HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemorandumCITY OF MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Victoria Mendez
DATE: May 31, 2022
RE: Proposed Settlement — City Commission Meeting — May 26, 2022
The Most Revered Thomas G. Wenski as Archbishop of the Archdiocese
of Miami, v. City of Miami, and Miami -Dade County, as Intervenor,
reference 3333 South Miami Avenue, 3601 S. Miami Avenue, 3667 South
Miami Avenue, and 3675 South Miami Avenue
Case No. 13-12523 CA 06
File No.: 11956
The attached proposed Resolution seeks authorization to execute a settlement
agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, for settlement of all claims alleged
against the City of Miami ("City") and Miami -Dade County -as Intervenor by The Most
Revered Thomas G. Wenski as Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Miami, ("Wenski")
Case No. 13-12523 CA 06, pending before the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial
Circuit in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida.
The claims and lawsuit were brought by Javier Avino and Mitchell Widom of the
firm Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price and Axelrod, LLP on behalf of Wenski, seeking
damages for alleged violations of the Bert J Harris Private Property Rights Act, Chapter
70.001 et seq, as a result of the passage of Ordinance 13114, the Zoning Ordinance of
the City of Miami, Florida, as amended ("Miami 21 Code") and specifically the provisions
of Section 3.5.5 of the Miami 21 Code, titled "Height Limitations for Properties Abutting
and in Proximity to National Historic Landmarks." Miami -Dade County ("County")
intervened in order to protect and preserve the provisions as they impact Viscaya
Museum and Gardens ("Viscaya"), a National Historic Landmark. Wenski's position in
the litigation was that the adoption and implementation of the Miami 21 Code affected
their vested property rights to develop their land.
Wenski's specific claims were that under Section 3.5.5 of the Miami 21 Code, the
heights for the CI District had been significantly lowered which caused a severe
diminution in value to the property (3333 South Miami Avenue, 3601 South Miami
Avenue, 3667 South Miami Avenue, and 3675 South Miami Avenue).
The City's position is that mere enactment of the Miami 21 Code does not meet
the strict requirements of a violation of the Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Act.
The County's position as intervenor is so as to protect its rights vis a vis Viscaya
and the Viewshed Ordinance.
The City's professional staff, including the acting Planning Director and the
Zoning Director together with Assistant City Attorney's met several times with the
Plaintiff's and their experts and the parties agreed to a Settlement Agreement and
Proposed Development Agreement. The Development Agreement is scheduled to be
presented to the Planning and Zoning Board for review and will be presented to the City
Commission for final approval as required.
The Office of the City Attorney has investigated and evaluated the claims and
lawsuit has approved a recommendation to settle the instant ligitation, with each party to
bear their own costs and fees. The City Attorney's Office seeks approval of a
Commission Resolution with final approval contingent and approved simultaneously
with final approval of the Development Agreement.
Attachment(s)
cc: Art Noriega, City Manager
Miriam Santana, Agenda Coordinator
Attachment(s)
11956 Exhibit A — Draft Settlement Agreement
11956 Exhibit B - Draft Development Agreement
City of Miami
Legislation
Resolution
Enactment Number: R-22-0189
City Hall
3500 Pan American Drive
Miami, FL 33133
www.miamigov.com
File Number: 11956 Final Action Date:5/31/2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION, WITH ATTACHMENT(S),
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, A DRAFT OF WHICH IS ATTACHED AND INCORPORATED AS
EXHIBIT "A," AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO REFER THE
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, A DRAFT OF WHICH IS ATTACHED
AND INCORPORATED AS EXHIBIT "B," TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
FOR REVIEW AND REFERRAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR FINAL REVIEW,
CONSIDERATION, AND APPROVAL AS REQUIRED BY THE CODE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, AND FLORIDA STATUTES, IN FULL
SETTLEMENT OF ANY AND ALL CLAIMS ALLEGED AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI
("CITY") IN THE CASE OF THE MOST REVERED THOMAS G. WENSKI, AS
ARCHBISHOP OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF MIAMI, V CITY OF MIAMI, AND MIAMI-
DADE COUNTY, AS INTERVENOR PENDING BEFORE THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, WITHOUT
ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, UPON EXECUTING A RELEASE, SETTLEMENT, HOLD
HARMLESS, AND INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT OF THE CITY, ITS PRESENT
AND FORMER OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM ANY AND ALL
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS ARISING IN AND FROM ALLEGED VIOLATION OF
CHAPTER 70, FLORIDA STATUTES, EACH PARTY TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS
AND FEES; FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY
ATTORNEY, TO EFFECTUATE THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, The Most Revered Thomas G. Wenski as Archbishop of the Archdiocese of
Miami ("Wenski"), has filed a lawsuit asserting claims and damages for alleged violations of the
Bert J. Harris Private Property Rights Act, Chapter 70.001 et seq, as a result of the passage and
implementation of Ordinance 13114, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Miami, Florida, as
amended ("Miami 21 Code") and specifically the provisions of Section 3.5.5, "Height Limitations
for Properties Abutting and in Proximity to National Historic Landmarks."; and
WHEREAS, Miami -Dade County ("County") intervened in order to protect and preserve
the provisions as they impact Vizcaya Museum and Gardens ("Vizcaya"), a National Historic
Landmark; and
WHEREAS, the City of Miami ("City") has denied any and all claims and liability; and
WHEREAS, this Resolution seeks authorization for the settlement of all claims brought
by Wenski involving the City by the City's entry into a settlement agreement, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney, a draft of which is attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A"
("Agreement"), with Wenski;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are
adopted by reference and incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section.
Section 2. The City Manager is hereby authorized' to negotiate and execute the
proposed Agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, a draft of which is attached and
incorporated as Exhibit "A," and further authorized' to refer the proposed Development
Agreement, a draft of which is attached and incorporated as Exhibit "B," to the Planning and
Zoning Board for review and referral to the City Commission for final review, consideration and
approval as required by the Code of the City of Miami, Florida, as amended, and State Statutes
in full settlement of any and all claims alleged or which could have been alleged against the City
in the case of The Most Revered Thomas G. Wenski as Archbishop of the Archdiocese of
Miami, ("Wenski") in Case No. 13-12523 CA 06, pending before the Circuit Court of the
Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami -Dade County, Florida, without admission of liability,
upon executing a release, settlement, hold harmless and indemnification agreement of the its
present and former officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims and demands
arising in and from alleged violation of Chapter 70 of State Statutes.
Section 3. The City Manager is authorized' to negotiate and execute the any and all
necessary documents, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, to effectuate the settlement.
Section 4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and
signature of the Mayor.2
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
ndez, City Attor
ey
5/17/2022
ndez, City ttor ey 5/26/2022
1 The herein authorization is further subject to compliance with all legal requirements that may be
imposed, including but not limited to, those prescribed by applicable City Charter and City Code
provisions.
2 If the Mayor does not sign this Resolution, it shall become effective at the end of ten (10) calendar days
from the date it was passed and adopted. If the Mayor vetoes this Resolution, it shall become effective
immediately upon override of the veto by the City Commission.