The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutM-79-0105MARINA OPERATIONS REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS RE: DINNER KEY MARINA. 2/22/79 A) Contract with Biscayne Recreation not be accepted for following reasons: (1) Term of 10 years with 5 year option is not in accordance with short-term 4 year management agreement as agreed to by Biscayne Recreation with the City Commission in Public Hearing of July, 1978. B) Principals of Biscayne have not had experience in managing a marina or in construction of marina facilities. C) The proposed contract gives Biscayne 5% of existing (25) as well as to be built slips from which to conduct a yacht brokerage business. Our sub -committee which investigated the potential income from this provision by contacting leading yacht brokers in the area concluded that Gross Sales of 3 to 10 million could be expected, with a 10% Brokerage Fee of $300,000.00 to $1 Million annually, or $3 to $10 Million to Biscayne over 10 year life of contract with no share of this income to City of Miami. D) Proposed contract contains incentive to Biscayne to increase dockage rates since their fee will be increased accordingly. The committee fears that Dinner. Key will become another Bahia Mar where only luxury yachts can afford rates. As a result, Bahia Mar is full in season but has only 20% of slips leased in off-season, and thereby does not serve Public Interest! Further, the sub -committee reports that the City of Ft. Lauderdale is extremely unhappy with the private operation of a once public marina. E) Proposed contract gives Biscayne right to replace sail -boat rental operators, commercial fisherman, and operate bait and tackle property formerly known as Seminole. The committee's analysis of the projected revenue's from these profit centers would probably yield an annual gross of an additional $1 Million Dollars with a net profit before taxes of $250,000 annually or another $2.5 Million to Biscayne over 10 year contract. Except for one cent per gallon on gasoline sales (instead of 1.5 cents paid by Seminole) the City will derive no share of Biscayne's revenue except for small (1/35 of cost) depreciation reimbursement. 7'9- 105, -2- We believe the public will not be served by displacing present sailboat rental companies or commercial fisherman. We do, however, recommend that the city promptly request bids for a new operator for the former Seminole shop to serve the boating public adequately. F) The Committee has reviewed the study of Waterfront Recreational Opportunities, Part 1 and 2 prepared by Greenleaf/Telesca and reviewed costs being incurred by other municipalities to construct marinas and we recommend to the Commission that serious thought be given to not spending $4.5 Million for 200 slips at Dinner Key when the same $4.5 Million would probably build 300 to 500 slips on Virginia Key with a lot less problems with permits and not harming the ecology surrounding Dinner Key. At the public hearing last month we heard from experts that it is not feasible to add two more piers to Dinner Key, it certainly seems to be better use of $4.5 Million to build a new first class marina at Virginia Key. G) Dinner Key Marina revenues from dock rates now tied to the city budget by ordinance are producing $200,000.- annually over and above expenses and reserves plus a contribution to run the Directors of Public Facilities Office of almost $50,000,- annually. These profits recently paid for new pilings of $100,000 - and will pay $125,000.- to $150,000.- for improvements to the dockmaster's office recently approved by the City Commission and now being prepared for bidding. This facility will replac showers and rest rooms now in use at City Hall, plus laundry, ice machines, and improved dockmaster's offices. Our point- is that we believe th;it major repairs and improvements at Dinner Key can be paid for with annual operating profits without incurring, bond interest expense. We believe that the annual operating profits can continue to improve if a study of administration policy and personnel were to be conducted and continued review by your citizens advisory board which herewith offers its continued help and advice. H) in conclusion, we strongly recommend that you reject the proposed contract which we feel will shortly deny the public its rightful use, to wit, Bahia Mar in Fort Lauderdale as a prime example. The City of Miami can and must preserve this jewel for all of the people. The proposed contract •.ail1 benefit Biscayne Recreation and its principals by millions of dollars, with little or no return to the City of Miami Treasury. Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Committee • Fred A,Roth, Chairman 79-105 f Hall ' 15 February 1979 Take notice that this serves as my notice of making objection to the proposed management agreement between the City of Mi ami and Biscayne Recreation Developement Co under Charter provision # 56 (H) on the grounds that the City Commission has not designated property which the Commission deems will be specially benefited thereby ; nor has the City indicated the proportion of the cost thereof which shall be specially assessed ; nor has the City listed the property against which assessments are to be made for the cost of improving Dinner Key Marina- a waterfront property - owned by the City of Miami , as required under City Charter 56, (D) - 56 (E) - .This notice complies with Charter 5- (H) and I respectfully request to be heard by the City Commission in its scheduled session of 22 February 1979 at D inner Key, Commission Chambers. the quoted section of the City Charter applies as the improvement considered is one of Waterfront . Furthermore under Section 56 (F) the Commission shall receive all objections of interested persons,'which I am , in addition to being a City of Miami resident end property owner. In addition the proposed Management Contract is in default and defective as Section #4 subsection (B) of said contract states that both the City and Bis- cayne Recreation Developement Co. make a diligent effort to sell a sufficient of revenue bonds within a Two year period ,from adoption of contract; is said sufficient revenue bonds are not sold then any remaining revenue -after expenses and management fees , shall go Fifty Per Cent to Construction Reserve Fund and Fifty Per Cent to the City. 15 February 1979 Mr. Ralph G. Ongie City Clerk- City of Miami City Hall Dinner Key Co mplex Mr. Ongie: Take notice that this serves as my notice of making objection to the proposed management agreement between the City of Mi ami and Biscayne Recreation Developement Co under Charter provision # 56 (H) on the grounds that the City Commission has not designated property which the Commission deems will be specially benefited thereby ; nor has the City indicated the proportion of the cost thereof which shall be specially assessed ; nor has the City listed the property against which assessments are to be made for the cost of improving Dinner Key Marina- a waterfront property - owned by the City of Miami , as required under City Charter 56 (D) - 56 (E) - .This notice complies with Charter 5- (H) and I respectfully request to be heard by the City Commission in its scheduled session of 22 February 1979 at D inner Key, Commission Chambers. the quoted section of the City Charter applies as the improvement considered is one of Waterfront . Furthermore under Section 56 (F the Commission shall receive all objections of interested persons, which I am , in addition to being a City of Miami resident and property owner. In addition the proposed Management Contract is in default and defective as Section #4 subsection (B) of said contract states that both the City and Bis- cayne Recreation Deaelopement Co. make a diligent effort to sell a sufficient of revenue bonds within a Two year period ,from adoption of contract; is said sufficient revenue bonds are not sold then any remaining revenue -after expenses and management fees , shall go Fifty Per Cent to Construction Reserve Fund and Fifty Per Cent to the City. PAGE TWO NOTICE OF OBJECTION Section Six of proposed contract - Construction of New Facilities- it is' anticipated the City issue approximately $4,500,000 worth of Bonds to provide financing ; which requires a general referendum to sell such Bonds; and such Bonds are a liability for which assessments , may have to be made. In addition to violating Chapter 56 of the City Charter , the proposed Management Agreement violates Section 74 of the City Code which states - No ordinance granting - renewing- or leasing the Right to Public Grounds or Buildings of the City of Miamito any persons , firms or corporations shall become a Law or Effective in any way until approved by a majority of the qualified voters of the City on the Question of its being granted- and shall not be submitted to a voteexcept on deposit with the City Clerk the expense of such submission. In addition the proposed resolution exceeds the power of the City Commission including those rights to lease public property under Mahoney vs Givens, as it is a fair statement to say the City will expend funds under this arangement con- tract and further expend funds and create a liability with the issuance of revenue bonds. This notice of making objection complies with Charter Section 56 subsection (F) and of (M). Respectfully Submitted. Sherwood Griscom 2525 S.W. 29th Avenue Miami, Florida 33133 443-8200