HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 2004-07-29 MinutesCity of Miami
City Hall
3500 Pan American Drive
Miami, FL 33133
www.ci.miami.fl.us
Verbatim Minutes
Thursday, July 29, 2004
9:00 AM
PART B (Portions of the July 22 Meeting were continued /
Additional items have been scheduled)
City Hall Commission Chambers
City Commission
Manuel A. Diaz, Mayor
Arthur E. Teele, Jr., Chairman
Joe Sanchez, Vice Chairman
Angel Gonzalez, Commissioner District One
Johnny L. Winton, Commissioner District Two
Tomas Regalado, Commissioner District Four
Joe Arriola, City Manager
Jorge L. Fernandez, City Attorney
Priscilla A. Thompson, City Clerk
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
CONTENTS
PR - PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
MV - MAYORAL VETOES
M - MAYOR'S ITEMS
D1 - DISTRICT 1 ITEMS Pages 4-5
D2 - DISTRICT 2 ITEMS
D3 - DISTRICT 3 ITEMS
D4 - DISTRICT 4 ITEMS Pages 6-17
D5 - DISTRICT 5 ITEMS
PH - PUBLIC HEARINGS Pages 18-20
SR - SECOND READING ORDINANCES Pages 21-23
RE - RESOLUTIONS Pages 24-41
DI - DISCUSSION ITEMS Pages 42-59
PART B
PZ - PLANNING AND ZONING ITEM Pages 60-81
9:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Present: Commissioner Gonzalez, Commissioner Winton, Vice Chairman Sanchez,
Commissioner Regalado and Chairman Teele
On the 29th day of July, 2004, the City Commission of the City of Miami, Florida, met at its
regular meeting place in City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, in regular
session. The meeting was called to order at 9:37 a.m. by Chairman Arthur E. Teele Jr., recessed
at 11:10 a.m. to convene a Special Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Board Meeting,
adjourned the Special CRA meeting at 11:19 a.m. to reconvene the regular Commission Meeting,
recessed at 11:47 a.m., reconvened at 2:23 p.m., and adjourned at 5:42 p.m.
ALSO PRESENT:
Joe Arriola, City Manager
Maria J. Chiaro, Interim City Attorney
Sylvia Scheider, Assistant City Clerk
PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
PR.1 04-00862 CEREMONIAL ITEM
Name of Honoree Presenter Protocol Item
Kathleen Woods -Richardson Chairman Teele Salute
City of Miami Page 2 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
MAYORAL VETOES
04-00862-protocol I ist. pdf
PRESENTED
The Commission presented Kathleen Woods- Richardson with a proclamation for her
outstanding work during her short tenure with the City as the Director of the Solide Waste
Department.
Presentation made.
NO MAYORAL VETOES
ORDER OF DAY
Chairman Teele: Would you please stand for a moment of silent prayer, followed by the pledge
of allegiance to the flag?
Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Teele: Good morning. This is a continuation of the Commission meeting that was
convened on Thursday, July 22nd. This Commission meeting is a continuation of that meeting.
Later in the afternoon, we will have a budget workshop, and although we attempted to clear the
afternoon, I'm advised by staff that we have, at 2 p.m., a PZ 1 item, which was deferred for a
time certain of 2 p. m., which is a Major Use Special Permit entitled Opus, and I'm also entitled
that there will be two other public hearings, one entitled -- at 3 p.m. -- the transfer of funds
relating to Off -Street Parking, and the second is a public hearing related to a continuation of the
allocations of the economic reserve from those districts that have reserve. Following those
items, hopefully by 3:15 -- and we'll be able to finish those items in 10 to 15 minutes -- we'll go
into a budget workshop. At the close of the budget workshop, we will complete any other
Commission business, and then it is our intent to break for the summer, and there is no intention
to call any special meeting in the month of August. Commissioner Winton has made it very clear
that he intends to be outside of anybody's jurisdiction for a call, and we commend you, sir, for
keeping us on focus. Commissioner Winton, we would also like to advise you and any other
member of the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) Board that, at the CRA meeting of
Monday night, there was one matter that came forth that, as Chair, I determined they had not
conferred with you appropriately. I assume that it's non -controversial. It is a request of the
Omni Advisory Board and the Executive Director for an Art Basel event entitled 'Impact Basel,"
and it has a substantial dollar amount; substantial meaning about double what we have spent in
the past. We will take that up at 11 p.m. -- 11 a.m --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: A.M.
Chairman Teele: -- but I would hope that your staff and the Executive Director would clearly
brief you, and that the Clerk would make available to you the transcript of the meeting as relates
to that portion, and the professor and the others who came and spoke and --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. 1 got a copy of the transcript this morning.
Chairman Teele: -- we told them there was no need to come to this meeting; the need was to
clear this with your office.
Commissioner Winton: 1 read the transcript this morning.
Chairman Teele: OK.
City of Miami Page 3 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: But I haven't talked to anyone, so the only thing I've done is read a
transcript.
Chairman Teele: All right. Well, they need to talk to you because we're -- you know, I think
there is strong support for the idea, in concept. There was concern about dollar, and we're
looking for your advice on --
Commissioner Winton: And what 1 know about Art Basel is that they have another event planned
that is formally sanctioned by Art Basel, and I don't know if this is a part of it, or if this is an add
-on to it. I don't know anything, so I need to find that out.
Chairman Teele: That's very important because we don't want to wind up doing the third -- I
mean, doing something that's not a part of it, and then what we're going to wind up doing is
getting another request --
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: -- to be a part of it.
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Chairman Teele: So, again, we appreciate your advice, and the only other issue before the
board meeting is the authorizing a month -to -month regarding the Grand Promenade where,
currently, we have no services being provided, and this would give us the right to cancel -- to
monitor the Grand Promenade, relating to the debris and construction debris, refuse, containers,
illegal vendors that are all over the place now, as well as to collect parking, so those will be
coming up at 11 a.m., and there is also, in your packages, I would hope, a dear colleague letter
that is dated yesterday, July 28th, regarding the selection of the City Attorney.
CITYWIDE
HONORABLE MAYOR MANUEL A. DIAZ
DISTRICT 1
COMMISSIONER ANGEL GONZALEZ
D1.1 04-00864 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION CODESIGNATING
NORTHWEST 14TH TERRACE FROM NORTHWEST 10TH AVENUE TO
NORTHWEST 11TH AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS "SCHONINGER WAY;"
FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF THIS
RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICES.
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 3 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton and Teele
Absent: 2 - Commissioner Sanchez and Regalado
R-04-0524
City of Miami Page 4 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: You can take care of anything you'd like to. D --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- Discussion Item Number --
Commissioner Winton: Second
Commissioner Gonzalez: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Winton: Second the motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: OK. It's moved and second.
Chairman Teele: Moved and second. Read the item. I mean, the title number.
Commissioner Winton: It's a street codesignation.
Chairman Teele: But that's --
Commissioner Gonzalez: A resolution of the Miami City Commission codesignating Northwest
14th Street -- 14th Terrace from Northwest 10th Avenue to Northwest 11 th Avenue, Miami,
Florida, as Schoninger Way; further directing the City Manager to instruct the Director of
Public Works to complete a copy of the resolution herein designated office. Once again, we keep
codesignating streets and nothing is happening from the County. We're not getting signs. We're
not getting -- so, you know. Mr. Manager, I asked you at the last Commission meeting to
please --
Chairman Teele: All in favor --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- talk to the County.
Chairman Teele: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed. We stand recessed until 2 p.m. sharp.
DISTRICT 2
COMMISSIONER JOHNNY L. WINTON
DISTRICT 3
VICE CHAIRMAN JOE SANCHEZ
DISTRICT 4
COMMISSIONER TOMAS REGALADO
D4.1 04-00850 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING LEGISLATION REGARDING THE AFSCME
LAWSUIT RELATED TO THE LAY-OFF OF EMPLOYEES IN THE
City of Miami Page 5 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
04-00850-cover memo.pdf
WITHDRAWN
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We'll go now to the District Commission items, the blue pages, 1
believe.
Commissioner Winton: Can I -- may 1 interrupt you? It's 4 o'clock; 1 have to be out of here by
6:15 and we've got our budget stuff, so --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I believe the only items that Commissioners have, 1 believe is
Commissioner Tomas Regalado, is the only one in -- I belief that's it, right?
Commissioner Winton: If -- Commissioner, if these are time sensitive, then obviously, we have
to take them up. If they're not, 1 would love to move them to the first meeting in September.
Commissioner Regalado: No. These are time sensitive -- actually, I'm pulling one and just
doing one.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Which one are you --
Commissioner Regalado: I'm requesting D4.1 be pulled --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: -- from the agenda.
D4.2 04-00851 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION CONCERNING LEGISLATION INSTRUCTING THE
AUDITOR GENERAL TO REVIEW, AUDIT, AND REPORT FINDINGS TO
THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE FIRST SEPTEMBER BUDGET
HEARING REGARDING EACH EXPERT CONSULTANT, BOTH HIRED
AND RETAINED, PROVIDING QUALIFICATIONS, EDUCATION,
EXPERIENCE, RATE OF PAY, AND TOTAL RATE OF PAY -TO -DATE,
INCLUSIVE OF THE TOTAL COST TO THE CITY AND HIS FINDINGS
AND/OR RECOMMENDATIONS.
04-00851-cover memo.pdf
DISCUSSED
Direction to the Clerk by Chairman Teele to research the record regarding original request for
audit of consultants and the discussion related to Frank Castaneda. [Note: Clerk distributed
copies of requested transcripts on 8-3-04.1
Discussion on Item D4.2 resulted in the resolution below:
(D4.2) 04-00851a RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE
AUDITOR GENERAL TO REVIEW, AUDIT, AND REPORT FINDINGS AND/OR
City of Miami Page 6 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE FIRST
SEPTEMBER BUDGET HEARING, REGARDING EACH EXPERT AND
REGULAR CONSULTANT, BOTH HIRED AND RETAINED CITYWIDE,
DURING THE LAST TWO YEAR -PERIOD; PROVIDING QUALIFICATIONS,
EDUCATION, EXPERIENCE, RATE OF PAY, AND TOTAL RATE OF PAY -TO -
DATE, INCLUSIVE OF THE TOTAL COST TO THE CITY OF MIAMI, FOR
SAID CONSULTANTS.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0528
Commissioner Regalado: And D4.2 -- actually, this is an item regarding -- is the Inspector
General here?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: . He was. Could someone --
Commissioner Winton: He's here.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, he is.
Commissioner Winton: He's here.
Commissioner Regalado: Anyway --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Igwe --
Commissioner Regalado: -- my --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- please step up to the podium. Thanks.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I have a motion. This is regarding our input in the
budget process. A motion to instruct the Auditor General to review, audit and report findings to
the Commission prior to the first September budget hearing, regarding each expert consultant,
both hired and retained, providing qualifications, education, experience, rate of pay, and total
rate of pay to date, inclusive of the total cost to the City and his findings and recommendations.
So move.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion.
Commissioner Gonzalez: This is -- second for discussion.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second for the purpose of discussion. Commissioner Gonzalez, you're
recognized.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Is this going to be in reference to every consultant of the City, right?
Commissioner Regalado: Expert consultant.
Commissioner Gonzalez: To everyone.
Commissioner Regalado: Every consultant. Every consultant.
City of Miami Page 7 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: In the entire City of Miami. In other words --
Commissioner Regalado: In the entire City.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- anyone who is brought --
Commissioner Regalado: Approved by the Commission and by the Manager. I just want to
understand the consultant issue, and any and every consultant in the last 14 months.
Mr. Igwe: Yeah, Commissioner, Victor Igwe, the Auditor General for the City. We've already
started working on your request and we hope to have it ready before the budget.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Winton: What did you just say?
Mr. Igwe: 1 said we've already started working on his request because I received the memo
relating to this request about two weeks ago.
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Mr. Igwe: So we've already started working on it.
Commissioner Regalado: You think we would have a report before the first --
Mr. Igwe: Yeah. We should have something by the --
Commissioner Winton: Huh?
Mr. Igwe: -- before the budget hearing in September.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Just to clarify something. I believe the Chair is back, and 1
would like to pass the gavel to him on this issue. I just need to clam one thing. Is this going to
be citywide? We're talking about looking into any abuses that may exist --
Commissioner Regalado: No, no.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- pertaining --
Mr. Igwe: No, Commissioner. It's just going to be a listing of all the consultants hired by this
Commission and the City Manager within the period that he indicated, which is 14 months.
Commissioner Regalado: But it's not about abuse. It's just understanding the amount of money
and the qualifications of the person.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And how much further -- I mean, you stated something, 14 months. 1
mean --
Commissioner Regalado: 14 months.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is there a specific --
Commissioner Regalado: It has 14 months.
City of Miami Page 8 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- reason why we're going back only 14 months?
Commissioner Regalado: How many months do you want?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would like to go back maybe two years.
Commissioner Regalado: A year? Last year? I mean, from September --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would like to go back two years.
Mr. Igwe: Well, but --
Commissioner Regalado: Two years.
Mr. Igwe: But keep in mind, the longer the period -- the longer the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I understand.
Mr. Igwe: -- the more --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 1 understand. I understand
Chairman Teele: All right. All right.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But if you're going to compare apples to oranges, you know -- you
want to compare apples to apples, we'll compare them, but if you want to compare apples to
oranges, you know, we could also do that.
Chairman Teele: All right. How long has Angel -- how long has Commissioner Gonzalez's
Chief of Staff been a consultant? When did that --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Excuse me?
Chairman Teele: This whole thing started --
Commissioner Regalado: The legislation.
Chairman Teele: This whole thing started --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That was in June, I think.
Chairman Teele: -- when 1 opened the door because of the particular unique problem related to
retirement for Commissioner -- for --
Commissioner Regalado: Frank Castaneda.
Chairman Teele: -- Frank Castaneda. If you go back -- Madam Clerk, pull the record. I
uncorked this genie. It started to resolve a problem for Frank Castaneda. That was the first
time the City had ever even understood what that was, OK, and then we went ahead and
authorized it, and then the whole thing started, so just start it from the beginning, starting with
Frank and anybody before Frank, and just bring the thing up, and it ain't that many because the
one thing that we required was that the City Attorney had to sign off on them, right?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Wait a minute. Frank --
City of Miami Page 9 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: I'm totally confused.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Was Frank ever a consultant?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Chairman Teele: What we arranged for --
Commissioner Regalado: But we authorize it because of Frank.
Chairman Teele: We authorized -- this is --
Commissioner Regalado: And then he didn't took it.
Chairman Teele: This was the beginning you know. In the beginning, we authorized, as a way
to deal with this -- this is a normal process in the Office of Personnel Management for the entire
U.S. (United States) Government what we're doing here, and the first time that we did it was
when we did it -- when we authorized it for Frank. Whether he used it or not, 1 don't know, and
then we instructed the City Attorney to research this whole thing with OPM, Office of Personnel
Management, to come back -- a report came back.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute, but you never authorized Frank to
be a consultant.
Chairman Teele: No.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Chairman Teele: We authorized the use of this. I don't know how they dealt with it in the --
Commissioner Gonzalez: The use of what?
Chairman Teele: Of the expert consultants.
Commissioner Gonzalez: For Frank?
Chairman Teele: For anybody that qualified
Commissioner Regalado: For anybody. I remember.
Commissioner Winton: So, are you --
Commissioner Regalado: But he never used it.
Chairman Teele: I don't know if he used it or not.
Commissioner Regalado: And you never used it.
Chairman Teele: But that's where the discussion begins.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No, no, no.
Chairman Teele: And they -- if they get the record --
City of Miami
Page 10 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: And 1 think what it was, was a discussion when the issue come up that
he could not be my deputy -- my --
Chairman Teele: Chief of Staff.
Commissioner Gonzalez:: -- Chief of Staff because he was retired from the City --
Chairman Teele: Exactly.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and they -- I don't know who proposed, and 1 think it was you who
proposed --
Chairman Teele: I proposed it.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that maybe a solution for him to keep working with me was for me to
hire him as a consultant, but that never took place because we never had to do it, and --
Chairman Teele: And that's what I'm saying, but that discussion is where the Auditor General's
process would start.
Commissioner Winton: Whoa.
Chairman Teele: Because that -- when we finished with that, we came back and codified that,
Johnny, in a resolution --
Commissioner Winton: I remember that.
Chairman Teele: -- to authorize that, and the record --
Commissioner Winton: The use of it.
Chairman Teele: -- is going to be clear.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: And that was the first time, in the Office of Human Resources or anywhere that
we had began this process.
Commissioner Winton: But when you say expert consultant -- so you're referring to that very --
to that use, is that what you're talking about here?
Chairman Teele: I'm referring to that entity that has been created
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is it individuals?
Chairman Teele: And that is a -- and the word --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is it firms? Is it individuals? Is it firms? I mean --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no.
Vice Chairman Sanchez. -- we need to be clear.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no, no, no. Seriously.
City of Miami Page 11 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: That's what 1 was confused about also.
Chairman Teele: Seriously, trust me. There is a regulation this thick, which the City Attorney
supposedly researched from the Office of Personnel Management. The word "expert consultant"
does not mean what the two words say.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
Chairman Teele: It means a definitive person, natural person, not a law firm, OK.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK. I got it.
Chairman Teele: And it means a whole series of regulatory and personnel standards by which
you determine that, you determine the rate, and it is one of the methods of Personnel
Management that's widely used across the country, and it comes from the Office of Personnel
Management.
Commissioner Winton: OK, good.
Chairman Teele: There's a whole regulatory scheme associated with that.
Commissioner Winton: Does Victor understand that?
Chairman Teele: I would hope so, but that's why I wanted to get him to refer to it in the record
so that we could do it. He's going to need to talk to Alex Vilarello, who did the research on it,
but I gave him the phone number for the general counsel of personnel management when they
put this whole thing together.
Mr. Igwe: Well, Commissioners, the list that we're putting together includes all consultants --
Commissioner Regalado: Consultants, consultants.
Mr. Igwe: -- which will include architects, engineers --
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Mr. Igwe: -- and --
Chairman Teele: Well, this is what 1 would respectfully request of the maker of the motion: To
separate out expert consultants from all other consultants.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, 1 agree with you, because --
Commissioner Regalado: You can have two columns.
Chairman Teele: Because let me tell you something. If you study all the consultants, you're
going to be here until the middle of next year.
Commissioner Winton: That's what 1 thought.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And then we will have to go with this -- and then to make it real --
Mr. Igwe: That was my understanding of the Commissioners' direction.
Commissioner Gonzalez.: -- real maker -- the way it should be, then we will have to extend this
City of Miami Page 12 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
to every City agency. 1 mean, you know, every consultant used by every City agency. 1 don't
care, Bayfront Park, the Sports and Exhibition Authority, you know, whoever -- apply to
everybody.
Chairman Teele: The only thing that I'm asking the maker of the motion to do is to have two
separate tracks: One for the expert consultants, which is where, candidly, the unions are raising
all the concern. They've come to me. They've beat me up. They -- you know, dah, dah, dah, and
they've got some legitimate concerns and some legitimate issues that need to be flushed out.
Then the other issue relates to all of the consultants -- all of the other consultants, and I'm only
asking the maker of the motion to allow for the study to go on two separate tracks, the expert
consultants and all other consultants.
Commissioner Regalado: 1 don't have any problem. 1 think it would --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: As long as --
Commissioner Regalado: -- it would serve --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: 1 could support the legislation that you are presenting, as long as the
comments that the Commissioner made, that it should be a citywide basis, as to look into
everything -- I mean, if we're going to look in the closet, we might as well walk -- go in and look
at everything.
Commissioner Regalado: Don't mind.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's digest the beast.
Commissioner Regalado: And the only --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You want to digest the beast, I'll digest the beast, but 1 need to know
exactly what is it that you're trying to accomplish here.
Commissioner Regalado: Get information, to understand -- in fact, I don't have any problem in
dividing in segments, but maybe you can provide the City Commission sooner the expert
consultant, which I'm sure that it will be a smaller list than the consultants in general.
Commissioner Winton: But what is our objective with the consultants in general, what is he
tallying? That's what I don't understand yet.
Commissioner Regalado: To understand how much money we're spending.
Commissioner Winton: So, he's going to put together a list of all of them --
Commissioner Regalado: Right, and the money.
Commissioner Winton: -- and their contract amount?
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Commissioner Winton: OK Well, 1 don't -- good enough.
Chairman Teele: When I read the comments of the union.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Citywide, everyone.
City of Miami Page 13 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- one of the negative comments that the union made when the story came out
about the structural budget issue was, well, the City would be in balance if they weren't using so
many consultants. That's a typical union position, and 1 don't disrespect them and I don't
commend them -- I don't disrespect them for taking that position, but we don't need to let the
union give the signal that we're over using consultants because 1 think it's a finite number and
maybe we've gone too far in some direction, I don't know, but the union position is very clear.
They think we're over using and not hiring people, and using consultants as a way around the
personnel process, and that is my only concern. I want to quanta that, because that was not my
intent, was to, you know, begin to reduce the number of permanent employees.
Commissioner Gonzalez: If that is the concern -- if it is a concern of the union, you know, I'm
also a 100 percent support of doing this audit --
Commissioner Winton: But --
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- but let's do it citywide.
Chairman Teele: But he said --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because maybe you seem --
Chairman Teele: He's agreed to that.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: He's agreed to it.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what 1 said.
Chairman Teele: So, what's the open issue?
Commissioner Winton: Well, here is --
Commissioner Regalado: No issue.
Commissioner Winton: -- here's a point I'd make, and that is that if the objective is to figure out
whether or not we're using too many consultants and our consultants are preventing -- are being
used instead of hiring new people -- because they're certainly not being used to supplant existing
ones --
Chairman Teele: I don't think --
Commissioner Winton: -- so they could only be used to prevent additional staff this tally isn't
going to answer that question.
Chairman Teele: I agree, but it's --1 think it's a starting point.
Commissioner Regalado: But I'm not --
Commissioner Winton: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: -- but I'm not trying to find out that.
City of Miami Page 14 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: It's a starting point.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm trying to find out just an amount --
Commissioner Winton: Oh, OK. Fine.
Commissioner Regalado: -- an amount of money.
Chairman Teele: On the motion reoccurring --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And let me tell you, last week I think I even deferred the item of hiring
more consultants and putting --1 think it was $4, 000, 000 for consultant fees because 1 had a
problem with that, but with CIP (Capital Improvement Program), we have a serious problem, but
that -- if we don't bring more help, let me tell you, at least myself 1 have a serious problem with
projects that have begin and other projects that 1 have way done and, you know -- I mean, we
have to find a solution. You know, one way or the other, we have to bring help. I don't care if it
is -- you know, if it is from the Union, hey, better. If we can find them within the union than from
the outside, but we need to solve the problem.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but we approve this today. Today, we approve what you
deferred.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, l know.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor of the motion, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
Mr. Igwe: Can I just get one clarification? When you say citywide, what are we talking --
Commissioner Regalado: Citywide means --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We're looking at everybody.
Commissioner Regalado: -- the City --
Commissioner Gonzalez: All of the City agencies.
Commissioner Regalado: All agencies of the City.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All the City involved in --
Mr. Igwe: Including CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency)?
Commissioner Winton: Yep.
Commissioner Regalado: CRA.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: CRA, Model City.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Bayfront Park.
Commissioner Regalado: MSEA (Miami Sports & Exhibition Authority).
City of Miami Page 15 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Park, MSEA.
Commissioner Gonzalez: MSEA.
Commissioner Regalado: Bayfront Trust.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Little Havana Advisory Board
Commissioner Regalado: DDA (Downtown Development Authority).
Mr. Igwe: If we have to do --
Commissioner Regalado: CIA (Central Intelligence Agency).
Mr. Igwe: If we have to do that, we may --
Commissioner Winton: FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigations).
Mr. Igwe: -- not be able to get it done by the time you want it.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, but that's why -- you know, we don't want to overwhelm
you, but they need to -- and I think they're right.
Mr. Igwe: I mean, they can -- we can do it, but --
Commissioner Regalado: But what we -- what I was trying to understand is before the budget
process, at least the expert consultants, how much, you know, qualification; what they do, and
how much are they being paid, and then you do the other thing.
Commissioner Winton: So, how about if --
Commissioner Regalado: If you can focus --
Commissioner Winton: May I suggest something then, Commissioner Regalado, in terms of
priority. Priority one is the expert consultant. Priority two is the City itself and priority three is
all of the agencies --
Mr. Igwe: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: -- so that --1 think he wants to see, from a budgetary standpoint, what
we've done citywide. It won't hurt us to know all the rest of it, but we could know that
subsequently and deal with it in whatever way we need to deal with it subsequently, I would
think.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Going back two years.
Commissioner Winton: Going back two years.
Chairman Teele: By unanimous consent, that is adopted in the motion, as instructed
Mr. Igwe: OK.
Chairman Teele: As explained by Commissioner Winton.
City of Miami Page 16 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Igwe: That's fair.
Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Mr. Igwe: Sure.
DISTRICT 5
CHAIRMAN ARTHUR E. TEELE, JR.
City of Miami Page 17 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PH.1 04-00880 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION BY A FOUR -FIFTHS
(4/5THS) AFFIRMATIVE VOTE, AFTER PUBLIC HEARING, PURSUANT TO
SECTION 2-614 OF THE CITY CODE, WAIVING THE CONFLICT OF
INTEREST PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 2-612 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA ("CITY"), AS AMENDED, TO ENABLE
ALEJANDRO VILARELLO TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT TO TRANSACT
BUSINESS WITH AND FOR THE CITY AND APPEAR BEFORE THE CITY
COMMISSION RELATED TO LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT MATTERS
CONCERNING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS.
04-00880-cover memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Teele
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Regalado
R-04-0514
Chairman Teele: Madam -- All right. Can we just go down the various items that we've got?
We shouldn't have much controversial here. Could we start with PH (Public Hearing) -- PH 1
and go straight through the public hearing items, and then do the resolutions? Madam Attorney,
would you read PH. 1 ? Oh, I'm sorry. This is a public hearing waiving conflicts for the City
Attorney -- the previous City Attorney to enter into an agreement. This is a public hearing. Any
person desiring to be heard should come forward There are no persons coming forward
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move PH.1.
Chairman Teele: PH.1 is moved Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: Those opposed have the same right.
3:00 P.M.
PH.2 04-00698 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $600,000, FROM THE
MODEL CITY REVITALIZATION DISTRICT TRUST AND ALLOCATING SAID
FUNDS TO THE CITY OF MIAMI'S DEPARTMENT OF OFF-STREET
PARKING AUTHORITY; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AN AGREEMENT, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, FOR SAID
PURPOSE.
City of Miami Page 18 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
04-00698-cover memo.pdf
04-00698-public notice.pdf
04-00698-exhibit-agreement.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Regalado
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Teele
R-04-0525
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let's go ahead. The City Clerk advises that we have a sign
interpreter, who we're paying $65 an hour, and we need to get him out of here as quickly as
possible, so let's go ahead and bring up PH.2. Can we get Community Development? PH.2 is a
public hearing.
Unidentified Speaker: She's coming.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Madam Director, you have the floor.
Barbara Rodriguez: Barbara Rodriguez, Department of Community Development. PH.2 is
basically transferring $600, 000 from the Model City Homeownership Zone to Off -Street Parking.
Commissioner Winton: This is, I'm assuming, Commissioner Teele's item and he would like it.
I'll move it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sahchez: It's a non -controversial issue. There's a motion and a second. Open
for discussion. Hearing none, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone having opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion
carries unanimously.
PH.3 04-00702 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF 30TH YEAR ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT RESERVE FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $
250,000; ALLOCATING SAID FUNDS TO THE LITTLE HAITI-EDISON
FEDERAL CREDIT UNION FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
BEGINNING OCTOBER 1, 2004 TO SEPTEMBER 30, 2005; FURTHER
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH
SAID AGENCY FOR SAID PURPOSE, IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED
FORM.
04-00702-cover memo.pdf
04-00702-exhibit- agreement.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
City of Miami Page 19 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Regalado
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Teele
R-04-0526
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We go to Public Hearing Number 3.
Barbara Rodriguez (Director, Community Development): PH 3 is basically allocating
$250, 000; that it was already reserved, to the Little Haiti Credit Union. There were some issues
that we needed to resolve. They have been resolved and we're recommending it.
Commissioner Winton: Where did this reserve come from, though?
Ms. Rodriguez: It was originally -- on June 10th Commission, it was awarded, and
Commissioner Teele pulled it until an agreement was reached with their board.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, this was District 5 --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's District 5's money.
Commissioner Winton: -- stuff anyhow, right?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Rodriguez: Correct.
Commissioner Winton: OK. That's all I wanted to know.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. We need a motion.
Commissioner Winton: Move it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion. Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion by Commissioner Winton, second by Commissioner
Gonzalez. It is open for discussion. Hearing none, it's a resolution. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Hearing
none, motion carries unanimously.
Ms. Rodriguez: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you so much.
City of Miami Page 20 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
ORDINANCES - SECOND READING
SR.1 04-00703 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 11418, AS AMENDED, ADOPTED DECEMBER 12, 1996,
WHICH ESTABLISHED INITIAL RESOURCES AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR
THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND ENTITLED, "PARTNERSHIP FUND;"
INCREASING THE APPROPRIATIONS IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $
17,208, CONSISTING OF DONATIONS FROM VARIOUS PRIVATE
ORGANIZATIONS; AUTHORIZING THE DEPARTMENT OF POLICE ("
POLICE") TO ACCEPT DONATIONS FROM VARIOUS PRIVATE
ORGANIZATIONS TO BE DEPOSITED IN SAID SPECIAL REVENUE FUND;
FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF SAID FUNDS TO
SPONSOR NUMEROUS COMMUNITY EVENTS AND IN-HOUSE
PROGRAMS, INCLUDING THE PUBLICATION OF THE DEPARTMENT'S
ANNUAL REPORT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00703-cover memo.pdf
04-00703-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00703-pre ordinance.pdf
04-00703-pre ordinance 2.pdf
04-00703-pre ordinance 3.pdf
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12580
Chairman Teele: Now, PH.2 and PH.3 --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: CDBG (Community Development Block Grant).
Chairman Teele: -- are CDBG for a time certain --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Certain.
Chairman Teele: -- at 3 p.m. Is there a PH.5 and 6?
Commissioner Winton: Not on my (UNINTELLIGIBLE).
Chairman Teele: I don't have it. All right. SR.1, Second Reading Number 1.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Madam Attorney, would you read the ordinance?
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Interim City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: All right. Is there a motion and a second?
City of Miami Page 21 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second
Chairman Teele: Is there discussion? All those -- Madam Attorney -- Madam Clerk.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Ordinance passes second reading, 5/0.
SR.2 04-00704 ORDINANCE Second Reading
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), APPROVING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CRITERIA AND A SELECTION
PROCESS, ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED, TO FACILITATE THE
AWARD OF SCHOLARSHIPS FROM THE CITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF
SOLID WASTE'S RECYCLING AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST FUND,
ESTABLISHED THROUGH CHAPTER 22, SECTION 22-15 ENTITLED "
EDUCATIONAL TRUST FUND;" CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION, A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00704-cover memo.pdf
04-00704-solid waste memo.pdf
04-00704-detailed revenue & expenditure.pdf
04-00704-pre ordinance.pdf
04-00704-pre ordinance 2.pdf
04-00704-exh ibits. pdf
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
12581
Chairman Teele: Next ordinance. Read the ordinance.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: SRE. It's a resolution, right?
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's SRE?
Chairman Teele: Isn't it SR.2?
Commissioner Gonzalez: SR.2.
Maria J. Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): It is SR.2.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, I'm sorry.
Ms. Chiaro: I didn't hear the motion, but --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second
City of Miami Page 22 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
The Ordinance was read by title into the public record by the Interim City Attorney.
Chairman Teele: This is a public hearing. Any person desiring to be heard should come
forward. There are no persons coming forward Now is the appropriate time for the motion and
second
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Chairman Teele: They should not --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: -- make the motion and second until after they've heard from the public. All
those -- Madam Clerk.
A roll call was taken, the result of which is stated above.
Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Ordinance passes second reading, 5/0.
City of Miami Page 23 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
RESOLUTIONS
RE.1 04-00840 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE
PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES FROM THE GORDIAN GROUP, INC., FOR
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A JOB ORDER CONTRACTING ("JOC")
SYSTEM, AWARDED UNDER AN EXISTING CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
CONTRACT, EFFECTIVE UNTIL APRIL 11, 2008, SUBJECT TO ANY
EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE CITY OF MIAMI
BEACH, SOLICITED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP")
49-00/01, TO BE UTILIZED CITYWIDE ON AN AS -NEEDED BASIS, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $120,000; ALLOCATING PROJECT
FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $120,000, FOR THE
CURRENT FISCAL YEAR (FY 2003-2004) FROM VARIOUS CAPITAL
PROJECT ACCOUNTS, AS MAY BE ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY
THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES, OR AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS
PERMITTED BY LAW.
04-00840-cover memo.pdf
04-00840-miami beach RFP.pdf
04-00840-notice to bidders.pdf
04-00840-miami beach documents.pdf
04-00840-miami beach RFP addendum.pdf
04-00840-ag reem ent. pdf
04-00840-award under miami beach.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0515
Direction to the City Clerk by Chairman Teele to research the record wherein the Commission
instructed the Auditor General to conduct a complete audit of the South Florida Employment
and Training Consortium Workforce Centers.
[Note: The Clerk provided the requested document to Chairman Teele and to the Auditor
General on 7-29-04. J
Chairman Teele: RE.1.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.1.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there a discussion? Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed have the same right. Did -- when did we -- were we going to
hear from the -- did we ever hear the report from the Auditor General on the jobs, the
countywide jobs thing?
City of Miami Page 24 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Workforce.
Chairman Teele: Workforce. We --
Commissioner Regalado: Florida Workforce.
Chairman Teele: Weren't we in -- didn't -- no, no, no, we don't need to hear -- Madam Clerk,
pull up the instructions to the Auditor GeneraL and when he was supposed to report, and why
that was supposed to work out, please. Let's just get the record before us.
RE.2 04-00841 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, AUTHORIZING THE
AWARD OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTS ("JOC") TO CW CONSTRUCTION,
INC. AND ALPINE CONSTRUCTIONS, INC., FOR A CONTRACT IN ANNUAL
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,000,000, FOR EACH FIRM, PURSUANT TO
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA BID NOS. 12-03/04 AND 13-03/04,
EFFECTIVE UNTIL MAY 25, 2005, WITH OPTIONS TO EXTEND FOR FOUR
ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO ANY EXTENSIONS OR
REPLACEMENT CONTRACTS BY THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH; AND
AUTHORIZING THE AWARD OF JOC TO CARIVON CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
F.H. PASCHEN/SN NIELSEN, F&L CONSTRUCTION, H.A. CONTRACTING,
INC., AND PASS INTERNATIONAL, INC., FOR A CONTRACT ANNUAL
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $5,000,000 FOR EACH FIRM, PURSUANT TO
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA BID NO. 14-03/04, EFFECTIVE UNTIL
MAY 25, 2005, WITH OPTIONS TO EXTEND FOR FOUR ADDITIONAL ONE-
YEAR PERIODS, SUBJECT TO ANY EXTENSIONS OR REPLACEMENT
CONTRACTS BY THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, TO BE USED CITYWIDE ON
AN AS -NEEDED BASIS, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $29,000,000; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM VARIOUS CAPITAL
PROJECT ACCOUNTS, AS MAY BE ADJUSTED FROM TIME TO TIME BY
THE CITY COMMISSION IN THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS/CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS ORDINANCES, OR AS OTHERWISE ADJUSTED AS
PERMITTED BY LAW.
04-00841-cover memo.pdf
04-00841-contract documents.pdf
04-00841-contract documents 2.pdf
04-00841-contract documents 3.pdf
04-00841-contract documents 4.pdf
04-00841-contract documents 5.pdf
04-00841-award under miami beach.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Regalado, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0516
Chairman Teele: RE.2.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.2, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
City of Miami Page 25 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: Is there a discussion? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? I was -- Mr. Manager, I was jolted by the title of this.
Resolution authorizing procurement of services for various contract for job ordered contracts.
Job ordered -- and I know that we do have an open issue with the County that was supposed to
be dealt with before we left. I just want to know what we're doing.
RE.3 04-00865 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION CODESIGNATING
NORTHEAST 55TH STREET FROM NORTHEAST 2ND AVENUE TO
NORTHEAST 3RD AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS "SIR WINSTON
CHURCHILL WAY;" FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
INSTRUCT THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO TRANSMIT A COPY OF
THIS RESOLUTION TO THE HEREIN DESIGNATED OFFICES.
04-00865-cover memo.pdf
04-00865-budgetary impact.pdf
Motion by Chairman Teele, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0517
Chairman Teele: Mr. Vice Chairman, would you preside and allow me the privilege?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Sir, you're recognized
Chairman Teele: 1 would like the privilege of moving RE.3, which designates one block along --
from Northeast 2nd Avenue and 55th Street for one block going east, as Sir Winston Churchill
Way. So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. Open for discussion.
Commissioner Regalado: Is this a cigar make?
Chairman Teele: A cigar what?
Commissioner Regalado: A cigar brand?
Chairman Teele: No. This --
Commissioner Regalado: Churchill.
Chairman Teele: This is actually for Sir Winston Churchill --
Commissioner Regalado: I know.
City of Miami Page 26 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- and it relates to a nice little place where people go and watch British Cable
by satellite, and soccer and cricket --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion.
Chairman Teele: -- and they have their 25th Anniversary for the first week in September. We'll
get notices out, and the entire city is going to be invited, in the heart of Little Haiti.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I'll tell you something. Then we need to ask the County, which it
takes several weeks to place the signs on the street, to make --
Chairman Teele: To expedite.
Commissioner Regalado: -- to expedite that.
Chairman Teele: All right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Commissioner Regalado: It would be nice to have that during the September event.
Chairman Teele: The Public Works Department, I think, is working to expedite.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in the opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Hearing
none, passes unanimously.
RE.4 04-00868 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S
), AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE CONTRACT AWARDED TO PETRO
HYDRO, INC., APPROVED BY RESOLUTION NO. 03-752, ADOPTED JULY
17, 2003, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $265,166.16, INCREASING THE
AMOUNT OF THE CONTRACT FROM $737,543.05 TO $1,002,709.21, FOR
THE PROJECT ENTITLED "ROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT, B-4651,"
EXTENDING THE CONSTRUCTION ALONG NORTHWEST 35TH STREET
FROM NORTHWEST 25TH AVENUE TO NORTHWEST 27TH AVENUE, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED PROPOSAL; AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT, IN
SUBSTANTIALLY THE ATTACHED FORM, GRANTING AN EXTENSION IN
THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT BY 60 CALENDAR DAYS, FROM 150
CALENDAR DAYS TO 210 CALENDAR DAYS; ALLOCATING FUNDS, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $265,166.16, FOR ADDITIONAL
CONSTRUCTION COSTS PLUS $15,333.84 FOR COSTS INCURRED BY
THE CITY OF MIAMI, FOR TOTAL CONTRACT COSTS NOT TO EXCEED $
280,500, FROM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 341330,
ENTITLED "TRANSIT % CENT SURTAX."
City of Miami Page 27 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
04-00868-cover memo.pdf
04-00868-budgetary impact.pdf
04-00868-pre resolution.pdf
04-00868-pre contract.pdf
04-00868-pre project fact sheet.pdf
04-00868-pre formal bid.pdf
04-00868-pre contract 2.pdf
04-00868-first amendment pg.pdf
04-00868-exhibit 1-amendment.pdf
04-00868-exhibit 2-proposal.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0518
Chairman Teele: Regaining the chair, RE.4.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.4, Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there discussion? Is there objection? All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
RE.5 04-00870 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
ACQUISITION OF 400 LAPTOP MOBILE DIGITAL COMPUTERS, DOCKING
STATIONS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT, FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
POLICE FROM MOTOROLA, INC., A NON-LOCAL/NON-MINORITY VENDOR,
UNDER EXISTING CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS BID NO. 03-35, IN
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,023,624; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM: (1)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CIP) ACCOUNT CODE NO. 312010.
299401.6.840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $45,754, (2) CIP ACCOUNT
CODE NO. 312028.299401.6.840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $560,
570, (3) CIP ACCOUNT CODE NO. 312032.299401.6.840, IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $9,488, (4) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT
VII, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 142023.290539.6.840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $873,113, AND (5) LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT
VIII, ACCOUNT CODE NO. 142023.290546.6.840, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $534,699.
City of Miami Page 28 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
04-00870-cover memo.pdf
04-00870-budgetary impact analysis. pdf
04-00870-bid. pdf
04-00870-terms and conditions.pdf
04-00870-invitation to bid.pdf
04-00870-equipment list.pdf
04-00870-quote. pdf
04-00870-order form.pdf
04-00870-letter. pdf
04-00870-invitation to bid 2.pdf
04-00870-letter 2.pdf
04-00870-pre resolution.pdf
04-00870-staff review form.pdf
04-00870-award under Fayetteville. pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0519
Chairman Teele: RE.5.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'll move RE.5.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Chairman Teele: Fayetteville, Arkansas. All right. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All those opposed have the same right. We're utilizing the vendor from
Fayetteville, Arkansas, as a low bidder. That's great. My grandmother would be proud.
RE.6 04-00867 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ACCEPTING A
DONATION OF THREE SCULPTURES CREATED BY ARTIST FREDERICK
PRESCOTT, AT AN ESTIMATED FAIR MARKET VALUE OF $60,000, FROM
THE WASHINGTON MUTUAL COCONUT GROVE ARTS FESTIVAL, TO BE
PLACED IN COCONUT GROVE, FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI.
04-00867-cover memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0520
Chairman Teele: RE.6. Commissioner Regalado.
City of Miami Page 29 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Move it.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second I just --
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- have some questions on the item. Could someone answer those
questions? I want to know the appropriate -- are they going to be using public areas?
Commissioner Winton: They're probably going to go to a park.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well --
Commissioner Winton: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) come up?
Commissioner Regalado: You mean the monuments?
Commissioner Winton: These are --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. What -- I mean, what are they, and where is it going to be put?
Carol Romine: They are 14 foot --
Commissioner Regalado: Your name.
Ms. Romine: Carol Romine, President and CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of Coconut Grove
Arts Festival. They are 14 foot high, very frivolous, fun pieces of artwork. Actually, one is a
horse, a giraffe, and then a smaller horse, and they are in primary colors. They're very -- they
would be a great place for someone that was visiting the Grove to stand and take a picture and
feel -good pieces. They are not benches, which allow -- you know, some of our problems have
been in creating the art pieces that we wanted to give to the City -- loitering or problems like
that, so we haven't --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm all --
Ms. Romine: -- chosen a spot yet, but we'd love to do that with you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I'm all in favor of arts in public places.
Ms. Romine: Yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But, you know, I think that we have a fiduciary responsibility to ask
who's going to pay for the -- to put them up, and who's going to pay to maintain them?
Ms. Romine: Well, we've been in touch with Robert Parente's office and with Commissioner
Winton's office to do that. We have had them delivered to you, and they are now in the Expo
Center.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Ms. Romine: And they are --
City of Miami Page 30 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Ms. Romine: -- they're fabulous pieces. 1 think you'll enjoy it.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't doubt them.
Ms. Romine: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I don't doubt it. OK.
Ms. Romine: All right.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Put it in my office.
Ms. Romine: Any other questions?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, that's it. I mean --
Chairman Teele: On the motion, the subject reoccurs. Is there further unreadiness? If not, all
in favor of RE. 6, accepting a donation of $60, 000 for market value of the sculptures from
Washington Mutual -- is it from Washington Mutual?
Commissioner Winton: From the --
Ms. Romine: The Coconut Grove Arts Festival.
Commissioner Regalado: From the Coconut Grove Arts --
Chairman Teele: It's from the Coconut Grove --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Coconut Grove --
Commissioner Regalado: -- Arts Festival.
Chairman Teele: -- Arts Festival.
Commissioner Regalado: The Washington Mutual.
Chairman Teele: Washington Mutual's the naming rights of the festival, huh?
Commissioner Regalado: Right.
Chairman Teele: All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? It makes it look like they did it -- they're doing it.
RE.7 04-00839 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH
ATTACHMENT(S), RATIFYING, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE
SALARY AND BENEFITS TO BE RECEIVED BY INTERIM CITY
ATTORNEY MARIA J. CHIARO.
City of Miami Page 31 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
04-00839-cover memo.pdf
04-00839-exh ibits. pdf
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0521
Chairman Teele: All right. RE. 7. Haven't we done RE. 7?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
RE.8 04-00881 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE
ENGAGEMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO ADDRESS ISSUES
RELATED TO LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT MATTERS CONCERNING
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING UNITS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $
30,000, PLUS COSTS AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY;
ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM AN ACCOUNT TO BE IDENTIFIED BY THE
CITY MANAGER, FOR SAID SERVICES.
04-00881-cover memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0522
Chairman Teele: RE.8. Have we done RE.8?
Commissioner Winton: No. So move.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Second.
Chairman Teele: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
RE.9 04-00766 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DETERMINING THAT
THE MOST ADVANTAGEOUS METHOD TO DEVELOP CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS AT THE CITY -OWNED PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE
City of Miami Page 32 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
MELREESE GOLF COURSE, LOCATED AT 1802 NORTHWEST 37TH
AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
("PROPERTY") CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 130 ACRES, FOR
PLANNING, DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, LEASING AND MANAGEMENT OF
THE CITY -OWNED PROPERTY, IS AS A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT ("UDP"); AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE A
DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ("RFP") FOR SAID UDP TO INCLUDE
PLANNING WITHOUT LIMITATION, A GOLF COURSE, HOTEL, PARKING
AND ANCILLARY AND SUPPORT FACILITIES AT SAID PROPERTY;
CONFIRMING THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY CHARTER PROVISIONS,
A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD TO TAKE TESTIMONY REGARDING
SAID RFP, AND TO CONTINUE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UDP
PROCESS.
04-00766-cover memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Gonzalez, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0523
Direction to the Administration by Chairman Teele to ensure that public hearings are conducted
before this project is completed; further to ensure that the Request for Proposals (RFP) comes
before the Commission for its approval before it is publicly advertised
Chairman Teele: RE.9. Great idea, Mr. Manager.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Move RE.9.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second.
Commissioner Winton: Second
Chairman Teele: On discussion. We need to make sure that there are sufficient -- Commissioner
Gonzalez -- sufficient public hearings held in the neighborhood --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Definitely.
Chairman Teele: -- on this long before it comes to the City Commission.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Definitely.
Chairman Teele: You know, because --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That was my first comment in --
Chairman Teele: Well, we're counting on you to keep the angry neighbors satisfied.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): That's number one rule.
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Mr. Arriola: Number one rule.
City of Miami Page 33 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: Well, 1 hope you all will fully support the District Commissioner in making
sure that we have more charrettes and more hearings than necessary, but we need to make sure
everybody -- in the Army, they say 10 percent never get the word We need to make sure that
that 10 percent that never gets the word, gets the word before it comes here.
Mr. Arriola: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: As a matter of fact, my office has a list of the residents of this
neighborhood, and every time we have a public hearing, aside from the regular announcements,
my office sends direct mail to the neighbors advising them of their meeting -- of the meeting, so
they will all be notified.
Chairman Teele: There's no time table on this. Can the Manager -- can you tell us what the
proposed time table is?
Mr. Arriola: Well, actually -- and I have to sit down with Commissioner Gonzalez -- the very
first thing we're going to do is hold public hearings. We're not going anywhere -- we have -- we
had an issue with the library that we have solved, and we're going to start scheduling -- I don't
know how many Commissioner Gonzalez -- it will be up to what the neighbors want when we're
going to start --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Mr. Arriola: -- going through the process. Once we go through that process, then 1 think we'll
go into, you know, doing sort of a little master plan for this area, but first thing we're doing is
public hearing. We're not moving -- we're not talking about anything until we do public hearing
because this is more than just, as you know, the golf course. This is --
Commissioner Gonzalez:: Right.
Mr. Arriola: -- a lot of the plans that we have for --
Commissioner Gonzalez: The more --
Mr. Arriola: -- that whole area.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- more comprehensive plan.
Mr. Arriola: So this is not only on the golf course, but this is -- includes the baseball fields, the
proposed water park, you know. We're at the stage now that we could go to the neighbors and
tell them what we're going to do, and we have drawings and everything. All right, so --
Chairman Teele: I want to be very respectful of Commissioner Gonzalez, but I've got to say this.
We need to make sure that the RFP (Request for Proposals) comes back here before it goes out.
Mr. Arriola: Oh, yeah.
Chairman Teele: That we take time and discuss it so we're not in the situation like we got in with
Watson Island, where the staff put something in we don't know about. We're amending it at the
last minute, and this -- we need to make sure that our input is on the front end, because once the
thing goes out, you can't start amending once people apply so, again, Commissioner Gonzalez,
we're counting on you, but right now, the community is very hyped and very psyched about
development, and we need to make sure that we preserve all of the important issues, and we have
a process so that the public can weigh in on that, especially the public in the neighborhood. I'm
not as concerned about, you know, people from -- what's the next city over to the west, Hialeah?
City of Miami Page 34 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Hialeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. It would be --
Commissioner Winton: No, no, no.
Chairman Teele: I'm not as concerned about what Hialeah is -- views are --
Commissioner Winton: You mean to the west -- to the north.
Chairman Teele: -- like we got into with Watson Island.
Commissioner Winton: To the north.
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Commissioner Winton: What's that neighborhood?
Chairman Teele: Isn't there a city right around the corner there at the airport?
Commissioner Regalado: Miami Springs.
Mr. Arriola: No. It's just the airport.
Commissioner Winton: Miami Springs.
Chairman Teele: Miami Springs.
Commissioner Regalado: Miami Springs.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, Miami Springs.
Chairman Teele: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: They all have --
Mr. Arriola: No. It's very far away.
Chairman Teele: See, what's going to happen --
Commissioner Winton: Trust me, they all have something to say.
Chairman Teele: -- is everybody's going to start saying, well, how are you going to affect my
neighborhood? We need to make sure that we deal with the neighbors that live in the City of
Miami that are -- the residential neighbors that are affected in the RFP process so we don't get
boxed out or boxed in, but it's -- we're looking to you --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, actually, I don't know if you can call the refurbishing or the
improvement of parks -- if you can call that development, then I need to go back to the dictionary
and start refreshing my knowledge --
Chairman Teele: No.
City of Miami Page 35 Peinted on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- about the words. What we're talking now about here is about taking
care of three properties, which are parks that, as many, many other properties in the City of
Miami, have been abandoned and forgotten for I don't know how many years, and now I -- we
have stepped in -- you know, into this problem and trying to develop this park and make this park
more accessible for more people and different amenities that we never had, so --
Chairman Teele: But, Commissioner Gonzalez --
Commissioner Gonzalez: --1 don't see how this park can affect Miami Springs, and to be honest
with you, my personal opinion is, I need to be concerned with the City of Miami, not Miami
Springs, or Hialeah, or -- you know. I mean, I'm elected as an elected official of the City of
Miami and I have to look for the -- whatever is best and better for my City, as other cities do on
their cities.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, if I could clarify what I said. 1 was being somewhat sarcastic
in that the issue of Watson Island wound up more being about Miami Beach than --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- Venetian Way, OK.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I under --
Chairman Teele: And what I'm saying is, I'm not as concerned about Hialeah and Miami
Springs as 1 am about the residential areas that you represent in there, making sure that they feel
that they had a fair hearing, and I think it's very important that we be very clear about this. It is
everything that you said, but it's also much more. This is about a hotel, OK?
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's a component of the golf course. It's a component -- it's something
that we are thinking about. There is a portion of the golf course that is zoned -- actually, there is
no zoning change here for a hotel.
Chairman Teele: But, Angel, 1 think having a hotel is --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And this is something --
Chairman Teele: -- absolutely necessary.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right, but this is something --
Chairman Teele: 100 percent.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- that we're going to be presenting to the community, you know, and I
have at least two or three community meetings in my district -- in different areas in my districts,
not even to address development, but also to address police issues, crime issues, code
enforcement issues so, you know, my community is going to be informed. I'm going to be
meeting with them. As a matter of fact, we just had a meeting about a month ago in reference to
CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) --
Chairman Teele: Um-hmm.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and problems that we have on -- and actual constructions that is
taking place now on streets and sidewalks, which has become a nightmare, and 1 have -- I
spent -- last week, I spent two days walking in that community door-to-door handing flyers and
City of Miami Page 36 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
talking to the neighborhoods in reference to this situation that we're out there now.
Commissioner Regalado: Can 1 ask you a question --
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez. Commissioner Sanchez, Commissioner Regalado.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman, this -- if this is done with -- well planned, well thought
out, it could be something that could be spectacular for the City. If it's done being rushed, and
as we say, half you know what, it could have the same effect that it's had to this City after the
deal with the golf course. Looking at it and looking at the entire dealing and catching up on it,
one concern that I have -- and 1 think that it's going to have support from this Commission -- that
no land be taken from the park because, you know, when development comes, and you're
absolutely right, the public is out there. 1 know the Commissioner for that district will champion
that no land be taken from the park to add to the hotels, but --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Would you --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would yield.
Commissioner Gonzalez: If you remember -- and let's go back two years -- I had to put up a
real, real strong fight here to preserve -- I'm talking about Maceo Park --
Chairman Teele: Yep.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- against a developer, OK, so you know, 1 think 1 have proven myself
(INAUDIBLE) --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So you've been on the mount before.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Exactly,
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You've been on the mount before, but --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And 1 had to mobilize 600 residents to the meetings in order to settle
the issue.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But 1 think the scope here is not only to bring in what I would consider
a first-class hotel to operate and provide services that are needed in that area for people that use
our airport, but also for us to be able to have that company manage and improve the golf course,
because 1'll tell you one thing. I'm a golfer, and it's a shame that I have to go to --
Mr. Arriola: Not a good one.
Commissioner Winton: A duffer or a golfer?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Golfer, but somebody said I'm not a good one, but there's always room
for improvement, but it's a shame that 1 have to go to another city, such as Coral Gables and
Miami Beach, that has a great golf course, and I think that every great city deserves a great golf
course, and I think that when you negotiate all this, and I'm sure that the administration will
probably do a good job doing that, that they focus on having improvements to that golf course to
bring more programs for kids that are getting into golf now. You know, it's getting -- it's
becoming a very popular sport now so, you know, when it's all done -- said and done, we have
an opportunity to take one area that I consider that has been neglected in many ways, and
through the leadership of the Commissioner, he's been able to bring development to the area but,
once again, if it's done right, we have the potential to be very proud of it, but if we don't do it
City of Miami Page 37 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
right and we don't have public input, minimize the concerns, I could tell you that not everyone's
going to be in favor of it. There's always opposition. We've learned that, but as long as it's in
the best interest and we protect the City's assets and we improve a golf course that is right now
in horrible condition --1 don't take people to play golf there. It's in horrible condition. -- we
have an opportunity to work this all out so we not only bring a great hotel, we improve a park
and we also improve a golf course that could be -- that could compliment the City of Miami.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Regalado -- Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Commissioner Winton: 1 vote yes.
Commissioner Regalado: Just two comments, brief comments. I think that the main issue here is
the land use because the state Transportation Department demolished how many hotels? Four.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Four?
Commissioner Regalado: Four.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Six.
Commissioner Regalado: Six hotels, OK, from 836 to the airport entrance, they demolished six
hotels, so hotels in the area don't bother anybody because, I mean, you know, there were six
hotels, restaurants, bars and everything there, so it's a question of the land use and it's a
question of preserving the park. Now, the other issue is that I just want to understand what
happened to the motion that was passed by the Board of Directors of Miami Sports and
Exhibition Authority allocating -- is it a million --
Commissioner Gonzalez: I.7.
Commissioner Regalado: -- 1.7. This was done seven, eight months ago. 1.7, that's the
settlement that we get, and the board approved them for the Melreese Golf Course. Can you --
you are a board member, so do you know the status of that because we haven't met for a while?
Commissioner Gonzalez: 1 have asked the Executive Director of MSEA (Miami Sports and
Exhibition Authority) for the resolution, and I have asked him what's happening with that, and
actually, to be honest with you, 1 haven't gotten a straight answer, and I remember that was a
motion that you made. I believe I second that motion. It had total approval.
Commissioner Regalado: I think, you know -- Angel, 1 think we have a problem here because
I'm all for this and -- but the MSEA Board authorized the expenditure of almost $2, 000, 000 for
that --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That company.
Commissioner Regalado: -- golf course.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: It was for -- is it for a clubhouse or something that you want to --
Commissioner Gonzalez: For the clubhouse and the banquet hall.
Commissioner Regalado: So I don't know. 1 don't know what is going on. I don't know why the
City of Miami Page 38 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
staff has not been responsive, but the money's there. They cannot use it for --
Commissioner Gonzalez: For anything else.
Commissioner Regalado: -- anything else, so you know, we need to find out, and I don't know if
this has to do anything with this money, because if we're going to do like an RFP or something, a
clubhouse should be included
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, definitely. It is included It's part of the project.
Commissioner Regalado: But then we have money.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, right.
Commissioner Regalado: We have the MSEA money.
Commissioner Gonzalez: I'm going to call the Executive Director at lunchtime and find out
what's -- you know, see if I can get a straight answer on what the deal is with this money.
Mr. Arriola: Commissioner, I don't know where the money is, as you know. I mean, as we
talked about it. First of all, the truth is, it hasn't been seven months. It's been a little over two
and half months. We had to wait for the -- if you remember all the paperwork -- the transcript,
the property from the settlement back and forward, so that, as you know, has only been maybe
six, seven, eight weeks on that, but I -- we still don't know where that money is. That money, I
think, that you have suggested to put it for the banquet hall.
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's correct.
Mr. Arriola: And in the master plan, that's -- as you know, because you've seen it --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's part of it.
Mr. Arriola: -- that's where the money's going to go for, for the banquet hall more so than the
clubhouse but, of course, this is up to you when you finish going through all your public
meetings and all that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, the first thing that we need to do is, you know, finally find the
money and put it in the right account --
Mr. Arriola: Yeah.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- so then we can proceed to decide how we're going to use the money,
and remember that that money can only be used for sports, something related to sports. I mean,
we cannot use it for anything else but, once again, we need to find out where the money is, you
know. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Regalado left. Commissioner Regalado, are you here? 1 think
this is a very important discussion, and I think, Madam Attorney -- Mr. Manager, Commissioner
Winton, Madam Attorney, that we need to start doing this stuff right. Now, number one, we have
an ordinance that says any disposition of land should be done by public hearing, any changing
of land. Madam Director, is that not our ordinance? See, this -- what I'm saying here is this:
This is a textbook example of how we should start doing everything right to get the public to
understand that we're not doing things underhanded, or moving things around in a surreptitious
manner. Now, do we have an ordinance like that?
City of Miami Page 39 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Laura Billberry (Assistant Director, Economic Development): Under -- this procedure is under
29A of your --
Chairman Teele: No, no, no, no.
Ms. Billberry: I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: I'm not talking about this procedure. There is an omnibus ordinance -- and it
came up when we changed the designation of a park, I think, when Willy Gort was here. He
wanted to change the designation of a park from one name to another name, and then we did it,
and then all these people came down --
Commissioner Gonzalez: It wasn't to transfer it to my name, huh?
Chairman Teele: No, it wasn't to your name.
Mr. Arriola: No.
Commissioner Gonzalez: It wasn't to include my name?
Chairman Teele: But -- and we passed an ordinance that said any use or transfer or change
or -- relating to land must be held pursuant to public hearing so that the public is aware of it.
Madam Attorney, I would assume that the UDB (Urban Development Boundaries) process is
clearly encompassed, and I think the way we make peace with the public and the neighbors is
that this item itself should have been a public hearing. In other words, the public's on knowledge
and they have record of it. I mean, we need to make sure that the public knows. Having said
that, Commissioner Gonzalez, I only regret that you were not there yesterday at the Margaret
Pace Park. We have a runaway success. Everybody in this city is trying to use that park. We
had at least two different groups, unsolicited, passing out their cards wanting to schedule events
at the park. You know, they want to come in with a proposal. This Melreese Golf Course/Park
complex should be the next Margaret Pace Park, in terms of something that everybody in the
public is going to want to use. This is a great location. This is Miami -- golf and Miami go
together. This venue should be the best golf course in municipal government in the
United States.
Commissioner Gonzalez: But, Mr. Chairman, if you allow me? I think that we have -- one
problem that we have --1 don't think you understand the whole picture. We're not only talking --
in this plan, we're not only talking about Melreese Golf Course. We're talking about a complete
redevelopment of the golf course, the Grapeland Heights Park --
Commissioner Winton: Park.
Chairman Teele: The park.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- and the --
Chairman Teele: Library.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- the library -- and the possibility of building a water theme park, so
it's -- what we're working on and what we're looking at is a complete redevelopment of all these
parks.
Chairman Teele: And, Commissioner, what I'm telling you is, I --
Commissioner Gonzalez: It's not only the golf course.
City of Miami Page 40 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: -- maybe I don't understand it, and you clearly are the guy who does, but I
want to make you know that I want to support this and you 200 percent --
Commissioner Gonzalez: And 1 appreciate it.
Chairman Teele: -- because 1 think, at the end of the day, this is not going to be your district
park anymore.
Commissioner Gonzalez: No. It's going to be --
Chairman Teele: This is going to wind up being a great citywide asset, and I can assure you that
people from Broward County, and people from all over Miami -Dade County will want to use this
venue, if we do it right.
Commissioner Gonzalez:: Definitely.
Chairman Teele: And to the extent that I've got a few Quality of Life dollars that could be made
available, I'm prepared to basically invest right in because, I mean, you know, we want to have
kids in the inner city --1 don't have a golf course in my district. Nowhere in my district do 1 have
a golf course. When I say "my district," in District 5; it belongs to the people, but I would like
for District 5 residents to know that in this golf course, there's a golf course that draws for
everybody in the City, and I think we need to see this project --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Definitely.
Chairman Teele: -- as a project that is -- happens to be in Angel Gonzalez' district, like
Margaret Pace Park happens to be in Johnny Winton's district, but that Margaret Pace Park, we
had Luther Campbell over there the other night for the Hip Hop Memorial Day thing. We've got
people that are in line now trying to use it from across the community. Hispanic -- we had the
MTV (Music Television) scheduled to go there. I mean, so I see this venue as being that kind of
venue, and what I'm trying to say -- I'm really trying to brown -- you know, trying to get all up
into your business. If I can give money to this park so that the residents of District 5 can feel a
part of this, and so that the citizens of Miami -- because, you know, who knows? There may be a
Tiger Woods out there --
Commissioner Gonzalez:: Who knows?
Chairman Teele: -- in Model City, or in Little Haiti, or in Overtown, or some of the other areas.
Commissioner Gonzalez: What 1--
Chairman Teele: And so, I want to be 100 percent supportive of what's going on here.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, what 1 envision in this project is a signature project for
the City of Miami. I think that if we work this right, we are all going to be proud of this project.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner --
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Arriola: Commissioner Gonzalez, grab his money. Let's don't forget this. He offered
money.
Commissioner Winton: Well --
City of Miami Page 41 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, he already compromised --
Mr. Arriola: Let's grab it, right?
Chairman Teele: Oh, I'm --
Commissioner Gonzalez: He already compromised on the record.
Chairman Teele: Trust me, I am totally supportive of this golf course.
Commissioner Winton: Let me make -- I would like to weigh in on this point, and Commissioner
Teele, you brought it up and I think it is the crucial point about this. This -- and you said it and I
back it 300 percent -- this should be -- this should not be Angel Gonzalez' district money. This
should be citywide money, period, because this is a citywide park, and it ought to be treated like
a citywide park, and we shouldn't be looking for the money -- figuring out where Angel gets the
money from his district allocation bonds. This should be a citywide project, like we have a
number of citywide projects, and that's where the money ought to come from.
Chairman Teele: Here, here.
Mr. Arriola: You got your tie from Typhoon Lagoon there now, Commissioner.
Chairman Teele: And, Commissioner --
Mr. Arriola: This weekend 1'11 put a couple of more toys there.
Chairman Teele: And, Commissioner, that's consistent with what this Commission has done on
the Orange Bowl, as it relates to the Orange Bowl in the 255 bond issue. It's consistent with
what this Commission has done on the first-class soccer field in the Little Haiti, you know, and
it's -- the same thing applies. I see the soccer fields as being more citywide than Haitian.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Chairman Teele: You know, I think there'll be more Brazilians using that soccer field than any
other group, when the smoke clears, but the fact of the matter is, it's a citywide asset, so I'm
happy to bring this forward in this context because I think Commissioner Winton underscored
what I said and that is, we should look for citywide dollars to support this to make this, to use
your words, a signature venue, a signature destination, so we salute you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you, sir.
Chairman Teele: All in favor of this item, say "aye.
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed have the same right.
City of Miami Page 42 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
DISCUSSION ITEMS
DI.1 04-00842 DISCUSSION ITEM
DISCUSSION AND SELECTION OF A NEW CITY ATTORNEY.
04-00842-email.pdf
04-00842 - correspondence.pdf
MOTION
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele stated that the City Attorney's Office needs to have a
clearer organizational structure.
A motion was made by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed with Commissioner Winton voting no, to appoint Jorge Fernandez as the City Attorney.
Note for the Record: Chairman Teele appointed Commissioner Gonzalez as a committee of one
to study appropriate compensation and benefits for the City Attorney and to bring back a
recommendation at the Commission meeting currently scheduled for September 9, 2004.
Chairman Teele: Unless there is an objection, I would like to take up the agenda Item Number
DI -- Discussion Item 1 for discussion and action, as appropriate.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: DI.
Chairman Teele: Is there a manager in the house?
Commissioner Regalado: Which one?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: D1 ?
Chairman Teele: D1.1, which is selection of the City Attorney -- discussion on City Attorney. Is
there a manager in the house? Thank you, Madam Manager. Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Winton: I guess I'll start with what I consider to be the most important element of
my thought process first, and get to the -- probably the least important part second, but -- I'm not
prepared to make a decision today on selecting a City Attorney. I've had the opportunity to meet
with each of the candidates. I had half an hour time with each of them, which is all the time that
I had, and this is a very, very important decision, and I've never -- in all of my professional
career -- every hired someone after I've spoken to them only one time on one day, never in my
life. Because I feel it's important to spend whatever you -- time -- relatively short period of time
first time you interview them, whatever time I want the second time I interview them, but that
second time has to be after I've interviewed them the first time. 1 get a chance to sleep on it,
think about it. Think about what questions I want to ask, and I -- so that amount of time, 1 just
simply haven't had, so I'm just simply not prepared to make a decision and, frankly, I'm not in a
hurry. We've got an acting City Attorney, and because it is such an important, important
position for our City, frankly, it doesn't bother me if it takes us three months or four months to
find someone, but finding the right person is crucial, and I'm also -- and this is probably a little
less important, but -- and this isn't designed to denigrate the candidates that were before me
because 1 liked everybody that 1 talked to -- but I'm surprised, frankly, that a city that is really on
fire like we are, 1 would have expected to see a broader range of qualifications from some top -
City of Miami Page 43 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
notch people out somewhere, as finalized candidates. Now, I don't know what the process was,
and so that's probably a weakness that I have, and I should have probably asked that question
about process because process may have done all of those things, but I don't know, and so, I was
just --1 thought that -- I would have thought that we would have seen some top -- just
extraordinary lawyers from -- certainly, around the state of Florida, Miami -Dade County in the
search, and it surprised me, frankly, that we had, of the two finalists -- of the three finalists, two
of them were internal to our existing department, so those are my two issues.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner, let me try, just on the issue of process, to comment. By law, I
believe we're restricted to persons who have had "X" number of years of service that are
members of the Florida Bar. Mr. Attorney, would you fill in the blanks?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): Five years of service and members of the Florida Bar, as
you indicated, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: OK, so the universe is narrowed down for these outstanding qualifications all
over the world, but they must be a member of the Florida Bar. Now that's a big limiting factor, a
huge limiting factor.
Commissioner Winton: Yep, and I didn't understand that, so that's --
Chairman Teele: A huge limiting factor.
Commissioner Winton: Um-hmm.
Chairman Teele: But we have no -- whether we re -advertise or whatever, we can't change that.
Perhaps, one of the most well-known lawyers in the country, certainly, the highest paid lawyer in
the country, is David Boise, but he's not a member of the Florida Bar, so if you want --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Chairman Teele: -- to pay somebody like $12, 000 an hour, as a top-notch lawyer, to be in this
job, he couldn't qualdy, so that's sort of the real parameters. Now, the real problem begets to
this: When you interview somebody for your office, you've got a budget in mind, and you know -
- you interview based upon that. Pursuant to the directors of the Commission, we advertised this
job in all of the Florida Bar periodicals, so it's not a question of advertising in the Wall Street
Journal or the Washington Post, or the L.A. Times. We advertised this in all of the Florida Bar
publications, and most particularly, we put it on website and advertised it to the members of the
local government committee of the Florida Bar, where 99.9 percent of any of the pool of
applicants would be, so it's a pretty finite group. In addition, we advertised, Madam Clerk, in --
Madam Clerk.
Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): The Miami Herald, Daily Business Review and the
(INAUDIBLE) -- Miami Today, Florida Bar Journal.
Chairman Teele: So, in addition to that -- and the Florida Bar Journal is different from the
Florida Bar publication -- the newspaper that comes out every week or so, so all of the qualified
applicants got the word. Now, the problem is money. We advertised this and we were very
careful -- Alex was extremely cautious. We did not commit the Commission in any way, shape or
form to dollars, but we did write in the application, which has been passed out at one point -- we
should get another copy of it, Mr. Attorney. You could have your office send it over. We put in
the current salary, including fringe benefits, of the incumbent, that is, Alex, so what was the
amount, Mr. Attorney, that we advertised?
Mr. Maxwell: $200, 000.
City of Miami Page 44 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: So, it said -- it didn't say we were advertising to pay that, we said the
incumbent, the current incumbent is salaried at $200, 000. Now, that salary was actually -- his
actual salary was how much?
Mr. Maxwell: 1 couldn't tell you the exact figure, but you -- are you --
Commissioner Winton: 200, 000, total value?
Mr. Maxwell: -- talking about including benefits?
Chairman Teele: What was the actual salary? Where's the --
Mr. Maxwell: 198? 198, 000.
Chairman Teele: That was his current salary?
Mr. Maxwell: Actual salary; it did not include bonuses. It did not include other benefits.
Chairman Teele: It was a little bit of a fudge, not much, and we did that because to meet the
criteria that you're outlining, we would have to be prepared to say we're advertising -- and with
a range of -- which we did not commit anybody to, but we would have to start it around 400 to $
450, 000, because if you want to get the applicants falling out of the David Boise law firm that
has a big office here -- I think they acquired -- who did they acquire, Steve Zack's firm, and
Koniifsky (phonetic), and all those guys, and if you want to get, you know, some of these other
rainmaking firms, you know, you've got to start at around $500, 000, because that, candidly, is
what lawyers are making, and the lawyer that was on the television last night, I believe his' salary
is somewhere upwards of $15, 000, 000 a year, the one that everybody saw --
Commissioner Winton: He probably isn't a candidate.
Chairman Teele: So -- well, you never know, so the point I'm making, there's a reason that you
don't -- I would have thought that maybe some former military judge advocates, who are
members of the Florida Bar, would have considered applying but, candidly, the judge advocate
experience, as rich as it is, even if it's a (UNINTELLIGIBLE) general, is really not consistent
with a municipal governmental role.
Commissioner Winton: How many applications did we get?
Chairman Teele: Mr. Attorney, would you answer the question, please?
Mr. Maxwell: I'm sorry.
Commissioner Winton: How many applications did we get?
Mr. Maxwell: We had 15.
Commissioner Winton: We had 50?
Mr. Maxwell: 15.
Commissioner Winton: Oh, 15. 15.
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir.
City of Miami Page 45 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: And what was the process? We interview -- you read all the resumes,
and then we interviewed five or six, or something? I mean, how did that --
Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me. The committee did not interview. The interviews were scheduled, but
they were canceled when the board did not make a decision -- decided not to make a decision at
that time, so there were no interviews conducted by the board itself
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Mr. Maxwell: What the board did was to rank the applications and, pursuant to Commission
resolution, make a recommendation to the Commission.
Commissioner Winton: You mean rank them only by looking at a resume?
Mr. Maxwell: They ranked them by resume, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
Chairman Teele: They were ranked, but this is the problem and this is the reality. Of the six
board members -- of the six members of the committee --
Commissioner Winton: Um-hmm.
Chairman Teele: -- there were no more than four names that --1 think there were no more than
five names that were consistent virtually across the board I mean, there were five names --
Commissioner Winton: That fit. That --
Chairman Teele: -- that were here, and all the other names were way, way, way down there.
Commissioner Winton: And not unusual. I --
Chairman Teele: And the other name involved --
Commissioner Winton: Sounds typical.
Chairman Teele: -- City of Miami employees, as well, so I mean, do you interview four
candidates who are currently or formerly City of Miami attorney staff?
Commissioner Winton: Oh, you're -- OK, let me -- I didn't understand, so there were five that
really -- that fit up here --
Chairman Teele: There really were four.
Commissioner Winton: OK, four that fit up here, and you're saying three of those four were --
Chairman Teele: Four of the four.
Commissioner Winton: -- either former or current City of Miami staff?
Chairman Teele: I mean -- and just so that it's clear, Rafael Diaz was -- if there had been four
names forwarded, it would have been Rafael Diaz, who did extremely well and, really, the idea
was --
Commissioner Winton: So we got -- out of all these lawyers, particularly in Miami -Dade
City of Miami Page 46 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
County, and there's a ton of them, whether it's another City Attorney lawyer, or whether it was
from another municipality or a County lawyer, none of those -- apparently, most of them didn't
apply.
Chairman Teele: Well, you had 15 apply, but this is the problem. This is one of the
opportunities or challenges. With the exception of Jacksonville, and maybe Tampa, you know,
as big as the state is, we are the biggest city in the state, so --
Commissioner Winton: And one of the most complex.
Chairman Teele: And one of the most complex. Candidly, we didn't do a distribution study but,
based on my experience, most of the senior lawyers at the City Attorney's Office make more than
our City Attorney.
Commissioner Winton: Now try that on me again. Most of the what?
Chairman Teele: Most of the senior lawyers --
Commissioner Winton: Um-hmm.
Chairman Teele: -- in the County Attorney's Office of Dade County make more than our City
A ttorney.
Commissioner Winton: So, are we underpaying?
Chairman Teele: I would not represent that. We are a municipal government. Our budget is
$450, 000, 000. They are a countywide government; their budget is $6, 000, 000, 000. I mean, you
know, you take the -- take the Public Health Trust. They've got what, six lawyers over there, five
lawyers over there in the Public Health -- there're County attorneys there, and I guarantee you,
at least two or three of those people make in excess of what our City Attorney makes, and that's
just -- that doesn't talk about the airport that's got a law firm almost -- that involves -- their
complexities involve, essentially, everything that our City Attorney's Office combined would be
doing, and then you've got, you know, Police, so it's -- as big as we are, in terms of
municipalities, we're sort of -- you know, it's not at all unbelievable that the pool of applicants
would come from the City of Miami's Attorney's Office because, after all, we've had at least two
of our lawyers being recruited by substantial cities and all on the short list. I mean, in
municipalities, we're as big as it gets. We're -- so our lawyers, especially the ones that applied,
including the one whose name is not before us today, are all fully qualified to be a City Attorney
in a city anywhere in the state of Florida, including the City of Miami, and that was the
conclusion of the committee, is that there are at least five applicants that could be forwarded
here that meet all of the requirements, et cetera. Of the five, three are clearly, dah, dah, dah,
dah, dah.
Commissioner Winton: I think that -- because 1 interviewed the three that came forward, as I
said. Two of those that came forward have very little to zero supervisory experience. The City
Attorney's job isn't just being our attorney. The City Attorney also has the job of running a very
significant department, and understanding how to figure out if it's run properly, efficiently,
effectively, with good output, and you have to have experience doing it. You can't be an
individual who's not had supervisory experience, and suddenly become the big kahuna,
particularly, if you're coming through the ranks, and know what you're doing from a boss/
supervisory/department head standpoint. You can know the law backwards and forwards, but
you're not going to know the other piece, and that was something that I was very concerned
about, just in my own interviewing process, and so when we talk about putting somebody --
promoting somebody from within, which I'm never opposed to, but that person has to have all the
skill sets that you would want in a City Attorney to move to that top job, not just the law part,
City of Miami Page 47 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
and so if -- I guess my view is that -- well, 1 need to think about it a little bit, so I'll just be quiet
and let everybody else talk.
Chairman Teele: On this discussion, Commissioner Regalado has the next position, but
Commissioner Sanchez could respond. Commissioner --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, I think --
Chairman Teele: -- Winton.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- I think we should break it down as to what are the concerns that are
being expressed by this legislative body. I think it was broken down into the process and as to
the pool of applicants. When you -- the process itself that was put out -- I mean, was put
together, 1 don't think anyone's going to question that it wasn't properly advertised. It was
properly advertised The committee -- the volunteer committee who got together did exactly
what we instructed them to do, to bring back the applicants that they felt qualified and had --
Chairman Teele: Unranked.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Unranked.
Chairman Teele: The application list that came over here --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Exactly.
Chairman Teele: -- even though he said they were ranked, they were ranked but they came over
here unranked
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, on the process side, on the pool of applicants, I don't have a
problem with that. On the process itself I don't have a problem. Let me just say this, and it's
just like the Florida Lottery. If you don't buy a ticket, you can't win it, and you can't put a gun to
anybody's head and force them to apply to be the City Attorney for the City of Miami. It was
open to everyone. Everyone had the same opportunity to apply for the position, and would I
have liked to see more people apply for it, maybe with more experience, maybe with more
supervisory experience, maybe more legal experience, which -- you know, I had that opportunity
-- and I think all of us did -- to interview the three finalists. 1 was very impressed with all three.
I had two that are neck to neck, and 1 really had to decide who I wanted to go with, but I
basically based it on a couple of things that, you know -- as we go on in the debate, I'll get into
that as to what my choice was but, you know, this is a privilege. One of the few privileges that
this legislative body has is to confirm and appoint the City Attorney, and it's one that we take
very seriously, so I just wanted to toss in my two cents as to what you stated. I think
Commissioner Teele, as to the experience that he has being an attorney, clarified the process and
also clarified the applicant -- the pool of applicants, so later on when we start, you know, getting
into the experiences, I'm prepared today to support and, hopefully, make a motion to appoint the
next City Attorney for the City of Miami.
Chairman Teele: Further discussion. Commissioner Regalado and then Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Regalado: It was this City Commission that, I guess, established a rule to make it
easier for the members of the Commission to make decisions. After all, we're here to make
decisions, but when the voters of Miami, which are more important than us five sitting here,
decided to create an independent review board of the Police Department, this Commission
decided to create a selection committee, and we took names and we choose who we thought,
each of us, was the best person to be in that selection committee, and of all the different
applicants, when it came back, we took the list. We didn't deviate from the list. We made a
City of Miami Page 48 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
decision and it made the job simpler for us. This selection committee that was created -- and the
Chairman -- suggested by Commissioner Winton -- I think, simplified the job for us. I don't have
law experience. 1 try to understand the role of the City Attorney, but the members of that
committee are people that I really, really respect, from the Chairman to the former City Attorney,
from all the appointees to my appointee, which is actually a City Attorney of two small
municipalities, and it simplified the job for me of making a selection. I had the pleasure of
meeting with the three finalists -- and, by the way, we need to thank the City Clerk's -- Anna and
the City Clerk's Office, because they really organized -- I mean, all these meetings. 1 had more
than one hour of meeting with the three of them. I learned a lot. I asked a lot of questions,
sometimes dumb questions, but -- I mean, they were able to even answer those questions. Do we
have two from the current City Attorney's Office? That says a lot about the City Attorney's Office
and the potential that we have. Do we have a current City Attorney? It also says that even if you
are in a very high place, you still want to come home, so 1 am satisfied with the process. I trust
the wisdom of the selection committee. I don't have any problems with the way they were ranked
That's why they're attorneys and members of the Florida Bar. They did their job. I always have
accepted the decision of selection committees. I never challenge any decision from the selection
committee and, today, I think that we just should move forward I believe that it is unfair to the
selection committee members to -- just to hold this process. It's unfair to the candidates because
you cannot have people hanging on a wire, and I think that we're here to make decisions.
Today, Mr. Chairman, 1 am ready to make a decision on the selection of the City Attorney of the
City of Miami.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Well, basically, to a certain extent, I agree with Commissioner Winton,
to the point that, you know, we -- I feel that this process has been rushed, in a sense that, you
know, we were told last week -- we received an e-mail or a memo, you have to meet with these
three persons, you know, right away. I mean -- and now I find out that this selection committee,
as good as they might have been, and it was appointed by us, never interviewed the candidates.
They just worked on resumes. Well, you know, you can put on paper whatever you want to put
on paper. Paper holds anything you want to put on it. 1 have been concerned with the, you
know, process as far as us having to interview these candidates in a rush to make a decision
today. I interviewed the candidates. If we have to make a decision today, I -- you know, I have
my mind made up, based on my interview with the candidates, based on the experience of the
candidates and the track record. I'm not an attorney, so not being an attorney, I cannot go into
the law field because I wouldn't know what to ask in the law field; I'm not an attorney, all right.
Based on management -- on the management experience of these candidates and based on the
experience in government of these candidates, 1 have my mind made up. If we have to make a
decision today, I'm ready to vote for a candidate. Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Let me clarify two points. Number one, the decision or the process was
structured so that a decision -- when we appointed the committee in late May, the last meeting in
May, so that the decision could be made by this Commission before the break, and we said that
then. If we get the transcript, 1 think it'll be very clear that it was done in that frame of mind and
that was the intent; number one. Number two, the notices were done in late May and they
actually went out in June. There was some delay, I think, in getting them out and, as a result, we
advertised not just one time, but multiple times, like in the Daily Business Journal and in the
Florida Bar, there were repeated advertisements, and so --
Mr. Maxwell: And in the Miami Herald.
Chairman Teele: And in the Miami Herald Repeated advertisements. The applicantions were
received on June -- July 2nd Now, this is the dilemma. We took -- we gave the board a week to
evaluate the recommendations and to come back with a rating, and that actually wound up being
ten days, almost two weeks. When the applications came back, the evaluations, there were three
City of Miami Page 49 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
names with two additional names that were all of the votes. In other words, if you -- we ranked
all of the applicants, and if you take the top five applicants, there were no names other than five
names, with six different people. If we then looked at ranking the top three names, or just not
doing it, but looking at it -- and three of the names were pretty much unanimous. There was one
person, again, who was a City staff person, who came in on the -- as one of the three names, but
other than that, it was pretty much these five names, with these three being -- and nobody else
even coming into the five. Everybody on the committee, with the exception of myself knew the
three names that are before you. 1 will tell you this: I had never met with two of the applicants,
other than maybe at a social function, or in a context of seeing them on the dais, or whatever,
and 1 had never interviewed or met with two of the applicants. Those two applicants, I would be
prepared to vote -- be the third vote for either of those two. I would be fully satisfied with either
of the two applicants that I had never interviewed, or never known. I had the privilege of
interviewing one of the applicants when he was being considered for a role, a significant role at
the County Commission, as a County staff person, and so that's the three people that we have the
names for. Jorge Fernandez -- Jorge Fernandez, I had the opportunity to interview him for the
better part of three hours once, for a significant position at the County, Miami -Dade County in
my life as a County Commissioner. The other two, Julie and Warren -- and 1 must say this. 1
find Warren Bittner to be -- this guy is -- and he is, by the way, a division chief He's a Division
Chief over Litigation, which 1 did not know until 1 did the interview. 1 thought that was another
person who was a division chief and that puts one of your comments in a slightly different
context, that there had been no management experience. Parenthetically, one of the biggest
fights that I've maintained with Alex, the entire time he was City Attorney, is what you just said,
Johnny, and that is, there needs to be more of a pyramid in the City Attorney's office. There need
to be Division Chiefs, and the big fight we had was the deputy, because Alex never had a deputy,
and 1 basically said, if you don't name a deputy -- I don't care who you name -- I'm going to fund
it in the budget, as a deputy, and he went ahead and voluntarily put a deputy in and funded it,
but I totally agree that all of these applicants should hear that we are concerned about the very
things that you talked about, the organizational effectiveness of that office, the management of
that office, the flow of information through that office, and -- I mean, you know, there's a horror
story -- that 1 don't want to get into today -- involving an innocuous, mundane issue, like the
naming of a street, that was on the consent agenda, where the City Attorney advising the
committee this is an inappropriate action to take. The committee, being a committee of civilians,
chose to disregard that, which is their right --1 don't have a problem with that -- but that should
have been the end of that. It should have stopped right there. The City Attorney should have
never let it come to an agenda, and it never should have gone to an agenda as a consent item,
and that -- in looking at just that one little issue, it exposes everything that you just talked about,
Johnny; the fact that items are on this agenda that the City Attorney doesn't know they're on the
agenda, hasn't reviewed. In this case, we've got a Public Works Director telling us what's
legally -- you know -- you remember when Stephanie -- the Public Works Director came down?
That's a systems problem within our process, in the agenda process and in all of this, and it
really reflects, not on the Agenda Coordinator or the Manager, it reflects on the City Attorney in
the way that things are going, and 1 said to this applicant who, by the way, was a lawyer for the
committee, then you should have been standing there at that podium saying, 1 don't know why my
boss won't protect you all, but I'm here to tell you -- you know. I mean, every lawyer in the City
Attorney's Office has got a responsibility to protect this Board of Directors from taking decisions
that are inappropriate or illegal, every one of them, not just the City Attorney, and if they are
members of the Florida Bar, sworn to uphold the law and as officers of the court, every one of
those lawyers should be charged by us and the City Attorney that if we're about to take an action
that is inappropriate, illegal or totally insane, they need to come and raise a legal objection to it,
or at least put it on the record so we can consider that.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We've come close to that.
Chairman Teele: And it was only because of -- huh?
City of Miami Page 50 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We've come close to that.
Chairman Teele: We've come close to that, but it was only because of the innocuous issue that
you raised, Johnny, and I told the Manager when he raised it to me the day before, 1 don't have a
-- I -- nobody came to me on this Space thing. I don't support it. I'm not opposed to it. They
ought to have something because they were the pioneers, but it's symptomatic of a much bigger
problem, and 1 want to support everything that you said about that, but the bottom line is, at the
end of the day, the three candidates are well-known to the five of the six members of the selection
process. 1 interviewed the other two. I could vote for either of the three candidates. I think
either of those three candidates are fully qualified to be the City Attorney. The irony is this, is
that one of the three hired the other two. That's the irony.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's the irony of it.
Chairman Teele: That's the irony of this whole thing.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But it's irrelevant.
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Totally irrelevant.
Chairman Teele: But it's totally irrelevant, so I think the question becomes, is there sufficient
support to defer the item? If there is, we should have a motion and a second, a discussion. If
there is not, we should proceed to go forward.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: If there is not going to be any debate or discussion on deferring the
item, 1 would like to be the first to make a motion to appoint, hopefully, the next City of Miami
attorney. Let me just state that I interviewed all three. I was very impressed One thing that you
stated is that some of the attorneys -- I guess, Alex did a good job keeping them in a courtroom
somewhere because, you know, I've never met them, and really, when you start interviewing
these individuals, you really find the quality of people that we have working for the City of
Miami and, you know, I interviewed all -- I gave them the same time. 1 asked them the same five
-- six questions. I had my senior policy advisor with me in the process, and I was very
impressed, but at the end, I knew that we had to make a decision. That decision is to hire who I
consider to be the best out of the three, and I was -- Julie O. Bru, I was very impressed with you.
You're a first-class -- your professionalism. The other young man was also very bright, but you
have to look at one thing here. I looked at, when I interviewed them, the gentleman that really
popped out, and I basically gave him an "A-" in the interview, was that he really had the
experience not only to govern the City of Miami, which he did for many years, but he also went
to another government, which was a County government, and there he did exceptionally well,
from what I hear, creating a system where he had a metric system to judge the department and
the attorneys for their efficiency, which I felt was something that -- maybe it's needed here. I am
one who thinks that we should hold everyone accountable for their action and what they do, and
they're here to produce for the City. They work for the City, and when you work for the City, you
work for the taxpayers and the voters of the City of Miami. Also, on the management skills,
which is very important, because when you come in and you bring someone new, if that
individual doesn't come in with a plan to make changes, then you're wasting your time bringing
him them because you continue with the same (UNINTELLIGIBLE) style, but I was very
impressed with the response that he gave me as to the changes that he's going to bring, bringing
the department more efficiency and, once again, having much more experience than some of the
City of Miami Page 51 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
other candidates on a larger municipal law. The thing that I think that he's not that strong on,
but we do have good people here, like Joe, is on land use laws but, at the end of the interview, 1
had to make a decision, and / will make a motion to appoint Jorge Fernandez -- to nominate and
appoint Jorge Fernandez as the next City of Miami City Attorney. So move.
Commissioner Gonzalez.: Second the motion.
Chairman Teele: Moved and second. Now, there's two or three ways we can do this. Normally,
the vote is by a ballot; is that right, Mr. Attorney? I've never participated in this, to my
knowledge.
Mr. Maxwell: You can do it either way, sir.
Chairman Teele: But has it normally been by ballot?
Mr. Maxwell: I think the last was voice. The last one was voice. In the past, there have been
issues --
Chairman Teele: I used to read, with some degree of lightheartedness, the 23rd balloting of
this --
Mr. Maxwell: Yes.
Chairman Teele: -- that -- hold it, hold it, hold it -- that the City used to engage in. I think it
would be only fair if the other two applicants would be asked to come forward --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh, absolutely.
Chairman Teele: -- before there's a vote. Is Warren here?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is Warren here?
Maria J Chiaro (Interim City Attorney): No.
Mr. Maxwell: He's not in the chambers.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, I'm sure he's in his office watching Net-9.
Chairman Teele: Hello, Warren.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hello, Warren.
Julie O. Bru: Good morning, Chairman Teele and members of the Commission.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's not on.
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead.
Ms. Bru: Is it on?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Bru: OK. I'm Julie Bru, Assistant City Attorney, and an applicant who was qualified,
ranked and then referred for your consideration. 1 want to thank all of you for meeting with me.
This has been a very exciting and very challenging process, but 1 want to particular thank those
City of Miami Page 52 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
of you who supported me in a special way, and encouraged me to continue in the process. Those
of you that have worked with me and City staff that has worked with me for the past 15 years
know that my commitment and my ethical philosophy in the City is that the City comes first, then
comes my office, the City Attorney's Office, and then comes my particular interest, and in this
case, during this couple of weeks, I've met with Jorge Fernandez. As you know, I started my
career as an Assistant City Attorney under his leadership, and 1 am truly impressed and excited
about the ideas -- a lot of those cutting edge ideas that he can bring to this office, and at this
time, 1 think you truly have someone who is exceptional and extraordinarily qualified for the
position, and I look forward to you appointing him. I'm formally withdrawing my application,
and 1 look forward to continuing to develop those skill sets that Commissioner Winton talked
about so that, in the future, I could better serve this City and this Commission. Thank you very
much.
Chairman Teele: Are there questions of Ms. Bru or statements to Ms. Bru?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: First-class.
Chairman Teele: First-class. Mr. Bittner's not here. I would only like to say that I find --1 had
a wonderful interview with him. I've never really had a conversation with him. 1-- we talked a
lot about the Anglican Church and Trinity Cathedral, which is a church there right next to the
Grand, and the Marriott, where my wife, who is very much Episcopal Anglican, and we're very
proud of the fact that her brother is going to be ordained as a priest after two years of studying
in the seminary, and I must say that Warren Bittner is a very moral person, who has a unique
spirit and quality, and I think this City is really, really, really privileged to have someone of the
moral character and the legal competence -- he was the lawyer, as it unfolded, that advised the
board not -- that the naming of the street was inappropriate and inconsistent with the ordinance,
and he acknowledged that he had an obligation to object once it got on the agenda, and he also
recognizes that --
Commissioner Winton: How'd it get on the agenda then?
Chairman Teele: Well, I would have to ask Maria to explain that -- but he also recognized --
Commissioner Winton: 1 don't want to get off that (UNINTELLIGIBLE) --
Chairman Teele: -- but he also recognizes that the City Attorney's Office really needs to be
challenged to be much more proactive in the agenda process, and in looking at items, and
reviewing items to protect us. We are the Board of Directors. I take particular offense -- and as
I shared with him -- on -- he heads the Litigation Division -- and I take --1 told him, 1 take
particular offense to the way you've run the division, and we had some serious discussions about
specific items. You'll recall some two months ago, we voted to require specific performance on
the Model City Trust, where they had a piece of property they had contracted to buy. The guy
was now ready to back out and, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, and 1 said, why hasn't the action
been filed? And he says, "Well, because the policy has been that you take it to the board and
once the board does it, then you draft up the complaint." I said, "But that's not the way a law
firm should work." Suppose, in drafting up the complaint, you find that there is a statutory bar,
or latches, or some reason that you can't do the specific performance? When we get that
document, all of the background should have all of the legal research. We should be protected.
In other words, we're taking the action and now, if the lawsuit can't be filed, then we're looking
stupid. They're protecting themselves. 1 mean, not to make this a "we" versus "them, " but I
think that is the kind of dialogue that I was able to have with Warren, and he thoroughly
understood it and acknowledged that in a real world situation, if we were a multi -million dollar
client, no lawyer would approach the client by saying, give us the authority to sue, but not have
already researched all of the underlying legal issues, factors before coming to make that
recommendation, as just one example, and I found the meeting with Warren to be extremely
City of Miami Page 53 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
refreshing. I must say that I don't know Julie, and didn't have as long a meeting with Julie, but
she has a wonderful daughter that we talked about. My goddaughter was here for the summer,
and I'm looking forward to getting to know Julie and her family, and I'm just excited about the
potential of working with -- I will say this, as it relates to the nominee in question, 1 have had
some bitter disagreements with him on some policy matters in the County in the past. 1 respect
his very well reasoned opinion, and find him so academically and legally challenged that I'm
going to be looking forward to going to Bar Review classes with him, because he is very, very
steeped and studied in the law. He is one of the few lawyers in the Florida Bar section that
actually goes to Bar classes, that I've seen in CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency),
Community Redevelopment Bar Section, and I know that he's well aware of that because he's led
a lot of the class discussions over the months and years that I -- I'm a member of the Florida Bar
and 1 do have to go to Bar classes 30 hours every cycle, and I'm going to be there most of
August, in Bar Review classes, studying redevelopment and eminent domain, and those kinds of
things, and Jorge is an expert in that area, and I'm really looking forward to the fact that we'll
have an expert in Chapter 163, but I'm concerned about this comment that Julie put on the --
about this comment that she's looking forward to his -- how did you say that, biting, or what was
that?
Ms. Bru: I'm looking forward to continuing to develop my skill sets --
Chairman Teele: It's cutting edge. You said cutting edge.
Ms. Bru: Cutting edge. He has some --
Chairman Teele: And I just want to make sure the --
Ms. Bru: -- cutting edge.
Chairman Teele: -- edge he's cutting --
Ms. Bru: As long as he doesn't cut --
Chairman Teele: -- is not my edge.
Ms. Bru: -- the City Attorney's Office budget.
Chairman Teele: 1 just want to make sure that the edge he's cutting is not my edge, because I
can tell you this. Jorge Fernandez is a man who has strong opinions, who has very good legal
background and training. I have learned from him over the years in Florida Bar review -- or
Florida Bar classes for credits, classes that he's taught, classes that he's participated in, and I
can tell you that it's going to be interesting. He does have a cutting edge, so with that, is there
further discussion?
Commissioner Regalado: Roll call.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, would you call the roll?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So, we're waiving the ballot, which we --
Chairman Teele: We're waiving the ballot.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): Commissioner Winton?
City of Miami Page 54 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: As I said at the beginning, 1 have had all of 30 minutes to talk to Jorge.
Based on that conversation and his resume, I felt like he seemed to have all the qualifications
that 1 would be looking for in a City Attorney, but I'm going to stress "seem" because 1 don't
know for sure, and I haven't had an opportunity to talk to him more than 30 minutes, and I'm not
going to support any selection today. I would vote against whomever was moved today because
I'm not going to make, at least personally, a decision that impacts the City so greatly after seeing
somebody for half an hour, and this has nothing to do with you, Jorge, whatsoever. It's about
process and getting to know, so my vote is no.
Ms. Scheider: Commissioner Regalado?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So, your vote?
Commissioner Winton: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh.
Commissioner Regalado: My vote is for Mr. Fernandez. I met with him. I asked many
questions; he answered, and I am looking forward to work with Jorge as the next City Attorney
of the City of Miami, and my vote is yes.
Ms. Scheider: Commissioner Gonzalez?
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yes.
Ms. Scheider: Vice Chairman Sanchez?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes.
Ms. Scheider: Chairman Teele?
Chairman Teele: I'm deeply concerned about the budget and preparing for the budget. We have
one primary duty under our Constitution, our Charter; that is, to present a budget. There are a
number of issues, Mr. --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You've got to vote on the issue.
Chairman Teele: Huh? There are a number of issues that I'm deeply concerned about in the
budget, specifically, including the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement Team) Office, the
Departments of Communications, Human Resources and Parks & Recreation.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, you need to vote on the --
Chairman Teele: I'm about to vote.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: And I'm stating my reason for not willing to be willing to defer the item which,
under normal circumstances, I would certainly be willing to do, but I think we need a City
Manager -- City Attorney to come in and work through this next 30 days to help us have a solid
budget process. I'm going to vote yes for Mr. Fernandez. The vote is --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Congratulations.
Chairman Teele: -- 4 to 1.
City of Miami Page 55 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
(Applause)
Commissioner Regalado: You want to --
Jorge Fernandez: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) back?
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You (UNINTELLIGIBLE) back. Get used to being back here.
Chairman Teele: Group pictures. May be the last time we're all smiling here with him.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yep. Enjoy this.
Commissioner Winton: The next group picture is frowning?
Chairman Teele: Yeah, the next group picture is frowning.
Mr. Fernandez: Can 1 say it from here?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, absolutely.
Commissioner Regalado: Here, here.
Chairman Teele: No, no, no. Go ahead, get the City Attorney's chair.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh.
Chairman Teele: He's the first.
Mr. Maxwell: He hasn't been sworn in, yet.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: He hasn't been sworn in.
Mr. Fernandez: 1 haven't been sworn in.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Joel, you're holding on to that seat.
Chairman Teele: Are you ready?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Are you ready to swear him in?
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Better hurry up and get sworn in.
Chairman Teele: Go right ahead, Jorge. You can make a statement.
Mr. Fernandez: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, I'm deeply --
Chairman Teele: Your name and address, for the record.
City of Miami Page 56 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yeah,
Mr. Fernandez: You can call me George; you can call me Jorge, as long you don't call me late
for dinner, in case you ever decide to invite me. I'm deeply honored and very touched by the
process this morning, but mostly, I am touched by my colleagues, by Julie Bru and Warren
Bittner, and by the remainder of the office of the City Attorney, Maria. It's a different place.
When I left 13 years ago, the City of Miami was a different place than what it is today. I'm so
overwhelmed because I was thinking, perhaps, that 1 would not have to speak today, so 1 wasn't
really all that prepared, but the City of Miami is very dear and close to my heart. I spent the first
10 years of my legal career here, coming up through the ranks, and circumstances presented
themselves 13 years ago, when I felt it was in the best interest of my family that I should seek
some place else to bring them up for personal reasons, and so, in coming back to Miami, I'm
coming back to family and friends, but in coming back to the City, 1 am not coming back to the
same City that I left, and I want to make that very clear to all of you. I understand that this
Commission and the leadership of the City is radically different. The City is in a different
footing, heading in a different direction, with a different set of dynamics and players, and I'm
very proud to be one of those over the next several years. I was making reference to the City
Attorney. I have developed certain skills, perhaps, I have studied and worked hard at looking at
issues of management and metrics and accountability, and I certainly intend to bring to bear all
of the gifts and all of the knowledge that I have acquired over the past several years to continue
to make this City an incredibly beautiful and successful place. With regard to being sworn in, I
don't know what the plans of the Commission are. 1 am presently the County Attorney for
Sarasota County. My five Commissioners in Sarasota County are waiting for a phone call and,
in terms of deference and in terms of the legality of it, which 1 would defer to the City Attorney, 1
don't know that I could be two things at the same time, so 1 would need to resign my present
position as County Attorney of Sarasota County to be able to officially become your City
Attorney, so unless the City Attorney opines differently, I would beg of you to defer my swearing
in and my official acceptance into the chair until such a time as I square away with five very
dear friends in Sarasota.
Ms. Chiaro: I defer to his opinion.
Mr. Fernandez: So, again, I remember that in my very, very short speech to the City
Commission several years ago, the one statement that I made that still lingers in the mind of
some is that I gave you -- 111 give you assurances that I will make you proud of this decision you
have made. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Before you leave, I would like to clam just one issue and that is, in my memo,
I've asked that there be an appointment of a one person committee, preferably, the
Commissioner with the least longevity, as the Compensation and Benefits Committee for the City
Attorney designate, and to report back at the next regular meeting, and I would just ask
Commissioner Gonzalez if you would accept the responsibility of being the Compensation and
Benefits Committee to make a recommendation to the Commission, after meeting with Mr.
Fernandez and meeting with the Manager's Budget Officer and meeting with the Human
Resources people and looking at -- and making a recommendation back to us?
Commissioner Gonzalez: I accept the appointment, sir.
Chairman Teele: Is that by consensus that --
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: OK.
City of Miami Page 57 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: So we would expect you to handle that exclusively with Commissioner Gonza
lez, and we appreciate Commissioner Gonzalez' desire to help to expedite it.
Mr. Fernandez: Thank you very much.
Ms. Chiaro: And that recommendation will come back to the Commission for full approval on --
the ultimate authority remains with the City Commission for the salary and benefits.
Chairman Teele: Yes. That will come back on -- I think I read in September 9th, at the next
regular scheduled Commission meeting. At the next regular scheduled Commission meeting,
which 1 think is September 9th. All right.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Discussion on Item DI.1 resulted in the resolution below:
(DI.1) 04-00842a RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION ELECTING AND
APPOINTING JORGE L. FERNANDEZ AS CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND WITH
COMPENSATION AND EMOLUMENTS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE
CITY COMMISSION.
Motion by Vice Chairman Sanchez, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
Noes: 1 - Commissioner Winton
R-04-0532
DI.2 04-00869 DISCUSSION ITEM
REPORT CONCERNING THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND.
04-00869-cover memo
DISCUSSED
Direction to the Administration by Chairman Teele to provide the Commission with a written
report on the possibility of placing a City bond question, without raising taxes, to the voters on
the November 2004 ballot.
Chairman Teele: Further matters to come before the City Commission regarding this. Let's
defer the item related to bond and hear from the budget -- at the budget workshop.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): At what time is that?
Chairman Teele: At 2 o'clock.
Mr. Arriola: Oh, 2 o'clock.
Chairman Teele: And we would recess now until 2 o'clock.
City of Miami Page 58 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Winton: Great. 2 o'clock? Perfect.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Manager, we have one final item on the agenda before the budget, and
that is the report on the finance as it relates to the elasticity on the bond I think that's
Discussion Item D1.2 or Discussion Item 2.
Scott Simpson: Scott Simpson, Finance Department. We're prepared to talk about the bonding
capacity. As part of the presentation, the representative from RBC Dain Rauscher, one of the
City's financial advisors, John Moellenberg will talk about it.
Chairman Teele: Is there a written report?
Mr. Simpson: No, there's not a written report.
Chairman Teele: Are we going to pay him?
Mr. Simpson: We could --
Chairman Teele: Scott, 1 mean, I -- look, it's late and we all have some things -- I don't want to
be picky, but I asked for this. I mean, I've been treated like a child. I discussed this in this last
Commission meeting. I've not received any information, at all, and I've said, at every turn, that
it is my hope that if there is elasticity, that we would act today to at least consider a bond issue
provided we're not going to raise taxes on any citizen. I mean, it's clear to me that the County is
not looking out for the City's best interest in a number of areas, and we had a lot of discussion
about this during the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) meeting with at least three of the
CRA board members and Commissioners, and all that I've said is, I'd like to know what the
numbers are, but I expected to get at least the benefit of a report. I don't want to be treated like
a child This is a serious issue, and I think we're entitled to know a report. If we're paying the
financial advisor, then the financial advisor should give us a written report, and I don't think
that's asking too much, if we're going to consider going out to the voters and asking for that, to
have a written document. 1 met with the Manager yesterday for two hours. 1 asked the Manager
-- I didn't get any numbers, and I don't blame the Manager. You know, he's got staff to do that,
but I would have hoped somebody would have given us the numbers, so Mr. FA (Financial
Advisor), would you give us the good news or the bad news? Is there elasticity to go out with a
supplemental bond, beyond the 255, without raising taxes?
John Moellenberg: John Moellenberg, RBC Dain Rauscher. Chairman, Commissioners, we
were directed by staff to look into your request, and so we took a lot of looks at this, and we
started with the assumptions that the City has for growth and assessed value. We believe those
are reasonable. They're quite aggressive, but the projections of growth and assessed value are
based upon projects that are in the works, and so, over the first few years, those numbers are
large and they declined to more normal levels over time. We also looked at the current interest
rate market, and considered a number of scenarios. As you mentioned, there is the limited ad
valorem authorization of $102, 000, 000 that's still unissued, and so we created a hypothetical
model of that bond issue, and those bond issues, it's been the practice of the City to issue 20 year
maturities, as fixed rate bonds, being a very conservative --
Chairman Teele: 20 year?
Mr. Moellenberg: 20 year final maturity on those bond issues.
Chairman Teele: 20?
Mr. Moellenberg: That's right.
City of Miami Page 59 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: Our current bonds are 20 years?
Mr. Moellenberg: That's right, and it's typical that bonds supported by property taxes mature in
20 years, so that's been the practice of the City, so we looked at current market rates and found
that based upon that practice, there's not any additional capacity for bond issues without raising
taxes, if the City is to issue those additional bonds and stay with the practice of issuing 20 year
fixed rate bonds.
Chairman Teele: All right. Thank you very much.
City of Miami Page 60 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
PART B
PZ.1 04-00723 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENTS,
APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS, A MAJOR USE SPECIAL PERMIT
PURSUANT TO ARTICLES 9, 13 AND 17 OF ZONING ORDINANCE NO.
11000, FOR THE OPUS PROJECT, TO BE LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY
1237 BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, 324 AND 444 NORTHEAST 13TH STREET,
MIAMI, FLORIDA, TO CONSTRUCT A 57-STORY MIXED -USE STRUCTURE
CONSISTING OF 408 TOTAL MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS,
APPROXIMATELY 17,160 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/OFFICE USE, AND
570 TOTAL PARKING SPACES; DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL; MAKING
FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATING CONCLUSIONS OF LAW; PROVIDING
FOR BINDING EFFECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
04-00723 Fact Sheet.pdf
04-00723 MUSP Analysis.PDF
04-00723 Zoning Map.pdf
04-00723 Aerial Map.pdf
04-00723 UDRB Reso.pdf
04-00723 School Brd Recomm.PDF
04-00723 Traffic Impact Analysis.PDF
04-00723 PAB Reso.PDF
04-00723 MUSP Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00723 Sp Ex Fact Sheet.PDF
04-00723 Sp Ex Analysis.PDF
04-00723 ZB Reso.PDF
04-00723 Sp Ex Application & Supp Docs.PDF
04-00723 Plans.PDF
04-00723 Plans Re-submittal.PDF
04-00723 Legislation.PDF
04-00723 Exhibit A.PDF
04-00723 Exhibit B.PDF
04-00723 Exhibit C.PDF
04-00723 - submittal - 1.pdf
04-00723 - submittal - 2.pdf
REQUEST: Major Use Special Permit for the Opus Project
LOCATION: Approximately 1237 Biscayne Boulevard and 324 and 444 NE
13th Street
APPLICANT(S): 1237 Biscayne Blvd, LLC, Owner and 1237 Biscayne
Development Group, LLC, Contract Purchaser
APPLICANT(S) AGENT: Lucia A. Dougherty, Esquire
FINDINGS:
City of Miami Page 61 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: Recommended approval with
conditions*.
URBAN DEVELOPMENT REIVEW BOARD: Recommended approval with
conditions* to City Commission on April 21, 2004 by a vote of 6-0.
PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD: Recommended approval with
conditions* to City Commission on June 16, 2004 by a vote of 6-0.
ZONING BOARD: Granted the special exception on June 28, 2004 by a
vote of 8-0.
*See supporting documentation.
PURPOSE: This will allow the development of the Opus Project.
CONTINUED
A motion was made by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Commissioner Gonzalez, and was
passed unanimously, with Chairman Teele absent, to CONTINUE item PZ 1 to the Commission
Meeting currently scheduled for October 28, 2004; further requesting the developer to meet with
opponents of this item to try to come to an agreement before they come back on October 28,
2004.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- Z item. We have one item on the agenda, and it's PZ 1. If we could
have everyone -- Madam Clerk, could you swear in all those who'll be testifying on this item?
Sylvia Scheider (Assistant City Clerk): All of those -- those of you who will be speaking on
PZ (Planning & Zoning) items, please stand up and raise your right hand.
The City Clerk administered required oath under City Code Section 62-1 to those persons giving
testimony on zoning issues.
Ms. Scheider: Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. We'll go ahead and start with PZ item. The applicant will go
first and make their presentation. They'll have sufficient time. Then staff will give their
presentation and then, of course, the opposition or the public comments will have the
opportunity, too, so at this time, we'll go ahead and turn it over to the applicants.
Lucia Dougherty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission. My name is Lucia
Dougherty with offices at 1221 Brickell Avenue. I'm here today on behalf of the owner and the
applicant, and with me is Arva Jain and Paul Murphy, who are the principals of the property.
About four -- about five years ago, Arva Jain came to Miami and -- I'm just going to wait a
second here. About four years ago, Arva Jain came to Miami and started driving around
Biscayne Boulevard looking for sites to invest in, and four years ago, she started to acquire these
properties, not just one, but actually several properties. 1 think nine in total; all of them around
the Performing Arts Center, and two and a half years ago, there was an article in the paper,
which I'm going to pass out to you, telling you the vision that Arva Jain had for this particular
area. It's no different than those who built around the Lincoln Center in New York had This
property is located between 1-95 and the concert hall for the Performing Arts Center. It is on the
east side of the Biscayne Boulevard, and it was designed about a year ago when we had a design
competition between several architects and we picked Bernardo Fort -Brescia as the architect for
this project because it was the most sensitive to the Performing Arts Center. The property is
located in an SD-6 zoning classification. It is in the Omni CRA (Community Redevelopment
Agency), so all of the taxes that would flow from this building go into the Omni CRA Tax
Increment Fund. It's 408 residential units. There's a retail gallery, a restaurant, office, fitness
center, recreational amenities. It is, again, a list -- on Biscayne Boulevard, where the property
along -- this property, as well as all of the Miami Herald lots, as well as all of Biscayne
Boulevard south of this property all the way to the Freedom Tower is zoned SD-6, which allows
City of Miami Page 62 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
500 units per acre, so there was an incentive when we bought this property to develop this
property exactly as Arva Jain has envisioned it. It's an elliptical building, with no backs. It has
a facade that is attractive on all sides. It is unanimously approved by the Urban Development
Review Board, the Planning Advisory Board, the Large Scale Development Committee, the
Internal Design Review by the staff. Bernardo Fort -Brescia is the project architect. Dick
Rogers is the -- with Curtis & Rogers, is the landscape architect, and we have our traffic
engineer here from David Plummer & Associates. As this time, I'd like Bernardo Fort -Brescia to
come forward and present the project, and after that, Arva Jain would like to make a brief
statement for the record
Bernardo Fort -Brescia: Good afternoon. My name is Bernardo Fort -Brescia. I'm a principal
with Arquitectonica. I'd like to first begin by making some reference to the site and its location,
and how the building is positioned within it, and I'll use some of the boards to -- for this purpose
and take you through the project in its entirety. As you can see from this aerial view, the project
is located in an almost triangular site -- a trapezoidal site at the corner of 13th and Biscayne
Boulevard Would you like me to move this to the side to show it diagonally? OK. Yes. Catty -
corner from the main plaza of the Performing Arts Center, or say across the street from the site
of the symphony hall and catty -- and diagonally across from the Sears Tower, behind which is
the opera house. The site also is against the berm of the entrance of the McArthur Causeway
leading to Miami Beach on the southern side, and overlooking the future museum park. It is --1
think with -- I'm going to take you through a site plan that maybe explains better the exact
position of the building and, in fact, when I first got involved in this project, I took a careful look
at the position of the Performing Arts Center, its arrival sequence, its openings, its placement of
its architectural features, and 1 show you here the adjacencies, in fact, in that respect. You can
see here the symphony hall here on top, and you can see how the symphony hall tapers and
angles at the southeast corner, and there is a glass form that you can see -- in the way it is
positioned -- avoids, precisely avoids the corner of our property. In fact, we curved the corner to
clear that view corridor in that direction diagonally. In addition to that, we did notice that this
is the service side of that symphony hall. In fact, the main entrance into the symphony hall are
from the plaza and from the corner facing the Miami Herald and, accordingly, this was only the
entrance for the staff and the loading docks, which you can see here in the location indicated
here and, therefore, the building was rotating and it's, in fact, in the same shape as the actual
plaza of the Performing Arts Center. It's actually as if the form had been extruded and moved
over to this position and placed in that diagonal orientation. On -- catty -corner from it is the --
as you can see from this direction, is the Sears Tower, and in the -- over to the west of it, there is
a second window, a very large -- a much larger window because, in this case, the opera house
has a more important frontage, and it actually also clears diagonally past Biscayne Boulevard,
the position of the tower so that, intentionally, we created a very slender and small tower soft in
its shape, without any sharp corners, something that the eye could go around, and we made a
glass tower, as transparent and light as possible in this orientation at the corner of the site. With
this, I'd like to show you a third image here where you can see that position of the tower itself
and this is looking from 13th. This is a proposed park off to one side. You can see here the
position of the tower and, as I mentioned, it is a very slender tower. There were other proposals
for this site that created more of a crescent building, for example, that created more of a wall.
We, in fact, went to a very tall, skinny building that is almost 60 stories in height and that is very
translucent, and it's -- and very vertical, anchoring the corner of 13th and Biscayne Boulevard,
and probably this is the most important image to show you, but it also -- we presented it to the
other boards that we went through for the last six months of hearings, some of them arterials that
are part of this design. How we dealt with the podium; 60 feet of that podium is occupied by
offices and shops so that there is activation of the frontage on Biscayne Boulevard, and we
showed all the materials for the enclosure of the garage. We discussed a lightened and graphic
image that wraps around the garage and how the tower glass element comes all the way to the
ground through its lobby, as it rises to the top, and I think this is, in essence, a summary of this
project. There are views that 1 have available for you from all directions. There's elevations
from every side of the building that I'm available to show; from every different direction but, of
City of Miami Page 63 Printed on 12/16/2009
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
course, 1 was -- I'm primarily focusing on what you see from the Performing Arts Center corner
because, even for us, it's the most important facade of the building since it is facing a civic space
and activity area, facing a park and two prominent civic buildings in our City. 1 think that is, in
summary, the design of this project. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Ms. Dougherty: And now my client would like to make a brief statement.
Arva Jain: Hello. My name is Arva Jain. I reside at 608 West Dilido, Miami Beach, Florida,
33139. I am the owner/developer of Opus. 1'd appreciate a few minutes of everyone's time in
hopes that you will -- that those of you who are here to object would reconsider, or at least take
the time to understand what you are objecting to. It is important that the public know that I have
been available and forthcoming all along. Lucia's passing out an article that was in the Miami
Herald February 27, 2002; that's almost two and a half years ago. At that time, in that article, I
lay out my vision and express my intent for the project. I couldn't have been any more
transparent. I started buying these properties five years ago when no one else dared. I believed
and promoted the City's vision of a world -class cultural center. Three and a half years ago, I sat
down with Parker Thompson in Raul Rodriguez' office to introduce myself as the neighboring
property owner and express my interest to work together on the park. About two years ago, the
Mayor, Commissioner Winton, Commissioner Teele worked together in hopes of bringing the
Whitney Museum of American Art to Miami. About a year ago, I met with Michael Hardy in his
office and he seemed delighted at the time to have restaurants, cafes, future patrons, possible
donors living across the street. About four months ago, lastly but not only, my partner, Paul
Murphy and myself met with Woody Weiser, Parker Thompson and Michael Hardy. We shared
our vision of the area and informed them that we were beginning the MUSP (Major Use Special
Permit) process on Opus. We have gone through five of six steps: Earned the approval of the
Design Review Board and received unanimous approval from the PAB without objections the
whole time. The point being that everybody knew. Not only did they know, they supported it and
encouraged it. If you are going to object, don't object to me; don't object to Opus. You should
object to the PAC. You should object to the County. You can object to the FDOT I am the
victim here. To stop Opus would be to stop what will ultimately be a 750 to $800, 000, 000
development. That would -- in an empowerment zone, with the hopes that it would one day
generate about $15, 000, 000 in property taxes. A $15, 000, 000 annuity would support a 250 to
$300, 000, 000 bond in simple math. The Performing Arts Center is asking for a view from the 2
nd tier, a 200-plus million dollar view. That is what you are asking for. 1 hope the donors and
patrons and the public understands that. Mr. Chairman, 1 don't even know -- Mr. Arthur Teele --
Commissioner Teele isn't here. Pm not sure what that means in terms of dollars for the CRA.
I've invested five years of my life, my heart, my soul for today. I spent millions of dollars on land
that could have been invested elsewhere. I spent over $1, 000, 000 a year carrying these
properties, paying high property taxes with little or no services. Bernardo, I think you've
designed a fabulous building. 1 think that the City would be proud to have it. I followed the
rules. I'm building as of right. I've respected the process. I'm here before the Commissioners
today to ask you to have the courage to grant me the MUSP I so deserve. I'm the little guy here.
If you don't protect me, who will?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Lucia, who's next?
Ms. Dougherty: That concludes our presentation. We'd just like some time for rebuttal.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. All right. Staff recommendation. Staffs presentation.
Roberto Lavernia: Good afternoon. For the record, Roberto Lavernia, Planning & Zoning.
This item was presented at the City Commission of July 22nd this year. It was continued in order
for the applicant to have a meeting with FDOT and the Office of Transportation. This is a Major
Use Special Permit with 408 residential units, 17,160 square foot of retail and office and a total
of 570 parking spaces. The recommendation of the department is for approval with conditions.
City of Miami Page 64 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
You have the package of conditions in your package. The only extra thing that we are adding is
a condition from the Urban Development Review Board that the mural or artistic mural that they
are proposing have no -- any commercial messages, the final one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Lavernia: But the recommendation is for approval. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is FDOT here?
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You are here? OK. All right. Thank you. We'll go ahead and go with
-- start with the opposition or the public comments.
Jeffrey Bass: Members of the Commission. Jeffrey Bass is my name; 46 Southwest 1st Street is
my address. I'm here this afternoon representing the Performing Arts Center Foundation,
together with Mr. Sherwood Weiser, and we are here to present our objection to the project, the
Major Use Special Permit project, commonly referred to as the Opus. We have a thorough
presentation. We are well coordinated to move as quickly as 1 can. We do have a good amount
of ground to cover, and I make you the promise that I'm going to do it as quickly as I can. I
guess I have to start by correcting the record, and that is, correcting the record with respect to
the comment made by Ms. Jain during her presentation. This is not an as -of -right project. If it
were an as -of -right project, we would not be here. If it were an as -of -right project, there would
not be an opportunity for public input, public comment, and if it were an as -of -right project, you
would not have the discretion that you have under a MUSP to ensure that the proposed project
responds, connects and works with the fabric in context of the neighborhood into which it is
being cited. This Commission very recently rewrote its Zoning Code. It specifically rewrote its
Zoning Code to give specific standards to the MUSP ordinance, to give specific design criteria
for you to consider when you evaluate a project like this, and we're going to talk about those
criteria, but to say that this is an as -of -right project is to misstate the application that is before
you. I'm joined by several speakers. Nobody is going to repeat themselves, or they'll do their
best not to, and 1 want to march as quickly as I can through the application for a MUSP that's
before you because that's really all that is before you. Let me first turn to the economic impact
analysis that is submitted as part and parcel of this MUSP, and is submitted as part and parcel
of every MUSP. This economic impact analysis is deficient. It is fatally deficient because in no
way does the economic impact analysis wink, nod or even acknowledge how this proposed
structure is going to impact the Performing Arts Center from an economic perspective. There is
no discussion of the Performing Arts Center economics. There is no discussion of the potential
adverse consequences on the program behind the Performing Arts Center, and most importantly,
nowhere does it reference how the public private partnership that is the Performing Arts Center
will be impacted by the sighting of an over 600-story tower, with over 12 stories of parking
garage right in its face. The failure of the economic impact analysis to even address this, let
alone provide an analysis of it, in my opinion, renders it insufficient, and that alone is reason for
you to reconsider the approval, if for no other reason, to have a more complete and thorough
understanding of the economics. Next, this MUSP, like every MUSP, needs a traffic analysis. 1
know my way around your City Administration building, I think, as well as anybody, and as of
the time of the last public hearing, the review of your public records contained a letter on URS
letterhead dated June 9th, saying that as of that analysis, the traffic study was incomplete; it was
insufficient. More data was needed There were errors in the methodologies. Committed
development had not been considered. As of my review of the hearing on the review of the file on
the eve of the last hearing, on the face of the traffic report less than a week ago, the traffic
consultant hired to look at this said, we need more time to study it. I heard, for the very first time
at the last hearing, that a clearance letter was received. I tried my best to get a copy of that
clearance letter from the URS firm to be sure there was no copy of that clearance letter in the
City of Miami Page 65 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
file. I had no opportunity to review it. 1 had no opportunity to review the conclusions contained
within it, and all the clearance letter says is, we should expect a revised report soon. To the best
of my review of your public records, there is no revised traffic report in this file, and the failure
to contain a sufficient traffic report renders, in my opinion, this MUSP incomplete. We're not
talking about a nook and cranny of the City. We're not talking about a part of the City that
people won't be visiting. We are talking about the epicenter for the cultural redevelopment of
Miami, and we're not doing a very good job making sure that we are developing it the right way.
The failure of this applicant to submit appropriate traffic reports, traffic studies to address the
integration of this project with the existing traffic circulation patterns, and to take into account
the traffic flows generated by the committed developments, including the Performing Arts Center,
necessitates and justifies the denial of this application, or at least the deferral for further study of
those issues in a complete and comprehensive way. This Commission is not shy and, recently, I
have been proud and surprised, candidly -- pleasantly surprised -- at the zeal that this
Commission has shown to protect neighborhoods, to make sure that we do things right,
particularly in important locations. I can't imagine a more important location than this, and 1
can't imagine a better case to show that we know how to do it right. This has happened very,
very quickly, and I need to speak about that for a moment. I don't dispute any of the facts that
Ms. Jain said because I can't. I don't know about them, but what I can tell you is this. The
Performing Arts Center Foundation, the Performing Arts Center Trust did not receive notice of
the public hearing process. To the best of our knowledge, that notice got mailed to somebody at
the County and, in fact, when you review the Affidavit of Notice submitted, it suggests that
perhaps only eight property owners -- eight, maybe 12, no more than 20 -- received mailed
written notice of this process. The affidavit is in the file, and I was shocked to see it. The public
notice on this matter has been very quiet. We all really learned about the reality of this two and
a half weeks ago, maybe; a week before the first public hearing. That's not to say that they didn't
have conversations. That's not to say that they didn't know something was coming, but the
reality of the MUSP approval pending happened that recently, and one cannot construe our
failure to appear at the Planning Board or the lower boards as tacit approval. We simply did
not know that those hearings were going on, and I wanted to clarify that for the record. One of
the things that the traffic report that is in the file says is that the applicant must coordinate with
the City Transportation Office and FDOT regarding traffic circulation and access to the site and
plans for the 1-395 highway. My review of your public records doesn't show that that has
happened, and it would be outright silly to approve this unless it has to -- in a satisfactory way.
Let me move to your Zoning Code.
Commissioner Winton: Would you repeat that, what you just said? The point itself not the
conclusion, but the point.
Mr. Bass: The staff report -- give me a moment to look -- 1'm sorry. Not the staff report. There's
a letter in your file dated June 9, 2004, regarding the Opus. It's signed by Jenn King on URS
Corporation Southern letterhead. Let me read for you the points, if I may. The adjustments to
the raw collected data traffic has -- have errors and result in volumes that are too low, which
need a variety of corrections. The background traffic growth did not include the full build out
period, which must be revised. Next bullet point. The capacity analysis have technical errors
that must be addressed, including peak hour calculation, transit data, service volume, signal
timing, geometry volumes. Next point. Two committed developments in the area were not noted
in the report, which must be included in the analysis. Next point. The trip generation
calculation has typos that must be corrected and far underestimates the office use, which must be
revised. There is a discrepancy in the trip distribution that must be addressed. The future
analyses have technical issues that must be addressed, and a traffic control measure plan is
missing entirely, which is required Now, in your staff report -- that's the URS report -- and let,
while I'm on it, just offer a copy of that for the record. Let me talk for a moment about some of
the zoning issues. This MUSP applicant, like every MUSP applicant, submitted a MUSP
application under oath and, under oath, they described the metrics of the site and they talked
about what they have in terms of land area. This MUSP applicant stated in its MUSP
City of Miami
Page 66 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
application that the size of this site is 2.62 acres. Consistent with that, this MUSP applicant set
forth a gross lot area analysis of 114,332 square feet. Your ordinance relating to this zoning
district, and not surprisingly, based on where this is, requires open space in the form of an urban
plaza or an arcade on all new development on lots of one acre or more in area. That's Zoning
Code Section 606.8.3.1, special requirements concerning urban plazas. Open space in the form
of an urban plaza or an arcade shall be provided, improved and maintained by all new
development on lots of one acre or more in area. Well, we know for a fact that it's more than one
acre in area because on their sworn application, they said it was 2.62 acres in area, and we
know for a fact that the lot area is more than an acre because they tell us it's more than an acre,
but when you look at the zoning analysis provided by this MUSP applicant, they acknowledge
that they need to provide an urban plaza, but they don't provide one. Not applicable, NA. Now,
what I imagine they will say is, we don't need to do one because we managed to get our 2.6 acres
down to under an acre net, but the ordinance does not say that. The ordinance plainly and
unambiguously says that if your lot is greater than an acre, you need to have an urban plaza,
and it goes further than that. It tells you how big it has to be; not less than five percent of the
gross lot area. Not less than five percent of the gross lot area, and it goes on to tell you what the
urban plaza needs to look like. Suffice it to say, without an urban plaza, you can't possibly
satisfy the requirements for an urban plaza, so for that reason, as well as the other reasons that
I've stated, you need to deny this application. It fails to comply with the plain and unambiguous
requirements of your Zoning Code, and those requirements cannot be waived by an --
Commissioner Regalado: Question.
Mr. Bass: -- interpretation, and they cannot be waived through changing or evading the
language by unilaterally deciding we're going to use net lot area, where the Code itself does not
use that language.
Commissioner Regalado: Excuse me. Let me ask you. You challenged that before the other
boards?
Mr. Bass: As I stated earlier, Commissioner, I did not appear before the lower boards. We did
not have notice of those proceedings before the lower boards.
Commissioner Regalado: So this is the first time that we're hearing this, right?
Mr. Bass: This is the first time that you are hearing this. In fact, for all I know, maybe
somebody else brought it up at the lower boards. Quite candidly, I don't know what was
discussed there. One of the things you all did when you rewrote your Zoning Code was to
further set forth the requirements, what an applicant has to submit to have a MUSP application,
and one of the things that you all specifically amended your Code -- you amended your Code to
include this because it wasn't there before. You amended it to require --
Commissioner Winton: Jeff hold it up tight.
Mr. Bass: Up here? Thank you. You amended it to require that the applicant submit a context
plan, but not just any context plan. The context plan had very specific requirements. The
context plan needed to consist of three-dimensional renderings and/or a model of a proposed
project shown to scale and, importantly, within the context of the existing neighborhood for a
three -block radius. Well, curiously, the three-dimensional model that they have does not include
a three -block radius, neither do the submissions. They did not satisfy the requirements of
showing how this integrates with the context of the neighborhood, and I'm going to have our
design professional speak to its failings on that point, but again, without getting to the merits of
it, the application itself is facially deficient because it doesn't include the context study that is
required by the plain and unambiguous language of your Zoning Code. Now, this is an
important one. Not only must you have a three -block radius, not only must you have the context
City of Miami Page 67 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
and three-dimensional renderings, but it shall include the existing structures and the proposed
projects within the area. That's what the Code says. Now, 1 could understand somebody
claiming difficulty showing proposed projects that they don't know about. I could understand
that is an intellectually legitimate position. How could I show you a project that I don't know
about? But the reason that you rewrote your MUSP ordinance this way is to avoid painting
yourself into a corner; approving a piecemeal development without understanding the overall
consequences when you look at the whole thing in context, so I concede that a developer should
not be faulting -- should not be faulted for failing to show proposed development that they don't
know about, but that's not what's happening here. They don't show you this or anything like it,
or any proposal (UNINTELLIGIBLE) for anything else in the neighborhood. Now, whether
these plans are proposed or not proposed, or were one time proposed doesn't really matter
because they don't show you anything that complies with the language of your Zoning Code, so
again, to reiterate that point, their submission is deficient and the project needs to be rejected on
that basis. Let me move to your Comprehensive Plan. This project violates several goals,
policies and objectives of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. I'm going to have to take a little bit
of time to go through them, and I'm going to go through them as quickly as I can. Objective PR-
3.1, the City will continue to develop a clearly defined and functioning cultural arts district
within the downtown area. Well, there's no explanation as to how this works with the cultural
arts center. In fact, it's our position that, from a design standpoint, it works against it, and we
believe that approving this design on this location is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Next. Fosters the growth and development of downtown as a regional center of domestic and
international commerce, culture and entertainment. Next. Continue the growth of downtown
and further its development as a regional center for the performing arts and other cultural and
entertainment facilities. Next. Develop spaces that are aesthetically appealing and enhance the
character and image of the City. Next. Encourage the development of high quality cultural arts
facilities and programs and next, protect from the adverse impacts offuture land uses in
adjacent areas that disrupt or degrade the natural or man-made amenities. Next. Will consider
the impact offuture development that significantly increases residential densities on the quality
and delivery of neighborhood parks and recreation services. Next. The traffic circulation
system shall be coordinated with the goals, objectives and policies of the land use element,
including coordination with the land uses, densities, projected development and redevelopment,
urban infill and other similar characteristics of land use that have an impact on traffic
circulation. In addition to failing to satisfy the requirements for a MUSP under your Code, we
would further submit to you that it's inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the reasons
that we stated. At this point, I'm going to ask Roberto Espejo to walk you through some of the
design problems with this and following that, I'm going to have a series of speakers address you
as briefly as I can. There may be others to speak that are here, as well, but I'll wrap up at the
tail end of our presentation and then be available to answer any questions, so that's it. I'd like to
introduce Mr. Roberto Espejo from Cesar Pelli and Associates. For the record, 1 have detailed -
- I'm sorry. I have copies, in reduced form, of the photos that Mr. Espejo is about to present. I'm
going to give them to the Clerk in reduced form, in lieu of having these big boards moved into
the record.
Roberto Espejo: Good afternoon. I'm Roberto Espejo, with the firm of Cesar Pelli & Associates,
the architects for the Performing Arts Center. Pm here as a senior representative for the firm,
and I personally was involved in the original design competition and have been involved in the
Performing Arts Center Project continuously for the last 10 years. I'm here to, first, and if you'll
allow me, to go through some of the design images preliminarily, and as we went through a very,
very rigorous competition and design effort over a 6-year process to demonstrate some of the
virtues and missions of the -- intended in the original projects and project intent. From the
outset -- I just lost an image. I just need --1'll leave it there. The mission for this project, as you
all are all aware, was to build the greatest Performing Arts Center in the history of the United
States, if not in the world. The scope of the project is one of the largest scopes ever taken by a
single community since, as you've read, Lincoln Center, some 40 years ago. The mission was
quite multi -tasked. It was meant to create a building, or a set of buildings, a center that would
not only address the immediate neighborhood urban revitalization and, hopefully, development,
City of Miami Page 68 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
but it was also meant to deal with a very serious set of criteria that was specific with the site. We
have a U.S. Federal Highway running through the middle of the site, Biscayne Boulevard We
have an I-395 just to the south of the project. We have a neighborhood that has been in better --
had had better days in the last couple of decades, and the complex and foremost, one of the
primary drivers of this project, as it is for many performing arts centers, is to try to create a
building that is an icon, something immediately recognizable at the mention of the building or
the city. I reference Sidney. No one knew exactly what Sidney, Australia, looked like until the
Sidney Opera House was built, and now just the mention of the city conjures up images of this
project, the Sidney Opera House. In our design, we spent a considerable amount of time taking
into consideration a lot of these issues, and the very primary stroke that Cesar had intended for
this project was to try to create a building that had no primary front or back sides, entrances at
every corner, and entrances at every street; all collected around an urban -- large, urban plaza
that would be kind of the soul of the project, a collector of its function, a collector of its patrons,
and a signature that would make the project, as you see in this axes, the two city blocks
combined as one single city block. The experience is meant to be as if you can actually drive
your car right through the center of the building at any night of any event. Going -- the -- just to
refer to the project, Opus project being discussed, the site is immediately south of the symphony
hall and, as you can see, the axes I talked about in the plaza, with its orientations, is on center
with that orientation out towards the southeast, towards its views to downtown and the water.
One of the most exciting aspects of the project for us was the relationship to downtown and all of
the culture institutions that are being developed in Miami. The idea that, in one square mile, the
Performing Arts Center can have a conversation, a dialogue, it can relate to the arena, the
Children's Museum, Parrot Jungle, several of the projects in an almost urban corridor, a civic
corridor that is occupied by a park and its water would be signature probably to any city in the
world. 1'd like to show you enough of the design. I'm sure you've heard enough of the design for
the last 10 ten years. I'd like to reference you to the actual site photographs of construction
taken in May, a couple months ago. Just to kind of strengthen the idea of the building of no front
sides or backsides, an interesting point to reference on these photographs is that it actually looks
like a photograph of the building from the same view point, but it's actually opposite; one
looking south, one looking north. All of the plazas kind of cutting angles, creating plazas at
every single corner of the building, between the buildings, and all of the drop-offs and drive -ups
for the major lobbies. The Opus site here and here, you can see immediately that several of
these glass lanterns, areas that were specifically designed to look out south towards downtown
and the water simultaneously, would be obstructed. The other photographs that I'd like to
reference are views for the Children's Museum and Watson Island, views from the inside of some
of the glass objects, and just to reference the Opus project on this photograph would be
approximately here, and approximately here and approximately here, extruded up. I'll just put
up -- I'll just lean against the wall some of the other images. This one most kind of revealing,
which is the view from the plaza entrance, which is here on the ballet opera, looking out towards
Government Cut, with the Opus site at the foreground One of the obvious concerns is that the
project is meant to relate to your experience coming from Miami Beach, your experience
crossing the bridge at Star Island, the ferry at Fisher Island, and several other aspects from the
plaza of the arena, et cetera, et cetera. Just for reference, the parking structure of the Opus
project, a 12-story parking structure, is almost the same height -- actually, it's almost the same
height of the entire Performing Arts Center project, not just the inhabitable floors that view out.
A couple of the other points that I would like to make is, besides just the plain massing of the
project, some of the concerting aspects are access to the project and the circulation; the
pedestrian and vehicular pressure that will be put on 13th Street. We know, just from our own
experience designing our project, we had to create dedicated curb cuts right at the back entrance
of the Performing -- of the symphony hall to have buses have the opportunity to get to the less -
traveled right lane and move out of the way as lots of traffic comes from Miami Beach in the two
left lanes, wanting to make the dedicated left turn onto Biscayne Boulevard One of the things
that we have observed in the site plan of the project is, in Opus you have your service corridor
and the vehicular for some over 400 units on a rush hour, you know, beginning -of -the -day, end -
of -the -day, all loading up on a one-way, which is actually, virtually an off -ramp. When you
City of Miami Page 69 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
come off of McArthur Causeway and you approach Bayshore, the speed and the pressure at that
point is fairly intense and, as you know, Bayshore, turning left, is an on -ramp onto McArthur
Causeway, so I know, at the ballet opera, we actually had the design specifically on a dedicated
lane for the ballet to have less pressure from all of that traffic that is turning left to go south to
Biscayne and, unfortunately, the Opus Project depends on those two lanes to kind of come in and
come in -- out of the project.
Commissioner Regalado: Let me ask you if it's -- is it true what the County Manager said, that
this is as complex as building a nuclear power plant?
Mr. Espejo: We --
Bill Johnson: I'd be happy to address the question.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Maybe not as complex, but it is expensive.
Mr. Johnson: Certainly, I'll address that --
Commissioner Regalado: More expensive. No, but I'm curious because --
Mr. Johnson: Sure.
Commissioner Regalado: -- the County Manager said it on record, and I just want to
understand.
Mr. Johnson: Yes, sir. The answer is yes. Let me identibi myself for the record. I'm Bill
Johnson, I serve as the Assistant County Manager in your County government. Pleasure to be
with you this afternoon. Good afternoon to everyone. I have just a couple remarks. First, let me
answer your question, Commissioner. The answer is yes. This is clearly the most complex,
difficult challenging project this County government has ever undertaken and expensive. This is
a world -class facility. When this facility is complete in the year 2006, we as a community, we as
a South Florida, we as a state will have one of the premiere top performance centers in this part
of the hemisphere and throughout all of the Latin Americas, something we can truly be proud of.
This past Tuesday, the Board of County Commissioners invested our money, the public's money,
an additional 67, 700, 000 of Bed Tax, CDT (Convention Development Tax) Bed Tax, in a project
today, which stands just a little over $412, 000, 000. Before you today, 1 am the County's
representative to this project. I've been associated with this project over 15 -- approximately 15
years. We recognize it's had its ups and downs; it's had a number of sagas, but it's something
that we, as a community, can take a lot of pride in. It wasn't an easy decision for the Board of
County Commissioners this past Tuesday. We've been back to the well a number of times for
additional resources. Every time, the Board of County Commissioners and our Mayor have
supported the project. 1 was also this community's point person to build the American Airlines
.Arena. That project, in partnership with the Miami Heat, opened on time and relatively on
budget. I will tell you -- and that's one reason 1 am just absolutely surprised we're here today --
I respect the fact that the owner of the property has met with owners -- or excuse me, not with
owners. Let me correct it -- has met with representatives of the project. The owner of the
property, the owner of the improvement is your County government. It's you and 1 represented
through that County government. I may not be the most well-known person in town, but every
person that I've seen stand up here today, except for the owner herself, knows me. They've
worked with me on other projects; the traffic engineer, the architect, the attorney. Never have I
received a phone call on this project. The first 1 heard about this issue, myself the County
Manager, was about three weeks ago, maybe a month ago at most; phone call from Parker
Thompson. Maybe it was Woody Weiser, our financial partners. It's unbelievable to me that this
project, this particular project has worked its way through this system and --1 understand, they
say they've noticed us. We must get thousands of notices every week. We could certainly check
City of Miami Page 70 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
the log. 1 don't recall -- didn't see a notice. If there had been, we would have been there, I
guarantee you. We've got a $412, 000, 000 public/private investment. One of the most important
things on this project -- and if 1 sound hot, I'm pretty hot -- one of the most important things on
this project is a view corridor. We hired a world -class architect. This particular developer also
has a world -class architect. We're not disputing any of that. One of the most important things
on this project, besides the inner workings, the site lines, the acoustics are the site lines, the view
looking out. The view corridor, particular from the opera ballet house, the Sear's property. The
view corridor faces southeast, towards Government Cut, towards our cruise ships. That wasn't --
that was done by design. That's intentional. The County government for years has worked
closely in collaboration with the City. 1 can name you the individuals. The County invested over
$1, 000, 000, bringing in two of the nation's urban top -- top urban planners, Jonathan Barnett,
Alex Cooper, to work with me on these issues, to make sure that our community project was in
context with everything else happening in this five -block area, including the publicly owned
American Airlines Arena, so to be here today, to be having this conversation with such a
significant catalytic project, which has benefited our major City, the City of Miami, in such a
positive way, I'm just astounded, so on behalf of the County government, thank you very much,
as the owner of the property.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Manager, can 1 ask you something? I -- you just said that you
are involved in this project for a long time. I wasn't in the City Commission, but as a journalist,
I remember -- and maybe you have better recollection -- that then Commissioner Bruce Kaplan
called for a public hearing at the Hyatt -- at the Knight Center about this project many years
ago, many years ago, and there was very -- there was a very agitated, very lively meeting, and
my -- I'm wondering if, at that time, nobody thought on buying that piece of land that we're
discussing today as part of the complex. I mean, because somebody knew that that land would
be bought by somebody, and somebody will build something there. I mean, neither the City --1
wasn't here -- or the County thought on buying that land and making it a part of the project
because I remember, it was very controversial at that time, and I'm sure that you remember that
the Board of County Commissioners were there and the Knight Center.
Mr. Johnson: If I could, a couple points. That actually predates my tenure with the project. My
tenure started actually during the -- and both firms here, Arquitectonica and Cesar Pelli will
recall this. I was involved in the actual charette and the process by which the design architect
Cesar Pelli was selected from a staff level, so the selections of the property, what is now -- what
was Sears -- the Sears property and the Knight Ridder property predates me actually.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Mr. Johnson: Because there were other sites considered, including the river --
Commissioner Regalado: Well, 1 just remembered --
Mr. Johnson: -- and the FEC (Florida East Coast) property owned, at that time, by the City, so 1
don't really have the historical perspective on that, but what you're saying is true, and there have
been numerous meetings over the years, OK, with a fine planner. He used to work -- be the
planner for the City of Miami, Jack Luft. Many of us, umpteen number of meetings over the
years, making sure that what we were doing was, again, well thought out. We spent over $1, 000,
000 of County money working closely with the DDA (Downtown Development Authority), the old
days with Patty Allen, and even before Patty Allen, making sure that what we were doing with
the City planners was in context with the downtown, that what we were doing was well thought
out, and I'll say this, the property -- and 1 think Michael can help us -- it's approximately 20,000,
000 worth of property that was donated. The Sears property, which is approximately 3.4 acres,
donated by Sears Roebuck; the Knight Ridder property, where the concert hall rests, is about 2.4
acres donated. The County was able -- and 1 say it, this is a County government -- through a
grant, we were able to scrape enough money about seven or eight years ago to purchase the
City of Miami Page 71 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
property immediately south of the Opera Ballet House, what was the Sears property, to try and
preserve that water -- I mean, that view corridor, but there are unlimited -- I should say, there
are not unlimited funds and we just did not have the necessary resources to buy all the
surrounding property, but to think that we'd have a potential 60-story structure adjacent -- and 1
also say this, this is not a stucco building. Both buildings have the same treatment, the same
exterior material, the same granite, goes on all sides, and again, this isn't just, if you will, the
County government. This is done in conjunction with your own CRA district. You've got huge
sums of money in the City funds invested in this. This is truly the largest public/private
partnership that we have ever, as a community, undertaken, and I'll tell you this: You can knock
it; people can make fun of it; it's something we, as a community, should be proud of. I certainly
am.
Commissioner Winton: Bill?
Mr. Johnson: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Where is the -- I'd like to get the aerial that shows kind of the
surrounding area, because I want to understand something from -- a more global perspective,
but I'm going to start with the comment you made about the Opus site, and that is that no one
seemed to have the money to buy the site, the Opus site. Knowing full well that, at some point
down the road, that anybody that didn't think about the fact that full well, at some point down the
road, that because specifically of the Performing Art Center, that that would be a very valuable
site and somebody's going to build something on it, and you said, I'm just astounded that they're
going to build a --1 don't know -- 55-story, or 60-story, or 50-story, or 45-story. What is it that
you would think that they would build on that site?
Ms. Slazyk: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: That's one, and as you know -- you don't have to answer it -- as you
know, in the State of Florida, property owners have property rights --
Mr. Johnson: Um-hmm
Commissioner Winton: -- and I've heard of -- listened to all of Jeffs objections, and what we're
looking for here is a permanent solution, not a temporary solution. I've had a little argument
with the City Attorney on a specific issue that apparently I can't talk about, but relative to the
permanent solution, the principal objections here, as I'm listening to them, could probably be,
over time, overcome, and we still end up with a building, any building that's over five stories tall
or say 70 feet tall. I don't know how tall your -- the highest view point is on the Performing Arts
Center -- is going to block your view, and once it gets to that level -- and let's say it's 75 feet or
100 feet -- once it gets to that level, it doesn't matter if it goes to 300 or 1,000 feet, your view is
blocked, and so what we have to -- and so the -- part of the point here as -- that I'm struggling to
understand how we get to the permanent solution, which leads me to the next question. There
are blocks surrounding the Performing Arts Center. All of those blocks, I think, have the same
zoning intensity as the subject property we're talking about right now.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yep.
Commissioner Winton: Every one of those sites is going to be in play down the road, every
single one of them. You know it and I know it. Everybody at the Performing Arts Center knows
it, and so are we going to have this same issue with all of the sites --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Absolutely.
Commissioner Winton: -- or are these issues that are being discussed about -- specifically
City of Miami Page 72 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
related to the Performing Arts Center, just unique to these -- to this particular site?
Mr. Espejo: I'd like to address that. Again, Roberto Espejo, with Cesar Pelli. No. It's this
particular site. Actually, we were also the architects prior to the Urban Design Action Plan,
where we made certain assumptions about development in the area as part of the competition. It
was part of our contract afterwards. We actually also were the architects for the Knight Ridder
and Miami Herald for the entire year, and we reorganized the plan there. We've been privy to
several presentations, and actually the design of the building lends itself with the cut -- and 1'll --
the cut that orients to -- hello? -- to the circle. Density in these areas would not complicate our
matter significantly. The issue here is that the whole part "T" of the project is that one building
faces south, one building faces north, with its major lobbies, and we created other major
entrances and facades on all the other areas. This one in particular, which has a lot of pressure
on it, and we received a lot of pressure as the designers, the symphony people wanted to know
why are you facing our project north. We designed it -- and this was probably the most intense
area -- we designed it with this glass object that creates a very prestigious lobby that looks south
and creates that connectivity between the arena and all of your culture institutions. Again, this
disconnect of this one piece is mostly illustrated in the actual images of the construction. This is
an absolute connection from the Performing Arts Center of both buildings all the way to the
arena, the Freedom Tower, to the cruise ship, to Parrot Jungle, to Watson Island, to Fisher
Island. 1 mean, this is the one single lot, because this is --
Commissioner Winton: Well, good. I understand your answer. That's all I want to hear, and
thank God.
Mr. Johnson: Commissioner, if I may, answer your question, be as bold and direct as I will be.
It was your own City staff, in the years of planning days, lots of discussion on this particular
property -- used to be an oriental rug shop.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Mr. Johnson: Your own City staff your own planners, in many meetings with us, nothing will
ever get built there. If it does, the site is so small, there're egress, access problems.
Commissioner Winton: That's government in action, Bill.
Mr. Johnson: All right. Seeing it the way it is.
Commissioner Regalado: Who said that?
Mr. Johnson: Again, a project that's always had financial problems since day one. We don't
have unlimited resources. 1 can't buy every single block around me, but this is a piece -- a small
piece of property -- careful what I say -- it's a piece of property, which stands in a direct view
corridor that I've invested 412, 000, 000 of public and mostly -- mostly public -- private funds and
I'm facing a 12 -- what is it, 10-story? -- garage. 12-story garage. This is great -- never mind. I
stop.
Mr. Espejo: 1'd just like to briefly finish with my part of the presentation, and then 1'll move it
back to Joe. The other couple of points I wanted to make, 1 think I was finishing on the loading
of 13th Street and the access. Another issue is this -- again, the idea of the disconnectivity (sic)
of an actual structure in the way of the Performing Arts Center symphony as it relates to
downtown Miami. The wall that was created by 1-395 was something that we are very, very
conscientious of and worked very, very hard to kind of diminish and actually reduce, and 1 hope
the photographs refer to that. Finally, in all due respect to our colleagues, we respect Bernardo
and their firm Arquitectonica, the massing of this project, in all due respect, is due to the size of
the lot. You actually have a 600-story -- 600 foot tower that is kind of unarticulated all the way
City of Miami Page 73 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
down to the ground at the corner. This does not have setbacks. Setbacks not from the site line,
but setbacks in the building. This is something that we took very seriously. As you can see, our
building's not just gratuitous, angular forms with setbacks. This was intended to mast our
building all the way to the pedestrian level. It was designed from the sidewalk up, and views in
relationship to -- these fairly art -- the Performing Arts Center is fairly unfriendly buildings, with
very blank wall. It's a very, very intense design problem to create a building that slowly receives
itself down to the ground. The 12-story parking structure is virtually an unarticulated cube and
section, and the ellipse, even though it has very kind of nice round edges and it's made of glass,
it is a wall and it's a wall that has a width, and it's a wall that is 600 feet in the air from the very
front door, and those are the things that are very, very difficult for us to deal with. For that
reason, you know, the Opus project, it kind of fails in its kind of response to the physical context
of the environment, which -- taking into consideration its surroundings and the natural features.
Obviously, the context concerns in the neighborhood directly related to the Performing Arts
Center. This item that I just mentioned on the transition of bulk and scale, and finally, these
design facades that kind of primarily are meant to kind of relate to the human scale and these
are very, very, very tough walls. We don't have the kind of density that we have in New York City
in this area, and the digital screen, the kind of digital billboard that has been applied to the
parking structure is an attempt, but it is not -- it's still a digital billboard that is along a 120-foot
wall directly across from the Performing Arts Center. It fails to satisfy on every single one of
these points, and I thank you for your time.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. Counsel, how much time are you going to need --
Mr. Bass: At this point, very briefly.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- before you conclude your presentation?
Mr. Bass: And you've been so patient, I have to thank you. We were trying to do it fast as we
can. Michael Hardy. I think we have two more speakers, and 1 have about under a minute to
wrap up. Thank you.
Michael Hardy: Good afternoon. I'm Michael Hardy, President and the CEO (Chief Executive
Officer) of the Performing Arts Center Foundation, at 1444 Biscayne Boulevard, and the
Foundation is here to present its strenuous objection to the Opus project, located immediately to
our south. Before 1 continue, I do want to acknowledge the accuracy of what Arva Jain said in
terms of the time that we met a year ago. She and I met generally about the Whitney project,
which 1 think was still alive at that point in time, and talked in very general terms about the high
desirability of development around the Performing Arts Center, and we have sponsored the
Jonathan Barnett Study to encourage development, more often, low-rise development, to
encourage particularly street level development of restaurants, clubs, et cetera, which are vital
to the success to the Performing Arts Center, so I want to say, emphatically, that we are not
opposed to development, and development particularly to the east, to the north --1 mean, west
and north of the Center, and around the Center with lower rise close in, higher rise going out.
We think it's very important to the Center. On April 6, 2004, at our invitation, Arva Jain and Mr.
Murphy met with Woody Weiser and Parker Thompson, and myself and brought the entirety of
their plans for the property that Ms. Jain owns to the south of the Performing Arts Center, which
included the Opus project and the -- and an additional three towers of approximately the same
size, and a rendering, which, as I recall, looks something like this. Jeff, if you want to put that
up? We talked a great deal about that. We talked about their interest in integrating a front door
to this particular three towers through the County property that we do own that is going to be
developed as a park. Woody Weiser and Parker Thompson both clearly expressed that they were
appalled at this fence that would be erected between the Center and downtown. We think, in
short, that this direct -- represents a direct threat to the viability, the vitality and the success of
the center, and I'll be more specifically, and we do ask that you deny the application in its
entirety. I want to point out echo what Bill Johnson said, that it's not just the County, it's not just
City of Miami Page 74 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
the private sector, which has contribute $100, 000, 000 to this project, but the City of Miami CRA,
which, for the foreseeable future, will be spending 1,400,000 a year to support a large packet of
the construction bonds, is a substantial and important partner here as well. We're all invested in
the success of this project. Performing Arts Center is not a weekend center; it's a 24/7 center.
We have 4,800 seats; we have 85,000 square feet of outdoor plazas; we expect to be
programming about 1,000 events a year, seven days a week; private events, public events,
performances, outdoor festivals, et cetera. The glass lantern structure that this building would
interrupt and would now look at a 12-story parking lot pedestal is currently being offered by the
Foundation, along with its name -giving program, for $1, 000, 000 for a potential donor. We're in
negotiation with a donor now for $1, 000, 000 gift to name that space. Our belief is that the -- our
ability to successfully conclude that donation is going to be severely impacted by this project.
The feature of the glass lantern is used by public audiences during performance, intermissions;
it's also a space that will be booked extensively for private and public functions. Events rentals
of that kind constituted an important source of earned income for the operations of the
Performing Arts Center, and the same problem is created in a similar structure on the ballet
opera house, facing southeast, and the upper levels of the lobby, and exterior patio or terrace
areas of the Performing Arts Center, which will also be used for public events generating rental
income. As Roberto has said, the overriding organizing architectural intent of this structure has
been connected to downtown, to extend downtown north, and we believe this project creates a
great disconnect. It's not only views out from this project that are interrupted, it's views in. We
recently concluded a landmark study with MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) to bring
digital media and digital media projections to the exterior of this center that can be seen from
Miami Beach, from downtown, works of art that will be projected all hours of the evening on the
exterior of this building; views of those from all the other high-rises in Miami and all the other
vantage points of Miami will also be interrupted. I'll wind up. We've got hundreds of millions of
dollars from the public and private sector here. We've created already an unprecedented
development from 36th Street to downtown. If this project goes forward and
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) architectural master piece, if you look at it in perspective -- and I believe
there is another rendering that shows the concert hall in the shadow of Opus -- we're going to
wind up looking like R2-D2 in the shadow of Darth Vader.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you. All right.
Commissioner Regalado: Can I ask you a question before you -- have you communicated these
concerns to the Mayor of the City of Miami? Have you, in any way -- because he had made a
statement regarding the whole area, I'm seeing it in the paper. Do you know --
Mr. Hardy: I've had no conversations with the Mayor about it.
Commissioner Regalado: OK, so we don't know where he stands on this issue?
Mr. Hardy: I personally had no conversations with him.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I'm asking you.
Mr. Hardy: 1 don't know where he stands on the project.
Commissioner Regalado: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Sir, please state your name for the record.
George Lindemann: My name is George Lindemann. I own approximately 200,000 square feet
of office space on Biscayne Boulevard, between 29th Street and 45th Street, and about six or
seven acres of land. I'm also on the executive board of the Performing Arts Center Foundation.
I've owned these properties for about six or seven years. I'm very pro -development. I'm very
City of Miami Page 75 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
excited about what the Commission is doing for the neighborhood. The Performing Arts Center
has been a catalyst for all of the wonderful things which are happening, and have affected me
very positively. I'm very sympathetic to Arva, who I've known and who's -- we've knocked on
similar doors for many, many years. I'm sympathetic to her frustrations and feelings of being
wronged, but two wrongs don't make a right. I don't know why this land wasn't bought or wasn't
accounted for before, but a MUSP is granted at the discretion of this Commission, as I
understand it, and that's why it's not something that's done as of right. It's not in the interest of
99 percent of the stakeholders in this area for this project to be built. If it is built, 10 years from
now, we'll all be driving up and down Biscayne or some version of 395 and we'll look at it and
say, how could this ever let this happen? I'm hopeful that you all will consider that before you
grant the MUSP. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, sir.
Barbara Bisno: Good afternoon. My name is Barbara Bisno. I'm president of the Venetian
Causeway Neighborhood Alliance. 1 have -- I'm not on any board related to PAC (Performing
Arts Center). I had no notice. We had no idea this was before any of the boards that looked at
it. 1 read about it in the paper last Thursday. I'm not going to take your time to go over the
connectivity and the dwarfing. It's been more eloquently and more detailed presentations by the
architects and by the PAC representatives, but I do have a concern as a citizen that we're at this
point today. I don't know what kind of notices are given out on MUSPs. We never get any of
them for what's going on downtown, and our neighborhood is adjacent to the downtown
development. I was -- representatives of our organization were here on another MUSP, a very
big MUSP on Watson Island. We, again, never got any notices of it until somebody happened to
mention it to us. This didn't come to our attention, and we're horrified, really, that you people
have to make a decision or are being asked to make a decision to approve it tonight, with the
problems and negative impact on the downtown area and on our neighborhood. Appreciate all
your time to let us speak to you today. Thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, ma'am. Senator, always a pleasure to have you here.
Senator Ron Silver: Well, thank you. It is indeed a pleasure to be here. I'm Ron Silver, offices
at 407 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach. I come to you today just from -- hopefully, an informational
standpoint. I am retained by the Foundation to do some work for them, so I -- and that's how
I've registered, but I want to tell you that, as the Senator who represented this district from '92 to
2002 -- and I want to talk from a global perspective, if I might, Commissioner Winton -- what is
going to happen in this area has always been a concern to the State, and I will say -- now, the
question that you asked before is, you know, why didn't somebody do something earlier about
this? Well, I've got to tell you something that you probably know, the state doesn't act very
quickly in a lot of time, so we sort of act at crisis times and that's the bottom line. I just tell you
that it's so critical and important, this Performing Arts Center is being, you know, mentioned
every time we talk about the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) and bringing it to Miami
because of the tremendous international aspect that we have here. 1 could also tell you this, that
the traffic flow in this area is critical. You must want to be able to get to this facility, and not
only this facility, but all the surrounding areas. When we talk about the Port of Miami, I recall
back in the early '80s, when 1 chaired the Delegation, we were talking about traffic flow to the
port because that's a cost factor. That's a cost factor to our businesses to get the goods and
services from the port out to where it has to go, so this -- all this has been a major concern, and 1
congratulate this -- the Mayor and this Commission on what you've been able to do, but the
bottom line to it is that you have moved very quickly with regard to a lot of projects in this area,
and 1 think, if I might suggest as a former policy maker, that we need to have some coordination
here, because as just was mentioned before, when people start trying to get to this Center a few
years from now, they're going to say, why didn't somebody think of this or why didn't somebody
do something about this? And we have that opportunity to do that now, and I recognize and been
supportive of developers in the past. I don't want to hurt anybody's project, but 1 think it has to
City of Miami Page 76 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
be done in some sort of coordinated way, where we take into consideration all aspects of it, so
that's why I appear here before you today. I just want to tell you, just to think a little bit about
that because I think it's critical to the success of this project. Thank you.
Mr. Bass: Very briefly, and in closing, I'd also like to acknowledge the presence of Ms. Adrian
Arch, but in the interest of brevity, she is not going to address you personally. I feel older every
time 1 come here, because I experience more and more, I'll say, fantastic ironies each time 1
come before you, and perhaps the most fantastic irony of ironies that I've ever experienced is, I
stand here today and 1 think about the Atlantis versus the Brickell Bay Village Project. If you
remember, there was a condominium tower proposed on Brickell Avenue, condominium tower
that could be a sibling of this condominium tower; enormous parking pedestal, very, very tall,
tight site. This Commission spent hours and months requiring that developer to redesign that
tower, Michael Bowman was the developer. Why? In the irony of ironies, because its next door
neighbor was an Arquitectonica architectural icon, and here we are upside down through the
looking glass, having an Arquitectonica project threatening an architectural icon. With all due
respect to that fight -- and it was a good fight -- the developer went back to the drawing board
and he re -engineered that project. He re -engineered it again and again. Why? He did it
because, in the views of this Commission, and in the views of the Editorial Board and in the
views of the letters to the editor, the Atlantis was a sufficiently significant architectural icon to
merit acknowledgment and respect by its development neighbor, so here we are, the proverbial
shoe on the other foot. The stake's higher by a factor of 100x. You don't have a tough time
figuring out a spot in Miami to enjoy and evening in this shadow of a parking garage structure.
You could do that just about anywhere, but 1 submit respectfully, the one place you probably
don't want to do it is at the ballet, at the symphony or at the Performing Arts Center that your
hard earned tax dollars underwrote to contribute. At the end of the day, you need to ask yourself
whether or not this project -- because this is the Code that you all rewrote. This is the Code that
you paid tax dollars to rewrite, to give yourselves some specific metrics. You need to ask
yourself whether this development responds to the physical contextual environment, taking into
consideration urban form and natural features? You need to ask yourself, does this respond to
the neighborhood context? Does this create a transition in bulk and scale? Does this facade
respond primarily to the human scale? Why? Because we want to bring people to this part of
town. I would submit to you that your staff report contains no substantial competent evidence
upon which you could base your approval because it doesn't even address this. 1 would submit
to you that the competent, substantial testimony that you heard today from us establishes, to a
certainty, that this project does not satisfy those design standards, and for that reason, as well as
all of the other reasons that we've heard, you need to deny this application. Now, the good news
is, you have an extremely talented architect and the good news is, there might be a design
solution, but the developer of Brickell Bay Village didn't get to that design solution in order to
protect the architectural icon created by Arquitectonica and referred to as the Atlantis. It didn't
go there on its own, so Commissioner Winton, to answer your question, we won't know whether
there is a design solution until we try to fine one, and I submit to you, no developer is better
suited and better equipped with a design team to come up with a better solution than this
developer. They're not going to do it unless you make them. We would ask, on behalf of
everybody in Miami -Dade County, that you make them -- that you deny this application or, at a
minimum, defer it to allow this developer to come back and address all of our objections, both
substantive and procedural, and 1 do thank all of you for the -- for your patience and for the
ability to present. I know that there are some other speakers here, but this concludes the
presentation on behalf of the Foundation.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you, counsel. Applicant, how much time do you need for
rebuttal?
Commissioner Winton: We need to hear from --
Ms. Dougherty: I'm going to make it short to rebuttal, then --
City of Miami Page 77 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Huh?
Ms. Dougherty: -- then Bernardo Fort -Brescia would like to speak in rebuttal to all of the
design comments, as well as our traffic engineer -- and I believe there are some citizens who
want to speak, as well. First --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton -- before you start, counsel, Commissioner
Winton, would you like to address FDOT?
Commissioner Winton: Which one? I'm sorry?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: FDOT is here. Would you like them to --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, Johnny Martinez is here from Florida Department of
Transportation. I think he wants to put something on the record also. Is this on? Am I on?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, it is on.
Commissioner Winton: OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. We'll bring you up -- you want him up now or what?
Commissioner Winton: I don't care. You're the --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Before you do that, let's bring FDOT. Sir, please state your name for
the record. I believe there's something you want to put on the record.
Johnny Martinez: My name is Johnny Martinez. I'm with the Department of Transportation.
I'm the District Secretary. I'm not an attorney, but I brought one if he needs to come up here.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's always good It's always good to bring an attorney with you.
Mr. Martinez: This project, the 1-395 project has been in long-range plan since 1992. We were
going -- when we evaluate a project, we look at several derent alternatives, and then
recommend an alternative. Half -way through the process, the Dade County MPO (Metropolitan
Planning Organization) conducted a study that gave us certain parameters on how to look at this
project to reunite the community, and have a structure that's compatible with the PAC and
addresses the transportation needs. We're in that process now. What I can tell you is that every
alternative that we're evaluating now will require this property where the Opus is being located,
and in addition to all the way down to Northeast 1st Avenue to the west, every single alternative,
except the no -build will require that. Another thing that's a fact is, if the development were to go
forward, we would not have the type of project that was instructed to us to come up with to
reunite the community and address transportation needs because we simply would not be able to
afford it and tear down a structure of the magnitude of Opus through condemnation and go
forward
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: So, the point you're making, just to be quite clear, is that every single
alternative that is under consideration for redoing 1-95 -- 1-395, and that is the critical barrier to
reconnecting neighborhoods -- every single alternative that you all are considering requires this
piece of land to implement any of those alternatives?
Mr. Martinez: Unequivocally. We're studying for alternatives; an elevated, a depressed section
City of Miami Page 78 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
and a tunnel. The only one that doesn't require it, of course, is the no -build, which we're
required by the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) process look at.
Commissioner Winton: And it requires -- in addition to the specific Opus site, it requires two
more sites that are west that parallel 395; is that not correct?
Mr. Martinez: Absolutely. This is the trapezoidal site to the east of Biscayne Boulevard. The
other two sites are to the west, also under the jurisdiction of this developer.
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Secretary, just a question, sir. How you doing? But I read that
there was no funding --
Mr. Martinez: Well --
Commissioner Regalado: -- for this kind of project. 1 mean, that's why I asked before, did the
Mayor of the City has any position on this? Because he was the one with you and other City
leaders that proposed those changes, but at the same time -- well, nobody has told me about that
project -- but at the same time, there was the information in the article that there was no
immediate funding for that.
Mr. Martinez: Let me answer that. There's two types of funding that's required for the project:
the right-of-way funding and the construction funding. Normally, when we're in the PD&E
(Project Development & Environment) process looking at alternatives, construction is not
funding because we don't know which alternative is going to come out the winner. However --
and normally, we can't acquire right-of-way until we get location design approval, and that lets
the -- the federal administration gives us the go ahead to use federal funds to purchase property.
Here, we're doing what's called protective -- trying to do protective buying or advanced
acquisition because not buying the project will preclude the alternatives, so we're preparing a
study that we should be finished now in September, which we'll send up to Federal Highway. It's
called a categorical exclusion, which we'll send to Federal Highway; they'll give us approval,
and we'll mobilize to go ahead and make an offer to the developer and try to negotiate acquiring
the parcel with them. If we're not successful there, the next route is to go to condemnation, but
we're going to have the money in place to make an offer to the developer, and hopefully, we can
come to an agreement, and hopefully, all of this will be moot.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton, you had the floor.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. City Attorney, is the deferral or denial of the -- of this particular
MUSP -- is FDOT's plans for this site any grounds for us to make any decision relative to this
MUSP?
Joel Maxwell (Deputy City Attorney): FDOT's plan to acquire the property or need to acquire
the property would not be a valid basis for making a decision on this MUSP.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Counsel, you may proceed, unless there's other questions
from the legislative body. Hearing none.
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like Bernardo Fort -Brescia to discuss the design
issues.
Commissioner Regalado: But let me -- Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You have the floor.
City of Miami Page 79 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Before you discuss the -- let me ask something because I just want to
understand. Mr. Martinez, the Secretary, just said that regardless, they want to offer your client
to buy the property.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But I --
Commissioner Regalado: What's the story here?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Counsel.
Commissioner Regalado: 1 mean, you are trying to proceed with --
Mr. Maxwell: Excuse me.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner.
Mr. Maxwell: Commissioner.
Ms. Dougherty: I -- Wait. Let me answer the question, Joel.
Mr. Maxwell: Well, I -- Ms. Dougherty --
Ms. Dougherty: I -- the point of the matter is --
Mr. Maxwell: I would --
Commissioner Regalado: But, / mean, is that not a valid question to understand what we're
doing here?
Mr. Maxwell: Well, as I pointed out before in response to Commissioner Winton's question --
Commissioner Regalado: No, no, no, no. I'm asking, if they thinking that the alternative is to
sell the property, then why are we discussing the MUSP here?
Mr. Maxwell: Because they've made an application to develop the property --
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that, but I want to understand --
Mr. Maxwell: -- and they have a right --
Commissioner Regalado: I want to understand if they have been approached, if they would be
willing, if they would resist, if they would rather go ahead with the building? That's what 1 want
to understand.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That's my question.
Mr. Maxwell: That's perfectly -- they have their right to do that. They have the right to pursue
the application at the same time they may be negotiating with someone to sell the property.
That's their right. I just want to make sure -- and my admonitions in response to Commissioner
Winton's question were that you stay away from discussions that may, at some point in the future,
led some court to decide that the reason that you made a decision one way or the other, was
based on the fact that some other entity wanted to acquire the property. Therefore, those type
discussions are not appropriate at this time.
City of Miami Page 80 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I can ask --
Mr. Maxwell: You can make a decision any way you choose, but not based on that.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand that, but 1 want to understand the whole issue here, like
1 wanted to understand because 1 was there. I was there on the public hearing when the first
time ever this center was discussed, and they were talking about buying property all around. 1
remember. The County -- the Board of County Commissioners -- I think Commissioner Teele
was there. It was during his time -- decided to buy property all around. I want to understand
that, and -- you know, if -- look, if I cannot understand, then I might as well walk out and don't
vote.
Ms. Dougherty: Well, I'm going to answer your question, and the answer is, clearly the answer
to everybody's problem is if the DOT were to buy this property. That's the answer to my client's
issue. That's the answer to the City's issue. That's the answer to FDOT's issue, but we don't
know if that's going to happen for sure, and I'm asking you to approve this MUSP today because
surely, that's the one thing that's going to make FDOT buy this property in a hurry, because it is
because of an imminent development scenario that will make them buy this property in a hurry.
Well, let me just go on. This is an as of right building. I don't care what Jeff Bass says; we're
not asking for a rezoning. We're not asking for a special exception. We're not asking for a
conditional use. We're not asking for any kind of variance. The only thing that you're supposed
to do is to review this project and make conditions to the extent that are necessary for the
compatibility of this project. To protect someone's views is not one of the criteria. To deny it
because somebody else wants to buy it is not a criteria. To deny it to -- can you imagine if
somebody were to come to you -- and 1 know that you would never do this -- a developer were to
come to you and say, you know what, I've just invested a lot of money in this property over here
and I'd like you to protect my views and I don't want you to let the next developer to come in.
That's not something you would do, under any circumstances.
Commissioner Winton: By the way, we get that request with every single high-rise next to
another high-rise, so --
Ms. Dougherty: No. You don't get it from developers. You get it from citizens who don't want
their views bought, but you haven't ever done it and you wouldn't ever do it because that would
be patently unfair. 1'd like to see if you have an issue with the traffic. If you have an issue with
the traffic, then I would like to put Ramon Alvarez on, and I know that Jeff Bass is very good
about getting around the administration building, but all he had to do was ask me and I would
have provided him with the information that he wanted, but anyway, Ramon, if you'd like to
discuss the traffic issues and the letter that you have from URS that confirms that you have
answered all their questions.
Ramon Alvarez: For the record, Ramon Alvarez, with the firm of David Plummer and
Associates, 1750 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Coral Gables. On July 2lst, we and the City
received a letter from URS, the City's traffic consultant, stating that all of the comments that they
had previously stated, I think, their June 9 letter, had been addressed; that the study was
complete and sufficient, and essentially, they were satisfied with the conclusions. You know, we -
- that's in the City records. Public invitation has been provided, both URS and the City, and in
my mind, that should put to bed the issue of whether the traffic is complete and adequate. We do
have the letter. Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. City Attorney, I'm going to make a motion --
Mr. Bass: Actually -- I'm sorry. Could I --
Commissioner Winton: Yes.
City of Miami Page 81 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Bass: -- cross-examine Mr. Alvarez? 1 do have that right. He was put on for the first time. 1
have two questions for him.
Commissioner Winton: Well, hold on. I -- what I'm going to recommend is that we -- you're
going to help me here -- but that we stop kind of at midstream here the process of proposal, or
counter proposal, rebuttal and all that jazz, and defer or continue this item to the Planning and
Zoning meeting for the month of October. At which point, you can all continue right where we
stopped, with the expert witnesses, and the reason for that is because number one, 1 think there
are sufficient reasons, if there was -- let me see if I can say this without Joel yelling at me. On its
own, I think there are reasons why we would continue this project like we've done with many
others in the past, where you have this side over here and this side over here, and at every single
instance, since I've been elected, we sent both parties back together to try to work something out,
and 1 think we need to do that. Y'all can pick up where you left off but I would like to get
everybody back together. We'll bring this item back for the second meeting in October, which is
the Planning and Zoning meeting, and start right where we left off. Now, am I allowed to make a
motion like that?
Mr. Maxwell: Yes, sir. One thing 1 would ask of Mr. Bass: Mr. Bass, you were asking to cross-
examine. Would you waive that and continue at the next meeting?
Mr. Bass: Yes.
Mr. Maxwell: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Then --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right.
Commissioner Winton: -- so moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion to defer the item. Is there a second?
Mr. Maxwell: Continue --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Second?
Mr. Maxwell: -- the item to the --
Commissioner Winton: Continue to the --
Mr. Maxwell: -- Planning and Zoning meeting of October.
Commissioner Winton: -- Planning and Zoning meeting of October.
Ms. Dougherty: I would like to know what it is you would like us to bring back in October,
assuming that we do not have an agreement with FDOT.
Commissioner Winton: Well, OK. Assuming you don't have an agreement with FDOT, I would
be treating this -- and you've been here before, same way -- just like we've done all of these
projects where there's considerable disagreement. I think there's some legitimate issues -- and 1
know you guys are going to point, counterpoint and -- but from my standpoint, 1 think there are
some significant issues that you all need to work out, and so I think you just need to hear what
they have to stay and start thinking about that process when you come back, and while this is a
little different, if you would -- I'm going to trust that we have a lot of issues resolved by the
City of Miami Page 82 Printed on 12/16/2009
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
second meeting in October.
Mr. Maxwell: That's October the 28th.
Commissioner Winton: Right, without him yelling at me.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Mr. Bass: Thank you very much. There --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion
carries unanimously. The item has been deferred. OK.
Ms. Dougherty: Thank you very much.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Thank you very much.
City of Miami Page 83 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
NON -AGENDA ITEMS
NA.1 04-00900 DISCUSSION ITEM
Discussion concerning previously passed resolution authorizing the release
of the City's reversionary interests in Miami -Dade County owned property
located in West Miami -Dade in exchange for Miami -Dade County's release
of restrictions and reversionary interests in the property known as the Marine
Stadium and payment to the City in the sum of $2,000,000.
DISCUSSED
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, question regarding some issue that we were talking.
Last week, I think it was, the Commission approved the deal with the County on the 1,800 acres
and the deed restriction. Did the County Commission approve the same deal?
Joe Arriola (City Manager): It was deferred to the next meeting.
Commissioner Regalado: It was deferred?
Mr. Arriola: To the next Commission -- County Commission meeting.
Commissioner Regalado: Oh. Do we know why? I don't know why.
Mr. Arriola: 1 don't either.
Chairman Teele: You want to move to reconsider it? You want to move to reconsider that?
Commissioner Regalado: Look, 1 asked time -- I asked time to ask questions, but 1 was told it
was non -controversial, so I'm not going to do anything, but 1 had a lot of questions on that one.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE)
Chairman Teele: This is on the item where the City -- I voted no. He wasn't on the dais. It was
a 3 to 0 vote.
Commissioner Regalado: No, no. I vote --
Commissioner Winton: He voted no.
Commissioner Regalado: 1 voted no.
Chairman Teele: You were on the -- you were on the dais.
Commissioner Regalado: No. 1 was here.
Chairman Teele: No, you weren't.
Commissioner Winton: He voted no before we -- when we took it up, he said no and left.
Chairman Teele: He got mad and walked out the door.
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Chairman Teele: He didn't -- even here for the vote.
City of Miami Page 84 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
NA.2 04-00901
Commissioner Regalado: 1 was -- I got mad.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk --
Commissioner Regalado: 1 got mad 1 got mad but I voted no.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk --
Commissioner Winton: He voted no.
Chairman Teele: -- did he record a vote on the item? It doesn't matter. We're not going to take
it up right now.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Chairman Teele: But 1 think he's raising a very good point where we're always going first.
We're always putting ours and there it is.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Mr. Chairman, 1 think we skipped one item, DI 1.
Chairman Teele: DI.1 was the City Attorney.
Commissioner Gonzalez: The naming of the street in --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah. DI.1.
Chairman Teele: Is there a DI.1 ?
Commissioner Gonzalez: DI.1.
Commissioner Winton: At the top, under Angel's --
Commissioner Regalado: Oh, that's the district.
Chairman Teele: Oh, no, no. You're in your district.
Commissioner Winton: That's your -- that's --
Chairman Teele: We're in discussion item right now, DI. Just discussion items.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Oh, I'm sorry.
Chairman Teele: OK. We're going to go back and get all the district items.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right.
Chairman Teele: We're going to treat those sort of as last, that way everybody wants to stay.
DISCUSSION ITEM
Discussion regarding homeless problem under 1-395.
DISCUSSED
Direction to the City Manager by Chairman Teele to meet with the Administration, the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), and the Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) and provide a full status report on the homeless problem under 1-395.
City of Miami Page 85 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: Commissioner Winton, you're recognized, and if the Transportation
Coordinator, Ms. Conway, and the Public Works Director are available, we would appreciate,
Madam Director, if you would come forward
Commissioner Winton: And probably our Homeless Office.
Chairman Teele: And the Homeless Office, as well.
Commissioner Winton: Mr. Manager, I've -- huh?
Chairman Teele: Is Mary here?
Commissioner Winton: You might as well get him, and then y'all come back and 1'll -- I've had a
whole -- I've had a pretty significant number of complaints of late about homelessness really
taking over under 1-395 again, out of control. You know, they've been building little mini sheds
and just really taking over again, and here's what's disturbing to me. We'll do some sweep. We
get it all cleaned out, and then we go to sleep again. I don't understand why we go to sleep. 1
don't understand why someone isn't always on this issue and preventing these encampments from
being set up under 395, and letting the issue just go out of control to the point where the
businesses that are in the area that are paying significant taxes to the City can't run their
businesses, and 395 is a major entryway into the City of Miami for a lot of people, and they go
either downtown or they go to the Omni area, and that's just a disgraceful mess. In some way or
another, we have to get control of what's going on under 395. It's a gateway that is the pits.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Johnny Martinez from FDOT (Florida Department of
Transportation) is going to be here at 2 o'clock, and I think it'll be a great issue to bring up when
he's here.
Commissioner Winton: I'll be glad to.
Mr. Arriola: OK.
Chairman Teele: I think that's a good issue to bring up in his presence, but the DOT
(Department of Transportation), in no way, directly or indirectly, is responsible for the homeless
problem, and 1 want to commend --
Commissioner Winton: That's correct.
Chairman Teele: -- and support Commissioner Winton 100 percent. It is totally out of control.
I have no idea what the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) is doing. The CRA was
directed to have a full-time coordinator at night ever since this Miami Herald mis-expose
occurred I have not seen one person from the CRA down there with the homeless, because all of
them want to, you know, be doing their fingernails and so, so -- so you know, at 11 o'clock, and
1 o'clock, and 4 o'clock in the morning. We are required by the CRA to have a count, a monthly
count of the homeless and to provide a week -- I mean, a weekly count and a monthly report,
because the only way we're going to be able to justify the expenditure of dollars to deal with the
homeless is, we've got to have a record, and that's the Chapter 163 issue, and 1 know that the
lady, Katisha (phonetic) that was responsible for doing this, the lady that used to be out there
counting the homeless, I know she's no longer around, based upon the Herald story, which is
most unfortunate, but somebody needs to be out there, OK, within this $10, 000, 000 agency of the
CRA, keeping track, with the Homeless Trust and with the NET (Neighborhood Enhancement
Team) Office Homeless Office, because we have a problem now that has just mushroomed out of
control. It is -- it's literally -- underneath 395 on Miami Avenue, there's literally as many as 100
people sleeping out there during the weekends, literally, and 1 don't know where the reports are.
City of Miami Page 86 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
They're supposed to be filming. That's what Katisha and those people were doing, but I hope to
god you all are keeping a report. If you don't, we're gong to have a problem with Chapter 163,
so I really think, Mr. Manager, that the -- that you and the NET people that have the homeless
and the CRA, and the Public Works people need to come in here with the DOT and give us a full
and complete report as to where we are and where we're going, because it has mushroomed out
of control.
Commissioner Winton: And 1 would suggest that the problem isn't just with Chapter 163. It's
with Chapter 163 and District 2.
Chairman Teele: Yeah. Well, Chapter 163 gives us the authority to spend the money.
Commissioner Winton: I know, 1 know.
Chairman Teele: See, the problem is, we can't spend City money to rebuild the Camillus House
and all that as it relates -- particularly with eminent domain, as it relates to the homeless
problem, but we've got to do something.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Arriola: Yeah. You -- would you like me to have Brad Simon here -- is he on his way? But
would you like the report at the same time as we do FDOT at 2 o'clock?
Chairman Teele: I assume so, with Commissioner Winton's --
Mr. Arriola: Would you like that?
Commissioner Winton: Having him here would be a smart thing.
Mr. Arriola: Pardon me?
Commissioner Winton: He might as well -- Having him here would be good He might as well --
Mr. Arriola: I'll --
Commissioner Winton: -- hear the same thing.
Mr. Arriola: He's on his way, but --
Commissioner Winton: OK.
Mr. Arriola: -- you know, obviously, he wasn't counting --
Commissioner Winton: All right.
Mr. Arriola: I'll be delighted to have him here by 2 o'clock.
Commissioner Winton: OK, good. Thank you.
NA.3 04-00902 DISCUSSION ITEM
Discussion regarding previous direction to the administration relating to the
reconstruction on NW. 1 lth Street.
DISCUSSED
City of Miami Page 87 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Direction to the City Clerk by Chairman Teele to research the record wherein the Commission
instructed the Administration to reconstruct N.W. 11 th Street by December 30, 2004, in order to
coincide with the opening of the clubs in the area; said reconstruction to be scheduled as a high
priority City project, with financing to be provided by the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CRA), and further requesting the Manager to meet with Chairman Teele at 1 p. m. today on this
matter.
[Note: The Clerk provided requested documents to Chairman Teele on 7-29-04. ]
Chairman Teele: All right, and on the point, Madam Director, can we get a report on 11 th
Street? The -- we promised to have 11 th Street reconstructed by December 30th to coincide with
the club people, and that was turned over as a City project, with the CRA (Community
Redevelopment Agency) providing the financing. These clubs are working day and night, 24
hours a day trying to get their clubs opened, and I am not yet to see anything relating to 11 th
Street. 11 th Street was under water night before last because it rained hard It is totally
impassible by pedestrian traffic. Mary, can we get a report? It was designated as an
emergency, high -priority project about three months ago, four months ago.
Mary Conway: Mary Conway, CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) and Transportation.
Commissioner, there was a meeting that was held a couple days ago looking at what were the
options within the available right-of-way. The -- this is the first that I've heard of a
December 30th time frame, but 1 will find out what the outcome was of the Tuesday discussion,
and we'll do whatever we need to do --
Chairman Teele: Madam --
Ms. Conway:: -- to advance plans so that we can get something moving forward.
Chairman Teele: Madam --
Ms. Conway: I don't know if we could meet that deadline, but we'll work as close as we can
toward the nearest term deadline.
Chairman Teele: Madam Clerk, would you pull up the records on this? Can we do it, and could
I meet with you all at 1 o'clock, because I thought we were -- your people -- you were in an
argument twice about this thing about not having to do --
Ms. Conway: A study.
Chairman Teele: -- the study and this, and that. 1 mean, this was like four months ago, five
months ago, and that you all could do it on the turnkey. It would be much faster and all of that,
and then the previous person, Jorge Avino (phonetic) came in. He was in all of the meetings,
with all of the people, club owners. We told the club owners they had until, literally,
August 30th, at a minimum and December 30th as a drop dead date to get all their construction
done on the Grand Promenade because we were pulling the trigger, which we just did, and that
we would have the road done before January 1 opening, and we would all be on the same track,
and Jorge Fernandez went to at least five meetings with the club owners and all of that, and
again, you know, you all make these personnel changes, but you stand in the same shoes. We
can't --
Ms. Conway:: I understand, and I will look into it to be able to report back by 1 o'clock because
I do think that some of the resolutions that were passed earlier may allow us to advance the --
potentially the time frame.
Chairman Teele: Thank you so much.
City of Miami Page 88 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
NA.4 04-00903 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION GRANTING THE
REQUEST FOR A TWO-HOUR EXTENSION OF THE LIQUOR LICENSE
OF THE CHURCHILL RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 5501 NORTHEAST 2
ND AVENUE, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FROM 3:00 A.M. TO 5:00 A.M., DURING
THE ENTIRE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2004, TO CELEBRATE THE 25TH
ANNIVERSARY OF THE RESTAURANT.
04-00903 - memo.pdf
Motion by Commissioner Winton, seconded by Vice Chairman Sanchez, that this matter be
ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0530
Chairman Teele: All right. Would someone move this Churchill item, please?
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So moved Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Second
Chairman Teele: Motion on Churchill to extend the hours for two hours -- for the 25th
anniversary, during the month of September. All those in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Chairman Teele: All opposed? All right. Do we have any other matters, pocket items --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Make sure we're invited.
Chairman Teele: Huh?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Make sure we get an invitation.
Chairman Teele: Oh, yes, sir.
NA.5 04-00894 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXPEDITIOUSLY ENFORCE ANY AND ALL CODE
PROVISIONS AND APPLICABLE LAW, RELATING TO THE PROPERTIES
LOCATED AT 1024 SOUTHWEST 19TH AVENUE, 1026 SOUTHWEST 19TH
AVENUE, 1144 SOUTHWEST 19TH AVENUE, 1800 SOUTHWEST 11TH
TERRACE AND 1895 SOUTHWEST 11TH TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA,
INCLUDING STRICT ENFORCEMENT OF THE SPECIAL MASTER'S
ORDERS OF MAY 6, 2004 AND JUNE 10, 2004 WHICH ORDERED THE
PROPERTY OWNER, FAMILY BOARDING HOME, INC., TO APPLY FOR
SPECIAL EXCEPTION PERMITS WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE ORDER FOR
THE CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP, TO DECREASE THE NUMBER OF
RESIDENTS FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 1024 SOUTHWEST 19
TH AVENUE, 1026 SOUTHWEST 19TH AVENUE AND 1895 SOUTHWEST 11
TH TERRACE, AND NOT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS AT
City of Miami Page 89 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
1800 SOUTHWEST 11TH AVENUE AND 1144 SOUTHWEST 19TH AVENUE;
DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO PROVIDE STRICT ACCOUNT AND
RECORDATION OF ANY AND ALL ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CITY OF
MIAMI ("CITY") TO INCLUDE WRITTEN RECOMMENDATIONS AND
DECISIONS; FURTHER DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SEND A 30-
DAY NOTICE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT STRICT COMPLIANCE
WITH CITY PROVISIONS AND APPLICABLE LAW IS REQUIRED.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 5 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez, Regalado and Teele
R-04-0527
Chairman Teele: Are there any other pocket items?
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, I do have a very time sensitive pocket item. It's
regarding the situation with the ALF (Adult Living Facility) in Shenandoah. What is happening
is that the Special Master issued a ruling, but there is a State Statute that says that if the City
doesn't do anything in terms of denying or approving a license, they have the right, by State
Statute, to operate, and it's been more than 40 days now. We're going on a break --
Commissioner Winton: So, what do you need?
Commissioner Regalado: Nothing --
Chairman Teele: What do you want us to do?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, let's do it, because I --
Commissioner Regalado: Approve this resolution --
Commissioner Winton: We understand.
Commissioner Regalado: -- directing the City Manager to expeditiously enforce any and all
Code provisions and applicable law relating to the properties located at 1024 Southwest 19th
Avenue, 1026 Southwest 19th Avenue, 1144 Southwest 19th Avenue, 1800 Southwest II th
Terrace, and 1895 Southwest 11 th Terrace, including a street enforcement of the Special
Master's orders of May 6, 2004 and June 10, 2004, which ordered the property owner, Family
Boarding Home, to apply for a special exception permit, within 30 days of the order, from the
change in ownership; to decrease the number of residents for the properties located at 1024
Southwest 19th Avenue, 1026 Southwest 19th Avenue, and 8095 Southwest I I th Terrace, and not
to increase the number of residents at 1800 Southwest 1I th Avenue and 1144 Southwest I9th
Avenue,- directing the City Manager to provide a street account and recordation of any and all
actions taken by the City to include written recommendations and decisions; further directing the
City Manager to send a 30-day notice to the property owners that a street compliance with City
provisions and applicable law is required That is the motion.
Chairman Teele: Is there a second?
Commissioner Winton: Second
Chairman Teele: Is there objection? All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
City of Miami Page 90 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Chairman Teele: All opposed?
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you.
Chairman Teele: Ladies --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Teele: Commissioner -- Vice Chairman Sanchez.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: You know, that's in my district and 1 want to --
Chairman Teele: That's in your district?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir, and, you know --
Commissioner Regalado: What is in your district?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I believe that's in my district.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, it is. 19th and 10th is my district.
Commissioner Regalado: No, it's 19th Avenue.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Oh.
Commissioner Regalado: 18 -- you don't want that in your district, I promise you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I do have one of them.
Commissioner Regalado: I promise you that you don't want that.
Chairman Teele: All right, like the --
Commissioner Regalado: All of them.
Commissioner Winton: He wants what's in there, too.
Commissioner Regalado: Joe, all of them are in 19th Avenue.
Commissioner Gonzalez: He says to include his --
Commissioner Regalado: 18 and 19 Avenue. Huh?
Commissioner Gonzalez: He says to include his, too.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, put his --
Commissioner Regalado: We've got to cross --
Chairman Teele: Well, now he wants them in his district. Ladies and gentlemen, like --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: (INAUDIBLE) in my district.
City of Miami Page 91 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
NA.6 04-00904
DISCUSSION ITEM
Budget Workshop
04-00904-presentation
DISCUSSED
Direction to the City Manager by Vice Chairman Sanchez to ascertain that the City of Miami
pension trusts (1- The General Employees' and Sanitation Employees' Retirement Trust and 2-
The Firefighters' and Police Officers' Retirement Trust) present their proposed budgets for
Commission approval each year.
Direction to the City Attorney by Commissioners Regalado and Winton to provide a legal
opinion by September whether the City's cable channel "Miami Television" can legally have
certain programs sponsored commercially by private enterprise; further directing the City
Manager to take the necessary steps to implement said proposal if the Attorney deems it legal.
Direction to the City Manager by Commissioner Winton to provide a report, before the
September 9, 2004 public hearing on the budget, on the impact of City of Miami salaries and
pensions, including actuarial analysis; further directing that the analysis include the history of
how the salaries and pensions were calculated over the past 20-30 years; and including a
projection of the cost to the City annually over the next 20 years; and further requesting an
analysis of the schedule used to provide cost of living increases to retirees.
Direction to the City Manager by Commissioner Gonzalez to request the Budget Director to meet
with Commissioner Gonzalez; further requesting the Manager to provide an analysis and
recommendation regarding the impact of having fewer sworn police officers than normal.
Direction to the City Manager by Vice Chairman Sanchez to meet with the unions and the
Budget Director to negotiate ways to protect the City and cut irresponsible expenditures.
Chairman Teele: The budget hearing. I'm yielding to the Vice Chair. See, they treat me like I'm
a child.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. Director, you ready? Give you a few minutes to prepare yourself.
Larry Spring (Chief of Strategic Planning, Budgeting & Performance): If you could give me one
second
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK.
Chairman Teele: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Chairman Teele: I would appreciate if they -- if we could get a written, detailed report with all
of the backup and all of the analysis before we come back for the next regular meeting.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Mr. City Manager, before the next meeting, make sure you prepare the
necessary documents for the Chair and the Commissioners. Are you ready?
Mr. Spring: Yes, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Show time.
Mr. Spring: Afternoon, I guess, close to evening now, Commissioners. Larry Spring, Chief of
City of Miami Page 92 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Strategic Planning, Budgeting Performance. Pleased to come before you today to present the
2005 budget outlook. It's been a year already, and it's been a very interesting year, so I hope we
can get through this painlessly. The purpose of today s workshop, is to present, obviously, the
2005 fiscal year budget and out -- budget outlook and the underlying assumptions and estimates.
We also want to address some of the fiscal challenges that we're faced with this next fiscal year,
and probably the most important aspect of today's meeting is to -- it gives the administration the
opportunity to solicit feedback from the Commission on their priorities and goals for the
upcoming fiscal year. Of course, we will take that feedback and, over the next month, well
synthesize it into what will be the final draft of the budget to be presented in September. Before I
actually get into the budget figures, 1 think it's important that we establish the appropriate
context. One of the responsibilities of my position is to develop and implement the City's
Strategic Plan. Strategy's important because it establishes the course and measures an entity's
progress on meeting its vision. This administration has been, for the last year, very committed to
implementing a very thoughtful and detailed strategic plan that will guide our direction and
move us into our bright future. Before you, you see a chart, which, basically, graphically
demonstrates how our strategic plan process will work. As you see at the very top, the strategic
plan actually drives the development of the multi year, and the Capital Improvement Plan, and
the annual budget appropriation. Out of that, we will, you know, measure our progress and use
that data to refine future iterations of the strategic plan and the process begins again. There's
several strategic planning methodologies that exist. The City selected the Balance Score Card
methodology for two very important reasons: First, it has been proved -- it has a proven track
record in the public sector for transforming City administration into strategyfocused
organizations. The Strategic Balance Score Card methodology is being used by the Department
of Defense, HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development), the EPA (Environmental
Protection Agency), City of Charlotte, Portland, Oregon, and several other very successful
municipalities across the country. Successful organizations consider four perspectives when
formulating their strategy and making resource allocations. The first of those perspectives and a
main stable of the Balance Score Card methodology is the customer perspective. We understand
that the City exists primarily to serve citizens and business owners of the City of Miami. Seeing
ourselves through the eyes of the customers allows us continually to strive to provide superior
customer service. Second perspective that we must maintain focus on is our financial
perspective. We're held financially accountable for maintaining the City's financial strength and
for allocating resources in ways that will allow us to deliver back value back to our customers.
The third perspective of the methodology is the Internal Process perspective. We can strive to
constantly improve the efficiency, effectiveness and the quality of City government by focusing on
our internal processes and the procedures. The ERP (Emergency Repair Program)
implementation is a big example of just that, and finally, and probably one of our most
fundamental, is the Employee and Learning and Growth perspective. We must have an aligned
work force to accomplish our tasks, which drive us towards achieving our vision. These four
perspectives make up the Balance Score Card methodology. The second reason why we chose
that methodology is what's listed here on this graphic. The practice is a framework that helps
organizations transform strategy into measurable, operational objectives that drive both
behavior and performance. Over the last few weeks, we've been having employee meetings
where we've been sharing this vision, our strategy with the employees, and we've gotten a lot of
excellent feedback on that. That gives us the basis for our strategy map. The strategy map is the
-- our guide, if you will, to reaching our vision. We've taken, we've examined many of the
promises made by the Mayor and the Commissioners over the last few years and we've
synthesized that with the leadership team, which includes, of course, the City Manager, the
Chiefs and the Department Directors, into 20 strategic objectives that were defined over several
months. The Department Directors have used this strategy map in formulating their budget
requests for 2005, and it's important that we maintain focus on this strategy as we move forward
in adjusting our budget requests and allocating our resources. That being said, let's get into the
numbers. You see here the financial outlook for 2005 shows a General Fund budget for the
upcoming fiscal year of $444, 000, 000. The overall increase from '04 to '05 is approximately
26, 800, 000 or 6.4 percent from the adopted of last year. This increase is largely attributable to
City of Miami Page 93 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
the gross and tax base we've experienced as a result of all of the development that's occurring in
the City. Conversely, the expenditures in the upcoming fiscal year have been greatly impacted
by the effect of increase health care costs and our pension obligations. I will discuss the
highlights of both later in the presentation. However, I think it's important to note -- for the
Commission to note that, in order to achieve this balance budget, it calls for the appropriation of
approximately $40, 000, 000 of the City's reserve. In addition, a reduction --
Commissioner Regalado: Can I ask just one question?
Mr. Spring: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm looking here on the second line on the license and permits. It is
less now on the projection than it was on FY '04, and to me, is -- the question is, if we are
launching more construction, why the license and permits are going down, in terms of amount of
money? If we are doing the quality of life, then maybe that's included there, and with success,
getting license and permits in order, why is it coming down? It's less -- the projection is $2, 000
less and, yet, we have more construction on the way now than in '04.
Mr. Spring: You are correct, and the line items specific for Major Use Special Permit, our
forecast indicate an increase from year to year of approximately -- what is this here?
Commissioner Regalado: No. It's a decrease.
Mr. Spring: No. I'm looking -- within that category, license and permits --
Commissioner Regalado: Oh.
Mr. Spring: -- Major Use Special Permit is a specific line item. Within that specific line item,
we are forecasting the revenue to increase by 575, 000, so what you're saying is correct, we do
have that increase. However, on the -- we show an increase in our forecast in the area of
business licenses. Last fiscal year, we forecasted that we would collect about $6, 700, 000 in
business licenses. To date, our forecast indicate that we'll probably only collect 6.3. Now, 1
know we have the Quality Of Life Initiative going out there, and we're assessing, however, we --
it's an issue of collection, so it's an initiative that's out there. Unfortunately, we're recording the
assessment, but we still have to realize it.
Commissioner Regalado: I still don't understand why $2, 000less projection.
Mr. Spring: It's for the reason I just laid out.
Commissioner Regalado: No. I --
Mr. Spring: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: I understand the reason --
Mr. Spring: OK.
Commissioner Regalado: -- but I don't understand the -- well, anyway, go ahead I'm sorry.
Mr. Spring: 1 think it's just -- when you summarize all of the items within that category, netting
those things together, realizes this small reduction. For all the rest of the line items in that
category, they're essentially flat for the year, so a small adjustment in one down will have an
impact that will show a negative from year to year analysis.
City of Miami Page 94 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, Larry -- but 1 don't know if -- Commissioner, could you yield?
Commissioner Regalado: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: But in licensing a permit, we're down $2,193, right?
Mr. Spring: No. Actually, the total forecasted reduction is about 400, 000 from --
Commissioner Gonzalez: License and permitting.
Mr. Spring: Business licenses.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right, business licenses, and you said that the problem is a problem of
collection because I -- supposedly, just the Quality Of Life Task Force has generated, I don't
know how much money, and you --
Commissioner Regalado: Millions.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And you mentioned --
Commissioner Regalado: A million. More than a million.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right, and you mentioned the problem is collection.
Joe Arriola (City Manager): Not yet. They have collected a little over 500,000 bucks,
somewhere round in there.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Yeah, but I'm going to go back to something that 1 have been saying
for three consecutive years. Years ago, when I used to own businesses in the City of Miami,
every year, before the month of September, an inspector would knock on my door and ask me for
the renewal of my license. If I hadn't renew the license at that time, they will say, you can pay
me license; 1 issue a receipt, and we -- and they -- and the City collected the licenses. What
happened is that we don't have a system -- let me tell you. Let me give you -- I'm going to give
you an example. I'm the president of Allapattah Chamber of Commerce. We used to be at 2515
Northwest 20th Street. Listen to this, Johnny. We moved our offices to 2634 Northwest 20th
Street seven years ago. When we moved our offices, I applied for my Certificate of Use. We got
the Certificate of Use. We paid the Certificate of Use and paid the license at the new location
seven years ago. Well, on the City records, Allapattah Business Development -- and I'm sure
that you have that on arrears billing, OK, or on receivables, or whatever you call your -- you
know, that item in your accounting system. Used to -- in my system, when I studied accounting,
it was arrears billing. On the City record -- accounting system, Allapattah Chamber of
Commerce owes the City of Miami more than $1, 000 on Certificate of Use and occupational
license.
Commissioner Winton: From the old address.
Commissioner Gonzalez:: From the old address. Now, at the time that we moved from that
address, another business went in and they got their Certificate of Use and their occupational
license and they've been paying every year. I keep receiving, every three months, a bill from the
City of Miami that we owe an occupational license and Certificate of Use. You know, I send it
back with nos three or four times. I -- now, I decide to ignore it, you know. Just let them keep
City of Miami Page 95 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
sending the bills until maybe one day, when Allapattah Chamber of Commerce own the City --
owe the City $1, 000, 000, they decide to send somebody there to collect it, or take us to court, or
who knows? Then, at the time, you know, we'll have to say, well, where have you been for the
last seven or eight or ten years, you know? And that is one of the problems that we have. We
don't have a system to collect occupational licenses and Certificate of Use. Every year, I've been
talking about a lot of businesses that are out there, that they don't have a license, and a
Certificate of Use. Every time I talk about it three or four or five times, we form a task force and
we go out there and do a sweep, and when we do a sweep, guess what? We collect $500, 000, $
700, 000, $800, 000, but then we let it die, so we need to have a system on this -- you say it's a
problem with collecting this money. Well, you know why it's a problem with collecting this
money? Because we're not prepared to -- once we get to one of these businesses, sir, you need to
pay for your Certificate of Use or your occupational license or we will close you down. It's that
simple. No, no, no, I'll pay you right now. Let me have my check I'll give you your receipt, and
that's it, and we'd be collecting money but, unfortunately, we're concentrating on some other
things that are not -- as not as important as collecting money.
Commissioner Winton: So maybe, Mr. Manager, you might want to consider putting -- thank
you -- giving someone on your staff the task of doing research in terms of how other cities
around the State of Florida do this, because I'm sure someone does it extremely well --
Mr. Arriola: Yeah.
Commissioner Winton: -- and has a system for doing it extremely well.
Mr. Arriola: Obviously, 1 couldn't agree with Commissioner Gonzalez more. 1 mean --
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Arriola: -- this is a real problem, but that's one of the reasons we're spending the money
we're spending in the ERP process, precisely. I mean, we have no system -- I mean, no system. I
mean, so -- I mean, I couldn't agree with him more, but it's something that Peter and the whole
IT (Information Technology) Department is working to make sure that once a system is on, we
don't live like, you know, in the 1700s. It's -- couldn't agree with you more, Commissioner. It is
really bad. It's a very bad system.
Commissioner Winton: Well, when do you think --
Commissioner Gonzalez: Let me tell you, aside from sending the notices by mail, we have to
have a system that shows us that we send these employees today, 30 days later, if we haven't
received a check.
Mr. Arriola: Absolutely.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- we have to send somebody there to get the check --
Mr. Arriola: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- or to shut the business down.
Mr. Arriola: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Or to take some action.
Commissioner Winton: I don't think so.
City of Miami Page 96 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Arriola: Yes.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Because, you know, most -- some people, what they do is, they receive
the bill and throw it in the garbage.
Mr. Arriola: Throw it in the garbage, I agree with you.
Commissioner Gonzalez: We keep sending --
Mr. Arriola: Absolutely.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- (INAUDIBLE) sending bills and sending bills.
Mr. Arriola: Well, we have a system now that we send the bills, but we don't have anything that
ties that sending of the bills to what's outstanding.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right. You don't have a follow up.
Mr. Arriola: So, obviously, through the ERP system, we will not only get what we sent out, but
as they're paying, you know, you would have like an accounts receivable type of basis where you
can go after them in that process. Right now, you only have one way. You don't have a check
and balance, like you're supposed to have, but you will.
Mr. Spring: As I was saying, this balanced budget before you considers the use of $40, 000, 000
worth of the City's reserves, in addition to a reduction in the capital contribution from the
General Fund and us closely examining --
Commissioner Regalado: How many millions from the reserve?
Mr. Spring: $40, 000, 000.
Commissioner Regalado: 40, 000, 000?
Mr. Spring: Yes, in addition to a very close examination of the amount of personnel growth that
we'll be allowed to maintain. Specifically, we would have to ident the most critical and the
most strategic needs in order to move forward in next fiscal year. More than 70 percent of the
City's revenues is generated from about ten sources. We spent a great deal of my department's
resources analyzing and tracking those resources. They include utility service tax, solid waste
fee, asset sales tax, parking surcharge, fire assessment and, of course, ad valorem taxes. 1 want
to walk you through a few of those more significant revenues, and talk about some of the impacts
and some legislation that's passed over the last year. 1 stated earlier in my presentation, the
City's tax base has increased significantly since last fiscal year. The certified preliminary tax
base figures indicate that the total taxable base has grown by slightly more than $3, 000, 000, 000,
giving us a total taxable value of 22, 400, 000, 000, or approximately 15.66 percent increase over
the last year; 574, 800, 000 of that increase is directly attributable to new construction, leaving
the remaining 2, 500, 000, 000 of tax base increase associated with appreciation of existing
property. My -- currently, my staff is working on a project in conjunction with the County
Property Appraiser's Office to analyze the assessed value by folio number, so that we can
provide the Commission, during the budget hearings, specifics on growth in your districts, as
well as identify projects where we've been seeing the crane for more than two years, but now
finally, it has hit our books, so we can set the context, not only for you, but for the citizens to
understand that it does take a little time for those projects to hit our tax rolls. That tax base
growth translates into about $179, 000, 000 in tax revenue. That's assuming a millage rate of
8.7625, which is the same millage rate as the current fiscal year. The roll back rate for this
fiscal -- for this upcoming fiscal year is 7.5624 mils, which is about a 15.87 percent increase
City of Miami Page 97 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
over last year's rate. That translates into about $26, 900, 000. In our current scenario, a tenth of
a mil is approximately $2, 200, 000 of revenue to us, something to consider as we move forward.
Parking Surcharge. This fiscal year, the General Fund will be negatively impacted by the new
parking surcharge legislation. As you all know, the new legislation calls for an overall
reduction of 25 percent in the fee, and also requires that we contribute 20 percent of the
collected revenue to downtown infrastructure. The overall impact to the General Fund is
approximately $5, 000, 000; a $3, 000, 000 reduction in revenue, and then the $1, 900, 000
contribution in capital. The revenue for this fiscal year is approximated to be about $9, 450, 000.
Other notable revenues -- and I'm sure you'll be glad to note -- the residential solid waste fee
will remain flat for the upcoming fiscal year at 325 per household. In fact, the legislation that
the Commission passed earlier this year set that fee flat for the next five years. For this fiscal
year, that fee will generate approximately $20, 900, 000 of revenue. The other notable is our
residential fire fee. It will also remain flat in this proposed budget, generating a total of $14,100,
000 in revenue, as in past fiscal years; 9.8 of that will be contributed directly to the General
Fund to subsidize fire operation, while the remaining 4,200, 000 will go directly to capital for
department infrastructure needs. Expenditures. I talked briefly about the revenue side of this
coin.
Commissioner Winton: Why didn't you talk about, on the fire fee, the impact on commercial
properties?
Mr. Spring: It is also heldflat, and 1 actually have that --
Commissioner Winton: OK, that's fine. It's heldflat?
Mr. Spring: It's heldflat --
Commissioner Winton: Thank you.
Mr. Spring: -- also. As the Commission is fully aware, we are in the midst of our labor
negotiation process. The outcome of that process will have a significant effect on our proposed
budget, given that personnel and personnel related costs make up about 75 percent of the City's
budget. With that in mind, the City used, for this working budget document, on assumption that
we would increase salaries by five percent, which is consistent with the anniversary and
longevity step eligibility. As additional information is approved by this Commission, made
available, we will continue to update our budget assumptions, keeping in mind that any savings
that is garnered out of that process will go to reducing the amount of the revenue -- I mean, the
reserve that well have to use for the upcoming fiscal year. Earlier this year, the Commission led
the way in approving policy where we would convert some temporary -- long-time temporary
employees to permanent positions. To date, 27 positions have been converted from temporary to
permanent. Those are the 2005 implications of that are two positions in the Police Department
and 25 positions in Parks. The overall marginal increase is 200, 000, and as you know, they
were already being paid, so this is just the increase in salary and benefits related to making them
permanent positions -- permanent employees. Pension costs for the upcoming fiscal year
continue to rise. At a glance, the budget for the two pension trusts, FIPO (Firefighters and
Police Officers) and GESE (General Employees and Sanitation Employees) are five --
51, 200, 000 and 22,100, 000 --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Is that an increase of 51 percent?
Mr. Spring: Yes, it is.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Of 51 percent?
Commissioner Winton: 52.
City of Miami Page 98 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Spring: 52. 51.92 percent.
Commissioner Gonzalez: 52.
Commissioner Regalado: 51.92. Don't --
Commissioner Gonzalez: 51.92.
Mr. Spring: If we break down the numbers --
Commissioner Regalado: -- give them a break.
Mr. Spring: -- 69, 000, 000 of that -- of the total budgets of the two pension trusts represent the
actual City's contribution to the pension assets.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Let me ask you something.
Mr. Spring: Um-hmm.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: We approve all the budgets. Don't their budget come in front of the
Commission?
Mr. Spring: Actually, that was my next point. I've met with all of the outside agencies, and the
Pension Trust will be presenting their budget to this Commission for your approval some time in
September.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: But in the past, have they always presented their budget, just like
Bayfront Park, DDA (Downtown Development Authority), CRA (Community Redevelopment
Agency), everyone?
Mr. Spring: In the last one and a half fiscal years that I've been around, they've not.
Commissioner Winton: They've what?
Mr. Spring: They have not presented their budgets to the Commission. You've appropriated
funding to the Trust, via the budget that I presented to you, but the Trusts themselves have not
presented their board -approved budget to the Commission, which is legislatively required.
Continuing: 69, 000, 000, as 1 said, represents the actual contribution of the City for this year,
which is about a $22, 000, 000 increase over last fiscal year.
Commissioner Winton: But what kind of increase over the year before?
Mr. Spring: Over 2003?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, it all depends how the stock market does.
Commissioner Winton: Yeah, but I want to hear the number.
Mr. Spring: Let's see here, sir. There we go. For 2003, our actual for GESE was 5, 700, 000,
and for FIPO was $20, 000, 000.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: In --
City of Miami Page 99 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Spring: That was the total appropriation.
Commissioner Winton: And 2004 was what?
Mr. Spring: In 2004, we did 34.5 and 13.7, so that was 48, 000, 000, so it went from say
26, 000, 000 to 48; now total 73, and that's their entire budget. That's the contribution, plus an
additional approximately $4, 000, 000 of administrative costs between the two Pension Trusts.
Sorry. I also wanted to give you an overview of the outside agency budgets that had been
submitted, which have a General Fund impact. Very quickly, if we go down the list.
Commissioner Winton: Could 1 ask you a question about the --
Mr. Spring: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: When do we approve those budgets?
Mr. Spring: All of the outside agencies?
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Mr. Spring: You should also -- well, legislatively, in the Code, most of these have an approval
deadline ofApril 1st. In the last Commission meeting, I know that Model Cities had already
briefed with you on their budget, but the Commissioner -- Chairman kind of wisely said, we
should probably consider them all as one package.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, first of all, they need to be approved by their legislative body --
Mr. Spring: Correct.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and then they come to the City Commission for approval.
Mr. Spring: Correct.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And there is a deadline.
Mr. Spring: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: And it's -- but when do we do that? That's my question.
Mr. Spring: Well, this year --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Next month.
Mr. Spring: You will do it next month. I've met with all of the outside agencies and informed
them of their legislative requirement and, you know, everybody's in agreement, and they will be
coming for --
Commissioner Winton: OK, so next month is when we talk about the detail, because one of the
agencies --
Mr. Spring: Right.
Commissioner Winton: -- I'm not -- well, I'm going to have some discussion. I'm not going to
approve the budget, unless there's some changes made in it.
City of Miami Page 100 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Gonzalez: Right.
Commissioner Winton: And -- so when do we have that discussion? Is that --
Mr. Spring: You'll have the detailed discussion in the actual September --
Commissioner Winton: Got it.
Mr. Spring: -- budget hearings, but --
Commissioner Gonzalez: So -- Larry, excuse me.
Mr. Spring: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Gonzalez: So none of these agency budgets have been approved yet, right?
Mr. Spring: No, none of these have been approved, yet.
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE)
Commissioner Gonzalez: We will approve them next month.
Mr. Spring: You will approve them in September.
Commissioner Winton: And we can talk about the detail of them next month, is what he's
saying.
Mr. Spring: Very quickly, Virginia Key Beach Trust, their request is 1, 000, 066, which is about
350,000 increase over the last year. Bayfront Trust is the same, at 1, 000, 085, which is set by
interlocal agreement. Off -Street Parking, Gusman, 332 -- or 333, 000, increase of 76,000.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Wow.
Mr. Spring: Model City Trust, 641, 000, which is about a 19 -- a 19,000 increase. Community --
CRA, 659, 000, which is consistent with last year, is also mandated by interlocal, and finally,
Civilian Investigation Panel at 1,000,148, which is about a 474,000 increase from last year.
Again, I would respectfully request -- I've gotten feedback from the Commission earlier that
these boards do report directly to you and not myself and the City Manager, but notwithstanding
that, I would appreciate if the Commission could direct those executive directors to meet with me
so that we can have a dialogue about the -- their budget requests, specifically, given the fact that
it does have the General Fund impact and we are strapped this year.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Larry, let me ask you something. In the booklet that you -- the City
has provided us -- and I don't have it here with me. It's in my office -- does it break down as to --
it only goes back here to FY '04. Does it have it to FY '03, '2 and 'I?
Mr. Spring: Actually, I can provide you with that information --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Provide me on that --
Mr. Spring: -- by department.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- just for curiosity, what the increases are as to, once again --
I mean --
City of Miami Page 101 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Mr. Spring: Each of these?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: They have -- yeah. You know, there has to be justification for
increases. I mean, we just don't increase a budget just to increase it.
Mr. Spring: Actually, if you -- actually, don't have -- I thought 1 had that document here to
summarize, if I could Could I provide you with that specifically --
Commissioner Winton: Why don't you give it to all of us. You'll give us a schedule of last
four --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's what I was --
Commissioner Winton: -- the history of last four, five years?
Mr. Spring: Right, and I'll --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's what I was going to say.
Mr. Spring: -- give you a detailed schedule.
Commissioner Gonzalez: 1 would like --
Commissioner Winton: I'd love to see that.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- I would also like to have that.
Commissioner Winton: That's very -- that will be an interesting schedule, so how far do we
want him to go back, Joe, five years? Joe?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Sanchez, five years?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I -- yeah, 1 would like to go back five years. 1--
Mr. Spring: And some of these --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I mean, I have the books in my office, where I could -- but if you --
Commissioner Winton: Right.
Mr. Spring: Yeah --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- could simples my research.
Mr. Spring: -- we have it summarized. I will warn that, in some of the cases, like in the case of
Civilian Investigation Panel --
Commissioner Winton: We understand that. We're not --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, they weren't around
Mr. Spring: -- that one didn't exist, exactly, so -- and then there's the other General Fund
City of Miami Page 102 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
impacts that we need to discuss. Law Enforcement Trust Fund, funding has been reduced due to
a prosecutorial rule change. That is about to -- that impact is over two and a half, almost
$3, 000, 000 for this fiscal year --
Commissioner Winton: Wow.
Mr. Spring: -- which means that we will have -- the General Fund will need to absorb many of
those costs, and there are -- the Police Department wisely used that to help pay for certain police
operations and, you know, equipment; you know, cell phones and things of that nature that are
needed and, unfortunately, those things will be in the General Fund this year. Good news, our
fixed and variable operating costs, generally speaking, has remained essentially flat. I would
say, their Department Directors have done a real good job of really tightening the screws and
presenting a budget that is, you know, in accordance with the guidance that we've given them,
especially --
Commissioner Winton: You mean, all 20 percent of the budget?
Mr. Spring: Yeah, that other 20 percent, and some guidance and some feedback that I got in the
briefings that I've done with the Commissioners, we need to do a more thorough vacancy
analysis. There is a concern out there, particularly as it relates to Police, on the large number of
vacancies and what that impact's going to be to the City, so over the next month, we will be
going through that process, and coming up with some numbers and some strategies, hopefully,
that will lead us in a good direction. In addition to those, some that I don't actually have up on
the slide, Melreese Golf Course, we just assumed that -- about four, six weeks ago, you guys
actually had a conver -- a debate about it earlier today -- that could potentially impact this
General Fund from as little as about 250 to probably over $500, 000, depending on what it costs
for us to operate that versus the revenue we're going to get until it is actually redeveloped, so
you know, I presented this with those concerns, and actually --
Commissioner Gonzalez: That's why it's very important that we move forward with that project
and get it done, you know, if we're going to do it. Because if we continue to subsidize these
operations, very soon it's going to be better to say, forget about a golf course and, you know,
shut it down and make -- I don't know -- a big pool or whatever out of that park. It's going to be
less expensive.
Commissioner Winton: Make what out of it?
Mr. Spring: Actually, that is the end of my overview. 1'll actually -- 1'd like to open up to get
some feedback from the Commissioners, because it is the essential part of this presentation.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, before we do -- are you done with your presentation?
Mr. Spring: I am finished.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Well, before we do, being that it's a workshop; it is public hearing,
we'll open it up to the public, and then, when the public is done, we'll debate back and forth. It is
a workshop. It allows us an opportunity to start addressing some of the concerns and, basically,
gives us all an opportunity to look through it and have several meetings and get an opportunity
to sit down with all those involved in the process to try to compromise and see what we could do,
so let's go ahead and open it up to the public. All those wishing to address the issue, please step
up to the mike, state your name --
Albio Castillo: I know the routine, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- and you have two minutes. We're going to give him two minutes.
City of Miami Page /03 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
We're going to give everybody two minutes. I treat everybody the same way.
Mr. Castillo: I've been doing this for --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Fair.
Mr. Castillo: I've been doing this for 30 years. You don't think I don't know the routine by now?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I bet you do. I bet.
Mr. Castillo: My name is Albio Castillo. I live in 2386 Southwest 5th Street. My concerns,
which have not been mentioned or just touched upon, is the $330, 000 on our so-called
TV (television) station, which is being -- I believe it's not being operated correctly.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: That would be Net 9?
Mr. Castillo: Yes, sir. It is inadequately programming, and I'd like to know, if 1 pay that for the
fee in my cable --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Hello.
Mr. Castillo: -- because if it is, it is being --
Commissioner Winton: No, it's free.
Mr. Castillo: -- a breach of contract. The other thing -- although Kelly has done a terrific job in
the department -- My other question is in meters, illegal meters in the City of Miami. Most of
them is in Commissioner 3 and 4, and also what about my code enforcement idea, which I have
been saying since '96? And if I have to say it again, I will say it again. There's also
$13, 000, 000 uncollected in code enforcement, and if you're lucky to collect 1,000,000 out of
those 13, 000, 000, which happens to be in the 59, 000, 000 -- in the budget in the hole. Any
question from the administration? Any question from the Commissioners?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: No. We just said -- I think we're -- we're going to address that. That's
going to be -- several questions that are going to be asked by the Executive Director, and might
be --
Mr. Castillo: Any questions from the Finance Director, what 1 have just said?
Mr. Spring: None, sir.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Thank you so much.
Mr. Castillo: You're welcome.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone else from the public? Hearing none, giving everyone an
opportunity, the public hearing is closed, and we'll go ahead and open it up for debates,
suggestions, ideas from the legislative body. Mr. -- Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, on the budget of the pensions,
why is it larger this year than years before? What is it extraordinary change? I mean, the
administration. 1 mean -- I don't mean the money that we have to deposit, Wall Street ups and
downs and all that. 1 mean the administration.
Mr. Spring: Actually, the administrative costs between the two trusts have not increased from
year to year. It's just the fact that, I don't think this Commission has made a fully informed
City of Miami
Page 104 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
decision in the past because the budget has never been presented in a break down.
Commissioner Regalado: Are we, by law, required to pay the administration of the pension
plans?
Mr. Spring: Yes, you are. The Gates settlement requires that you have an investable
contribution and a non -investable contribution, which we're required to pay. However, my
meetings with the City Attorney, the previous Alex Vilarello, has indicated that we do, the
Commission does have the right to look in the details of that administrative budget to find out if
it's reasonable or not, and --
Commissioner Regalado: Do you think it's reasonable?
Mr. Spring: I think there's some areas that we can actually look into reducing some of their
costs --
Commissioner Regalado: And so how do --
Mr. Spring: -- quite frankly.
Commissioner Regalado: So how do we know that? Would you be able to provide or they be
able to provide the cost of operating the administration of those pensions --
Mr. Spring: Sure. They have --
Commissioner Regalado: -- before --
Mr. Spring: They provide me with very detailed, actually invoice by invoice information, as well
as summary reports that we can sit down and analyze and talk about with the Commissioners.
Commissioner Regalado: OK. The other question is, there is -- suppose that this balanced
budget goes through, there is no increase, at all, in any fees or taxes, other than the property
values.
Mr. Spring: That is correct.
Commissioner Regalado: It's important to make sure that that is well-known. The other issue
that 1 have for now is number of employees hired between fiscal years 203/204, 204/205; what is
the difference? Are we going to be able to have a report of the hiring and the different --
dierence in terms of budget that this is impacting?
Mr. Spring: Absolutely. Actually, in the presentation that I'm required to submit, one of the
requests of the Commission is that we have a break down of TO, showing the comparison and
change from year to year. What we'll do is, we'll make that a little bit -- another -- additional
report that will actually show the head count and the related salary -- you know, marginal
increase in salaries from year to year during the budget hearing. Actually, I'll be able to provide
it to you before that time.
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, but we will have it before?
Mr. Spring: Yes, you will.
Commissioner Regalado: Department by department?
Mr. Spring: Department by department. 1 can do that.
City of Miami Page 105 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: OK. On the Communications, I'm especially intrigued in terms of the
budget of the Communications Department and the expenses, and I just mentioned this,
Mr. Manager, because -- I mean, maybe someone can explore that possibility. The County
government does run two TV stations, and several years ago, I proposed something that was
never done and 1 just watched, by chance, the other day one County -- one of the County's TV
station and they do have sponsors, commercial sponsors --
Commissioner Winton: Amen.
Commissioner Regalado: -- that big companies -- it's like, exactly -- remember, I've been saying
this for years? -- exactly like WPBT. This program is sponsored by so and so, and so and so,
the best soft drink in the world, or whatever, and 1 just think --
Commissioner Winton: (INAUDIBLE) like the idea.
Commissioner Regalado: 1 don't understand why don't we --
Commissioner Winton: Do that.
Commissioner Regalado: -- do that. No. I mean, you don't have to do it. It's not your job, but
I -- I'm trying to understand the budget because I just want to figure out --
Commissioner Winton: Commissioner Regalado.
Commissioner Regalado: -- the costs and -- yes, sir.
Commissioner Winton: I would -- because 1 think your idea is a great one, and if it's --1 think
our City Attorney ought to opine, by September, as to whether or not it's legal and allowed by
our contract with our cable carrier, but if it is, we ought to direct the City Manager, as soon as
we find out, to take the necessary steps to do -- I think the idea's a great one. It could become
self-sufficient --
Commissioner Regalado: That's what I'm saying.
Commissioner Winton: -- entirely, and that would be a great thing.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: So, I like your idea.
Commissioner Regalado: I read the contract long time ago, and it can be done. It's exactly --
as long as there is no competition with the commercial channel.
Commissioner Winton: Why don't you bring a resolution in September, then?
Commissioner Regalado: And it's doable. That's doable, so I don't see why we're expending
millions and not making at least an effort to underwrite the cost of this production.
Commissioner Winton: Bingo.
Commissioner Regalado: I'm done.
Mr. Spring: Duly noted, sir.
City of Miami Page 106 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Winton.
Commissioner Winton: There's really only two things with virtually 80 percent of our total cost
related to employees. That's my focus, and there's two comments that 1 want to make, and I'm
assuming that over the course of the rest of the summer, we'll get this stuff finalized finally. One
point doesn't relate as clearly, but you said in your budget estimate that salary costs are
projected to go up across the board by five percent?
Mr. Spring: Yes.
Commissioner Winton: Is that what you budgeted?
Mr. Spring: That's what I budgeted
Commissioner Winton: And 1 will tell you that I read in -- I don't know -- Fortune or Business
Week or something just recently, estimating total salary cost increases in the private sector this
coming year is going to be 3.1 or 3.2 -- I don't remember which the number is -- and government
seems to be leading the pack again, as usual, and we've got five and that's a significant concern
to me, and five seems -- since I've been here, we've always had five, and the private sector hasn't
had a five percent across-the-board cost -- increase in cost, I can't tell you how many years it's
been now. It's been a long time, and so we're way ahead of that curve, which getting me to the
primary point -- and Mr. Manager, we talked about this at the very last meeting. We hired a
consultant. 1 don't know where the breakdown in communication was. 1 was frankly shocked at
the last meeting when it was determined that the analysis that 1 wanted done, which was the
basis of the resolution that 1 got passed three years ago, wasn't the analysis that was done, and
so 1 want to be really crystal -- and I got a memo from someone.
Mr. Spring: Rosalie and myself.
Commissioner Winton: Rosalie Mark. Yeah, that's who -- the other day, kind of outlining what
she thought I wanted, which wasn't correct again, and I've talked to Larry about it, and I think
we're clear, but 1 want to put it on record so that we're clear. I want to look at a 20 year
horizon. I don't want to look at a 10-year horizon only. I don't care if you look -- you have to
look at a 10-year to get to 20, but I want a 20 year horizon, and I want to understand -- and
you're going to have to have a real actuarial -- or maybe these analyses -- maybe the actuarial
work's already been done, and that will be fine, but 1 want to understand, very clearly, with the --
I'll back up a step. You've all read -- we've all read the article that was in Fortune a month or
two ago about -- it was called the $366, 000, 000, 000 Pension Scandal -- no, Government
Employee Pension Scandal, where the overall liability to taxpayers around the United States for
their hugely inflated pension plans is $366, 000, 000, 000 liability, which is almost double all of
corporate America's pension liability, and when I started thinking about our own pension
liability three years ago, I thought that this is probably just kind of a Miami -Dade County issue.
I had no idea that it was -- you know, the club was spread far and wide, which creates kind of
new alarms. My sense --1-- so 1 think we need to go back -- because I want to understand the
history of how government got where it is, not just looking at the future, so I want to go back and
understand when the current -- and I'm sure it was evolutionary, but there began an evolutionary
process that I'm going to bet started 20 to 30 years ago, not 40 or 50 years ago -- that's what I'm
going to bet, and I might be proven wrong, and that's OK. That's why I want the facts, but let's
say that I'm right, that the evolution of the current pension benefit that an employee in the City of
Miami gets today started 20 or 30 years ago. What that means is that if it started 20 years ago,
the bill is just beginning to come due. If it started 30 years, we've got a -- 30 years ago, and
depending on how that evolution comes, we probably -- we could have been paying some of that
bill over the last five years, but what becomes unmistakable is that that bill is now multiplied
every single year, and so I want to understand the history of how long it took us to get where we
are, and then I want the projections to tell me -- we've got a snapshot in time, which is today.
City of Miami Page 107 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
I'm not looking in the future in terms of -- today. Today, we know we have "X" number of
retirees, so in terms of an actuarial analysis, we can project out what those costs are going to be,
but we also know that we have "X" number of employees today and we have to make an
assumption that some percentage of those employees are going to stay with the City, are going to
retire, and are going to collect all those benefits. Over the course of the next 20 years, we'll
have every single year people retiring. What's going to be the projected annual cost to the City
year by year -- and I understand that stuff about reinvestment and everything -- but this whole
stock market reinvestment thing, I think, becomes kind of the red herring, because if the system's
filling up with these retirees -- and I'll give you the example. In corporate America, you can
retire and you draw your pension, whatever that is, once you reach the age of 65, and if the
actuarial say the typical life span of a retiree is 75 years old, that's their -- that's the life span,
then corporate America is going to be paying for that person, whatever that pension benefit is,
for ten years. In the City of Miami -- any government, seems like everywhere -- you can retire
after 20 years of service. 20 years of service means, if you went to work at 21 or 22 or
something, you can retire 41 or 42.
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Commissioner Winton: Well, let's say 45, just to make the math easy, we're going to be paying
for 30 years. 30 years. Somebody's -- whatever the benefit is -- 80 percent of their highest
salary or 100 percent of their highest salary. The taxpayers are going to pay that for 30 years,
and they're not even working for us, and that pool keeps filling up each year. Now, some come
out because they die. That's the analysis that I want to see, and 1 want to understand what the
impact on our taxpayers will be over this 20 year period, and I think what we ought to do, in
addition to that, is do a separate line analysis that takes what we recognize today as our current
salary escalation system. We know, in the City of Miami right now, that we give out a COLA
(Cost of Living Allowance) increase in -- but over -- which is not unusual out there -- but in
addition to that, we have this first five years, five percent, in addition to COLA, so if cost of
living is two and a half percent, we're giving out seven and a half percent. Nobody in America's
doing that anywhere, and 1 want to understand how that will impact long-term our City, and
when you add those two columns together, in terms of costs, I want that cost overlaid with what
just normal kind of historical projected revenues going to be, and where those graphs cross and
they head back into the tank. Now, maybe we don't. It would be great if we don't, but I'm telling
you, just the logic of how our system seems to work suggests to me that there's another world out
there that's not too far away, and then there's another one after that, and another one after that,
and so I really want to understand all of that very, very clearly before 1 get to the September
budget meeting. We're all clear?
Mr. Spring: I'm clear.
Commissioner Winton: Yes. OK, thank you. That's all I've got.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Gonzalez.
Commissioner Gonzalez: All right. We -- you know, we have touched in a few sensitive issues,
in reference to this budget, and you just touched on a point that really concerns me and it has
had me concerned for a long, long time. We have lost a certain amount of police officers, sworn
officers throughout this past year, and I hear rumors, and these are rumors, you know -- and I'm
sure that everybody heard the rumors, even the Manager heard the rumors -- that we may be
losing up to 200 and some more officers that will retire. Well, let me tell you. That is a serious
concern, and it's not only a serious concern because of the impact on the budget, but it's a
serious concern because -- I don't know what we're going to do to provide the proper resources
to the Police Chief in order to do his job, because there's going to be a point where we're going
to be very demanding, but if he doesn't have the tools, then up to what point can we demand? I
have had meetings with you in reference to the budget, and let me tell you, before this goes into a
City of Miami Page 108 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
disaster, we're going to need to take some drastic measures, and all 1 can ask is that -- you know,
you're our Finance Director --
Mr. Spring: Budget Director.
Commissioner Gonzalez: -- our Budget Director, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Linda. 1 demoted you or
fired you. What I would like to get from you is some recommendations and some analysis and,
you know, recommendations on how can we manage the situation that we have today in order to
survive. I know the future of this City is bright. I believe that the City's going to be in a very,
very healthy situation two years from now, three years from now, but we have to address the
situation now, and I believe that we're going to have to do, you know -- we're going to have to tie
our belts. It's going to be painful because, you know, every cure is painful, but we're going to
have to do it and some people are going to be very upset about it, and I can understand that, but
we have a responsibility, first of all, to the taxpayers of the City of Miami and to the residents of
the City of Miami. That is our first responsibility, and also we have to think that, you know, like
Johnny says, maybe it won't impact us while we're here, but 1 don't want to be with a burden that
once I leave office, I leave, you know, a big problem for my next successor, whoever it might be,
so there are times in life where you have to, you know, take positions and stand firm and do
what's right, and 1 believe we're going to have to make some real tough decisions for the benefit
of everybody; for the benefit of the taxpayers, of the business people in the City of Miami, of the
investors, even to the employees, because if there is no City, there is no paychecks, and if there is
no paychecks, there is no benefits, and there is no retirement and there is -- you know, so that's
all 1 have to say. 1 would like to meet with you again, before this September meeting, and get
some feedback and some recommendations so I can have time to analyze it and be prepared to
discuss it further.
Mr. Spring: Absolutely.
Commissioner Gonzalez: Thank you.
Commissioner Winton: Could 1 ask one more question about pensions? Are the -- are our
pension benefits -- the pay -out once you retire, are the pay -outs indexed to inflation?
Mr. Spring: Good question.
Commissioner Winton: Or they just stay flat?
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I believe they -- they're adjusted with inflation. They're not? I believe
they are.
Chief William Bryson: Chief Bryson. I used to be on the board. They're not indexed with
inflation, but there is a COLA that does not keep track with inflation, but there is a formula when
you turn age -- in the FIPO side, age 50, and GESE, I think 55 or -- Charlie?
Commissioner Winton: Is it an annual adjustment?
Chief Bryson: Yes, after that age, it's an annual adjustment, based upon a formula, not inflation.
Commissioner Winton: OK, which is also pretty scary.
Linda Haskins: Yeah. Linda Haskins, Chief Financial Officer. The Cost of Living Adjustment in
the Fire and Police plan is really dependent on the results of the -- the market results on the
assets, so --
Commissioner Winton: Oh.
City of Miami Page 109 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Ms. Haskins: -- they assume 7.7 and three quarters percent return. If the returns exceed seven
and three quarters percent, 75 percent of the first two percent of the excess goes into a COLA
fund. The next 50 percent -- the 50 percent of the next two percent, over the seven and three
quarters, goes into the COLA fund; 25 percent of the next two percent of excess returns goes into
the COLA fund. That's -- and then there's a dollar amount that goes into that COLA fund, and
it's distributed based on years of service and number of years in retirement.
Commissioner Winton: OK, and when you -- when y'all put together the analysis for me, I'd like
that schedule, also, so 1 can --
Ms. Haskins: We can give you that.
Commissioner Winton: -- kind of stare at it and think about it. Thanks.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Teele's not here, so 171 start and maybe he wants to
come out and ask some questions on the budget. Let me -- I think a lot of issues were already
addressed that are very, very important, but when you talk about a budget, we are dictated by
Florida Statute to have a balanced budget, and I could tell you right now that there's some
things that are -- that concern me, and the future for this City doesn't look good, not based on the
projections and data that we're gathering. I mean, we could end up like we were six years ago, if
we're not very careful of managing ourselves in a way that's appropriate to protect the taxpayers
in our City. You can't get into a situation where you -- your expenses -- your revenues -- in other
words, your expenses outdo your revenues. I mean, you just get yourself in a very bad situation,
and if -- one of the things that we're going to do in this budget -- to approve the budget, 1 think
that one of the things that we need to do is to make sure that there's a budget that is free of
irresponsible spending, and there's a lot of things that we need to address, but I think that we
need to look at everyone. I think that everyone needs to come together at the table and see how
we could address these issues, because if we don't -- you know, I've used this statement before --
that we end up killing the goose that lays the golden egg, and I say that every year in our budget
because we all have an interest in the City, whether we like it or not. Whether we're employed in
the City, whether we serve this City as an elected official, you know, we have a fiduciary
responsibility and the future of this City lies in our hands today. We're the ones that could really
focus on finding ways to make sure that, as Commissioner Gonzalez stated, five and six years
from now, where -- maybe 1 won't be here, because 1 won't be re-elected, or maybe some people
won't be here for whatever circumstances exist -- the other individual who's here will not be in
the same situation that we'll -- that 1-- that at least 1 was several years ago, and if we're not
careful, 171 be in the same situation. Let me tell you some of the key issues that I think need to be
addressed, but before that, the deficit numbers right now that are projected scare me. They
scare me, and the good thing about it is, that at least it's not the way it was four years ago, when
we did not have the warning before the storm. At least now, we have the warning to prepare
ourselves before the storm hits, and I think that we could all protect our fortress, and that
fortress is the City of Miami, and it's very important to direct the administration, the unions, and
all those who labor here in this City to sit down and find ways to come into a compromise or an
agreement compromise to protect this City. The issues that continue to concern me have been
addressed by some of my colleagues. One is the pension issue. The way it's designed now, it
really falls on the burden of the City when the times are tough, but on the other side, one can
make the argument, as long as the stock market is doing well, we're OK, but when you get hit
with these large numbers, and you have to dip into your reserves to pay -- you know, I know who
I answer to, and 1 answer to the voters that, every four years, go out and they vote for me and
they elect me to protect their interest. The other concern that I have is that we need to continue
to work harder -- and 1 know the administration -- and 1 commend administration for focusing
on risk management. I think we've come a long way on risk management, significant savings,
but 1 still think we have a long way to go to cut expenses. You know, there was a time here -- that
I don't need to remind you -- that we had, out of 2, 900 something employees, like 2, 700 open
City of Miami Page 110 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
cases, you know, in workman's comp. That was alarming, and it's something that I couldn't sit --
as an elected official, when that flag popped up -- and let it pass because I have a responsibility,
and 1 think we've worked -- I think the unions have, you know, done their part; the
administration's done their part, but I think both need to continue to do more to solve that
problem. The other thing is, I think the administration needs to find innovative ways to cut
spending, and find ways of savings. If it's, you know, buying only essential new purchases that
aren't required by contract, then those are the things that we need to do, but I'll tell you what we
need to do: Logic must drive us during the budget, not emotions or personal agendas. 1 speak
from experience because I was a proud union -- a proud member of the union and the Florida
PBA (Police Benevolent Association), so I know what it is. I've had the opportunity to sit in both
sides of the table, and it's not easy. It's not easy to give and it's not easy to give back when you
have something, so 1 think that we're going to have a tough year. We're going to have the
toughest year, I think, that this history's had in a long time, but I think it's going to be for the
betterment of the City, not for ourselves, for the betterment of the City. Maybe the next
generation that's coming on board I am going to review all the agencies better. Bayfront Park,
being one that I chair, I will address. 1 will look at the CRA. I will look at the DDA. 1 will look
at the Model City, et cetera, et cetera, but I'm also going to look at both pension boards' budget,
because I am shocked that we have not, in the past -- or no one's brought it to our attention --
that they needed to come in front of this Commission for approval, just like everybody else. Now,
just in conclusion here, I just want to say that we have that opportunity today to shape the future
of this great City, and the responsibility lies in our hands and we should not let that possibility
pass away, and certainly we must not sit here, myself as an elected official; you, Mr. City
Manager, as the City Manager, and all the Union presidents, to say we're not going to worry
about it. The next guy along is going to worry about it, so I encourage all parties to work to see
we, this City, could find a way, that we have safeguards in place so we don't end up in a situation
that's going to be embarrassing to all of us. Having said that, Larry, you and 1 have had several
meetings pertaining to the budget. 1 am going to be very aggressive this year. I think I've made
sure, as a City elected official, 1 have been more educated on the issue now and, you know, 1
think that we're going to make significant stride, but the key to the issue here is that we all work
together, and we're going to have to give some things up, and we're going to have to take some
things back, and you're going to have to give, but at the end of the day, I think that people are
going to realize that, you know, we're going to be able to work through it to keep this City going,
so Larry, I'm going to meet with you in the next -- I'm not going to -- I'm going to get out of town
in August for a couple of days, but I'm going to be here, and 1 do want to meet with the Union
presidents; I do want to meet with the administration; I do want to meet with you, Larry, to be a
part of that, to be a part of finding a solution to the problems that lie ahead for us, but I just
want to tell you right now, the storm is there. We have been warned. We have to take all the
necessary steps to make sure that we don't get hit by a perfect storm. Thank you.
Mr. Spring: I'd like to thank the Commission for your feedback. Again, like I said, it is the most
valuable part of the workshop for me, the Manager. We can take this information back. The
directors have heard it, and come back with a good budget proposal in September, so thank you.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: I would have loved to given the chance -- the Chairman an
opportunity -- he's not here.
Commissioner Regalado: He was around.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: The other concern that I have is -- and, Mr. City Attorney -- Mr. City
Manager, you need to pay attention to this --1 want to make sure that we, this City, puts together
a program to reward department directors who find ways to cut their budgets, OK? I don't want
to have budget directors who stay up the entire night before a budget hearing justifying -- or
we're wasting money to justify their budget. I think it sets a bad precedence. 1 think it's an
institutional thing now, in government, when people have to -- even though they don't use all
their budget, they find ways to spend it at the last minute so they don't come back and say,
City of Miami Page 111 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
NA.7 04-00918
"Listen, you know, we're going to cut your budget, " so these are the things that I think the
administration needs to be looking into. Cost efficient, when it comes to energy. This City has
not done anything, in the last three years that I've been here, to find savings and savings, which
could be a few hundred thousand dollars or a few thousand dollars. It's still -- it's a savings, and
I think, at times, we need to set the precedence to start the engine in motion to get other people to
find ways to save. If it takes walking out your door and turning off your light, so be it. It's a step
in the right direction to try to reduce the cost in the City. I'm very alarmed with the budget going
from -- went from 417 last year to 444 now. I'm going to talk to you about that. I mean, the way
we're going now, my gosh, 1 mean, where do you draw the line, if we're going to be continue --
how much more years are we going to continue when you have a percentage -- such a large
percentage growth with budget? And once again, I'm prepared to justify any expenditure that
has good justification. If it doesn't have good justification, there's no reason why we should be
spending the money, but it's a workshop. We have an opportunity to now work at, you know,
solving some of these issues.
Commissioner Winton: That's it?
DISCUSSION ITEM
Discussion related to the homeless.
DISCUSSED
Direction to the City Attorney to research, including asking the American Civil Liberties Union,
to determine the legality of the Key West Sheriff Department's actions in placing homeless
individuals on buses leaving Key West, most of whom end up in the City of Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Regalado: If -- before you adjourn, I have quick things and one question for the
City Commission. The question, especially to Johnny -- I would have loved to have
Commissioner Teele here, because it's all around, but to all of you, 1 received a copy of a letter
sent to the Homeless Trust from the sheriff of Monroe County, and it's very disturbing because
the sheriff says, "Yes, we're paying the bus ticket to any homeless who wishes to leave Key West
and go from Maine to California." However --
Commissioner Winton: And we're just trying to help them because they needed to get back
home. I'm sure it goes something like this: "I'm the sheriff. I'm going to arrest your rear end.
I'm going to throw you in jail, but 1 do have a ticket to get you back home, if you'd like."
Commissioner Regalado: Right, but you see, 1 checked This letter --
Commissioner Winton: Good work.
Commissioner Regalado: -- it's pretty weird, because he says that he only send two homeless to
the City of Miami. However, every bus that goes out of Key West, have to stop in Miami. You
either get off or -- you can even exchange the rest of your ticket for cash, if you get a ticket to
California, so that is --
Commissioner Winton: Wow.
Commissioner Regalado: -- so weird
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Before we -- are you done? I apologize for interrupting you. Are you
done? I just wanted to make one last statement before we adjourn. Does anyone --
City of Miami Page 112 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: No. I have two small things, if you allow me.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Are they pertaining to the budget?
Commissioner Regalado: No.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. Well, let's continue with the budget. Larry, you know how I
stand on the issue of parks. That is one department that I am going to protect. As a matter of
fact, 1 think that we, for the first time in many years, we're putting as much resources we can into
improving our parks.
Commissioner Regalado: The only question that I have is, I need to attend a meeting during
August of the Homeless Trust, so what do you want me to do with this thing of the sheriff?
Commissioner Winton: Oh, I'm telling -- I think our City Attorney ought to research whether or
not -- and maybe talk to the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) or anybody else, for that
matter, that you can talk to to determine whether or not what the sheriff in Key West is doing is
legal, and if it isn't -- maybe even if it is, 1 think we need to file suit against the City of Key West
and block this blatant transfer of their homeless people to the City of Miami.
Commissioner Regalado: Well, I was thinking more on the line of getting funding from the
Commission to send them back.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Intercept them and send them back.
Commissioner Winton: Well, actually, if a lawsuit doesn't work, we -- we're --1 will bring a
resolution -- because I'll guarantee you, the entire 6,000 homeless population of the City of
Miami would love a vacation in Key West, and 1 will bring a motion forward to buy them bus
tickets to Key West.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: And to limit it to two drinks per person.
Commissioner Gonzalez: And we can always buy them a shoe -- pair of shoes and
(INAUDIBLE).
Commissioner Winton: Yeah.
Commissioner Regalado: Lunch box. A lunch box.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. Is there a motion to adjourn?
Commissioner Winton: So moved.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. No discussion. All in favor, say
"aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Motion passes unanimously. Thank you so much, staff. Thank you so
much, Mr. City Manager.
NA.8 04-00845 RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION PROVIDING SUPPORT
City of Miami Page 113 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $500, TO BE USED AS PAYMENT OF
THE RENTAL FEE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LIVING WORD BAPTIST
CHURCH'S FIRST ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION, TO BE HELD AT THE
ORANGE BOWL ATHLETIC CLUB; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE
DISTRICT 4 SPECIAL EVENTS NON -DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNT NO.
001000.921054.6.289.
Motion by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by Commissioner Winton, that this matter
be ADOPTED PASSED by the following vote.
Votes: Ayes: 4 - Commissioner Gonzalez, Winton, Sanchez and Regalado
Absent: 1 - Commissioner Teele
R-04-0529
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Commissioner Regalado, you're recognized for your pocket items.
Commissioner Regalado: Thank you, thank you. This is a resolution of the Miami City
Commission providing support in an amount not to exceed $500 to be used as payment of the
rental fee associated with the Living Word Baptist Church First Anniversary Celebration to be
held at the Orange Bowl Athletic Club; allocating funds from the District 4 special events non -
departmental account, number such and such.
Commissioner Winton: Second.
Commissioner Regalado: Make it.
Commissioner Winton: Second. Mr. Chairman, you're drinking water.
Commissioner Regalado: Second.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: There's a motion and a second. Open for discussion. Hearing none,
all in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion
carries unanimously.
NA.9 04-00919 DISCUSSION ITEM
A motion was made by Commissioner Regalado, seconded by
Commissioner Gonzalez, and was passed unanimously, with Chairman
Teele absent, directing the City Manager to come back on September 7,
2004 with a recommendation related to needed in -kind services amounting
to $150,000 for venues within the City of Miami for the Source Award
ceremonies, which will be televised internationally.
MOTION
Commissioner Regalado: Mr. Chairman, the other is a direction to the administration,
especially to Larry, to come back on September 7th with more details about in -kind services for
the Source Award The Source Award is planning several --
Vice Chairman Sanchez: What, Source?
City of Miami Page 11-1 Printed on 12/16/2004
City Commission
Verbatim Minutes July 29, 2004
Commissioner Regalado: -- events throughout the City of Miami. The motion is in -kind
services for venues only in the City of Miami in the amount of $150, 000, including TV
(television) spots in the national network where this program be broadcast several times, and
direction to the Manager and -- to come back with some ideas on the funding source.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: All right. It's --
Commissioner Regalado: On the 7th.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: So, basically --
Commissioner Regalado: That's a motion.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: It's a motion directing to come back some recommendations to
provide assistance, not to bring out this pocket item to hand over $150, 000. All right. There's a
motion and a second. Open for discussion.
Commissioner Winton: That is correct, right, what you just said? That is -- that was the --
that's your intent, correct?
Commissioner Regalado: Yeah, that's the intent.
Commissioner Winton: Fine. Correct.
Commissioner Regalado: That was the intent.
Commissioner Winton: I got it. OK.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: OK. No further discussion on the item. All in favor, say "aye."
The Commission (Collectively): Aye.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: Anyone in opposition, having the same right, say "nay." Motion
passes unanimously. Any other item as a pocket item? Hearing none --
Commissioner Winton: Move to adjourn.
Vice Chairman Sanchez: -- is there a motion to adjourn? There's a motion and a second --
Commissioner Regalado: No.
City of Miami Page 115 Printed on 12/16/2004