HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRA-R-09-0049 09-29-2009 Submittal-Bradley KnoeflerINTO THE
PUBLIC RECORD FOR
OPEN LET I ER TO THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMIREM CR19- ON 9--rR'?---09
it
Dear Commissioners,
Last week we attended the Special CRA meeting in order to comment on the
utter lack of public participation in this plan. Even Commissioner Sarnoff,
sitting commissioner for the OMNI area, stated on the record that after three
years in office, the first time he had seen the new redevelopment plan was at
the beginning of last week.
The item was deferred to the October CRA meeting and it was mentioned
that a town hall meeting would be held to discuss the plan with the
community. We thought the matter was done. You can imagine we were
surprised to receive notice, less than 24 hours before this meeting, of the
same item. We feel that this is unacceptable and does not constitute proper
public notice and would like to put on the record that we formally contest
the validity of this meeting.
F.S 163, which governs Community redevelopment, clearly states:
(2) The governing body shall hold a public hearing on a proposed modification of any
community redevelopment plan after public notice thereof by publication in a newspaper
having a general circulation in the area of operation of the agency.
On page two of the 2009 plan introduction, it states clearly that the last
public meetings on this plan were held in April and May or 2005. Well, a
lot has changed since then and the plan has obviously been updated — hence
the title 2009 update.
This is supposedly a slightly modified version of the 2006 Zyscovich plan.
Where are the changes vs this plan? What has changed? How is the
community to evaluate a major change to the redevelopment plan with no
public hearing or presentation?
I would like to read you an excerpt from page three of the 1986 Omni
redevelopment plan:
A citizen's advisory Committee was established to provide input to the
master plan. This group includes representatives from the Omni
neighborhood and provides a forum where interested citizens, civic leaders,
and public officials join forces to address development issues and
community concerns. During a series of workshops, held over a six-month
period, a draft downtown policy plan has been formulated.
This was the process back in 1986. Why, in 2009, are we being asked to
approve a plan released only days ago which has had absolutely no public
participation and community input? This potential violation of State law
should be taken seriously by the City.
And let's look at the plan itself:
Much has been made of the fact that even though things like giving $11.5
Million of public funds to the Miami Herald, $18 million of redevelopment
money to fund the boondoggle streetcar project, and $4.5 Million to build
parking for the PAC are in the plan — and not supported by the community
and even the district Commissioner — they are not set in stone.
Why even approve such a plan against the wishes of public officials and
stakeholders? If there was a 20 foot tall stature ofManny Diaz in the plan
that will never get built, would you approve it today?
F.S 163 requires that Community Redevelopment Plans:
(c) Provide for the development of affordable housing in the area, or state the reasons for
not addressing in the plan the development of affordable housing in thc area.
Why is there no affordable housing component in the plan?
Where is the revitalization component of the plan? Why are we not
rehabbing existing housing rather than constructing more big developments
to forcibly gentrify the neighborhood?
Is this new plan consistent with the neighborhood comprehensive plan?
Where is the study showing this?
Where is the impact study showing the differential impact on the community
from this new plan compared to the 1986 plan? The four page impact
commentary with standard disclaimers in the back of the plan hardly
constitutes a proper impact study.
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item # I on
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
These are just some of the questions that have come up in the past few days
and I think it shows that this plan and its implementation have some serious
procedural and legal issues.
Commissioners, this is not a game. These rushed decisions affect our lives
and the future of our community. Forcing through the redevelopment plans
and the bond issuance without properly involving the community is a
mistake, and may be a violation of Florida law. With this time of budget
crisis and unfunded liabilities, the City should be extremely careful about
not following the correct legal procedures to avoid any additional liabilities.
Please allow us the respect and dignity of properly evaluating this plan and
to allow the community to comment and have input as to the future of their
neighborhood. We urge you to defer this item until the correct legal
procedures, including public hearings and a comment period, are followed.
Bradley Knoefler
697 N. Miami Ave, Loft # 2
Miami, FL 33136
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item 4 I on I-23-0
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk