite grounds that it would
be preventative. Also, by the way, as far as it being covered only 25% of
the car being bullet proof, when the passenger pays and leaves this bullet
proof thing the driver has ample opportunity to drive off and while it might
be only 25% of the area it would very well probably prevent 80% of the hold-
ups. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: All right, sir, for the last statement.
Mr. James Youngblood: My name is James Youngblood, I'm a lessee. I think
most of the owners and cab managers are concerned about the taxicab drivers.
Mayor Ferre: ARe you going to say something new now or are you going to re-
peat something that has been said?
Mr. Youngblood: I'm going to say something new.
Mayor Ferre: Good.
Mr. Youngblood: The Metro bus drivers, that was one fad that you know people
that were robbed, were victimized and then there was the truck drivers and now
it's the cab drivers, it's the same thing but we think that the drop safe is
one deterent against the w°,ole thing and we would like for the City Commis-
sion to give it a try at least. Thank you.
Mayor Ferre: You're in favor of the shield then, you would like to give it
a try?
Mr. Plummer: No, he wants to try the drop safes and
Mayor Ferre: Oh, the drop safes, I'm sorry. Okay.
Mr. Leslie Eisenberg: Mayor, any chance I can get one word in here? I'm
Leslie Eisenberg, I'm the President of the Yellow Cab Company. I'd like to
say something new and the word is tips. You know just a few words between the
driver and the passenger is often supportive of tips for the driver and I
think this is going to Beverly hamper, regardless of whether they want to
believe it or not, the tips. Thank you.
123
VAR 819i9
•
Mayor Ferre: All right, what's the will of this Commission?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I find it difficult to not support anything that
would save the life of people. I may not save all of them but if I save
25% of the 100% I think I'm batting great. I would hope that all of us will
want to save if only one life, if you save one life it is worth every bit
of it and I don't think we need to equate life with cost. I hope we will not
equate life with cost. I understand your $400 figure because let me say this
for the benefit of all of us - you know we're in the midst of a life and
death struggle with what's going to happen. Mr. Mayor, this is a very inter-
esting marriage. Some of the same people who were here telling me no, don't
have no shield are some of the same people who say yes, let's have shields,
they're on the opposite side as to whether or not you ought to turn over the
taxi permit business to the County. It's very interesting - where the pocket-
book is. I thought I'd better put that on the table. But for the sake of
everybody I believe if you save the life of one man it's worth all the money
that you concern.
Mayor Ferre: All right, sir, you, therefore?
Rev. Gibson: I am for the ordinance, that's a motion.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there's a motion on Item 5, is there a second? Is
there a second to the motion that Section 56-36 of the City of Miami Code
requiring a permanent installation of a bullet -resistant plate or partition?
Is there a second? Is there a second to the motion?
Mr. Plummer: For the lack of a second, Mr. Mayor, I make a motion at this
time that the Manager through the Police Department go back and make more
aware this Commission on all the findings which we have not been priviledged
to in the past. I would also like to see that a provision be given consider-
ation for exemption of owner drivers, the people who drive their own cabs
tat they own that they don't want to protect themselves I don't think that
we should make it mandatory. So the people that we're speaking for I think
is the people who do not own the cabs who are at the mercy. There are a num-
ber of cabs that I know in this town that are operated on an independent con-
tractual basis and that figure and fee I'm sure as in all cases the consumer
pays will be figured in the next time that cab is rented. I would suggest
and in a motion that this matter be referred back and that the Manager report
back to this Commission within 30 days giving us more facts and more figures
for an intelligent decision with the provision being studied which I have
outlined. I offer that in the form of a motion.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Lacasa: I second that.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a second, further discussion?
Rev. Gibson: On discussion, I hope while we take 30 days to investigate and
get some more statistics not a single person gets killed. What will happen,
we won't need the statistics then for that person and certainly you'd see
how quick the statistics are had and you would see how quickly we'll vote.
I'm going to vote with your motion because I want to make sure that you know,
and I want you to have your thing.
Mr. Plummer: Father, I hope that no cab driver in the next 30 days is in-
volved in an automobile accident in which he loses his life, those are facts
of life and things that happen. One argument that I did want to counteract,
and I had used in my mind the thinking before and that was that a big thing
around here for quite some time was bus drivers...
Mayor Ferre: All right.
Mr. Plummer: May I finish, please? They were the number one target. They
put in drop safes with no keys and, in fact, yes, it stopped the robberies
but a taxicab driver has to carry change. There is a difference, a big dif-
ference so that's where I see the difference.
124
MAR 8 19fl
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-171
A MOTION RESCINDING PREVIOUSLY PASSED ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 56-30 OF THE CITY CODE WHICH REQUIRED PERMANENT
INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT PARTITIONS IN TAXICABS
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO GO BACK TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND BRING ALL PERTINENT INFORMATION NOT PREV-
IOUSLY PROVIDED TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A PROVISION
FOR EXEMPTION OF OWNER/DRIVERS OF TAXICABS AND MAKE
REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson.
Mayor Ferre: I'll vote with the motion and hope that we don't end up regret-
ting it. I hope that you will come back hastily on this matter. Let me
state on the record as I did the last time my inclination is to vote for the
shields because I think that if we can psychologically prevent, even if it
saves one life it's well worth it. On the other hand I think there are some
things that have been brought out here that I think should really be addressed
and that is the question of the 4th passenger getting up front and you know,
what protection is there at that point. The question of the ability to
speak because in New York I have a devil of a time because you have to scream
you know and it is very difficult to be understood with those heavy plastic
plates with those little holes in it and there is no question that with air-
conditioning I think there is a problem also and there's been a point brought
out about the tips. I don't think that tips are really that affected but
you know that's a new subject that's been brought out.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me indicate on the record that I intended that
this would come back no more than 30 days, I would be very pleased if it
comes back at the next Commission Meeting but I will not force the administra-
tion to make a hasty decision.
Mrs. Gordon: But J. L., there will only be one meeting I believe in the 30
days. Yes, that's the only meeting.
Mayor Ferre: Talking about the 22nd, if not he's talking about April 12th.
Mr. Plummer: If they can come back by the 22nd it would please me.
Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you very much.
125
'MAR 8 1979
32. PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF ORLANDO URRA - PROPOSED USE OF OLD
FIRE STATION NO. 16.
Mayor Ferre: At this time I'd like to recognize Mr. Urra, is he here? Mr.
Urra, I apologize, I know you've been here seven hours and I know it is a
long time to make you wait. You represent the Allapattah Community and we're
happy to have you here.
Mr. Orlando Urra: As you know, my English is very bad, if some one wants to
translate for me.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Manager, would you get somebody to ...
Mr. Urra: I have Mr. Lazaro Albo as my interpreter.
Mayor Ferre: I think we're going to need an interpreter for the interpreter.
Mr. Grassie, I didn't hear a response as to who is going to interpret. All
right, thank you Mr. Armesto.
Mr. Urra as translated by Mr. Armesto: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, we have
a peculiar situation that comprise the three ethnic groups of the City of
Miami. Right now we have a tiny dining room for 1,500 elderly people that
receive hot meals every day. Besides that we have a Youth Activity Center
Program and a juvenile program also in the community of Allapattah. These
two programs are located in a housing facility that is not proper or adequate
to the development of these two projects. We have been looking at all the
properties owned by the City of Miami and we find there is one property owned
by the City of Miami in the Allapattah Community. Our intention at this time
is not to go against the welfare of the Fire Department or the Rescue Department
of the City of Miami. We have been watching very carefully for the last months
the proposal and the extension of the Fire Station No. 16, located in
Allapattah. They do use those facilities rur a training program three or
four times a month only, the rest of the time they use that facility as a
warehouse space. Because the necessity and the needs that our community has
to house those two programs I am requesting the consideration of the Commis-
sioners and the Mayor of Miami if we can house those two programs of the
Allapattah area in the Fire Station 16 or in the Rescue that they don't use
those facilities for the whole month. We need that facility because our dining room
provides more than 55 hot meals a day and the space is not enough for housing
the three programs, the meals program and the two youth programs. Our com-
munity is a poor community and I am requesting you to give special consider-
ation to this specific case.
Mayor Ferre: all right, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: Two things or really three things, Mr. Mayor and members of the
City Commission, one we are anxious to help insofar as the City can to make
Mr. Urra's programs more successful. We're very concerned about the question
of the Fire Department's facility.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, Mr. Grassie, you know conversely does Mr. Urra under-
stand what you're saying? Is there anybody? Do you understand? Okay.
Mr. Urra: Yes, sir.
Mr. Grassie: I would like a little later to have the Fire Chief speak to you
about is being done in that building simply so that you understand why we're
concerned about the location that they have in mind but thirdly, I have asked
the CD staff to look for some alternatives in that neighborhood and they have
been able to identify a couple of places within five blocks or so of the fire
station that we're talking about. Now we have not determined yet under what
circumstances this may work with their program but I think that this sort of
alternative is worth exploring so I wanted to make those three points with
you simply to help the discussion.
Mayor Ferre: Now you understand that what Mr. Urra is saying is that he thinks
that the program for serving hot meals should be moved from one location to
126
VAR a 1979
• •
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-171
A MOTION RESCINDING PREVIOUSLY PASSED ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 56-30 OF THE CITY CODE WHICH REQUIRED PERMANENT
INSTALLATION OF BULLET -RESISTANT PARTITIONS IN TAXICABS
AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO GO BACK TO THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT AND BRING ALL PERTINENT INFORMATION NOT PREV-
IOUSLY PROVIDED TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A PROVISION
FOR EXEMPTION OF OWNER/DRIVERS OF TAXICABS AND MAKE
REPORT TO THE CITY COMMISSION NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson.
Mayor Ferre: I'll vote with the motion and hope that we don't end up regret-
ting it. I hope that you will come back hastily on this matter. Let me
state on the record as I did the last time my inclination is to vote for the
shields because I think that if we can psychologically prevent, even if it
saves one life it's well worth it. On the other hand I think there are some
things that have been brought out here that I think should really be addressed
and that is the question of the 4th passenger getting up front and you know,
what protection is there at that point. The question of the ability to
speak because in New York I have a devil of a time because you have to scream
you know and it is very difficult to be understood with those heavy plastic
plates with those little holes in it and there is no question that with air-
conditioning I think there is a problem also and there's been a point brought
out about the tips. I don't think that tips are really that affected but
you know that's a new subject that's been brought out.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me indicate on the record that I intended that
this would come back no more than 30 days, I would be very pleased if it
comes back at the next Commission Meeting but I will not force the administra-
tion to make a hasty decision.
Mrs. Gordon: But J. L., there will only be one meeting I believe in the 30
days. Yes, that's the only meeting.
Mayor Ferre: Talking about the 22nd, if not he's talking about April 12th.
Mr. Plummer: If they can come back by the 22nd it would please me.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, thank you very much.
125
'MAR 8 1979
•
32. PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF ORLANDO URRA - PROPOSED USE OF OLD
FIRE STATION NO. 16.
Mayor Ferre: At this time I'd like to recognize Mr. Urra, is he here? Mr.
Urra, I apologize, I know you've been here seven hours and I know it is a
long time to make you wait. You represent the Allapattah Community and we're
happy to have you here.
Mr. Orlando Urra: As you know, my English is very bad, if some one wants to
translate for me.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Manager, would you get somebody to
Mr. Urra: I have Mr. Lazaro Albo as my interpreter.
Mayor Ferre: I think we're going to need an interpreter for the interpreter.
Mr. Grassie, I didn't hear a response as to who is going to interpret. All
right, thank you Mr. Armesto.
Mr. Urra as translated by Mr. Armesto: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, we have
a peculiar situation that comprise the three ethnic groups of the City of
Miami. Right now we have a tiny dining room for 1,500 elderly people that
receive hot meals every day. Besides that we have a Youth Activity Center
Program and a juvenile program also in the community of Allapattah. These
two programs are located in a housing facility that is not proper or adequate
to the development of these two projects. We have been looking at all the
properties owned by the City of Miami and we find there is one property owned
by the City of Miami in the Allapattah Community. Our intention at this time
is not to go against the welfare of the Fire Department or the Rescue Department
of the City of Miami. We have been watching very carefully for the last months
the proposal and the extension of the Fire Station No. 16, located in
Allapattah. They do use those facilities iur a training program three or
four times a month only, the rest of the time they use that facility as a
warehouse space. Because the necessity and the needs that our community has
to house those two programs I am requesting the consideration of the Commis-
sioners and the Mayor of Miami if we can house those two programs of the
Allapattah area in the Fire Station 16 or in the Rescue that they don't use
those facilities for the whole month. We need that facility because our dining room
provides more than 55 hot meals a day and the space is not enough for housing
the three programs, the meals program and the two youth programs. Our com-
munity is a poor community and I am requesting you to give special consider-
ation to this specific case.
Mayor Ferre: all right, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: Two things or really three things, Mr. Mayor and members of the
City Commission, one we are anxious to help insofar as the City can to make
Mr. Urra's programs more successful. We're very concerned about the question
of the Fire Department's facility.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, Mr. Grassie, you know conversely does Mr. Urra under-
stand what you're saying? Is there anybody? Do you understand? Okay.
Mr. Urra: Yes, sir.
Mr. Grassie: I would like a little later to have the Fire Chief speak to you
about is being done in that building simply so that you understand why we're
concerned about the location that they have in mind but thirdly, I have asked
the CD staff to look for some alternatives in that neighborhood and they have
been able to identify a couple of places within five blocks or so of the fire
station that we're talking about. Now we have not determined yet under what
circumstances this may work with their program but I think that this sort of
alternative is worth exploring so I wanted to make those three points with
you simply to help the discussion.
Mayor Ferre: Now you understand that what Mr. Urra is saying is that he thinks
that the program for serving hot meals should be moved from one location to
16
'MAR p 1979
another location and it has to be an appropriate location for that purpose.
Now Mr. Urra, you're not talking about a new program but the existing program
or are you talking about a new program?
Mr. Urra: This is a program existing right now.
Mayor Ferre: Existing program, all right. Now, Chief, my problem is this:
Mr. Urra came to see me and he talked to the Manager and the response was I
think either from Mr. Fosmoen or Mr.•Grassie, I forget who told me, "Well,
the Fire Department needs Fire Station 16 because that's where we do our
training and that's where do such and such.". You see, and then there was a
period and I then asked the question, "Well, isn't there a provision for a
new training, didn't we just approve a new training station?" And I remember
we just passed a million dollars or what have you for a new station with
new training facilities.
Chief Herman W. Brice: At the present time Station 16 which we call the
Rescue Administration Training Center is providing exclusively EMS training
for our people in the rescue service. Our Fire College located over on 7th
Avenue still functions as the Fire Fighting Training Center and yes, wee do
propose to build a Fire College in the future, however, that program is
probably two years off. The bonds will probably be sold on that this summer
and then we will begin design on that.
Mayor Ferre: Then the question should be after the bonds are sold and after
the station is installed and after the program is moved will there be room
station 16 to do other community type activities?
Chief Brice: Well, it is the Fire Department's position at this time that we
think 16 is a necessary facility for the Fire Department in the future also.
However, we are willing to evaluate that a year or two down the road when the
Fire College is built. There are other facilities that we will be releasing,
however, this particular one of all the stations along with Station 3 are two
facilities we would like to keep in the system.
Mayor Ferre: All right, sir. Then I think the answer, Mr. Urra, is that the
Manager is trying to locate another location that might be acceptable since
that Fire Station will not be available for at least two years. Maybe in two
years it will be available, we don't know that today. Now is there anything
else that we can say?
Mr. Lacasa: I'd like to ask a question of Mr. Urra. The question is this,
you mentioned that what you wanted to do is change the location of the hot
meals program now.
Mr. Urra: Right.
Mr. Lacasa: But the hot meals program is funded by the state, right? So we
have no jurisdiction over the hot meals program.
Mr. Plummer: Where does it exist now?
Mr. Lacasa: It's in another location.
Mayor Ferre:
ity over it.
Mrs. Gordon:
the money for
am I correct,
Well, I think we have no jurisdiction but we have moral author -
The program operates at the state, Mr. Lacasa, the state gives
the meals program but the state does not provide the facility,
where you're supposed to disburse these meals to the people?
Mr. Urra: Right.
Mrs. Gordon: So, therefore, Mr. Grassie has said and I concur, he's going to
find an acceptable location in that area and I will try to assist if I can
through my real estate.
Mr. Lacasa: But then the facilities are provided by the City? Is that the
situation?
Mr. Grassie: No.
Mrs. Gordon: The comm_ ity serves itself.
127
MAR g 1979
Mr. Lacasa: So what is the involvement of the City here?
Mr. Grassie: We're simply trying to be helpful, Commissioner, and I don't
think it should be taken as a promise that we absolutely can find a place
but we have already started looking and we will do everything we can to try
and locate a place. That is not a promise that we're going to find one.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Manager, I think we
only reason we're trying to help them
for our facilities and since we can't
so it would ease the pressure for us.
make sure they understand me.
ought to make it clear too that the
find it is because they came looking
turn it over now we want to help them
We want to be good City officials,
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there anything else to
not, thank you very much, Mr. Urra.
All right, if
come up on this item?
33. PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF GEORGE MAJOR TO REQUEST
STREET CLOSURE FOR "JUNKANO0 MARDI-GRAS AND
FESTIVAL".
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Major, if you would step forward, Father, I think you
might want to move the, this gentleman wants the street closed for the
Junkanoo Mardi -Gras.
Mrs. Gordon: What number is that?
Mayor Ferre: It's a pocket item, he's come here before us.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to make sure everybody understands this -
we instruct the people of the Goombay Festival to go back and get their
act together.
Mr. Major: It is not the Goombay.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, you asked me a question.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir, I did.
Rev. Gibson: I insist, this administration knows where I stand and they
know my position, call it any other name it's the same. I want you to go
back, my brother, as a good citizen and get your act together because I'm
going to be up here, I want to make sure - I'm not going to be like some
of the otheres - I'm going to be up here opposing you until you do the
right thing. I'm not going to have you mislead. He has the Conch Shell
Corporation which is the same thing or by and large not the same name but
going to do the same thing as the Goombay Festival. Let me say we had some
problems, I don't want to hear it in public. I begged them to sit down,
get their acts together. Now I said to them if they don't two things are
going to happen: (1) I'm going to oppose closing of the streets because
that belongs to the public and you can't kick the public around. (2) I say
that since all of you were in there and some group went off and got their
own thing he is the third group. Now he knows what I'm talking about, go
get your act together.
Mayor Ferre: Father, you don't have to speak anymore, Mr. Major, you're
not on this agenda, I have recognized you out of courtesy to you, my assoc-
iate here, fellow Commissioner Father Gibson has spoken, he has spoken for
me and I'm sure he has spoken for the rest of this Commission.
Mr. Major: Mr. Mayor, may I explain myself?
Mayor Ferre: If you take one minute to do it in.
Mr. Major: On July 31, 1978 I received a response back from Mr. Homan say-
ing, "I offer you the following consideration: This is a self-sustaining
event, this is not an event in connection in any way with the Goombay Festi-
val. I came, you know, before. Now I went out and I solicited the vendors
because I thought I had the approval, now he tells me, first the game about
the resolution.
128
MAR 8 f979
•
0
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Major, you heard Father Gibson's position. I don't care
what you're going to say here you're not going to change unless he changes
his position I'm not changing mine.
Rev. Gibson: No, sir!
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much and good luck to you.
34. CREATE AND ESTABLISH MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD
CONSISTING OF NINE MEMBERS.
It was suggested that five of the nine members of the committee be resi-
dents of the City of Miami and that the other four members could be from the
County at large, however, it was the position of the Commission that all
members should be residents of the City of Miami.
Section (d) was amended to include: Coconut Grove Civic Club, The Tiger -
tail Association, Bayshore Homeowners Association, Grapeland Heights Assoc-
iation and the Little Havana Development Authority.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-172
A RESOLUTION CREATING AND ESTABLISHING A MIAMI WATERFRONT
BOARD, CONSISTING OF 9 INDIVIDUALS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
REVIEWING AND EVALUATING WATERFRONT ISSUES; DESCRIBING
THE METHOD OF APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE BOARD; THE TERMS
OF OFFICE; DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARD; PROVISIONS
FOR REMOVAL OF MEMBERS; AND SELECTION OF A CHAIRPERSON.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
11AR 8 197g
41.OQ
35.URGE DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO REJECT PROPOSED ORDINANCE
REPEALING EXISTING COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 31 AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW
ONE THEREFOR PROVIDING FOR DUAL CITY/COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -
HIRE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES."
Reverend Gibson congratulated Sergeant Campbell for his representation
of the City of Miami at a meeting relating to this matter and a portion of
the Police Chief's memo was read into the record.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-173
A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION
TO REJECT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 31 OF
THE DADE COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES WHICH PRESENTLY PRO-
VIDES FOR BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -HIRE
PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES"; ALSO DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO FORWARD COPIES OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION TO ALL MEMBERS
OF THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
36. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: FRANK ALBRITTON.
Mr. Frank Albritton: This is in reference to the last item up, and I just
want to publically thank all of you for the endurance over the last two years
on this going back and forth.... I really want to personally thank every
one of you for electing and deciding on this course and I hope that those of
us out in the marinas will realize that the challenge has really now begun
and it is for us to produce and I hope those that get involved will feel the
same way. Thank you.
130
35.URGE DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO REJECT PROPOSED ORDINANCE
REPEALING EXISTING COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 31 AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW
ONE THEREFOR PROVIDING FOR DUAL CITY/COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -
HIRE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES."
Reverend Gibson congratulated Sergeant Campbell for his representation
of the City of Miami at a meeting relating to this matter and a portion of
the Police Chief's memo was read into the record.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-173
A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION
TO REJECT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 31 OF
THE DADE COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES WHICH PRESENTLY PRO-
VIDES FOR BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -HIRE
PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES"; ALSO DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO FORWARD COPIES OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION TO ALL MEMBERS
OF THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
36. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: FRANK ALBRITTON.
Mr. Frank Albritton: This is in reference to the last item up, and I just
want to publically thank all of you for the endurance over the last two years
on this going back and forth.... I really want to personally thank every
one of you for electing and deciding on this course and I hope that those of
us out in the marinas will realize that the challenge has really now begun
and it is for us to produce and I hope those that get involved will feel the
same way. Thank you.
130
8 197:
•
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Major, you heard Father Gibson's position. I don't care
what you're going to say here you're not going to change unless he changes
his position I'm not changing mine.
Rev. Gibson: No, sir!
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much and good luck to you.
34. CREATE AND ESTABLISH MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD
CONSISTING OF NINE MEMBERS.
It was suggested that five of the nine members of the committee be resi-
dents of the City of Miami and that the other four members could be from the
County at large, however, it was the position of the Commission that all
members should be residents of the City of Miami.
Section (d) was amended to include: Coconut Grove Civic Club, The Tiger -
tail Association, Bayshore Homeowners Association, Grapeland Heights Assoc-
iation and the Little Havana Development Authority.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-172
A RESOLUTION CREATING AND ESTABLISHING A MIAMI WATERFRONT
BOARD, CONSISTING OF 9 INDIVIDUALS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
REVIEWING AND EVALUATING WATERFRONT ISSUES; DESCRIBING
THE METHOD OF APPOINTING MEMBERS TO THE BOARD; THE TERMS
OF OFFICE; DUTIES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARD; PROVISIONS
FOR REMOVAL OF MEMBERS; AND SELECTION OF A CHAIRPERSON.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
AIA R 8 197g
35.URGE DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO REJECT PROPOSED ORDINANCE
REPEALING EXISTING COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 31 AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW
ONE THEREFOR PROVIDING FOR DUAL CITY/COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -
HIRE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES."
Reverend Gibson congratulated Sergeant Campbell for his representation
of the City of Miami at a meeting relating to this matter and a portion of
the Police Chief's memo was read into the record.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-173
A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION
TO REJECT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 31 OF
THE DADE COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES WHICH PRESENTLY PRO-
VIDES FOR BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -HIRE
PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES"; ALSO DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO FORWARD COPIES OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION TO ALL MEMBERS
OF THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
36. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: FRANK ALBRITTON.
Mr. Frank Albritton: This is in reference to the last item up, and I just
want to publically thank all of you for the endurance over the last two years
on this going back and forth.... I really want to personally thank every
one of you for electing and deciding on this course and I hope that those of
us out in the marinas will realize that the challenge has really now begun
and it is for us to produce and I hope those that get involved will feel the
same way. Thank you.
130
8197f
35.URGE DADE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TO REJECT PROPOSED ORDINANCE
REPEALING EXISTING COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 31 AND SUBSTITUTING A NEW
ONE THEREFOR PROVIDING FOR DUAL CITY/COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -
HIRE PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES."
Reverend Gibson congratulated Sergeant Campbell for his representation
of the City of Miami at a meeting relating to this matter and a portion of
the Police Chief's memo was read into the record.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-173
A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION
TO REJECT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 31 OF
THE DADE COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES WHICH PRESENTLY PRO-
VIDES FOR BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -HIRE
PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES"; ALSO DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK
TO FORWARD COPIES OF THE HEREIN RESOLUTION TO ALL MEMBERS
OF THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Lacasa, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
36. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: FRANK ALBRITTON.
Mr. Frank Albritton: This is in reference to the last item up, and I just
want to publically thank all of you for the endurance over the last two years
on this going back and forth.... I really want to personally thank every
one of you for electing and deciding on this course and I hope that those of
us out in the marinas will realize that the challenge has really now begun
and it is for us to produce and I hope those that get involved will feel the
same way. Thank you.
130
8 WI
37. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH
JOSEPH F. RICE - COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CENTER PARKING
FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY.
Mrs. Joanne Holshouser appeared and requested that consulting firm
consider input from the various Coconut Grove Civic Groups during the study
which was agreed to by the City Commission.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-174
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO THE
ATTACHED AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH F. RICE, P.E. CONSULTING
ENGINEER AND PLANNER FOR A COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CENTER
PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, WITH FUNDS
THEREFOR PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED UNDER ORDINANCE 8719, DATED
OCTOBER 26, 1977, FROM THIRD YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FUNDS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
38... RECO".SIDERATION AND RESCINDING OF RESOLUTIONS 79-152 &
79-153 PASSED AND ADOPTED EARLIER IN THE MEETING
EXTENDING FOR ONE-YEAR THE LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH MIAMI
YACHT CLUB & MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB (DEFERRED)
Mrs. Gordon:
speak to that.
Mayor Ferre:
and 22?
21 and 22, I think there are some people here that wanted to
All right, who are the people that want to speak to items 21
Mr. Lacasa: Those were passed this morning.
Mayor Ferre: I know but this is under reconsideration. Go ahead, sir.
Mrs. Gordon: You know I just want to say that the procedure that was taken
this morning was rather appalling to me because things were picked up here
and there and everywhere. I was ten minutes after nine or fifteen after
nine and by that time seven or eight or ten items were completed. Now I
don't think that that is and especially in the items like 21 and 22 a proper
procedure.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me?
Mrs. Gordon: I don't think that's a proper procedure for this Commission
to select items and particularly items as important as 21 and 22 to rush
through ten minutes after nine in the morning when they're scheduled for
somewhere down the list of items. Okay? Let the record reflec•-.
Mr. Plummer: You should have been here on time and there would have been
no problem.
131
37. AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT WITH
JOSEPH F. RICE - COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CENTER PARKING
FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY.
Mrs. Joanne Holshouser appeared and requested that consulting firm
consider input from the various Coconut Grove Civic Groups during the study
which was agreed to by the City Commission.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 79-174
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO THE
ATTACHED AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH F. RICE, P.E. CONSULTING
ENGINEER AND PLANNER FOR A COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CENTER
PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY, WITH FUNDS
THEREFOR PREVIOUSLY APPROPRIATED UNDER ORDINANCE 8719, DATED
OCTOBER 26, 1977, FROM THIRD YEAR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FUNDS.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
38... F:ECO".SIDERATION AND RESCINDING OF RESOLUTIONS 79-152 &
79-153 PASSED AND ADOPTED EARLIER IN THE MEETING
EXTENDING FOR ONE-YEAR THE LEASE AGREEMENTS WITH MIAMI
YACHT CLUB & MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB (DEFERRED)
Mrs. Gordon: 21 and 22, I think there are some people here that wanted to
speak to that.
Mayor Ferre: All right, who are the people that want to speak to items 21
and 22?
Mr. Lacasa: Those were passed this morning.
Mayor Ferre: I know but this is under reconsideration. Go ahead, sir.
Mrs. Gordon: You know I just want to say that the procedure that was taken
this morning was rather appalling to me because things were picked up here
and there and everywhere. I was ten minutes after nine or fifteen after
nine and by that time seven or eight or ten items were completed. Now I
don't think that that is and especially in the items like 21 and 22 a proper
procedure.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me?
Mrs. Gordon: I don't think that's a proper procedure for this Commission
to select items and particularly items as important as 21 and 22 to rush
through ten minutes after nine in the morning when they're scheduled for
somewhere down the list of items. Okay? Let the record reflect.
Mr. Plummer: You should have been here on time and there would have been
no problem.
131
ti � e t
•
Mayor Ferre: Let me tell you something, if we left it to Plummer the whole
meeting would have been over by 11:30 and I think Mr. Grassie would have been
very happy.
Mr. Plummer: What's wrong with that?
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, are you for this?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: Well, it's already passed so I'm only going to listen to those
that are opposed. Is there anybody here that wants to speak in opposition?
Is there anybody here who wishes to speak in opposition to Item 21 or 22
which is authorizing the Manager to extend the leases of the Miami Outboard
Club and the Miami Yacht Club on Watson Island for one year?
Mrs. Gordon: I do, I want to speak on the principle of it, of what we're
doing. We are in essence granting a special privilege on public land to
these two organizations who perform service but not necessarily for the citi-
zens of the City of Miami or for anyone who wishes to become a member. There
is no restriction, as I understand it, for these organizations to just have
membership from citizens in the City of Miami. That became apparent in
the recent case where there were two ships that caught fire and neither one
of those two owners were residents of the City of Miami because their ad-
dresses were in the paper and both of them were from other than the City.
I feel that since we have just created a Waterfront Board that this City is
obliged in my opinion to at least refer matters relating to the waterfront
to the Board and you in my opinion acted hastily in approving this without
referring it to the board that we're now creating. It would be my opinion
that we should postpone any action because the organizations can operate
and will operate until action is taken on it and at that time after the
Board has reviewed it and made a recommendation then we should act accord-
ing to their recommendation.
Mr. Lacasa: The question here is that Watson Island was specifically ex-
cluded from the Waterfront Board's jurisdiction so I don't see how we can
refer this to the Board.
Mrs. Gordon: Watson Island Development is a development in total and this
was granted last year because it seemed eminent that Watson Island was going
to proceed with development. At this point in time it is not in my opinion
an item that is going to proceed just right away. Now I want somebody to
tell me why a dollar a year for this much land is an equitable amount of
money. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be allowed to operate I'm saying
they should not be allowed to pay a dollar a year.
Mr. Plummer: Would you consider fifty cents?
Mrs. Gordon: I would consider a fair and equitable amount as it would be
to any other group that would be bidding to use that much land that was
owned by the citizens of the City of Miami.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there anything else you want to add, Rose?
Mrs. Gordon: I don't know what I can add, I did not vote with it this morn-
ing because you pulled it out of context. You said that you would withdraw
any items where there was controversy.
Mr. Plummer: Sure.
Mayor Ferre: Fine, I will withdraw it and resubmit it for a vote again.
Mrs. Gordon: I would motion that we not take any action on this at this
time.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion to reconsider is the way we would
do it I guess, or if you want we'll waive even that and say there is a
motion not to take any actions on Item 21 or 22. Is there a second?
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, a point of information, if I am not mistaken, that
board which we just created excludes that board from hearing anything per-
taining to Watson Island.
MaN'or Ferre: Yes. I think the point, Mr. Plummer, is that out of courtesy
to Commissioner Gordon we said, you said since you started the meeting
at
8 1979
132
9:00 O'Clock sharp that any items that we passed on that any Commissioner
felt, I we think we extend to that Commissioner the courtesy of bringing it
uP
Mr. Plummer: Fine.
Mayor Ferre: I would, therefore, accept from you which is the proper way
of doing it a motion to reconsider Items 21 and 22.
Mr. Plummer: Fine, so move.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved
its adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-175A
A MOTION TO RECONSIDER ITEMS 21 AND 22 OF TODAY'S AGENDA
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Vice -Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now Mrs. Gordon, I will recognize you.
Mrs. Gordon: I move that we take no action on this item either 21 or 22 at
this time.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion on Item 21, let's take them one
at a time.
Mrs. Gordon: That it be referred to that board even though the board did
not say they had jurisdiction over Watson Island I still feel that the
board's recommendation would be helpful to this Commission in setting the
guidelines for what it ought to be returning by way of revenue to the city.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a second to that motion? Is there a sec-
ond to the motion? Is there a second to the motion?
Mrs. Gordon: I'm going to put this on the record. The people who are gain-
ing the benefit from the subsidizing that the City is doing on this property
are not necessarily those same people who are citizens of the City which
Father Gibson made a big point about a few minutes ago about membership on
the Board must be restricted to citizens. Well, I would think the benefic-
iaries of the taxpayers' money ought to go also to the citizens of the City
of Miami.
Mayor Ferre: All right, is there a second? All right, for the lack of a
second the motion dies. I'd like to speak, Mrs. Gordon....
Mrs. Gordon: Father Gibson has a problem with whether or not we could legally
refer a matter that is on Watson Island to the Board we are creating, Mr.
Alvarez, would you answer that from the legal standpoint?
Mr. Jose Alvarez: Section four of the just passed resolution specifically
excludes the Watson Island from the jurisdiction of the new board.
Mrs. Gordon: That is not the question, are we prohibited from referring it
to them anyhow? Are you saying legally we cannot refer anything to them
on Watson Island?
Mayor Ferre: You would have to change the resolution I would imagine.
Mr. Alvarez: The resolution would have to be changed.
Rev. Gibson: Mrs. Gordon, my concern was that when we created the board we
specifically excluded Watson Island and to now include it puts me in a dilemma,
that was my position.
Mayor Ferre: I'd like to address the issue because I.... Let me say some-
thing now, Rose. ... If I could just without any interruptions, if you'll
133
MAR 8 1979
give me three minutes I promise I'll stop at three minutes.
Mr. Plummer: Boy, I'll hold you to that one.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now you time it Plummer. Ladies and gentlemen, the
problem here, and there are two sides to this like everything else, I under-
stand the concern of Mrs. Gordon about using City property for the benefit
of people who live outside the City of Miami. Now let's consider the alter-
native. The alternative is for us to kick these people out, just say "No",
we don't have it and you're out and we're not going to let you have that
land. Now, I might suggest to you that Coconut Grove.... Club.... Let me
finish, Rose. ... and the two clubs on Watson Island are the only clubs
around here where a person that doesn't have a big yacht and doesn't have
a lot of money can launch his boat and get boating facilities. Now, for us
to say that we will only put boats in the water who are citizens of the City
of Miami I think would be unfair because that's the same kind of a problem
that say, for example, Bolivia has of not getting to the Pacific Ocean. You
know there are a lot of cities like Hialeah, now what do you expect the peo-
ple of Hialeah, how are they going to launch their boats, in the waters of
Hialeah? See, obviously the City of Miami is a waterfront city. Now I
don't think that we can unfairly restrict people from having that kind of a
facility and all I'm saying is this: These clubs are open to anybody who
wants to join them, black, white, Latin, men, women, people of all ages, they
are available to everybody and anybody. They are not expensive. These are
the only facilities in this whole community that give these type of advant-
ages to people that don't have a lot of money and the fact is that I think
it is the responsibility of the City of Miami. Why? Because we own all the
land. Now if this were like California where there would be miles and miles
of land that would be in private hands... Would you tell some of the City
people back there? If we owned miles and miles of land in the private sector
then I would see that there is an alternative but the fact, ladies and gentle-
men, is that the majority of the waterfront land in this community especially
in the central city is either owned by the County or by Miami Beach or by
some governmental agency or by the City of Miami and the private land where
you can launch a boat is very very limited and, therefore, I guess all I'm
saying is that I think we ought to find ways, and I don't know what they are
but certainly I don't want to impose upon these people in a forced way. Now
I think what we ought to do is we ought to address the issue as we have ad-
dressed the Watson Island Development hopefully and, therefore, what we're
talking about is not giving these people a lease in perpetuity we're talking
about one year. Now I know it can be said it was one year last year, Ok,
and it will be one year this year. Hopefully by next year at this time this
matter will be resolved or on its way. If not then I want to state for the
record that I, my vote next year will be for a full discussion, public dis-
cussion and for a resolution of this problem that has been before this Com-
mission for years and years without solving it. That's just my position.
Mrs. Gordon: Tell me why you feel a dollar a year is fair and equitable.
Mayor Ferre: I think that if these clubs, I'm perfectly willing to charge
them nothing.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, a dollar is nothing.
Mayor Ferre: Well fine, a dollar a year or fifty cents or zero is the same
and I think the only reason I'm willing to do that is because I think it
serves a public purpose and the public purpose it serves is the ability for
people who do not have a lot of money to maintain small boats and to be able
to launch them. As long as those clubs are open and available at a low cost
to anybody who wants to join them then it serves a public purpose.
Mrs. Gordon: Then tell me why you feel it is equitable that the people who
are not living in the City of Miami should have no more privileges than those
who don't. Why should they live in the City if they're going to have every-
thing the same?
Mayor Ferre: Well then I think if you take that kind of an approach you
might also say that only people who live in Dade County can use Dade County
Airport.
Mrs. Gordon: No, we all pay the money for Dade County, all of us.
Mayor Ferre: Well, but I say then why should the people of Monroe County
and other places use Miami International Airport? I mean you can take this
MAR 8 1979
134
argument to ridiculous extremes. The point is how do you expect the people
of Hialeah, for example, to launch their boats?
Mrs. Gordon: I would expect the associations concerned and are listening to
this conversation would take this matter before their board of directors and
come back and make an equitable suggestion to us because I don't think that
they really feel that this is equitable. I think they think it is a nice
thing to have and certainly I don't blame them for having it if we're willing
to do it but I don't think that we should any longer give away the rights of
the people to have whatever financial benefits could be accruing from that
property to the City's coffers which certainly aren't very rich these days.
Mayor Terre: Sir, would you stand up please and come over here, you represent
one of these clubs. Which club do you represent?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm the Rear Commodore of the Miami Yacht Club, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Terre: All right, would you give us your name for the record?
Mr. Jack Shoe: My name is Jack Shoe.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, Mr. Shoe, is your club open to anybody who wants to
join?
Mr. Shoe: Absolutely.
Mayor Ferre: If a Cuban or a black person or any kind of a citizen were to
want to join your club would there be any problems?
Mr. Shoe: Absolutely no problem at all, it doesn't even require a sponsoring
membership. We have an open membership to anyone.
Mayor Ferre: It's open membership?
Mr. Shoe: Absolutely.
Mayor Ferre: Now let me ask you this. How much do you charge for your member-
ship?
Mr. Shoe: Our yearly membership dues are $68 a year.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, now let me ask you this, Mr. Shoe. Do you know of
any other club in these United States or let's say limit it to Dade County
that charges $68 a year?
Mr. Shoe: No, sir, and I can say that I have traveled, I race a sailboat all
over the United States and a fee of $68 a year is unheard of.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, Mr. Shoe, let me ask you this question. If we were
to close down these clubs where else could somebody for $68 keep a boat and
launch a boat and be able to use waterfront facilities? Do you know of any
place?
Mr. Shoe: I have no idea, no, sir.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now let me ask you this question. What do you get
for $68?
Mr. Shoe: We have free pram lessons for anyone whether a member or not to
teach young children how to sail. We have adult sailing programs to teach
people how to sail. From time to time we have sponsored Big Brothers and Big
Sisters, we give outings and we try to cooperate with the Sea Scouts and other
similar organizations at no cost.
Mayor Ferre: Now let me ask you this question. For that $68 you don't get
the right to moor a boat or to put a boat in a slip or something like that?
Mr. Shoe: No, that's an additional fee but that's very very reasonable, $8 a
month you can leave your outboard or your sailboat on the club grounds.
Mayor Ferre: Now, sir, let me ask you this. Do you know of any other location
anywhere in this community where for $8 a month you can leave a boat?
Mr. Shoe: Absolutely not.
I sc
*VAR 8 19T9
Mayor Ferre(cont'd): All right, now let me ask you this question. What do
you get for $68.00?
Mr. Shoe: We have free lessons for anyone, whether a member or not,
teach young children how to sail, we have adult sailing programs to teach
people how to sail, from time to time we have..we sponsor Big Brothers and
Big Sisters, we give outtings and we try to cooperate with the Sea Scouts
and other civic organizations to, at no cost...
Mayor Ferre: All right, now let me ask you this question: For that $68 you
don't get the right to moor a boat or to put a boat in a slip or something
like that.
Mr. Shoe: No, that's an additional fee but that's very, very reasonable, for
$8.00 a month you can leave your outboard or your sailboat on Club grounds.
Mayor Ferre: Now, sir, let me ask you this, do you know of any other location
anywhere in this community where for $8.00 you can leave a boat?
Mr. Shoe: Absolutely not, absolutely not.
Mayor Ferre: All right, this is my last question to you. If we were to charge
you $100,000 a year -which is what that property is worth, on a lease basis, to
be fair, that's you ought to be paying- how many members do you have?
Mr. Shoe: I agree. We have approximately 400 members.
Mayor Ferre: All right now, 400 members, that means...of course, you have a
big subsidy, like Harvard University, where you get $200,000 a year anyway,
right?
Mr. Shoe: Unfortunately not...
Mayor Ferre: In other words, who would pay for the $100,000 that we would have
to charge you?
Mr. Shoe: Well, the Club would no longer exist.
Mayor Ferre: Then the Club members would have to pay for it, now let me
ask you this, rather than $68.00, the Club members would have to pay $500.00,
how many of those 400 members would you have?
Mr. Shoe: Very few, I couldn't say exactly, but very few. Our members are...
generally, blue collar people, working people.
Mayor Ferre: And that's the point, isn't it?
Mrs. Gordon: Could I ask him a question? Mr. Shoe, how many of the 400 members
live in the City of Miami?
Mr. Shoe: I couldn't say.
Mrs. Gordon: Would you furnish this Commission with that information?
Mr. Shoe: I will endeavor to do that, yes Ma'am.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, do you believe that your non-resident members should pay a
higher fee than the resident members?
Mr. Shoe: Well, our non-resident members cannot live within a 150 miles of
the City... maybe I misunderstand...
Mrs. Gordon: No, no..I mean non-resident, not City of Miami residents..
Mayor Ferre: Coral Gables, Hialeah...
Mrs. Gordon: That's anywhere. Do you think they should pay a higher fee?
Do you think that the City of Miami taxpayers should have some special benefit
for living in the City and paying City taxes?
Mr. Shoe: Well, that's a...
136
'NEAR 8 ten
Mrs. Gordon: Do you live in the City?
Mr. Shoe: No, I don't live in the City, I live in Dade County, but I don't
live in the City of Miami.
Mrs. Gordon: Do you think you should pay more than $68.00 for the privilege
of using the facilities or not?
Mr. Shoe: That's difficult to say.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, all right, you've answered the question.
Mayor Ferre: All right, I think that that is a valid point, that there should
be a distinction between residents of the City and non-residents, and I would
have you come back and I would -certainly after this matter has been approved -
if it does get approved- for you to come back let's say within a month, your-
self, and your associates, and the other yacht clubs, and recommend to us for
discussion the differential that you are going to charge for City and non -
City residents. I think that there should be a distinction between them, I
think that is a very valid point. Now, back on item 21, what's the will of this
Commission?
Mr. Lacasa: I move that it be approved.
Mrs. Gordon: It was a motion but it didn't get a second, is that...?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, if they are going to be considering this and come back
to us, why don't we wait until they come back and make a 9
Mayor Ferre: Because I think that we ought to...
Mrs. Gordon: It would encourage them, Maurice, to do it quicker.
Mayor Ferre: Well, my opinion is that what we ought to do is who...
Mr. Plummer:
wouldn't.
Mayor Ferre:
valid or not.
Mrs. Gordon:
anymore.
Rose, I asked you to use that theory this afternoon and you
That's right, it all depends on where you apply it, whether it's
Well, that's what you said, if you pay the fiddler ne won't play
Mr. Plummer: Boy, history is really catching up around here.
Mayor Ferre: Well, you know. I frankly think that my position is not going
to change at all as far as giving these people a one-year lease for $1.00; and
secondly, that as far as I'm concerned what we are talking about is not whether
or not they going to lease for one year for $1.00 but what they are going to
charge the residents versus the non-resident....
Mrs. Gordon: Right, and I would expect them to contribute some of that additional
money to the City, I mean, let's face it, that's what the purpose is in charging
more money.
Mayor Ferre: Fine, that's something that we can consider at that time but, you
know, whatever the Commission wants to do, so make your motions.
Mrs. Gordon: I move to defer this item, and for them to come back to us with
a recommendation of what they are willing to do other than the $1.00 a year.
Mayor Ferre: Motion to defer, is there a second?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I would second the motion with the understanding that...
I want everybody to understwid that does not mean I don't want those people to
have that....
Mrs. Gordon: No, I never said that.
Rev. Gibson: ...I know, I just wanted to put it on the record, that does not
mean I don't want them to have that lease, I just want them to move forward
and bring us that information back, okay? All right.
nth 137
'MAR 81979
Mayor Ferre:
Rev. Gibson:
Mayor Ferre:
All right, do you second the motion?
Yes, sir.
Further discussion, call the roll.
THEREUPON, the foregoing motion introduced by Commissioner
Gordon and seconded by Commissioner (Rev.) Gibson, died on
account of the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
None.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now on item 21, is there a motion?
Mr. Lacasa: I move item 21 be approved authorizing the City Manager to extend
the Lease Agreement with the Miami Outboard Club on Watson Island for a one-
year term.
Mayor Ferre: Is there a second? Is there a second? All right, what do you
want to do?
Mr. Plummer: I know what I'm doing.
Mayor Ferre: (PASSING GAVEL TO VICE MAYOR) I'll second the motion.
Mr. Plummer: Any discussion?
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Lacasa, was your motion including the $1.00 a year lease?
Is that what the motion is?
Mayor Ferre: ...As it reads in the Resolution.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, it wasn't read into the record then.
Mr. Plummer: Does your motion include $1.00 a year?
Mr. Lacasa: Yes, it does.
Mr. Plummer: Okay, any further discussion? Hearing none, call the roll.
THEREUPON, the foregoing motion introduced by Commissioner
Lacasa and seconded by Commissioner (Mayor) Ferre, died on
account of the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Gibson*
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ON ROLL CALL:
*Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, I'm going to vote "no"
because I believe if those people are going to come back here within a reason-
able length of time nobody is going to get that place, and I'm going to vote
then. I don't want to vote now because I want to do then what Plummer was
urging us to do with the School Board, and my vote is going to be "no." And
please tell them, I'm not voting against them, I just want them to get back
in and bring me that information. All right.
Mayor Ferre:
Rev. Gibson:
to us within
Mayor Ferre:
Okay, what's the will of this Commission?
Mr. Mayor, I move that the people be instructed to come back
30 days with the requested information.
There is a motion, is there a second?
Mrs. Gordon: A1so,..I'11 second it, will you include, Father, in that motion
that they bring back the info:oration and a recommendation of what they would
338
'MAR 8 Mt
Mrs. Gordon (cont'd): be doing other than...or would be willing to do other
than the $1.00 a year.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there is a motion and a second,
on the motion, call the roll:
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner
moved its adoption:
by
MOTION NO. 79-175B
further discussion
(Rev) Gibson who
A MOTION TO RESCIND EXTENSION OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE
MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB ON WATSON ISLAND AND INSTRUCTING THE
MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB TO COME BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION
WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION; NAMELY, A REVISED FEE STRUCTURE
THAT WOULD ESTABLISH A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CITY OF MIAMI
RESIDENTS AND NON -CITY RESIDENTS; AND FURTHER REQUESTING
THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ADJUSTMENT IN THE YEARLY RATE
PAID TO THE CITY FOR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY OTHER THAN THE
PRESENT $1.00 A YEAR RENTAL FEE; RECOMMENDATION DUE WITHIN
30 DAYS.
Upon being seconded by Comissioner Gordon, the motion was passed
the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Gibson
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.*
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre**
NOES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa
and adopted
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
*Mr. Plummer: I vote with the motion. It is not a motion of deferral, it is
a motion of specific intent, and it behooves them to come back to get their
contract renewed, I will vote with the motion, yes.
**Mayor Ferre: I'm sorry, I was listening to Mr. Grassie when I should have
been paying attention, so tell me, what was the vote, ...I remember the motion,
it was Father's motion, seconded by Rose, the vote has been what?
Ms. Hirai: Mr. Lacasa voted "no."
Mayor Ferre: And Mr. Plummer?
Ms. Hirai: He voted "yes", everybody else has voted with the motion.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I think, obviously, if we couldn't get a second...I mean
three votes on 21 and 22, obviously, the best thing to do is to bring it back
in 30 days, and we will consider it at that time, so I vote with the motion.
Mayor Ferre:
Mrs. Gordon:
Rev. Gibson:
All right, I would imagine you want the same with item 22?
Yes.
Sure.
Mayor Ferre: All right, move 22 the same way, and second, further discussion,
call the roll.
Mr. Plummer: This is on item 22?
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, what was the motion on 22?
Mayor Ferre: Same motion in 21 as in 22.
Mr. Plummer: But there is no representative here of the Outboard Club to
mh
IIAR e 19t9
181
Mr. Plummer (cont'd): discuss the matter, is that correct? We do not at
this point know what their policy is.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I think that what's valid for 21 is valid for 22.
Mrs. Gordon: The same information can be transmitted to them and they could
then take it before their Board of Directors for the same discussion, J. L.
Mayor Ferre: How about the Coconut Grove Yacht Club?
Mrs. Gordon: Well, it's not in the agenda Maurice.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me give you an overlay here of what my real basic
thinking is. You know, it is very clear when we negotiated the Watson Island
contract, and that contract calls and specifically speaks to the Yacht Club
and to the Miami Outboard Club if Watson Island becomes a reality. Now, my
immediate question to Mr. Grassie was, why do these people have to have a
lease at all? Because their term of really being there as spelled out in the
Watson Island lease is only as long as it takes to finalize Watson Island.
It that's 6 months, then it is 6 months, if it's 12 months or 18 then that's
what it is, and I personally don't think a lease is necessary. Unfortunately,
Mr. Grassie thinks that it is because of liability. Now, you know, I'm just
speaking to the point that I personally do not think the lease is necessary
they have existed there in great harmony with this community but I just don't
think a lease is necessary when their days are spelled in the Watson Island
lease.
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion on item 22, there has been a motion and a
second, that this matter be brought before us in 30 days with their recommenda-
tions, etc., etc.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-175C
A MOTION TO RESCIND EXTENSION OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE
MIAMI YACHT CLUB ON WATSON ISLAND AND INSTRUCTING THE MIAMI
YACHT CLUB TO COME BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION, NAMELY, A REVISED FEE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD ESTABLISH
A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CITY OF MIAMI RESIDENTS AND NON -CITY RESIDENTS
AND FURTHER REQUESTING THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ADJUSTMENT IN
THE YEARLY RATE PAID TO THE CITY FOR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY OTHER
THAN THE PRESENT $1.00 PER YEAR RENTAL FEE, RECOMMENDATION DUE
WITHIN 30 DAYS.
Upon being seconded by Comissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner Armando Lacasa*
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
*Mr. Lacasa: Based on the fact that there is no representative from the Miami
Yacht Club I vote yes..
Mr. Plummer: Miami Outboard.
Mr. Lacasa: No, Miami Yacht Club.
Mr. Plummer: Oh, I'm sorry, you are right.
Mayor Ferre: Miami Yacht Club is here.
Mr. Lacasa: Well, then 21...
Mayor Ferre: That's right, then there was no representative...
Mr. Lacasa: Well, then there was a reversion here.
MAR 8 1979
140
mh
Mayor Ferre: It doesn't make any difference.
Mr. Lacasa: Well, okay, yes.
Mrs. Gordon: I believe, Maurice, you have to have -and we didn't do it- the
motion to rescind on 22, we rescinded 21.
Mayor Ferre: No, we did both of them at the same time.
Mrs. Gordon: Were they done together? Okay, fine.
Mayor Ferre: Well, all right, now I would like for somebody to make the same
motion for the Coconut Grove Sailing Club, they are under the same conditions,
and as a matter of fact...
Mrs. Gordon: I would tell you to put it on the agenda, I don't know anything
at all at this moment on their lease or anything else, do you?
Mayor Ferre: No, I would like to move you then, I'll pass the gavel over ..
that the Manager then bring back at the same time as he does this, all yacht
club leases...I want to tell you, I've got a very different attitude toward
a yacht club where you have 60-foot yachts than I do for little clubs that
have 10-foot boats, outboards, for $68.00 and $8.00 a month...that kind -of -a -
thing, where you have all kinds of people that do not have a lot of money but
want to enjoy the waterfront and have a right to enjoy the waterfront, and my
position is -I don't care what the editorial says, I don't care what anybody
is going to write about or criticise the little people of this community have
just as much a right to enjoy the water and the boating facilities as the rich
and my position is going to be consistent with that in the future.
Mrs. Gordon: Maurice, I would venture to say that you didn't ask for a State-
ment of financial wealth of each participant there and I would have to imagine
that they are not all poor, little people.
Mayor Ferre: I guarantee you that you are not talking about the big yachts.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but a lot of rich people don't want big yachts, they want
a little one they can run around fast in, and you know, with some skis behind
them and whatever.
Mr. Plummer: Are we going to the size of the boat or how fast it goes?
Mrs. Gordon: Depends on what you enjoy doing.
Mr. Plummer: Would you repeat your motion, please?
Mayor Ferre: I made a motion and it is that the Manager bring before this
Commission a review of all of the yacht clubs that have any kind of leases
with the City of Miami.
Mr. Lacasa: Second.
Mr. Plummer: Seconded, any discussion? Hearing none, call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner (Mayor) Ferre, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-176
A MOTION INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE PRESENT
LEASES EXISTING WITH COCONUT GROVE SAILING CLUB AND ALL OF THE
YACHT CLUBS THAT HAVE ANY KIND OF LEASES WITH THE CITY OF MIAMI
TO BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AT THE SAME
TIME THE CITY COMMISSION CONSIDERS LEASES WITH MIAMI OUTBOARD
CLUB AND THE MIAMI YACHT CLUB.
Upon being seconded by Comissioner Lacasa, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner (Mayor) Maurice A. Ferre
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice May..r J. L. Plummer, Jr.
mh
141
PI 1171
pk
(VOTES ON MOTION 79-176 coned):
NONE: None.
ABSENT: None.
Mayor Ferre: So much for 21 and 22.
39. REJECT BID for UNIFORMS for Police Department -
Direct City Manager to READVERTISE.
Mayor Ferre: All right, 24, sir. Now, look, last time we wasted one hour
and a half on this item. We heard from you, we didn't hear from your opposi-
tion and I'm going to give you each 5 minutes and that's it, and then we are
going to vote, okay? Now, I don't care which one of you starts first.
Mr. George Norman: I believe that Mr. Bronstein....I would like to....let me
begin first...
Mayor Ferre: No, no, you are not going to begin unless...you have 5 minutes,
do you want to take your 5 minutes now? You want to talk first?
Mr. Norman: No.
Mayor Ferre: Do you want to talk first?
Mr. Bronstein: I have nothing to say.
Mr. Norman: Mr. Mayor, I've been sitting here respectfully listening to the
people for 7 hours, I think you've done a magnificent job.
Mayor Ferre: No, sir, I told you to come back at 5:00 o'clock, and I watched
you come here at 5 minutes or 10 minutes to 5, so don't tell me you've been
sitting here 7 hours.
Mr. Norman: I'm talking about the last time I was here, sir. And I did not
speak for one hour and a half but I'm sorry that we are starting off this way
because I wanted to thank you for your indulgence and the Commission. I would
like to go back to the meeting last time and just say this -and I hope you are
listening to me, Mr. Mayor- that my argument is not with Jules Brothers, I have
no argument with the opposition on this bid, my argument is exactly what I said
before and that is with the misleading specifications that are on this bid and
we called for clarification, if you go back to the Minutes of the last meeting -
are you listening to me, Mr. Mayor? Thank you. If you go back to the minutes
of the last meeting, Commissioner Gordon questioned the Purchasing Agent to
ask him if he called Jules Brothers with reference to negotiating after the bid.
According to Mr. Mullins he said he understood the specifications clearly,
Mrs. Gordon questioned him, he admitted he had a question by calling Jules
Brothers after the bid was opened. We again respectfully submit that the bid
is illegal, it is not fair, and we ask that the bid be thrown out and we have
no argument, again, with Jules Brothers.
Mr. Bronstein: I don't quite understand what he said there but I assume that
we are dealing with item 4, is that correct? Item 4 deals with women's slacks.
Despite the bid specifications being very, very clear, they called for ready
made slacks and also made -to -measure slacks. Under the circumstances, any
person who has dealt with bids would understand very clearly that when you
have a situation like that where it says "OR" is not an alternate, it means
you must bid on both because both till be used. So that when you have a
situation that says "OR" to me it becomes very plain. You are not being asked
for an alternate bid, you are being asked for an orbit, which means that you
come to me for buying made -to -order and also off -the -rack. In that case, you
just normally estimate the thing to be on a 50/50 basis and you place your
bid accordingly, which of course is what I did in this case. However, there
142
MAR 8 1979
is nothing wrong with quoting a price for each, as was the case with Mr. Norman.
He quoted a price for made -to -order ....
Mr. Norman: From instructions by the Purchasing Agent.
Mr. Bronstein: ...and he also quoted a price on the made -to -measure. Now,
in the case of the made -to -measure -ready-made, rather- he bid a very low
price; however, on the made -to -measure he bid a very high price. And when
you averaged them both out they came up pretty high. Now, the year before
on the made -to -measure...
Mr. Norman: I think that's irrelevant...about the year before.
Mr. Bronstein: On the made -to -measure he bid $26.25 and raised the price this
year an additional $8.00, to $34.30. Now, our price last year on the made -to -
measure -that means, we measure this person individually and make it to measure -
and we provided them at $17.25. This year Lamar is asking $34.30 for the same
item. Now our price of 1979 on this bid, averaging -assuming that there is going
to be a 50/50 situation- we bid $15.50 and I don't think we are going to lose
much money out of it. It's possible that if we get a lot of made -to -measure
we are going to lose a few pennies, but when you consider the fact that the
overall bid is $128,000, it becomes a rather negligible one and infinitesimal.
As a matter of fact, it is very common when we bid a bid this size with a mul-
titude of different items, we like Department Stores, grocery stores, ...we feel
one of few loss leaders in order to try to bring down the overall amount that
we are going to charge so that we can come in as the low bidder.Nor, I understand
another item dealing with the coveralls, item 24. Now, item 24 there is no
question about it because it definitely states that the price shall include all
lettering in the overall price of the garment. Now, last year, Lamar bid the
item with exactly the same verbiage, identically the same verbiage, without any
problems. This year he, evidently, has created a problem but on item 24 there
is not even any room for any heavy discussion because it is identically the
same. The verbiage is the same, last year and it is this year, and this year
it says -and if I may read it, it'll take me a second- it says: (this covers
the question of embroidering) and it said: "All coveralls to have lettering
embroided unto back and collar as designated by the various individual units.
Price of coveralls to include all lettering and emblems." So, why this whole
question of lettering is brought up I don't understand because the bid speci-
fications were completely clear, no question about it.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, can I ask him a question? Mr. Jules -I don't know
your name, so your name...
Mr. Bronstein: Frank Bronstein.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, let me ask you a question. Did you receive a call from
Mr. Mullins asking you for clarification on item 4.
Mr. Bronstein: Yes, he did, he called me and I came down to his office.
Mrs. Gordon: That was after the bids were opened?
Mr. Bronstein: Yes., he told I had lost the bid.
Mrs. Gordon: He told you you had lost the bid.
Mr. Bronstein: Yes, because he...
Mrs. Gordon: So then you said, what?
Mr. Bronstein: I said, well, this is possible
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, and then what happened?
W. Bronstein: And then we went over it and it was pretty obvious that I had
not lost the bid because on it I had set out one individual price across the
board, in other words, I averaged it out, which is very common in this
particular kind of business. I don't know whether you are familiar with it
but it is a very common practice to average out, ..but this is not an unusual
thing, it happens very frequently. So when he refigured it it was pretty
obvious that I had not lost I was still the lower of the two.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, I know, but if somebody greeted me -Hey, you lost the bid,
MAR 8 1979
143
mh
I sure as the devil might decide that I'm going to average something n o w.
I'm just telling you how I think human nature would react to that pro-
nouncement. I, Mr. Mayor, feel very uncomfortable about this and I would
like to move that this bid be sent back for rebidding.
Mr. Bronstein: May I make another comment.
Mayor Ferre: Not right now, there is a motion on the floor and now we have to
see whether there is a second to that motion, and then, I'll let you say.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to second the motion for the purpose of
discussion.
Mayor Ferre: All right, now...
Mr. Bronstein: Mr. Mayor, we have done nothing wrong, we have complied with
the bid specifications, we read the specifications as any other vendor would,
we were the low bidder, we in no way are to blame or fault for anything, we
were recommended by the Police Department, we were recommended by the Purchasing
Department and to put this out for rebid would be -in my opinion- a miscarriage
of justice, and as a matter of fact it can't be done, because my prices are a
matter of record as are Lamar's prices and to rebid this thing would be a big
problem.
Mayor Ferre: Do you want to say anything to this?
Mr. Norman: Yes, sir. I appreciate it. First of all, again, Mr. Bronstein,
I have no argument with you or Jules Brothers, my argument again is with the
City of Miami Purchasing. Lamar Uniforms took two specifications and said -
custom or stock ...we called for a clarification, we were told to bid both items
separately, my only squabble is I didn't cet a written addendum because I helieveci
in the Purchasing Agent of the City of Miami and that's my biggest fault I made.
But if we were told to bid two separate ways, even if Jules Brothers bid $15.50
which I'm not going to tell him how to run his business, he's not going to tell
me how to run mine, he should have indicated stock slacks $15.50, custom -$15.50...
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, it should have been identified like that.
Mr. Norman: ...and that's the way the bid should have been done, that is legal,
and any other way in my opinion is illegal and again, Mr. Bronstein, I am not
arguing with you, sir, you did what you had to do, we tried to get a clarifica-
tion and I am arguing with Jules Brothers.
Mr. Bronstein: This is your opinion, sir, but it doesn't make it correct.
Mrs. Gordon: Maurice, there is a motion on the floor.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, there is a motion and a second now, before we vote,
under discussion..
Mr. Plummer: Are we under discussion?..Fine. Sir, you represent Jules Bros?
Mr. Bronstein: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: All right, sir. You presently hold a contract?
Mr. Bronstein: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: What was your bidding price for last year when you held a contract
on the slacks?
Mr. Bronstein: $17.25.
Mr. Plummer: Was that either or?
Mr. Bronstein: No, sir, that was the most expensive, that's the made -to -order,
made -to -measure.
Mr. Plummer: And what did you bid for off -the -counter?
Mr. Bronstein: It wasn't in the bid last year. This was the first year that
the "OR" situation came in. Now, again, I'd like to repeat myself, you cannot
bid but one price when it says "OR", you have an "OR" situation here, you must
mh
144
IA AI 8 1870
bid it. Now, where it calls for an alternate you don't have to bid the
alternate, you can bid only that which is specified.
Mr.Plummer: You bid last year $17 and change.
Mr. Bronstein: $0.25, yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: This year you bid $15 and change?
Mr. Bronstein: You would like to know why?
Mr. Plummer: Obviously, sir, you know that I don't.
Mr. Bronstein: Because I assume that half of the slacks that would be
purchased this would be off -the -rack, and off -the -rack slacks cost me a lot
less than the made -to -order slack. So I merely assumed that 50% of the slacks
would be made -to -order and 50% would be off -the -rack.
Mr. Norman: Then it should have been put in the bid, may I, stock and custom-
made...
Mr. Bronstein: That's not..I don't understand what you are saying,
Mr. Norman: You understand clearly, Mr. Bronstein and what you are
is you are forcing me to get upset with you when I don't want to do
Mr. Plummer: Sir, if I had asked the question of you I would have
you to answer and show courtesy to him...
Mr. Norman: I apologize.
doing, sir,
that.
expected
Mr. Plummer: I asked him the question and I now still ask for the answer.
Are you finished, sir?
Mr. Bronstein: Yes, I just merely averaged it out. The off -the -rack slacks
are cheaper, the made -to -order slacks are more expensive, so I assumed 50/50
and came up with the price of $15.25.
Mr. Plummer: My final question, Mr. Mullins? Would you tell me the conse-
quences of rebidding, if any.
Mr. Art Mullins: My Commissioner, to rebid these uniforms would really get
us nowhere because there were only two bids and both bidders have stated
their prices where it is now a matter of record.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mullins, can you tell me why you didn't notify Jules Bros.
that you wanted two separate prices the same way you did Lamar?
Mr. Mullins: Mrs. Gordon, as I stated at the meeting last time, it was reported
to the Commission by Lamar Uniforms that I told them to show two prices, and I
reported to you that I did not tell them that they had to show two prices. I
said that they could show two prices if they so chose to do.
Mrs. Gordon: But you did say they...
Mr. Mullins: That they could.
Mrs. Gordon: You didn't tell that to Jules though, you didn't tell them that
they could show two prices.
Mr. Mullins: No Ma'am, because Jules Brothers did not pose the question.
Mrs. Gordon: When you give information on bids to one party, aren't you supposed
to give the same information to both.
Mr. Mullins: If it is answering a question, not necessarily; if it is a change
in specifications or bid conditions that would require a written addendum,
perhaps yes.
Mayor Ferre: Did you hear what your Purchasing Manager said, Mr. Grassie?
Mr. Grassie: I heard it, Mayor.
mh 145
MAR 8 fa?0
Mayor Ferre: Do you agree with that?
Mr. Grassie: I think that it is very difficult to answer in generalities what
turns out to be a specific question. What he is responding to, I believe, is
the circumstance of his dealing with these two individuals. What he is saying
to you is that one person asked him a question, he tried to answer the ques-
tion, the other person simply didn't ask the question.
Mayor Ferre: No, but that's not the question.
Mr. Grassie: It was not a question of his providing more information, I think
that that is what he is trying to say.
Mayor Ferre: All right, let me ask you
in my vote, it is going to really hinge
my mind at this point. This morning we
torneys discussing...Father Gibson went
one attorney knows it is only fair that
this question, because I -you know -
on this, because I haven't made up
had the case of Ball Point, of at -
to great length to point out that what
the other attorney knows so that he
can properly the answer. Now, if an tmnortant r+oirt is asked becausehieddifsa t er
nebulous position in a contract, isn t it proper for us to let a
know that this question has been raised and these answers have been given?
Mr. Grassie: In retrospect, it seems reasonable, yes. I'm sure that at the
time it did not occur to Mr. Mullins that it was going to be much of a contro-
versial question.
Mayor Ferre: I guess the point then is, shouldn't that be established as a
standard policy of this City that whenever information is brought out to some
ambiguity that it should be shared with all people that are bidding. As a
matter of policy., on all matters on future bids.
Mr. Grassie: It's easy for me to agree that that makes sense in general but
I can also appreciate the problem of carrying that to reality, you know, for
the people who have to do the work day to day.
Mayor Ferre: Wouldn't that avoid this kind of a confrontation?
Mr. Grassie: If they can do it, yes.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, excuse me, Mr. Grassie the thing that bothers me
we ara really in teh area of custom-made pants, "Sam you mare the pants too long",
yet in the cover sheet here it says: "All potential bidders indicated they
could not meet all the specifications or could not make a local tailor avail-
able as required." Now, how can you make custom-made pants without a local
taylor, do you send the person out of town? Excuse me, Mr. Mullins...
Mr. Mullins: I believe that the statement was made that the other potential
bidders indicated that they could not meet the specifications because they
could not provide a local taylor.
Mr. Plummer: I stand corrected, you are right.
Mayor Ferre: You want to say something and then I have a question for Mr.
Grassie, go ahead.
Mr. Bronstein: Again, I'd like to make this point. As far as the coveralls are
concerned, I think we've settled that. That the specifications were very clear
and there was no room for bidding the lettering separately because it said very
definitely that it should be included. Now, in this particular case I was like
to reiterate and repeat myself. This was an "OR" situation, you have to bid on
both...
Mayor Ferre: You've already said that.
Mr. Bronstein: ...Yes, I want to emphasize it, so there was no other way
that you could bid it.
Mayor Ferre: You've already said all that, you haven't said anything new.
Mr. Manager, you've looked into this, I'm sure, you know it's a difficult
item. What's your recommendation.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, I have to view this from the point of view of the
mh
146
MAR 8 8179
Purchasing Agent attempting to do a good job for the City and running into
this kind of competitive problem occasionally. The Purchasing Agent attempts
on a day-to-day basis on hundreds of decisions that he makes to be fair to
vendors. Sometimes when people lose they feel that they've been wronged.
The fact that he answered the question for one person and then did not get
on the phone and called the other person and said -why didn't you think of
asking me this question...
Mayor Ferre: That's not the point at all.
Mr. Grassie: ...is something that, you know, maybe somehow in the future he
can try to do more of that. I think that the basic point is that he came to
a professional judgment with regards to the bid that is in the best interests
of the City, basic purchasing procedures have been followed and I feel that
the recommendation of the Purchasing Agent should be accepted by the City.
Mr. Norman: I would like to add one more thing, sir. Is it customary -I'm
asking this to the Commission- for the Purchasing Agent to call up a vendor
and advise him over the phone that he was the high bidder. And that's what
according to Mr. Mullins...he answered Mrs. Gordon, Mrs. Gordon said -why
did you call Mr. Bronstein? He said -Mr. Mullins called me up (I believe)
to tell me I was the high bidder, something along those lines. I'd like to
know why the contact was made after the bid?
Mr. Bronstein: That isn't what I said, I said that Mr. Mullins called me and
I was out, I got this message and I came down to his office. I remember as I
walked in Mr. Mullins said -Hey, I see you lost the bid, you were the high
bidder, I said -that may be so. But we went over it and he recognized the fact
that...he didn't realize that the $34.30 bid was -as a footnote- was fpr am
alternate bid, and of course when he refigured it we were the low bidder. Now,
he did call up and tell me that I had lost the bid. You know, the
Purchasing Agent, you are friends, when you walk in, he probably started kidding
and said -well, you've lost the bid.
Mr. Norman: Well, I take an oath on a stack of bibles that we followed the
instructions of the Purchasing agent and I don't argue with Jules Brothers,
I say that both bidders should have bid the same thing exactly alike, that's
what I stand on and that's what I believe.
Mrs. Gordon: Excuse me, sir, did you receive a call to come down, also?
Mr. Norman: No, Ma'am.
Mrs. Gordon: How come you called him to come down?
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Mullins?
Mr. Mullins: Mrs. Gordon, I didn't have time to call him, they called me
and advised me that they won the bid.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but he said you called him.
Mr. Mullins: Mrs. Gordon, I think probably within a matter of hours after the
bid opening...I was not at the bid opening and obviously the bids have to be
tabulated after they are opened. I was going to called by Mr. Norman's
Manager and he told me -well, we won the bid, when do I get my Purchase Order?
How long will it take for the Commission to award the bid? So, I called Mr.
Bronstein to tell him after I had tabulated the bids according to what I had
to tell him...
Mrs. Gordon: I have some serious questions about some things I'm hearing...
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I don't want to delay this but it would appear to me
that, sir, this may not do us any good in this instance, but I would hope that
the bid document will say next time, precisely, custom-made ..what price; you
know, tailor-made...what price?..And then, there would be no doubt. Now, in
view of the fact that there is some doubt, doubts, serious doubts. Did you make
your motion?
Mrs. Gordon: I sure didn't get seconded.
Rev. Gibson: I'll second.
147 "AIL s ton
mh
Mayor Ferre: There is a motion and a second, call the roll please.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-177
A MOTION REJECTING ACCEPTANCE OF BID FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT
UNIFORMS FROM JULES BROTHERS UNIFORM, INC. AND DIRECTING
THE PROPER CITY OFFICIALS TO READVERTISE AND REBID.
Upon being seconded by Comissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre*
NOES: Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
*Mayor Ferre: I'll vote with the motion and I don't want my vote in any way
to cast any questions about the integrity of the Purchasing Agent or on Jules
Brothers, I think that my problem really is that I think we've got to be -in
the Purchasing end of the thing- we have to be like Caesar's wife, you know,
there just cannot be any question about any phone calls made to the one that
was not made to the other. I don't think anything was done wrong, I really
believe that, but on the other hand I think that there are enough questions
that have come out of this that I think the best procedure and I'm sorry that
are all going to have to go through the misery of this again but it is to be
very, very specific and I think, after this, I'm going to make another motion,
Mr. Mullins, we cannot be casual about these things, it can't be based on
friendly conversation between friends because then it opens itself to all
kinds of potential accusations. We cannot permit ourselves that luxury. I
have no questions that you did the right thing, that you are an honest man,
and that you meant well but there are a lot of questions as to how this was
handled and I think it is more a question of judgment more than it is one
of integrity and I vote with the motion. The motion therefore carries 4 to 1.
Mr. Bronstein: I got the specifications, I talked to no one, I didn't talk to
Mr. Mullins, I didn't talk to this gentleman, who was the only other bid, I put
in my bid in good faith, I was the low bidder and let me finish, there was
never any implication of hanky panky I certainly, personally resent it.
Mayor Ferre: No implication, you lost 4 to 1.
Mr. Bronstein: I, I can't bid again Mayor, I'll tell you why, all my prices
have been exposed, I've been exposed, now this happened once before on the
City of Miami Fire Department. The Lamar organization, we were the low bidder
the Lamar organization came in with a couple of sleezy items, such as this today,
the one item on the slacks -
Mr. Norman: Mr. Bronstein...
Mr. Bronstein: Just a minute, let me finish, and they made a lot of fuss with
the Fire Department, the Fire Department called me up and said -look, we don't
want any legal hassles, will you go along and let us rebid it, and I said okay.
They took my prices, dropped about $.15 to $.20 and they got the bid. Two years
ago, they pulled the same thing, they found some little thing to come before
the Commission, which they did, two years ago.
Mayor Ferre: Sir, it's not your fault, I'm sorry...
Mr. Bronstein: Well, then why should I be penalized? I have done nothing
wrong, I'm a legitimate businessman...
Mayor Ferre: Sir, I understand your position, and I for one am not questioning
your integrity nor am I questioning Mr. Mullins' integrity, I am questioning
his judgment, and I think the vote of 4 to 1 is a questioning of judgment and
what we are questioning here is -and this matter is now over- we are going to
rebid it, and that's it. Now, if you don't want to rebid it that's your problem.
I'm sorry, and I hope you'll reconsider. Now, Mr. Plummer, I give you the gavel and
mh
148
MAR lift*
40. DECLARE POLICY OF THE CITY COMMISSION CONCERNING
"BIDDING PROCEDURES."
Mayor Ferre(cont d): I move you, sir, that the Purchasing Dept. .e nstructe
that in the future there shall be no conversations between bidders and the
City of Miami without full and open disclosure to the other bidding parties
so that all bidding parties are informed that the same information,...that if
there is any question on the bid procedures that is brought up by any bidders
that if the question is valid that without..not at the discretion of the
Purchasing Agent, but any questions that are brought up that it be put in
writing and immediately notified to all bidders so that they have all equally
the same information and at the same time.
Mrs. Gordon: In writing.
Mayor Ferre: In writing, and I move you sir.
Mrs. Gordon: Second.
Mr. Plummer: Any discussion,..hearing none, call the roll.
Mr. Grassie: Yes, there is some discussion, Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie.
Mr. Grassie: What you are addressing, Mr. Mayor, is a question of how the
Purchasing function is to be administered.
Mayor Ferre: Policy matter, that's right.
Mr. Grassie: ...and what we will have tp report back to you on is whether
in fact they can function and we'll try to distinguish for you the question
of policy versus the question of the day-to-day administration of that func-
tion.
Mayor Ferre: That's fine. I accept that, if you can distinguish, all I'm
saying that it is the policy of this City of Miami that any communication
between any potential bidder and the City of Miami will be public information
and by that I mean that all bidders will have the same information and that
if bidder A asks a question to clarify paragraph 36, that bidders B, C, D, E,
F, G and H be informed of what the question was and what the answer was, in
writing. And then there won't be any questions, and that's a matter of policy.
Now, call the roll.
Mr. Plummer: Further discussion? Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner (Mayor)Ferre, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 79-178
A MOTION DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE PURCHASING
DIVISION THAT IN THE FUTURE, THERE SHALL BE NO CONVERSATIONS
BETWEEN BIDDERS AND THE PURCHASING AGENT WITHOUT MAKING, AT THE
SAME TIME, FULL AND OPEN DISCLOSURE OF THE MATTERS INVOLVED TO
ALL OTHER PARTIES INVOLVED, IN WRITING, SO THAT ALL BIDDERS HAVE
THE SAME INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THEM.
Upon being seconded by Comissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES:
NOES: None.
Commissioner Armando Lacasa
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Vice Mayor J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you. Now,ladies and gentlemen, we are going to
mh
149
MAR g 1979
take up the Planning and Zonign Agenda next. And if you should forgive us,
we are going to take a 15-minute break.
AT THIS POINT THE CITY COMMISSION TEMPORARILY ADJOURNED
THE REGULAR PORTION OF THEIR AGENDA AND WENT INTO RECESS
IN PREPARATION TO TAKE UP ISSUES IN THEIR PLANNING &
ZONING AGENDA.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Commission,
on motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 7:59 P.M.
ATTEST: RALPH G. ONGIE
City Clerk
MATTY HIRAI
Assistant City Clerk
150
MAURICE A. FERRE
Mayor
MAR 8 1rg
CI*4If OF IW*MI
DOCUMENT
MEETING
INDEX March 8, 1979
DAT E:
ITEM NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
•
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
COMMISSION
ACTION
RETRIEVAL
CODE NO.
10
11
12
13
14
15
COMMISSION AGENDA AND CITY CLERK REPORT
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE
AMENDING RULE VIII, SECTIONS 8 AND 9, OF THE CIVIL
SERVICE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF MIAMI
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING
ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED
EXTENSION AGREEMENT FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN CITY
PROPERTY ON WATSON ISLAND WITH THE MIAMI OUTBOARD CLUB
INC.
ACCEPTING THE BID OF MITTFR-METOER OF FLORIDA FOR
FURNISHING ONE ARSON SURVEILLANCE VEHICLE FOR THE
DEPARTMENT OF FIRE, AT A TOTAL COST OF $18,498.75
EXPRESSING THE CONDOLENCES OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO
THE FAMILY AND FRIENDS OF HARRY P. CAIN
ACCEPTING THE ATTACHED "FINANCIAL CONCEPT" FOR THE
CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI JAMES L. KNIGHT
INTERNATIONAL CENTER AND GARAGE
FINDING AND DETERMINING THE PUBLIC NEED AND NECESSITY
FOR ACQUIRING THE FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO CERTAIN PROPERTY
DESCRIBED HEREIN TO BE USED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
THE CONFERENCE CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE.
APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL BUILDING PER-
MIT TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATION WORK
REQUIRED FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI/UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI
JAMES L. KNIGHT INTERNATIONAL CENTER
RATIFYING, CONFIRMING AND APPROVING THE ACTION OF THE
CITY MANAGER IN EXTENDING THE PRIOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY AND LANGAN ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.
ACCEPTING THE BID OF BARTLETT CONSTRUCTION CO. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,435,000
APPROVING, RATIFYING, AND CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF
THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING THE EMPLOYMENT OF
, ESQ .
R-79-152
R-79-154
R-79-155
R-79-157
R-79-158
R-79-159
R-79-160
R-79-161
0041
0042
0043
0044
0045
0046
79-152
79-154
79-155
79-157
79-158
79-159
79-160
79-161
0047
'DOCU MENT(N DEX
CONTINUED
TDI NO.
16
17
18
19
20
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
AMENDING SECTION 56-30 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, BY REQUIRING A PERMANENT
INSTALLATION OF A BULLET -RESISTANT PLATE OR PARTITION
ISOLATING THE DRIVER FROM THE REAR SEAT PASSENGER AREA
IN ALL TAXICABS WHICH OPERATE UNDER A CERTIFICATE IS-
SUED BY THE CITY
CREATING AND ESTABLISHING A MIAMI WATERFRONT BOARD
CONSISTING OF 9 INDIVIDUALS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RE-
VIEWING AND EVALUATING WATERFRONT ISSUES.
STRONGLY URGING THE DADE COUNTY COMMISSION TO REJECT
THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 31 OF THE DADE
COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES WHICH PRESENTLY PROVIDES
FOR BOTH CITY AND COUNTY REGULATION OF "FOR -HIRE
PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES.
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OT ENTER INTO THE ATTACH-
ED AGREEMENT WITH JOSEPH F. RICE, P.E. CONSULTING
ENGINEER AND PLANNER FOR A COCONUT GROVE BUSINESS CEN-
TER PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES FEASIBILITY STUDY
ACULFrING THE BID OF JULES BROS. UNIFORMS, INC. FOR
FURNSIHING UNIFORMS, AS NEEDED, ON A CONTRACT BASIS
FOR ONE YEAR FROM DATE OF AWARD FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF POLICE.
EMMISSION
ACTION
R-79-172
R-79-173
R-79-174
RETRIEVAL
SOX NO.
0048
79-172
79-173
79-174
0049