HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1977-05-18 MinutesTY OF MIAMI:
OF MEETING HELD ON PlAY 18. 1977
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
RALPH GI ONGIE
CITY CLERK
1
M NO,
Cl4
HEX
LINI#AMILlet
SUBJECT
b!NANCE Of
SOLUT I ON N0
PAGE NO,
1.
1.
2.
4.
SA.
5B .
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
SPECIAL MEETING -COMMISSIONER REBOSO'S PROPOSAL FOR LEGAI DISCUSSION
ACTION TO ENJOIN THE SPRING TREM OF THE DADE COUNTY (See Item #12)
GRAND JURY.
CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-C TO C-1, 100 N.E.
84th STREET.
8654
DENY AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE CONCERNING VARIANCES
AND CONDITIONAL USES. M 77-431
AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING A DEFINITION AND
THE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS. FIRST READING
AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR
TEMPORARY AMUSEMENT ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS.
CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM C-2, C-4 AND R-4 TO
GU, 500-540 N.W. 2ND AVENUE.
GRANT PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE POST OFFICE
AT 500-540 N.W. 2 AVENUE.
DEFER CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING
CLASSIFICATION, 5 N.E. 53rd STREET.
ESTABLISH THIRD THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH EXCEPT AUGUST
FOR THE COMMISSION'S PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.
CHANGE MEETING DATE OF JUNE 23RD MEETING TO JUNE 21,
1977.
APPOINT COMMISSIONER J. L. PLUMMER, JR. TO JOINT CITY -
COUNTY ADVERTISING PROGRAM.
REQUEST GOVERNOR ASKEW FOR APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF
THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVIS-
ION COMMITTEE.
CHANGE THE MEETING DATE OF THE CITY COMMISSION FROM
JUNE 23RD TO JUNE 21, 1977.
REQUEST MEETING BETWEEN CHIEF JUDGE IN CHARGE OF GRAND
JURY AND THE CITY COMMISSION TO DISCUSS PROPOSED
CHANGES IN THE GRAND JURY SELECTION SYSTEM.
FIRST READING
FIRST READING
R 77-432
M 77-433
R 77-434
(See Item 11)
M 77-435
M 77-436
M 77-437
M 77-438
PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF ERNIE FANNATO CONCERNING THE
ORANGE BOWL IMPROVEMENTS STRAW BALLOT ELECTION, JUNE 7. DISCUSSION
PERSONAL APPEARANCE OF MARILYN REED CONCERNING PENDING
LEGISLATION IN TALLAHASSEE ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE CITY
OF MIAMI. DISCUSSION
PUBLIC HEARING: ONE-WAY STREET DESIGNATION FOR MATILDA
STREET/FLORIDA AVENUE AREA OF COCONUT GROVE, M 77-439
ADJOURNMENT
1-8
9
10-12
13
13-14
14-15
00
IS-17
18-19
20
20
20-21
21-22
22
22-24
24-26
26
27-34
35
MINTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION QF.MLAMI, FLORIDA
ON THE 18TH DAY OF MAY, 1977, THE CITY COMMISSION OF
MIAMI, F ORIDA, MET AT ITS REGULAR MEETING PLACE IN SAID
CITY IN SPECIAL SESSION TO CONSIDER BUSINESS OF PUBLIC IMPORT,
THE MEETING AS CALLED TO ORDER AT 2:00 O'CLOCK P.M. BY
MAYOR MAURICE A,ERRE WITH THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE
COMMISSION PRESENT:
Comm.i44ionen Mano.Co Rebo4 o
Comm.L44.ioner J. L. Ptummer, Jh.
Commi44.ioneh Ro4e Gordon
Vice Mayon (Rev.) Theodore R. GJb4on
Mayon. Maurice A. Fenre
ALSO PRESENT:
Jo4 eph R. Gra44.4e, City Manag en
R. L. Fo4moen, A44.i4tant City Manager
George F. Knox, City Attorney
Ratph G. Ongi e, City C.eerk.
Matty HLn L, A44.i4tant City CQenk
An .invocation wa4 deU.ivered by Reverend Theodore R. G.ib4on
who then .bed tho4e present in a p!eda e 06 atteg Lance to the 6tag .
1, SPECIAL MEETING - COMMISSIONER REBOSO'S PROPOSAL FOR LEGAL ACTION TO
ENJOIN THE SPRING TERM OF THE DADE COUNTY GRAND JURY,
Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, before we go into our formal City Commission
Session for Planning and Zoning matters I have called a Special Commission Meeting
at the request of Commissioner Reboso to specifically discuss the problems con-
fronting this community as it regards the Grand Jury selection process and the
fact that the process even though we've struggled with it for quite some time,
still follows a blue ribbon foremat and in effect does not take into account sub-
stantial minorities, specifically the Latin Community and to same extent the black
community in its account. Commissioner Reboso.
Mr. Reboso: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much. As you all know, last Wednesday
a new Grand Jury was selected, the Spring Term Grand Jury that is going to be
seated next June 29. So once again, I am concerned over the inequities evidenced
by the composition of the Spring Term Dade County Grand Jury in the systematic
manner in which it has excluded minorities from its composition and relegated them
to second class citizens.
Though blacks total 25% of the population of this city and Latins 54%, the
total members of both minorities sitting on the present Grand Jury are three, or
less than 15% representing a majority of the population of this City.
In fact, the 54% of this city which is Latin is not represented by any mem-
bers of the Grand Jury as there are no Latins sitting there presently. This is
indicative of an invidious pattern of discrimination in which Grand Jurors have
been selected and seated over the years.
Based upon the most recent U.S. Supreme Court decision when dealing with the
composition of grand juries which use a similar system of that now being put into
effect in Dade County to pick grand jurors, the court found that when it compared
the low percentage of minorities represented in the Grand Jury to the population
it served, there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate discriminatory practice
by those states which did not have an equitable number of minorities represented
as Grand Jurors.
The present Grand Jury system is an elitist one. All of the Circuit Judges
of our county act as Grand Jury Commissioners, selecting ten persons with whom
they are familiar to form a Grand Jury pool. 'roam this pool 23 Grand Jurors are
selected,
T
MAY 181977
111
I am not questioning the objectiveness of our elected circuit judges but
attacking a system that does not allow more minorities to participate in Grand
Jury proceedings.
This is not a request to establish quotas for Grand Jury selections but to
find alternatives so minorities will not have to wait until they are able to
elect a proportionate number of black and Latin judges so they can become entitled
to equitable representation on our Grand Jury.
i want to reaffirm the principle of equal representation before our judicial
system in the great American tradition of being judged by our peers.
It is of great importance to understand that Dade's Grand Jury has power to
investigate and indict over 68% of the population of the county which are minorit-
ies. However, the composition of this body is less than 15% minorities.
My objective here is to change the current system and not to attack the
honorable judges in our county or to create a quota but to insure greater parti-
cipation with an objective system for all members of this great community of ours.
0n November 18, 1976, the Miami City Commission by resolution 76-1086 urged
the Grand Jury Commission of Metropolitan Dade County to exercise scrutiny in
their preparation of the list of jurors to serve as grand jurors and thereby demon-
strate that the part of the judicial system referred to as the Grand Jury and the
guardian of the police power of the state is a system and means whereby all of the
people of Dade County can participate directly in the administration of their
government. This has been grossly ignored. I, therefore, request that we take
immediate legal action in Federal Courts to enjoin the Spring Term Dade County
Grand Jury. f so move, Mr. Mayor
Mayor Ferre: All right. We have a statement by Commissioner Reboso and subsequently
a motion that this matter be taken to the federal courts to enjoin the Spring Term
Dade County Grand Jury. Is there a second to that motion?
Mr. Plummer: First of all, I would have to question the authority of this city
doing such a thing. That's (1). (2) I don't necessarily have any disagreement
with Commissioner's Reboso's statement, and I think that if we were to pursue the
avenue of which he states it is something that this city could involve itself in
and that is not a fight with the court but with the system. I don't think that I
for one would want to stop the Grand Jury System. I think it is good, it's a
check on balance. But I think that the main problem of which he is speaking is
the selection, if you may, the system of selection and I think that's where this
commission should involve itself; in fact, the problem is the solution. So I
would have to (well actually I'm speaking out of term, Mr. Mayor). I would join
with my colleague Commissioner Reboso in helping to correct the system but I could
not involve myself with attacking a legally constituted body.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, I would submit to you that you are out of order and it
is my fault for not calling...
Mr. Plummer: I said that, sir.
Mayor Ferre: So there is a motion on the floor. Is there a second? I will pass
the gavel on, Father, to you and second the motion for discussion purposes.
Father, under discussion, I would like to point out if I may... I don't know
whether I have my complete file here but at least... I wrote a letter to Harold
Vann last November and when this whole matter started coming up we subsequently
passed resolution 76-1086. Mr. Knox also wrote a series of letters. Then there
was some correspondence with Chief Judge Grady Crawford in December. And then on
December 20th I wrote the new administrative judge, Judge Kehoe and I'd like to
for the record read that letter into the record.
Dear Judge, as you will be assuming the responsibility as the Chief Judge of
the Ilth Judicial Court I feel it is important to bring you up to date on a con-
cern of the City of Miami Commission that has been expressed. Attached you will
find a copy of a resolution passed by the City of Miami in November and correspond-
ence between City Attorney George Knox and Judge Harold Vann and Judge Grady
Crawford. Please know that our concern on this matter is sincere. There is no
intention here to polarize the community or to create problems or to seek any
adverse publicity but the lack of proportionate black and Latin representation in
previous Grand Juries, we have a basic concern that not all of the citizens are
properly permitted to participate in such an important function of the community.
We in the City of Miami beset by problems of Affirmative Action, discrimination,
Consent Decrees with the Justice Department, surveys by the U.S. Commission on
Civil Rights, etc. are very much aware of the need of Affirmative Action. As we
are to implement Affirmative Action in the Police Department and other departments
of the City of Miami the question continually arrises about the Grand Jury and we
feel that it is appropriate that an example be set at the top, if on the other
hand, the Justice Department and the Federal Judiciary are requesting and enforcing
Affirmative Action in the lower areas of government. I hope that we will have the
opportunity to discuss this matter with you soon after you're appointed as Chief
Judge.
2 MAY 181977
I'd like to emphasize the point that it is these very same courts that are re-
questing Affirmative Action and all we're saying is why don't you set the example
for us if you want us to do these things. Now, subsequent to that I received a
letter dated April 6th from Chairperson Richard Pettigrew of the Metropolitan
Dade County C.R.B. in which he informed me that the C.R.B. was recommending that
Dade County go to a federal type election process and he presented for our study
the selection process for the Grand Jury, its diagnosis and treatment, March 1977.
I subsequently wrote to Senator Pettigrew the following letter:
April 13, Dear Dick, Thank you for your letter of April 6 along with the C.R.B.
Special Report on the selection process for the Grand Jury of March 77. For your
files, I am enclosing herewith pertinent correspondence between myself, the
City Attorney's Office and the court. At the present time the Chief Judge has
requested a list of Spanish surnamed citizens to be included in the master list.
I notice in your special section FY-77-3 on page 10 in section 1 and 3 you recom-
mend a random selection system along with a screening process. I would certainly
subscribe to the federal system under normal circumstances. However, we have an
abnormal situation in Miami with close to 500,000 Spanish speaking citizens in
Dade County and yet less than 100,000 of these are citizens registered to vote
from which Grand Jurors are selected. The Cuban American Democrats, a group with
whom you are acquainted, are presently making a study which brings out some very
interesting historical information that amazingly shows that registration is a
recent process in the United States of America only in this century. Previously,
the philosophy in most American communities was that whoever lived in the commun-
ity was entitled to vote, that voter qualifications of citizenship, residency, etc.
is a recent development in American history. - This is a complete surprise and was
a shock to me but evidently the theory of it was that these tremndous migrations
from Russia, Poland, Italy Sweeden, Germany and so on sometimes would cause such
havoc in communities that up until the first of the century there was no qualificat-
ion. It was just if you lived there you were entitled to vote. That's all. And
the question of residency and citizenship is a new development amazingly enough.
Now the letter continues: As it applies to our Miami situation, a major segment
of our taxpayers and residents would not be properly represented in a Grand Jury
random selection process. Although I certainly would not subscribe to a quota
system which in effect would make 1/3 of all grand juries Spanish surnames, we
must take into account the special circumstance within our community. A screened
random selection system would not accomplish this special recognition of the
Spanish surname.
I subsequently got a letter which is dated April 28th which I'm not going to
read because it's too long but I will submit into the record and it's by Albert
Dilthey , Interim Chairperson of the C.R.B. which I'll read the first paragraph
and the last paragraph and then the rest I'll just put into the record.
Dear Maurice, April 28th. The Dade County Community Relations Board is very
grateful for your fine letter in response to our C.R.B. Special Report on the sel-
ection process for the Grand Jury. Your letter has raised a concern regarding how
our report relates to the abnormal situation in Miami where close to half a million
Spanish speaking people live in Dade County and yet less than 100,000 of these are
citizens registered to vote. We are, therefore, happy to attempt to clarify our
report in relation to the Latin community specifically. (1) the key man selection
system(which is described quite at length), (2) the Federal Grand Jury selection
process is clarified, Sections a,b,c,... Conclusion, the Grand Jury special report
recommends that a random selection system be instituted so that divergent viewpoints
held by the various social classes of this community may be represented including
the blacks and Latins and poor. The Community Relations Board reviewed four pro-
posed selection processes. Of these it reviewed the Community Relations Board indi-
cated that it looked with favor upon such reform of the present selection system
that would include provisions which are similar in spirit to those provisions under
the federal system for selection of Grand Juries. It is not, therefore, in con-
flict with the basic recommendation of C.R.B. Grand Jury Special Report; that in
the development of a specific plan it may include changes in the selection process
namely... (1) Citizenship provisions be eliminated and residency requirements be
substituted as provided in the Almeda County California, see Civil Rights Petitioners
to the Grand Jury, University of CAlifornia Law Review, Volume XX, page 581. Removal
of citizenship and substitution thereof of residency has already been done in
several communities in the United States. (2) So as to assure that person's not
customarily represented on voter registration lists, the present sources for federal
systems of Grand Jury would have an equal opportunity of being considered for parti-
cipation in Grand Juries, that there be defined additional, appropriate and enumer-
ated source lists. These could include appropriate listings such as census data,
public housing, welfare roles, tax records, public utility records, drivers licenses,
newspaper distribution and credit agency lists. See Civil Petitioners
Sincerely, Albert Dilthey, Chairperson for the Community Relations Board.
Nov on May 12th I write Mr. Albert Dilthey, C.R.B.: Dear Albert, thank you
for your thorough letter of April 28th in answer to mine to Pettigrew of April 13th.
I am enclosing for you the minutes of the meeting that took place on April 28th
3 MAY 181977
lb
with Judge James W. Kehoe here at City Hall with about 2Vsome odd Latin
representatives. At that meeting I basically made the following statement
which I hope was conciliatory to the various opinions expressed, namely: The
Grand Jury system in the best of Anglo-Saxon tradition is a group of peers that
gather to judge matters that concern the whole commonwealth in common. Obviously
blue ribbon panels discriminate against a cross section of the community and as
it is not reflective of said community it brings up the question, "Is it a group
of peers judging peers?". On the other hand, although American society is much
advanced, there is some question as to whether or not a true cross section would
include people that would be functionally illiterate and incapable of grasping
more sophisticated problems. The problem is augmented in Miami by the presence
of many residents who do not speak English. Historically these questions have
been handled in western civilizations usually in a democratic society by creating
multi -level systems. For example, in most cases there is in the legislative
process an upper and a lower house that addresses itself specifically to this
problem. I would recommend that we try to merge these solutions and come up
with a Grand Jury System that takes both areas into account. That is the blue
ribbon concept and the cross section of representative peers concept. Specifically,
I would recommend a random selection of a thousand names from registered electors,
for these a judiciary panel would cull and bring the number down to 200 and these
200, there would be a proper balance for ethnic, sex and other considerations in-
cluding ssibly the input on a limited basis of select names to further balance
the universe from which the selection is to be made. Finally, I would go back to
the random sampling to select the final jurors. This system is unquestionably
complicated and time consuming but I think it would satisfy most of the objections
you outlined in your April letter and which has been plaguing this community in
the Grand Jury Selection process.
Now in view of all of the correspendence and information and what have you
and the fact that we've been struggling with this for at least six or seven months
and in view of the fact that despite the C.R.B. and despite George Knox and despite
Manolo Reboso and despite all these letters, we haven't come to anything. I
personally don't feel that this commission or any other governmental body in my
opinion in the face of this situation has any other choice but to test this in
court. I hate to do this, it's the last resource but I certainly would say that,
and this is why and I apologize to you for taking 15 minutes of your time in read-
ing all of this into the record, but I wanted to document carefully that these are
not casual things. I want to say into the record that every single letter read
that had my name on it was drafted by me, written by me based on my personal studies
and I didn't have anybody do any of this for me and I think that shows certainly
my concern and my deep preoccupation that we seem to hit a brick wall and nothing
has happened and I think like California and like Texas and like many other states
we're just going to have to grab this bull by the horns.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, if I may just respond, since we obviously in philosophy
do not have a difference of opinion but specifically we do. First of all, I think
the letter from the C.R.B. was totally out of character. They do not address
themselves to the problem. The problem is not whether a voter has the right to
sit on a grand jury. That's not the question - it's representation. If I'm not
mistaken in this community today we have 100,000 of Latins registered to vote and
could select from that 100,000. So I don't think the problem as I understand the
C.R.B. letter is whether or not citizens or residents or what have the right to
serve. Anyone who is a registered voter in this community, as I understand it,
has the availability and possibility of presently serving without talking to the
C.R.B. letter. So I don't see that as being pertinent to the fact. That's #1.
#2, I think everyone sitting here agrees that the Grand Jury system is a must.
The only thing that we are disagreeing about is how the system constitutes those
23 people who are chosen. Mr. Mayor, I don't say that this is a case of last resort.
I say this is a case of ill timing. We addressed as you stated this problem in
November and I think if we wanted to be honest ourselves... Well, I'm not
saying dishonesty in the form of anything else, Mr. Mayor. ... Please, I am not
taking this personally. Ok? So I'm glad that you clarified that so there will be
no misunderstanding later. What to me would have been proper procedure would have
been to file a lawsuit in December restricting the Grand Jury from seating the new
Grand Jury until the system was changed. Now to me this is the wrong way to do it.
I would vote today, so that there will be no misunderstanding, to stop the Grand
Jury from impaneling the next Grand Jury until the system is changed. But to stop
a legally constituted body by a lawsuit inhibiting them from carrying on the nec-
essary work, I have to be opposed to it.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, the whole history of the Civil Rights movement of these
United States is replete unfortunately with blood and violence and people being
forced into situations and if it weren't for the likes of people like Lyndon
Johnson who in my opinion is going to go down in history as one of the great pres-
idents of this country because it was he who got the Civil Rights Legislation of
1964 going. Kennedy thought of it and Kennedy got the credit but Kennedy didn't
• 4
MAY 181977
do it. And it took an awful lot of banging people over the head and going to court
and marching on Selma and people being thrown into jail. We've got one right here
who had to go to jail because as an American citizen and as a human being he wasn't
allowed to sit at a counter top or had to ride in the back of a bus. And as an
American I'll tell you that this is 1977 and I'm just fed up and tired of saying,
"Well, we're going to do it next year and we're going to take care of it slowly
and we're going to do it gradually and this is not the proper way of doing it."
Well, what is the proper way of doing it? We've written letters. We've written
letters to Judge Crawford, to Judge Kehoe, to Judge Vann. We've had conferences,
our City Attorney has met, we've had meetings up there on the second floor with
20 and 30 people. We've gotten the C.R.B. involved. We've done everything and
the fact is that the new Grand Jury that came out, not one, not one, not one Latin
name. And I don't know how long, and I'm not going to make... Hey, this is the
end of my speech and I'm going to leave you with this thought and I'm not going to
say anything else on it and we'll put it to a vote after everybody expresses their
opinion. I'm going to leave you with this thought and it comes out of a man by
the name of Hillo who 2000 years ago said, "If I am not for myself who will be for
me?" "And if I am only for myself what am I?" "And if not now, when?"
Mr. Plummer: Well, just in rebuttal, Mr. Mayor, I have always in my political
life tried to avoid government by crisis. This matter was discussed in November.
It is now,six months, has enterlapped in between. Obviously I was not invited to
attend these meetings that you speak about and obviously at these meetings nothing
of a commitment to try and change was made. I don't know because I wasn't invited.
I was never invited, Mr. Mayor. It's immaterial.
Mayor Ferre: You weren't invited because the judge, the judge's orders to me were,
"He said you gather a group of Latin citizens who are interested in this matter",
and that's exactly what was done.
Mr. Plummer: Well, obviously I'm not a Latin citizen. That's probably why I
wasn't invited.
Mayor Ferre: Well, there's no question about that. You know you Conchs deny it
an awful lot but I see a little Latin in you somewhere.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. I'm not going to argue with you. Mr. Mayor, all I have to say
is I still think to impede the work of the Grand Jury which I feel is needed is
the wrong way to do it. I think that if you wish to force through a lawsuit, and
I would hope that that would not be necessary, that you do it through a lawsuit
which says if you don't change the system before the selection then we're going to
ask the courts not to allow it and I think that's the kind of lawsuit that should
have been filed in December.
Mayor Ferre: Look, one last thing, Father, I'm going to say about this. Look,
this justice doesn't have a color. You know I remember when I was a kid going to
the University of Miami at a cocktail party in my neighbor's house, "Oh, the NAACP,
that's a communist group and Claude Pepper is a communist" and you know justice
does not have a color and justice does not have a name and it has nothing to do
with Latins or blacks or anything else. It's a question of right or wrong.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, you're very right because however you want to put it I
appeared before the Grand Jury for my only time, I hope, which I appeared twice,
first and last. There was a black there and what you're saying is correct.
Mayor Ferre: But one black, and let me if I may, Mr. Plummer, give you the statis-
tics. So far this year, I mean since the beginning of this... Well, let me get
my figures right. Yes. In the last five years, I'm sorry, since 1970 on there
have been 140 jurors of which five have been members of a minority.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would stipulate for the purpose of not having to dig in
the records that the proportionate share does not compare. I have no disagreement
with that. I think the Grand Jury should contain more Latins. It should contain
more blacks. It should contain a cross section of this community.
Mayor Ferre: Women blacks, everybody should be represented.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I don't think my wording of cross-section of this commun-
ity has to be misinterpretted. I think it is very clear. My only disagreement is
in the method which you are trying to accomplish today in hindering a constituted
body. I say it is ill timed. That's all.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, one other thing that I wanted to mention to you about
that. You say why didn't we put in the lawsuit in December.
5
MAY 181977
•
Mk. Plummer: That's right.
Mayor Perre: Let me remind you in case you have forgotten that this commission
was asked to appear before the Grand Jury and that one of the commissioners at
that time refused at first to go before the Grand Jury for this very same reason.
And let me remind you further, Plummer, that the judge told that commissioner
"You go to the Grand Jury or you go to jail" and that was the major headline in
one of the local newspapers here just like that. And therefore, I think that it
would be fair to say that that was a rather politically sensitive time for us to
do such a thing especially since there were letters being written back and forth,
resolutions, meetings with judges and so on. And I think all Commissioner Reboso
has said is: Look, we're tired of talking; we're tired of meetings; we're tired
of no action and I think it's time to bring this matter to a head and I happen
to agree with him.
Mr. Plummer: That's why there's five of us, Mr. Mayor.
Mrs. Gordon: As I understand the motion, the motion is the last two sentences in
this letter that was distributed. Is that correct? I totally disagree Manolo,
with the approach you're taking to go to federal court to enjoin the Grand Jury
that's been empaneled. To me it would be a step in the wrong direction and would
probably cause you more harm than good with results you hope to anticipate. I
would consider that, I hope you thought this out very carefully before you brought
this to us and I assume you did, but I would hope that you would reconsider this
approach and take an approach that would be more meaningful in the long run and
I'm not going to vote with the motion very frankly.
Mr. Plummer: Just so the record is clear, may I make one other comment, Mr. Mayor?
In November when the vote was taken about the imbalance of the Grand Jury I voted
in favor of asking those in authority to do something about it. I believe it was
a unanimous vote.
Rev. Gibson: Let me ask a couple of questions, Mr. Mayor. J. L., did you say
that you would vote with the motion if the motion were changed to read how?
Mx. Plummer: Well, basically if the motion were to read that this commission would
find itself in a position of filing a lawsuit without a commitment for the next,
whatever the next Grand Jury would be - it's the fall Grand Jury I assume, that if,
in fact, the system of selection were not changed we would then ask the courts to
enjoin from a new Grand Jury being chosen. I could agree with that.
Mrs. Gordon: I would like to speak to what J. L. is saying because I don't believe
in us going to court until we have a substitute procedure to recommend. I think
that we're saying we don't like what's being done but I haven't heard anybody say
how it should be done in order to bring about without a quota system and without
removing the ability of selection being made on a non -partial basis.
Mr. Plummer: Father, did you understand my answer?
Mayor Ferre: Rose, I just read you my recommendation and I just also read the
C.R.B.'s recommendation so there are two recommendations.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, I don't believe that there has been enough preliminary work
done. I think that it is premature to take the court route and I would vote
against either court proceedings, either J. L.'s or the one that's being presented
now.
Mr. Plummer: Rose, wait a minute now. So you don't misunderstand, I said that I
could agree and feel comfortable with a motion that says that without a commitment
that you will change the system, then we would have no alternative. I'm not say-
ing... Hey, I don't ever want to go to court.
Mrs. Gordon: Neither do I.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Let's have that understanding. I don't ever want to go to
court but if in meetings with these people we cannot get a commitment in the next
60 or 90 days then they leave us no alternative and then I would have no qualms
about going to court.
Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you a question. You all voted for the Cohen Case, you
went to court on Cohen.
Mr. Plumper; That's right.
MAY 181977
Mayor Ferre: You ail voted fot the United States Justice Department VS. the
City of Miami Consent Decree.
Mr. Plummer: Back up, Cohen never went to court, never went to court. It never
Went to court.
Mayor Ferre: It has the signature of none other than Judge Joe Eaton...
Mr. Plummer: Fine, but remember vividly, Mr. Mayor► it was a Consent Decree.
One of the big paragraphs of the U.S.A.-City of Miami said, "There shall be no
finding of fault".
Mayor Ferre: I agree. The fact is that it took federal court action before two
federal judges to move along on something that we've just been dilly-dallying with
Mr. Plummer: Only for approval, only for approval. It was never tried in court.
Mayor Ferre: Pappa, you know that it was a lot more than that.
Mr. Plummer: Oh sure, and I think it is far from being over. I've told you that.
Mayor Ferre: The only way we could have gotten off the dime and here we are on
the dime again.
Rev. Gibson: I'm very interested in what Mr. Plummer said. Mr. Plummer said that
he would have no objection to supporting a motion to, and even a commitment that
if the court did not agree within the next 60 days to change its method to go to
court. Is that right?
Mr. Plummer: Father, I said 60 to 90 days, I think a reasonable time.
Rev. Gibson: Sixty to ninety days, alright. We aren't going to die over thirty
days you know, sixty to ninety days. What is the difference between an individual
filing an immediate suit and the city filing?
Mr. Plummer: It would cost an individual more money and the taxpayers would have
to pay the bill, excuse me. The City would have to pay the bill, of course, if
the city went to court and an individual would have to pay it out of his own
pocket. That's the only difference I see.
Rev. Gibson: Is that right, counsel?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir, basically that's correct.
Mr. Reboso: Father, but you have to have in mind that 79% of this city is a
minority...
Mrs. Gordon: But Manolo, excuse me I just want to correct something because this
letter is incorrect also. The Grand Jury is not selected just from the City of
Miami, it is a Dade County selection...
Mr. Reboso: I know. Well take 68% then instead of 79%, that changes the figure.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, you have to address yourself to the county proportion.
Mr. Reboso: Rose, why did you vote then for the resolution last November 18?
Mrs. Gordon: I had no objection, that was not testing a court case that's to try
to go about it in a way that could bring about change through the process of meet-
ing with the people involved and working in a manner that in my opinion is better...
Mr. Reboso: They didn't pay any attention to our resolution.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, we could reaffirm our resolution and thereby in contact with
them have them know we haven't forgotten about it, it's not going away, you still
wish to have this come about. I object to the court testing, at least I do at
this time.
Rev. Gibson: What's wrong with reaffirming our position and our concern and saying
to the court that in the event we do not have a commitment within 60 or 90 days we
have no choice and then... Mr. Mayor, what I'm trying to do is I'm trying to make
sure that Plummer is voting because that's very important,
7
MAY 181977
•
Mayot Ferre: ...call the Public Defender's Office because I think they've already
instituted a suit and perhaps,;let's determine exactly what their suit is.
Nev. Gibson: All right.
Mayor Ferre: The way for us to do it is to join the Public Defender's Office,
Rev. Gibson: I'd like that even better because at least they can't say... Well,
l'an going to wait until he finds it out...
Mayor Ferre: Alright, I'll tell you what let's do if it is alright with you,
Commissioner Reboso, let's find out exactly what's going on in the public Defender's
Office and then we can come back to this.
M. Reboso: No, Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry but I would like the City Clerk to call the
question. I think that one way or the other that...
Rev. Gibson: Manolo, I want to tell you as your friend you'd better listen to the
Mayor. Experience has taught me you'd better listen to the Mayor now.
Mr. Reboso: I want to call the question.
Rev. Gibson: Ok. Question, Mr. Clerk.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: There is no question how i will vote. Mine is strategy for a
fellow commissioner who wants more information. Since it is being forced to a
vote there is no question I will vote 'no'.
Mayor Ferre: Again, I think this is a matter of principle and I vote yes.
Mrs. Gordon: I've stated before my position and the vote is no.
Rev. Gibson: I want to say that Manolo, you give me no choice. I think
that for a few minutes we could have waited, found out if the Public Defender had
a case, had a suit going and I think everybody knows that I am a part of the
history - I am the history. Unlike the rest of the people, I am the history.
and one of these days you may learn and I'm going to vote 'no'.
The preceding motion, introduced by Commissioner Reboso and seconded by
Mayor Ferre failed to pass by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Reboso and Mayor Ferre.
NOES: Mr. Plummer, Mrs. Gordon and Rev. Gibson.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I wish Mr. Plummer would offer his motion and I'm pre-
pared to second the motion.
Mr. Plummer: Father, I'm not going to offer that motion... Father, I don't think
you're prepared as I'm not prepared until we hear from the City Attorney.
Rev. Gibson: Alright, I want to make a commitment on the record that if the City
Attorney tells me that the Public Defender does not have a case going Theodore
Gibson is offering the motion that if I don't get an affirmative commitment from
the court to change within 60 to 90 days at the maximum that I offer the motion to
pursue it in court in the name of the city.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, we're now on the regular Planning and Zoning Agenda, we'll
come back to this issue in a while.
Thereupon the Special Meeting of the Miami City Commission was adjourned at
2:44 O'Clock P.M.
ATTEST; Ralph G. Ongie
City Clerk
Natty Hirai
Assistant City Clerk
Maurice A. Ferre
Mayor
MAY j 81977
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COMMISSION or MIAMI, FLORIDA
ON THE 18RH DAY OF MAY, 1977, THE CITY COMMISSION OF
IAMI,_ QR DA MET AT IT REGULAR MEETING PLACE IN THE ITY
ALL, 5 UU FAN AMERICAN DC
RIVE, MIAMI, FLORIDA IN REGULAR SESSION6
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 2:45 O'CLOCK P6_6 BY
MAYOR MAURICE A. t-ERRE WITH THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS OF THE
COMMISSION FOUND TO BE PRESENT:
COMMi44iOneh Manoto Rebo4O
Commi44ioneh J. L. Ptummen, Jh.
Commti44ioneh Robe Gondon
Vice-Mayoh Theodon.e GLb4on
Mayon MauhLce A. Fekhe
ALSO PRESENT:
3o8eph R. Gna6.6ie, City Managers
R. L. Foamoen, A44iotant CL.ty Manage'
Geonge F. Knox, City Attohney
Ra.eph G. Ongie, City CQekh
Matty Hihat., A44i4 taut City Ceekk
16 CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM R-C TO C-1 CEO N.E, 84 ST.)
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPRE-
HENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 11 AND 12,
BLOCK 14, LITTLE RIVER GARDENS AMD (6-51), BEING 100
N.E. 84TH STREET, FROM R-C (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE TO C-1
(LOCAL COMMERCIAL); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES
IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF THE SAID
ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN
ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDIN-
ANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT;
AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of April 27, 1977, was
taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the Ordinance was
thereupon given its second and final reading by title and passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Reboso
Commissioner Gibson
Commissioner Gordon
Mayor Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Plummer.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO, 8654.
The City ATtorney read the ordinance into the public record and
announced that copies were available to the members of the City Com-
mission and to the public.
MAY 3 81977
2. DENY AMENDMENT TO Z I NG D I NANCE CONCERNING VARIANCt AID CONb I t I ONAL. USES i
Mayor Ferre: Item #2 on First Reading Ordinance, Planning Department application.
The Planning Advisory Hoard recommends 7 - 0, amending the Zoning Ordinance by
changing the 6 months expiration limitation for approved variances or conditional
use to two years. Is there anybody here who is an objector? Are there any?
Why don't you state your objections and then we'll...
Mrs. Marilyn Reed: It's more of clarification than it is an objection. This is
about the fifth time I've been down here on this from your workshop through the
Planning Department. The last meeting when it was deferred Commissioner Plummer
offered...
Mayor Ferre: We need your address for the record.
Mrs. Reed: Marilyn Reed, 3183 McDonald Street, Coconut Grove. Commissioner
Plummer isn't here right now and he offered a motion last time which I liked very
much. However, the Planning Department worked on this because this was originally
scheduled for an open ending which we cannot go with. We do not approve of it.
The Planning Department worked out this as one way to go. Now we were with this.
However, Commissioner Plummer has another motion. Either way, I would be with
either Commissioner Plummer's previous motion or the way it is set up here but
absolutely opposed to open ending variances and conditional uses.
Mr. Bob Davis: Mr. Mayor, the request also was for further clarification and the
statistics involved regarding this natter as to how many and which items had ever
been reviewed before by the Commission and denied. The Planning Department has
reviewed this for a major statement.
Mrs. Gordon: Will you speak into the microphone please, Bob? You know you're not
coming through.
Mr. Davis: The Planning Department wishes to clarify the statistics as requested
by the commission.
Mr. R.L. Fosmoen: Very simply, in our report to you which is contained in your
agenda package; Since 1974 there have been 24 applicants who have requested a
time extension beyond the initial six months granted by the board and in all
instances these have been granted by the City Commission. We would think that a
two year review is appropriate.
Mrs. Gordon: You're recommending two years....
Mr. Davis: The specific instances you spoke to, Mr. Plummer, were not standard
conditional uses or variances they were situations with parking that set up a
special review at the end of the year.
Mr. Plummer: That's right, but we got the end results. We got the bottom line.
Mr. Davis: That isn't what this amendment is speaking to is what I'm saying.
Mr. Plummer: The bottom line, that's what I'm getting at. All the rest of it
is turkey talk. The bottom line is what counts and that's how we accomplish it.
Mrs. Gordon: I cannot find a reason why you would want to give a longer period
of time, Mr. Fosmoen particularly for the extension of a variance that has not been
utilized and that's what it is. Isn't it? It hasn't been put into place.
Mr. Fosmoen: It's primarily directed at conditional uses, Commissioner.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, variances and conditional uses which have not been developed.
Is that correct?
Mr. Fosmoen: That's correct. Now what I'm pointing out to you is....
Mrs. Gordon: Will you talk on the microphone if you're going to say something
that's going on the record? And if not, then...
Mr. Davis: Commissioner Plummer asked me a question, perhaps he'd like to reask
it.
Mr, Plummer: No, I didn't ask the question,
with it.
I made the statement and you disagreed
�.Q MAY 1$1977
Mr. Davis: Yes, sir. I' 1 state the disagreement. Commissioner Plummer said that
there was no difference between this and the situation where a variance for a con-
ditional use is granted subject to the review by the Board or the Commission at the
end of one year or six months or whatever it is. This attacks a different situation.
This is the length that every single conditional use and variance can exist before
its being utilized by either getting a building permit or a certificate of use and
occupancy by the applicant.
Mr. Plummer: That's right.
Mr. Davis: But this is different than what you were referring to.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes. Excuse me, Father, I wanted Mr. Fosmoen to clarify his state-
ment he started to make.
Mr. Fosmoen: It is for variances, you're quite right. What we're pointing out,
Commissioner, is that the 24 cases that have come before you for an extension,
all of them have been granted.
Mr. Plummer: No, you're wrong.
Mrs. Gordon: No, you know if we just catch one that shouldn't have been granted
in the first place by containing it to a six month period of time let me tell
you something, that's worth while; You know especially now because now we don't
rule on variances anymore and the only time we get them is when they've been
denied and there's been an appeal and otherwise they go straight on through.
To let them go through and hang around there for two years in my opinion is leav-
ing us open for some real problems. I would like to keep it as it is and if we
have to rule on them again fine, we'll rule on them again. We're not being
terribly overworked.
Mr. Plummer: A11 I wanted to say was, Mr. Grassie, I don't believe, sir, as was
the case with the tasicabs or the garbage permits that they have to be individual
items. I think the City Attorney has already ruled that you could have taken, if
it had been time wise, all 24 of these and lumped them into one item for mass
approval or if a Commissioner had an objection. You know I understand what you're
trying to accomplish and I wholeheartedly agree - cut down the agendas. I have no
disagreement with that. But I think the manner in which I personally would like
to see is that all of these be grouped on a quarterly basis or however you want
to do it and group them together where we only attack the problem twice a year or
four times a year. And I think that will really accomplish a great deal towards
what you want to accomplish but it will still save for us that right to say to
someone we're going to hold your feet to the fire and if you don't do this, and
Bob, unless I'm way off base even though I voted in the opposite, I think Fair
Isle is a great example. If I'm not mistaken, Fair Isle lost their variance at
one time and went to court to fight to get it back.
Mr. Davis: That's correct.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Now if you gave them an automatic two full years that court
decision for that particular case would have been tremendously altered. I don't
think that there's anything wrong with us keeping our finger on the pulse with a
review at 6 months. That's my opinion for what it's worth.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I'm opposed to the change. I think that this commission
needs to retain some of its authority and also needs to say to people who come
here and make presentations to us that they are in dead earnest about what they
say. They come here for variances sometimes with no intention of doing what they
ask for and then trade it off. I don't want to be put in that position so I want
you to know Theodore Gibson is opposed to the change. If a guy knows that every
six months he's got to do some things - and I'm the best example. You could buy
a building permit and if you don't have that inspector for whatever purpose come
there every three months that building permit is null and void. And you know
what? That makes me continually plan to do some work to that house that I'm build-
ing to make sure that I don't lose that building permit. So I ain't about to go
with you.
Mr. Grassie: I believe that we would withdraw based on the expressions of interest
that you have on this. We withdraw the request.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, so that it be in the records that this commission voted against
it and for future bodies that might be sitting here or might decide to do this I
think the record should reflect our opposition to this movement and I so move,
11
MAY 181977
•
N±4 Ernie Fannatto: t thought this was a public hearing, Mayor.
Mayor teere: This is hot a public hearing but I'll recognize you anyway
Mr. Fannatto: It's a very irportant matter and I think...,
Mayor Ferre: Look, you asked me a question, "Is this a public hearingfi"x The
answer is it is not a public hearing.
Mr. Fannatto: Alright. I just would like to say this here. If you give them
for two years you're losing control of the variance and in Many cases it creates
a hardship on the business and the community at large.
Mayor Ferre: Right, and we agree with you Ernie. I think you swung a vote or two.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon, Who Moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77- 431
A MOTION TO DENY APPLICATION BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD TO
AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY CHANGING THE 6-MONTH EXPIRATION
LIMITATION FOR APPROVED VARIANCES OR CONDITIONAL USES TO 2-YEARS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Rev. Gibson, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer.
NOES: Mayor Ferre
ABSENT: Mr. Reboso.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: I have to vote in favor even though I don't want to vote. I
think that the applicant under our system has the right to withdraw, the applicant
is the city and they have withdrawn. Now there is no question how I feel, I vote
'yes'. The motion is to deny.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, the motion is to keep the record straight. This matter
came before us and it requires an action so that the records will reflect it.
Mayor Ferre: I happen to feel differently about it. I happen to think that
we're bogged down with an awful lot of repetitious things. I can't remember for
the life of me once in eight years, yes I can remember one one time that we turned
down an application to extend a conditional use or an approved variance. Frankly,
I think this is just... I know these are sensitive tunes because of the emotions
created by the controversy between the commission and the City Manager on several
things last week but this is not in that category and I can't see it so I vote 'no'.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I want to make sure the record reflects, emotion or
no emotion - if you don't do anything but catch just one, if you don't do anything
but keep before the people that they had better get on their, get up off their
rusty dusty. That's the way we do in theology. We hold sin up before people all
the time hoping that we keep them from sinning even though they sin and I don't
want to give that up.
Mayor Ferre: Father, we just have a difference of opinion on it. It's an
honest difference. You know you want to keep it on a six month basis, to me a one
year or a two year basis is ok but that's that so I vote no and the majority
carries as a 3 to 1 vote.
FIRST SING FINANCE; Agri MINING ORDINANCE BY ESTABLISHING A
DEFINITION AND THE STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS,
Payer Pert-etPert-et fete there any objectors to Stem #4? Any questions?
Mr. Plum er: Would this be basically the establishment of the same rules and
procedures that exist now at the Plat Committee?
Mr, Davis: The Plat Committee has had no standards by which to judge private
roads since it has been established by the Law Department that a private road is
suitable in a plat for frontage on a lot. The Plat Committee requested the Public
Works Department and the Planning Department to establish and recotttmend standards
for private roads. These standards are now before you.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPRE-
HENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY
ADDING TO ARTICLE II, DEFINITIONS, SECTION 2, A NEW
SUB -SECTION (57-A) PROVIDING A DEFINITION OF PRIVATE
ROADS AND BY AMENDING ARTICLE IV, GENERAL PROVISIONS,
BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 11-1 ENTITLED PRIVATE ROADS,
TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE ROADS.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Gordon
and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES: Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer, Rev. Gibson and Mayor Ferre.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Reboso.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the record and stated that copies
had been furnished to the commissioners and that copies were available to the
public.
•
4. FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISH PROCEDURES
FOR TEMPORARY AMJSEMENT ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS,
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPRE-
HENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, ARTICLE
V, ONE FAMILY DWELLING, R-1, R-1A, R-1B DISTRICTS BY
REVISING SECTION 1, USE REGULATIONS, SUB -SECTION (6),
PARAGRAPH (k), ENTITLED TEMPORARY AMUSEMENT ACTIVITIES,
OPERATED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF A CHURCH,
SCHOOL, OR PUBLICLY OWNED RECREATIONAL OR CULTURAL
FACILITY AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND
LIMITATIONS, BY DELETING SUB -PARAGRAPHS (1) AND (5)
AND BY ADDING NEW SUB -PARAGRAPHS (1), (5) AND (6)
AND BY AMENDING ARTICLE XII-LOCAL COMMERCIAL-C-1
DISTRICT, BY REVISING SECTION 1, SUB -SECTION (2-A),
ENTITLED AMUSEMENTS EVENTS, TEMPORARY, BY DELETING
PARAGRAPHS (a), (b), AND (e) IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND BY
ADDING NEW PARAGRAPHS (a), (b). AND (e); BY REPEALING
ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF IN
CONFLICT; AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Gordon
and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES:
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Reboso.
The City Attorney read the ordinance.into the public record and announced
that copies were available to the members of the city commission and to the public,
13 MAY 181917
1110
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, excuse me, let me back up on this one ordinance. Maybe
it's zoning and maybe it's not. Mr. Grassie, did the City Administration or the
City Commission address itself to the problem which existed in reference to carni-
vals and amusement things such as this nature in relation to the occupational tax?
You recall here recently there was a case in which the occupational tax division
came forth with a license like 17 or $1100 where in the previous it had been 25
or $30 and I remember that you interceded in that. Was that matter ever resolved?
Mr. Grassie: It seems to me, Commissioner, that it was but ....
Mr. Plummer: I don't recall this commission changing the ordinance which I think
would be required. May I just ask that you not drop the matter so that the sub-
ject doesn't come up again so that we clarify and ask for a future agenda that
this matter, if the report is that it's all now been taken care of that's what I
think we want to hear. I don't think we want to start getting phone calls again
that the city is holding us up or trying to crucify us.
Mr. Grassie: My impression, commissioner, is that we did, in fact, ask you to
change an ordinance about three months ago but we'll check and make sure that
that's true.
Mr. Plummer: Please do, my memory isn't that good. I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor, I just
think it needs to be cleared up.
5A, FIRST READING ORDINANCE: CHANGE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM Cl, C4, AND RLI
TO GU (500-5410 N.W. 2ND AVENUE),
Mr. Bob flavic: Mr. Mayor, if I may just in this whole item six, I want to explain
the Planning Advisory Board's recommendation on this whole item.
Mayor Ferre: Are the applicants here, the school?
Mr. Davis: Yes, sir, they are.
Mayor Ferre: Are there any opponents here? One opponent. Alright, sir.
Mr. Davis: Particularly on Item 6(b) which is the application of the post office
on this site proposed to be rezoned GU the Planning Board heard the item and recom-
mended to this commission that the approval for the post office be given only if
a separate and later hearing were held to consider the wall and/or fence topped
with barbed wire that is planned now on being placed around this institution.
There were strong objections to this wall and/or fence. They wanted to protect
their property. They will speak to it, Mr. Plummer, but that is the recommendation
of the Planning Advisory Board. They recommend the placement of this institution
in this location but with that hearing to come later. The reason for the rush in
getting it up to you being that the people have let their contracts already on it.
Mr. Fosmoen: Perhaps as a point of clarification the Planning Advisory Board has
approved the rezoning, has approved the site plan with the exception of the wall
and they have asked that that come back to them for further study and for their
recommendation to this commission. ... But there was not contained in the site
plan an adequate definition of the wall and the Planning Advisory Board has
approved as I said the site plan and the rezoning with the exception of the place-
ment of the wall, the type of wall, the type of material that's going to be used
for screen. ... That issue is part of the wall issue, Commissioner(Plummer). That
issue is going back to the Planning Advisory Board for their recommendation to you.
Mr. Plummer: ... What you're saying so that the record is clear is that same
issue will have to come back before this commission.
Mr. Fosmoen: That's correct.
Mr. Tom Post: For the record, my name is Tom Post. I'm an attorney and I repre-
sent property owners who own residential property adjacent to the post office and
who attended the Planning Board hearing and who vehemently are opposed to the con-
struction of the Post Office if it includes the inclusion of a chain link barbed
wire fence around the post office which the present plans call for. As long as
the record is clear that no fence or no wall will be constructed around the post
office without that issue coming before this commission again we would be satisfied
to address it at the appropriate time but we just feel that it is highly inappro-
priate for the city to build a government center surrounded by chain link barbed
wire fences. Thank you.
14 MAY 181977
Mr. Plummer: ... I have no objection to a chain link fence, they're used ail the
time. Well, t'tn speaking...
Mr. Post: Well, the original plans, Commissioner, called for a masonry fdnce to
surround the property. As t have reviewed the Planning Department's recommendat..
ions, or if I could call them objections to the proposed plan their objections
were that the fence would be unsightly if it were a chain link barbed wire fence
adjacent to a residential area and in the proposed new Government Center and
secondly that the plan lacked adequate landscaping and those recommendations, t
think, Mr. Davis, so that I did not mis-state that, is that correct? And with
those admonitions to the commission, we do not object to the post office we just
object to the landscaping that's being proposed and to the fence which is proposed
to surround the post office.
Mr. Plummer: See you next month, hopefully we won't.
Mr. Post: Well perhaps if the, we have been trying to work with the Post Office
Department. The Post Office is concerned about security for the area and one of
the recommendations was that possibly a monitor in the police station could, there
is already a monitor present at that corner, could monitor the parking lot at the
police station. We would very much support that endeavor and would like to work
in cooperation with the post office to relieve any problem there is.
Mr. Plummer: Send them a letter.
NOTE: Commissioner Reboso returned to the meeting at 3:05 P.M.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, since what the attorney just read is different from what
I have on my application I'll be forced to vote no.
Mr. Davis: Not on the (a) portion, sir.
Mr. Plummer: The motion that I have before me is the change from C-2 and C-4 and
R-4 to GU.
Mayor Ferre: Part 4(a).
Mr. Plummer: The City Attorney did not say C-4. The City Attorney said C-2 and
R-4. Is that included?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPRE-
HENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 1 THROUGH 20,
BLOCK 66N, MIAMI NORTH (B-41), BEING APPROXIMATELY 500-
540 N.W. 2ND AVENUE, FROM C-2 (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL),
C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL), R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE)
TO GU (GOVERNMENTAL USE); AND BY MAKING THE NECESSARY
CHANGES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP MADE A PART OF THE
SAID ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY REFERENCE AND DESCRIPTION IN
ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 THEREOF; BY REPEALING ALL ORDIN-
ANCES, CODE SECTIONS, OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT; AND
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner Gibson
and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote -
AYES; Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and announced
that copies were available to the members of the city commission and to the public,
SB, GRANT PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT 8 OPERATE POST OFFICE AT 500-540 NSW. 2 AVE,
Mr. Davis: If I may, Mr. Mayor, does this include the provision that you only want
this before the Planning Advisory Board or do you wish this back before you?
15 MAY 181977
Mr. Planner: The only thing that you'll bring back up here is just the fence
which is the only thing they're going to be addressing. Correct?
Mr. Mattis: This is what I'm stating, that this resolution should include some
proviso as to that because if you passed the resolution that's before you it's to
grant..
Mr. Plummer: Ok. I move 6(b) subject to a review of the wall by this commission,
Well, Ok. Sir, as Father says, the English language is very clear. I did not
speak to the landscaping. Ok? I spoke to the wall.
Rev. Gibson: J. L., I would respectfully suggest that we do nothing about the
wall and the landscaping6 tp°er see, there may be a give and take. That would put
this gentleman in a much;lgargaining position if he has to bargain both ways -
landscape and wall - and I think the post office will be reasonable. They were
with us down on Grand Avenue.
Mr. Plummer: Father, that was the only reason I hesitated about bringing it back
before this commission. If it can be worked out at the other level then I don't
want it to coarse back before this commission.
Rev. Gibson: How would we know that this gentleman....
Mr. Plummer: Well, because this gentleman always has the right of appeal as a
loser to this commission. He has that right.
Rev. Gibson: You want to take that chance? Alright.
W. Post: The only thing I'm doing is reiterating what your Planning staff has
suggested to you, that there are two issueswhich remain, the wall and the landscap-
ing issue. We would like both of those issues which the Planning Department or
the Planning Commission said 6 to 0 should come back. We'll work out our landscap-
ing and wall problems if we can.
Rev. Gibson: Let me help you since I go through this often. I think we ought to
pass this up until such time as you're ready to deal otherwise when you try to
appeal you're going to pay. Isn't that true?
Mr. Plummer: No, he can approach any one of us and we have the right to make the
appeal.
Rev. Gibson: Well, you know he can have it for free at that point in time.
Mr. Davis: We're not charging any fees on this situation since it is a government
application.
Mr. Plummer: If he were to appeal you would.
Mr. Davis: Under this situation we would not charge him either.
Rev. Gibson: Ladies and gentlemen of the commission, I don't think we ought to
pass this to safeguard that gentleman.
Mr. Plummer: Father, let me just lay it out on the line. Ok? Let's lay it out
on the line. First of all, the post office doesn't even have to come here. Ok?
That's number one. Just like schools post offices are exempt from local regulat-
ions. I think it proves by virtue of them being here that they do have an interest
of wanting to do the thing properly. That's number one. Father, this commission
as well as the D.D.A. and everyone, my God how hard we're working to try to get
these kind of things in downtown Miami. Now Father, all I'm saying to you is I
don't want to impede them. But let me tell you if I had to impede them because
of a barbed wire fence there's no question I would. But Father, don't stop them.
Approve this - they're ready to go. They're ready to go, let's not stop them.
Let them go. We reserve the right, and look, I'll amend my motion to the wall and
landscaping.
W. Post: We would accept that....
Rev, Gibson: Right, we're together.
Mr. Plummer: For God's sakes, let's get with them. Send a limousine for them.
There were an awful lot of broken hearts when that Federal Reserve Bark went back
out to the palmetto and my heart was broken too.
16 MAY 181977
•
1
1
Mt. bards: And you wish this to come back to the coifUnission, sit/
Mi"r, p1et: Fine, bring
it back to the coMmission. Ok. Look, the only thing I
Waht to do is &lsk the question and you can shake your head yes or no. The hotmal
procedure for post offices as I understood it, that they never owned the land,
Mt. Davis: Right.
Mt. PluMmere That they had somebody build it for
theM,king ttook
fback aolong
ntermlease.
Is this a change from that procedure? I'fn
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, this building is owned by the united States Governflent=
The building, what about the property?
Mr. Plummer:
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: The property is owned
by the United States Posta:
and we are....
to comply with any local ordi
Mir, Plummer: I understand that, sir, but in
in this particular application you, in fact,
you are the owner of the building.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, I just wanted it for my own information. Thank you.
introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved
The following resolution was
its adoption:
nances.
other words what you're telling the,
are the owner of the property and
RESOLUTION NO. 77-432
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A
POST OFFICE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE XXI-2, SECTION 3, OF
ORDINANCE NO. 6871, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI, ON LOTS 1 THROUGH 20, BLOCK 66N► MIAMI
NORTH (B-41), BEING APPROXIMATELY 500-540 N.W. 2ND AVENUE,
ZONED C-2 (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL), C-4 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL)
AND R-4 (MEDIUM DENSITY
SUBJECT,'I'O�LATERDA�PRBOVAI�BY THE
TO GU (GOVERNMENTAL USE);
PLANNING ADVISE LANDSCAPID NG CITY ON OF WALL
OR FENCE AND
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
nESs None.
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
6. DEFER CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING CLWIPICAtION
( 5 N.E. 53RD STREET )t
The Mayor announced that the Commission was now ready to he:'r objections to
Item #7.
Mr. Garland Styleman: Mr. Mayor, my name is Garland Styleman. I'm here with
Mt. Deeb and at this time we would like to request from the City Commission if
possible for a deferral on this item. He doesn't have his legal counsel here
and I see there are objectors and I do believe he does have a good application
but I would like from the commission if possible for a 30 day deferral.
Mayor Terre: I think that's a proper request
Rev. Gibson: I think we ought to have those objectors to understand what's
happening.
Mayor Ferre: Yes. Would the objectors come forward. Ma'am and sir, the applicant
has requested a deferral because their attorney is not present and under our rules
around here the way we operate we grant people that right if their lawyer is not
present. But since you take the time to be here certainly you have the right to
be heard and if you'd like we would take your testimony at this time.
Mrs. Harris: We are Mr. and Mrs. Harris. We own the property directly in front
of what they want. We've been living therefor quite a while and we wouldn't want
this.
Mrs. Gordon: Which one is your property► the one that's marked in red up there
on the map? You're across the street?
Mrs. Harris: Directly across the street.
Mrs. Gordon: How come it's not identified► Bob?
Mrs. Harris: Our address is 5265 N. Miami Avenue.
Mr. Davis: They did not send in a written return, Mrs. Gordon.
Mrs. Gordon: But they took the time to come here.
Mrs. Harris: Well, my husband works and goes to school and it is very hard for
us to come and we have three little children and today we did take the time to
come because this is the only time he would have to come because other than that
he wouldn't be here.
Mrs. Gordon: Did you go to the Planning Board too?
Mrs. Harris: No, we couldn't make it because my husband works and he goes to
school.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, the Mayor has expressed an interest in your deferment but I
don't personally feel a deferment is going to make any difference with regard
to this application as far as I'm concerned, one person on this commission because
I don't need an attorney to tell me it's good or it's bad when I see what it is
and I. know what it is and I can make a decision without an attorney here to speak
for you. Is the Mayor interested in listening to the comments? Mr. Mayor, I
don't know any rule that says we have to defer items for lack of an attorney.
Mayor Ferre: No, of course, not there's no rules it's just a courtesy that we've
always extended.
Mrs. Gordon: I know, but we have a courtesy to extend to the people who are liv-
ing in that area and have been living there for a long time.
Mayor Ferre: It's up to the majority of the commission. I do not remember of
any case, Rose, when somebody has asked for a deferral because the attorney is
not present that we haven't deferred but it is up to the will of this commission,
Mr. Plummer: Call the roll, let's find out what the will is on it.
Mayor Ferre; Well, we don't have to call the roll.
MAY 181977
1
ReV, Gibson: Mt. Mayor, I
cote back here so that the
tepresented. Please.
The motion is for deferral, tight/
Vet. I just want you to understand =i=
What I just Stated, it's very hard for tie t$ Met
We understand.
Mr. PlUMMer:
Rev, Gibson:
Mrs. Harris:
Rev. Gibson:
Mrs. Harris: My husband woks
l0� 0.8 Gk?the
i havebottling
t}ireeUntil
sti5tall ohildrengwhoffiarenin
hour and goes to school u
school all day and it's very hard for me, you know. bike the last time it was indOna
venient that's why we weren't here.
Rev. Gibson: I promise you we will keep that in mind just as if you Were standing
to that podium. I promise you that.
Father Gibson is saying you really don't have to come back if you don't
would like to plead with you Ilk DEB t ke ail Waft to
►an would hot be able to say that hs was not prosily
Mrs. Gordon:
want to.
Mrs. Harris: It's not that we wouldn't want to come you know but it is hard to dbme.
Rev. Gibson: I understand.
But we wouldn't want a store in front of our house either. I
in front of our house because it's not going to help the commur►-
Mrs. Harris: Ok.
don't want a store
ity any.
Rev. Gibson: All right, we understand but I want that man to have every opportunity
to exhaust his remedies. Please. Ok?
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77- 433
A MOTION TO DEFER CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BY GEORGE DEEB
TO CHANGE ZONING CLASSIT�'HTN AT HISTAPPROXIMATELY 5 LEGAL COUNSEL MAYNBE•53 PRESENTEET
FROM R-2 TO C-5 IN ORDER
AT THE HEARING.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Reboso
Rev. Gibson
Mr. Plummer
Mayor Ferre
NOES: Mrs. Gordon.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: I could elaborate but I vote 'yes'. To me we've always afforded
the opportunity for people to be heard and I just feel very strongly about it. I
vote 'yes' to defer.
MAY 1,81977
RESOLUTION: ESTABLISH THIRD THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH (EXCEPT
AUGUST FOR THE COMMISSION'S PLANNING a ZONING MTGI
ice. pier: Would this ai ply to ,Tune, Mr. Grabsie?
Mr. Grassie: Yes.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Clerk, that doesn't cause any problems for you does it?
Mr. Ongie: No, sir.
Mayor Ferre: 1 have ho objections to that. Are We having an all day session how on
this?
Mr. Davis: No, sir, it will only be the afternoon session.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plucmner, who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-434
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE THIRD THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH,
EXCEPT AUGUST, FOR THE COMMISSION PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Vice -Mayor (Rev.) Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None.
�3► BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: CHANGE MEETING DATE OF JUNE 23RD MEETING TO
JUNE 21, 1977,
Mayor Ferre: I notice the sche'ule, I %•ill not in Mit!ri. on • une 23rd.
Mr. Plummer: Well, that's the commission, not zoning. That doesn't address this.
Mayor Ferre: I know that. In the past, Commissioner Plummer, you and I and others
have asked for changes on Commission days so that we could accomodate.
Mr. Plummer: Fine, you want to move it to the 30th? I've got no problem.
Mayor Ferre: I'm leaving on the inaugural flight for Paris on the 23rd and I will
not be back until the weekend of July 4th which falls on a Monday.
Mr. Plummer: Well make it the 22nd.
Mrs. Gordon: I'm going to be out of town until the afternoon of the 23rd. No, I
think I can do it then, let me ask Delores, just a minute.
(SEE ITEM *111
9. APPOINT 0344ISSIONER J. L, PLUNMER, JR► TO JOINT CITY-COWTY ADVERTISING
PROGRAM,
C
Mayor Ferre: While we're waiting, you have before you a letter from Steve Clark
which says, at the regular meeting of the Metropolitan Dade County Commission Tuesday,
I appointed and the commission concurred, Commissioner Barry Schreiber to represent
Metropolitan Dade County on the joint city -county committee to select an advertising
agency for our joint advertising program. As soon as you designate the city's repre-
sentative would you please let me know which commissioner you've selected and from
that point it is my understanding that Lew Price will coordinate the meeting. So in
Other words we'll have one commissioner from Miami and one from Metro and Lew Price
receive and evaluate advertising and then come back to each respective commission.
T think it is in my opinion, I've expressed this before, over due that we go through
20
MAY 1. 81977
an advettising process, mean to a public bid process orris. I've talked to
Steve Clark about it, he concurs and this is the result of that. I'd like to
appoint J. L. Plummer on that committee to meet with Barry Schreiber and Lew Price.
Is thete any objection on anybody's part? If not...
Mr. Plummer: The Manager syas he thinks it would be in order for a motion.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77- 435
A MOTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER J. L. PLUMMER, JR. AS THE CITY
OF MIAMI REPRESENTATIVE TO A JOINT DADE COUNTY/CITY OF MIAMI 3-
MEMBER COMMITTEE, WITH METRO COMMISSIONER BARRY SCHREIBER AND
LEW PRICE, TO RECEIVE AND EVALUATE ADVERTISING PROPOSALS FOR THE
SELECTION OF AN ADVERTISING AGENCY FOR JOINT CITY -COUNTY ADVERTIS-
ING PROGRAMS; SUCH COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO REPORT THEIR FINDINGS TO
THEIR RESPECTIVE COMMISSIONS.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
aU, REQUEST TO GOVERNOR ASKEW FOR APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION TO THE CONSTITUTIa4AI. RFVISICV CO'MIT U.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a motion at this time which I think
would be in order. I would like this commission to petition the governor that we
would like, if possible, representation on the Constitutional Revision Committee,
that being the largest city in the State of Florida and being vitally effected
that we would like to have a representation seeing as how he has 15 appointments,
that we respectfully request that one of the members of this commission be considered
for that appointment. I'll offer that in the form of a motion. The governor has
15 appointments to the Constitutional Revision Committee and I feel that being the
largest city and vitally effected by the work of that body...
Mrs. Gordon: Has he made his appointments yet, J. L.?
Mr. Plummer: No, but it's coming up quickly and just for your edification, the
governor has made a commitment to the Florida League of Cities that he will honor
one of their people as one of the 15. I will tell you very truthfully I'm fighting
very hard to get on that committee. I would love to serve. I make that in the form
of a motion that a letter be sent immediately to the governor asking for that con-
sideration.
Mayor Ferre: I want to tell you that that's an awful lot of hard work. I happened
to serve on that committee ten years ago. In those days the committee was called
the Florida Legislature and I served, the Florida Legislature served as a Committee
of the Whole for Constitutional Revision. I want to tell you if that's what you
want and you get appointed you're in for a lot of long hours.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I think that that revision will vitally effect this city
good, bad or indifferent and I just would like to be a part of it. ... Rose, I'm
not saying myself. Ok? I'm just saying that one of our commission should be
represented.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion by Commissioner Plummer seconded by Rose
Gordon; that the governor be advised that this commission...
Mr, Plummer: That the governor be requested.
Mayor Ferre: Be requested that we respectfully request that one of the members of
the City of Miami Commission be appointed on the advisory board since the City of
Miami is the largest city in the state. Jacksonville might have some questions
about that.
21
MAY 181977
The following notion was ihttoduced by Co tissionet Plummet who towed itb
Adoption.
P4oiION NO. 77-436
A MOTION OF INTENT REQUESTING `!THAT A LETTER BE SENT TO GOVERNOR
RUSIN ASKEW POINTING OUT THAT SINCE MIAMI IS THE LARGEST CITY
IN FLORIDA, WE REQUEST THE APPOINTMENT OF ONE MEMBER OF THE MIAMI
CITY COMMISSION TO SERVE ON THE FLORIDA STATE CONSTITUTIONAL
REVISION COMMITTEE.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote-
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
11, MOTION TO CHANGE THE METING DATE OF THE CITY COI''MI SS ION FROM JUKE 23 D
TO JUNE 224 1977.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77-437
A MOTION TO CHANGE THE DATE OF THE JUNE 23, 1977 CITY OF MIAMI
COMMISSION MEETING TO TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 1977.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
12, REQUEST MEETING BETWEEN CHIEF JUDGE IN CHARGE OF GRAND JURY AND THE
CITY COMMISSION TO DISCUSS PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE GRAND JURY SELECTION SYSTEM.
Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. City Attorney, did you get an answer from the Public
Defender's Office?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir. The Public Defender's Office has on behalf, well, it's filed
a class action which challenged the seating of the present Grand Jury. Now it's
based upon a matter of criminal law. The theory is that they're seeking to now have
this commission seated because they reasonably believe that anybody, it's illegal
and, therefore, anybody who is indicted by this commission would have been
unlawfully indicted. Judge Vann heard a motion and denied it. There are several
other matters that have to came before Judge Vann in this case. A hearing was held
yesterday, another one today and that is an open and active case.
Mayor Ferre: Our situation is different and I really feel that the only way we're
going to be able to break through on this is by going to the federal court system.
But, unless somebody wants to change their vote then the majority of this commission
has to prevail.
Mr, Plummer: Ok. Since that fails, Mr. Mayor, if you wish further discussion I at
this time whether it be by motion or what, I would like to request the Chief Judge,
that one responsible for the Grand Jury be requested to meet with this commission
not in an official meeting so that we can express to him and request of him the
things that Commissioner Reboso is trying to accomplish. I offer that in the form
of a motion, The motion is that this commission meet with Chief Judge in charge of
the Grand Jury System so that we can request of him certain changes to be made.
22
MAY 81977
•
Mayor Terre: There is a motion and a second. I'm going to vote against the motion
and I want to explain to you why. I've been through all of that. I've met with
the judge, I've written hit letters and you can do it if you want. Maybe you Might
be able to accomplish something that I wasn't able to accotplish but t've had
plenty of meetings and letters and requests.
Mrs. Gordon: Were you alone, Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: No, absolutely not.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, why don't we as Mr. Plummer said, as a body we might have with=
Out taking anything away from your impact but as a body we might strengthen it by
five.
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon, I'll tell you I thought it was an important matter. We
passed a resolution, you voted on the resolution. I took that resolution like you
could have or Plummer could have or anybody. We're all commissioners, we all have
the same and I followed up on it. I wrote a letter, I talked to the judge, I called
him by phone, he invited me then he asked me to do something. I did it, he's the
one that took up the initiative. He invited and he told me what to do. He said
get a group of Latins into a room and I'll have a meeting with them and we spent an
hour and a half discussing it. Now, you know I'm satisfied that I've done all that
I could. I've got no problems with Judge Kehoe, he's a fine man and I think he
means well but you know we are, it's the same problem that we have in the Police
Department. It's institutionalized and you've got to break through. Unfortunately
if you can't break through it by zigging you've got to zag. So we tried this way
and now we've got to try the other way.
Mr. Plummer: Well, but Mr. Mayor, I don't hate to say this but I've got to say it.
Mr. Mayor, you did that as an individual.
Mayor Ferre: No, no sir.
Mr. Plummer: Yes, you did.
Mayor Ferre: No, sir, this commission went on record. We passed a motion....
Mr. Plummer: I'm talking about the meeting, Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: No, sir. The motion, I followed up on the motion as a person and the
judge...being the Mayor of Miami following up on instructions of my commission and
the judge answered me and this is what he answered: He said, "Ferre, you do such
and such" and I followed what the judge asked me to do. Now you want to do different
that's all right. You do whatever you want to.
Mr. Plummer: I've never had the opportunity to discuss it with him.
Mayor Ferre: Fine, I think you're entitled to that and, in fact, I'll change my
vote. I'll go with you so that you can pursue it. I'll tell you what I'd like to
ask you to do. Make it pursuant to the motion which you passed before. Mr. Plummer,
would you amend your motion and do it this way? Pursuant to City of Miami Commission
Resolution No. 76-1086.
Mr. Plummer: What did it say?
Mayor Ferre: You voted on it.
Mr. Plummer: I'm not disputing that. What did resolution 1086 say?
Mayor Ferre: Urge the Grand Jury Commission of Metropolitan Dade County to exercise
scrutiny in their preparation of the list of jurors to serve as Grand Jurors and
thereby demonstrate that the part of the judicial system referred to as the Grand
Jury and the guardian of the police powers of the state is a system and means whereby
all of the people of Dade County can participate directly in the administration of
their government. It basically says that we wanted the Grand Jury System to be
opened up.
Mr. Plummer: I have no objections to that.
Mayor Ferre: So just make it a part, Say, subject to.,.. following up on such and
such a motion.
Mr. Plummer: Subject to, Rose, the motion which passed unanimously,
Mrs. Gordon: We repeat what we did before.
2.3
MAY 181977
Mayor Ferret November 18th, 1976, All it says is, Judge, we want to Meet with
you to talk about our Motion of November 18th, six months later.
Mr. Plusher: As a commission.
Mayor Ferre: AS a commission.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Is there anything wrong with that?
Mayor Ferre: No, nothing wrong, more paper, more letters, snore motions, Novetber
of 77, 78, 79, it doesn't matter. Ok.
Mr, Plummer: Those comments, of course, were reserved to yourself.
Mayor Ferre: As all comments i make on these microphones I certainly would not pre-
sume at any time to speak for you, Mr. Plummer.
Mr. Plumper: Thank you, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Never have and never would.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77-438
A MOTION REQUESTING A COMMUNICATION BE SENT TO THE CHIEF
CIRCUIT JUDGE OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE GRAND JURY, REQUESTING A MEETING WITH THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION PURSUANT TO THE CITY OF MIAMI COMMISSION'S
RESOLUTION NO. 76-1086 PASSED AND ADOPTED AT ITS REGULAR
MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 18, 1976, TO DISCUSS CHANGES REQUESTED
IN SUCH RESOLUTION IN CONNECTION WITH THE SELECTION PROCESS
OF PERSONS TO SERVE ON THE DADE COUNTY GRAND JURY.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and adopted
by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Reboso: I vote 'no' because I am planning to go to court as an individual. '
Mayor Ferre: I vote 'yes' because even though it's a futile act and it is just
an act typical of the many, many, many other resolutions that this commission has
passed asking Metro and other governmental bodies to do this or to do that and they're
just summarily put into some file and not paid attention to. It's a complete futile
act but I'll go along with it, I'll vote 'yes'.
13 PEDAL. APPEAMWCE: ERNIE FAtIIATO - CONCERNING JUNE 7 ELECTION,
Mr. Ernie Fannato: Honorable Mayor and members of the commission, Ernie Fannato is
my name, President of the Taxpayer's League, Miami and Dade County. I'm here today
asking you as Mayor and the commissioners to rescind the Bond Stadium issue that you
voted on. I think it was voted a little hastily and I'm afraid that it is going to
fail and fail bad and it'll jeopardize the future bond issues you might want to put
before the electorate in the near future. I say this here, that I don't think you
should have did it unless you invited Mr. Robbie here and Mr. Robbie should offer
you a ten year contract instead of three. In other words that would give you some --
security but there's no point in spending $18,000,000 in the stadium when you won't
have any contract. Who are you going to play to, empty seats? Now I also think if
he does that and comes up with a reasonable head tax on admissions I think it can
be financially feasible and I believe maybe Mr. Robbie will agree to it. I think if
you just void this here, have a public hearing and invite him and I think maybe you
can do something for that stadium. But I don't want to see it fail, you'll jeopard-
ize the future vote and the people are not in any mood at this time to vote on a
bond issue unless they have some security, financial security that's going to be
24 MAY i 81977
• of
Within reason and we don't have anything at all at this time and I think you ought
to really cancel it.
Mayor Ferre: Ernie, let me tell you in quick English; if the people of this commune
ity are serious about upgrading the Orange Bowl then they'll vote yes because it's
a straw ballot. If the people of this community don't want to Vend tax monies to
upgrade the Orange Bowl then they're going to vote no. If the people of this com-
munity vote no as far as I'm concerned it's a dead issue unless somebody like Mr.
Robbie or somebody who wants to put a professional baseball team or somebody else
comes along and puts something in to sweeten the pie but as far as I'm concerned
I'm sick and tired about reading articles and editorials and hearing speeches and
people talking about whether or not this or that. You know I'm going to tell you
I'm going to put it right to the people and let the people decide. If the people
say yes, fine, then we'll work out slowly some kind of a deal with Mr. Robbie or
otherwise and we'll put it back on the ballot in November and that will be the end
of it. But if the people vote no, as far as I'm concerned, as a taxpayer, a bond
issue supported thing you don't have my vote at all, I mean zero.
Mr. Fannato: Mr. Mayor, you've got to give the people same financial security. If
he wants to go to Broward County after you build a stadium who are you going to put
in that stadium? How are you going to pay off the bond issue? You just can't pay
it, Mayor. Oh, yes, it will be the issue. If he leaves, if you spend $18,000,000
in that stadium what are you going to do with it if you don't have a football team?
Mayor Ferre: Ernie, on June 7th that will not be voted on.
Mr. Fannato: What?
Mayor Ferre: That's not on the ballot on June 7th.
Mr. Fannato: It's a straw vote that's going to kill it for the future and you don't
have any security to give the electorate to say, we were going to get so much from
Mr. Robbie and he's going to put on a head tax and give us a head tax on admissions
and it'll pay for itself. You don't have anything, Mayor. In other words you're
sure to get beat and get beat bad. So I urge you not to put it before the bond issue.
It's not a reasonable request, it's not business, it's not financially feasible so
why do you want to put a straw vote when it's going to get beat overwhelmingly? Let's
take a shout and have Mr. Robbie come up here and say,"Mr. Robbie, will you give us
a ten year lease, will you put a head tax on?". Then you can put it on in November
or September and it will probably pass.
Mayor Ferre: Look, if Mr. Robbie comes up with something like that I have no object-
ions to putting it on in November.
Mr. Fannato: But you're asking us, the taxpayers, to vote now without any security.
You're not giving the taxpayers a break.
Mayor Ferre: It's not going to cost the taxpayers a penny, it's a straw ballot, it's
a referendum.
Mr. Fannato: I know it is but it's going to kill the vote for the future ...
Mayor Ferre: It's not going to kill the vote for the future.
Mr. Fannato: Because you're going to poison the mind of the people and I think you
should have a little discussion on this here and I don't see how you can ever expect
it to pass and I think that you should have discussion on it and I think you should
rescind it because I don't think the taxpayers are getting a fair shake here. Even
if they vote and they vote for it will be bad business, very bad business on the part
of the voters.
Mayor Ferre: Anybody else want to make a comment?
Mr. Fannato: Well, I mean I think the commissioners should comment and I think the
City Manager should comment. You mean to tell me, Mr. Manager, you're going to sit
there and allow this vote to come up without any protection of the taxpayers having
on this here? I'm surprised at you, Mr. Manager. Who are you representing? Mr.
Grassie, I'm going to tell you the truth, I'm a little surprised. You know when you
first come here I thought you were a brilliant manager but actions speak for them-
selves and I don't mean maybe. I don't like you standing there laughing either. I
don't consider you a top-flight manager with the way you're acting. What in the hell
do you want $18,000,000 to be spent, a bond issue when you don't have any contract
with robbie to put people in that stadium? Tell me why you would do that. Now I'd
like to have you answer that question. What are you going to do, just kid the people
25 !WAY 181977
Ahd take $18,000,000 and nobody Put iii that Stadiuf►? Now Mt, drastic, let's t
that question.
Mt Grassie: re we ready to stove to another item, Mt. Mayor?
Mayor Terre: Joe, just give him a quick answer and that's it, Ernie,
Mr, Grassie: I'm not sure that he asked anything that can be answered quickly, Mt:
Mayor,
Mr, Fannato: .., I'm just going to answer this here, Mt. Mayor. I'm going to tell
you something that's going to be reality in this community. He's not going to be
here after November and we're going to shake up the whole damned commission!
You're just fooling the people by letting them have a straw vote on this here. They
haven't got any security whatsoever. I think it is a shame, it's business and if
this man is going to stay here as Manager I'll miss my guess after November. We're
not going to stand for this kind of business. He's not a top flight manager
Mayor Ferre: Ernie, don't put the blame on him.
Mr. Fannato: Yes, I am because he makes the recommendations.
Mayor Ferre: He didn't make any recommendation, he wasn't for that.
Mr. Fannato: What? I asked him a minute ago if he thought it was financially feas-
ible. He's the Manager that's supposed to guide you. I want to tell you point blank
if this the kind of shenanigans ... and not take any interest in the taxpayers in
this community you're walking backwards.
Mayor Ferre: All right, anything else?
14. PERSONAL APPEARANCE: MARILYN REED - CONCERNING PENDING LEGISLATION
IN TALIAMSSEE ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE CITY OF MIAMI.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, I believe that Mrs. Reed would like to speak to a point of
legislation just for the information of the commission.
Mrs. Marilyn Reed: Up in Tallahassee right now there is a bill that concerns you
directly. If you're not aware of it, I'll get the number. I have it at home. Let
me explain this to you. Under the permitting system the local permits must be gotten
first before the D.E.R. and all the other agencies, approach the applicant and what-
ever they're applying for. Under this bill your permit won't count anymore. It is
to eliminate this. You can go ahead and issue your permits but Tallahassee will
issue before or after, you will only be allowed to comment and I've had plenty of
experience with commenting - they don't pay any attention to you. Now I've got the
number of the bill at home. I work with Push Schulman down at Dade County and he's
got their lobbyist on it and if you are not on it I recommend you get Sisser hopping
on it.
Mr. Plummer: And I recommend that you get that bill number to the city administration
who could if, in fact, they agree...
Mrs. Reed: Who do you want me to give it to?
Mr. Plummer: Give it to Grassie so he can get in touch with our lobbyist.
Mrs. Reed: Ok. There are two or three bills similar to this that are absolutely going
to undermine local government and I'll give him all those and I think Mr. Sisser had
better get on it.
Mr. Plummer: I agree.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much.
•
. PUBLIC ING: NE WAY STREET DESIGNATION FOR MATILDA STREET / FLORIDA
AVENUE AREA OF COCONUT GROME
Mayor Ferret Ladies and gentlemen, we are gathered here on this auspicious occasion
to discuss Matilda Street/Florida Avenue and shall Florida Avenue be designated a
one-way street or not. Who wishes to speak on this subject? Six speakers. All right.
Do you feel that three minutes is sufficient? Does anybody want to talk more than
three minutes? You do? Ok. How long do you want to speak, Mrs. Bettner? All right,
I see your logic. How many minutes would you like to speak, Mrs. Bettner? All right,
I'll tell you what. We'll try to keep it balanced. Would you all try to keep your
statements to three minutes and we'll keep tabs on both sides. We'll try to equalize.
Is that fair? You have an objection. ... Twelve minutes. Well, I would be most
grateful if you could cut it down a little bit. You know there is an old saying and
I agree that if you can't, by the time five minutes is over if you haven't made your
point it isn't going to be made or it's not going to be believed. So, we'll start
with you.
Mr. Vince Grimm: Mr. Mayor and members of the commission, more or less as an intro-
duction to this, this problem goes back I guess it's almost two years now and the
same group of people appeared before the commission and the commission directed us
to study the area for about a year. In the fall we submitted a joint report by
Public Works and Planning and as a result of that study this group again appeared
before the commission. There was still considerable disagreement. The commission
then directed that we have a special public meeting with the residents in this area
and other people affected and see if we couldn't come to some compromise type of
program. We did this and we presented this to the commission in January and it was
adopted and all of the things physically that we said we would do at that time have
now been accomplished. Now there was one thing that was kind of left hanging up
in the air and that's the reason why we're here today. There were some questions
raised in that meeting as to other traffic considerations, specifically the relocat-
ion of a pedestrian signal and the possible development of a one-way street for
Florida Avenue between Matilda and MacDonald. Now, where we made our mistake is
that we went out and put announcements on the peoples' doorsteps that we were going
to make that street one-way before we came back to this commission. Well, when we
did that several people, Mrs. Bettner namely, objected violently so we withdrew from
that position and went back out into the neighborhood again with another public meet-
ing to discuss that particular problem. Now the end result of that was we finally
called it to a vote. It wasn't a matter of who was right or who was wrong but what
the will of the majority might be. And depending on how you looked at the vote there
were about 15 people in attendance at that meeting, 10 voted for it and five voted
against it. But when you separated out from that 10 and 5 those that actually did
not live on the street either as residents or owners that vote came down to 7 to 3
in favor, still, as far as we're concerned the majority. Now, in your packet is a
rather detailed recommendation of the traffic department as to why they feel Florida
should be one-way. They have further suggested that Florida be one-way on a trial
basis until the beginning of the school term. Now this has the support of the school
and it has the support of the majority of the property owners and tenants. I separate
those by saying that we considered primarily the people who lived on that street as
interests above an owner who might live some place else. Now in substance, members
of the commission, that's the way this stands today and it is my recommendation
that we put Florida in as a one-way street on a trial basis. There are representat-
ives of traffic here.
Mr. Plummer: The question that has to be asked: Ok, we've made a lot of changes in
favor of the school, numerous changes. In your estimation and that of the Traffic
Department, is this still needed? In other words is there a dangerous situation
existing?
Mr. Grimm: Well, if you'll look at the photos we gave you today, commissioner, which
were taken just the other day you'll notice that along side the park that even though
we have signs designating that as no angle parking the people are still parking there
on an angle simply so they can get more spaces in. That circumstance, of course, is
a little more dangerous when the traffic is two way because of the width of the
street than it would be if it were one-way. So possibly. But again, you know I
think that here is a group of people in a neighborhood who have a difference of opin-
ion but through the Democratic process the majority of them would like to try this
to see if it wouldn't improve it further and I think that's your major consideration.
14r. Plummer: Paramount in my mind, and I'm sure of this commission and of every one
here, the safety of the kids. Is there that much traffic still being generated to
need a one-way street? That's my question. Your opinion is what?
27
MAY 18197 7
411
Mr. Grimm: Well, I have no statistics, and I hope I neveo, that any accidents
have happened to children in there whether the street was one-way or two-way. 1
think the concensus of opinion when you read that 'report is that this would improve
conditions and improving conditions mean making it safer.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grimm, you've been in the Manager's Office too long, you're turn=
ing into a politician.
Mt. Grimm:: I told you my recommendation. My recommendation is to do it.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. Now I'd like to hear from the Traffic Department. What's their
recommendation?
Mr. Ed King: My name's Ed King with the Dade County Traffic Department. We feel
that there are certain advantages to the proposal and certain disadvantages. The
advantages do not by any means far away the disadvantages. In other words its not
a clear cut case of being much better one way than it is now two-way.
Mr. Plummer: For the safety of the children.
Mr. King: We feel there are more advantages than disadvantages, however, we can't
say there will be any great improvement. There will be some improvement but not a
great improvement.
Mr. Plummer: What did he say? ...
Mr. King: What I'm really trying to say is it's not a clear cut case that it will
greatly improve the safety. There will be some improvement because the children will
not have to cross lanes of two-way traffic. They'll all be getting out on the school
side of the street which is an advantage.
Mr. Plummer: We're talking about Florida from Matilda to MacDonald. Why do the
children get out on Florida at all?
Mr. King: Well, they wouldn't necessarily but by making Florida one-way westbound
all the children then would be getting out on the east side of Matilda because the
cars would be exiting via Florida westbound.
Mr. Plummer: Well, it surely is my hope that the children are discharged on the east
curb of Matilda.
Mr. King: Not at the present time, no.
Mr. Plummer: Well then somebody is making a sad mistake.
Mr. King: Because cars can enter eastbound on Florida and the children can be dis-
charged on the west side of Matilda and then they run across Matilda and that is
happening now.
Mr. Plummer: They have a name for that and it's called 4-P's, I can't repeat it over
this microphone but most of it is improper planning. There are other adjectives that
go with it.
Mr. King: That would be the major improvement.
Mr. Plummer: I'm not finding fault with you, sir, that's the School Board. 'Ok, what
are we going to do?
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now the speakers. Who is first?
Ms. Rita Sander: My name is Rita Sander, 3170 Florida Avenue. I'm a teacher at
Coconut Grove as well as a rdsident on Florida Avenue. I walk to school down Florida
Avenue every morning and if ever there was a witness of what goes on, I am. A lot of
times I stand between about 8:05 and 8:15 in front of my front yard and I watch what
happens and it makes me very angry and Mrs. Good could very well say that I've gone
to school very upset. I can't understand how parents can discharge their children
in such improper places.
Mr. Plummer: Well tell us what you see.
Ms, Sander: Well, they discharge the children on the wrong side of the road and then
they barrel down the road. They make unbelievable speed between Florida Avenue and
my house which is in the middle of the block, they can get up to 40 miles an hour.
Mr. Plummer: Who is they, the parents?
28
MAY 181977
Ms. Sander: The parents.
Mr. Plummer: School buses?
Ms. Sander: Yes, and they have no concern for the children whatever. There is no
sidewalk for the children to walk on.
Mr. Plummer: So you're speaking in favor of the one-way?
Ms. Sander: Yes, I am.
Mr. Plummer: Ok.
Ms. Sander: At least the children can look in one direction.
Mr. Plummer: Ok. That's the only speaker?
Mr. John Daw: My name is John Daw. I live at 3155 Florida Avenue. I avoided
coming up first because it always seems that I have to kick these things off some
way. I wish to speak in favor of making an experiment to see whether the direction
of traffic one-way on Florida as proposed by the city will act to improve the condit-
ions in the area. It's quite clear that any situation like this is a trade off. You
win something and you lose something. The question is whether one wins more than one
loses. Now as a resident on the street what I lose, of course, is a certain amount
of freedom in moving my car into and out of the street. However, over the past couple
of weeks I've made a definite attempt to try to use the street as I would have to use
it if it was one-way and I cannot honestly stand here and say that I would be serious-
ly inconvenienced by that. Now what the gain would be, I suggest, is not only for me
but for others as well. There will be a probable reduction in traffic on the street
as a whole as we avoid this business of trucks and so forth cutting off the traffic
light at the bottom of Matilda as it goes onto Grand. They use Florida Avenue as a
side cutting up there. And what we will also primarily gain is a much more rational
traffic plan concerning the dropping and the picking up of the children at the school.
Recently the study was made by the city and it stated that it was not an excessive
amount of traffic on our street as a city street. Now this is quite true but accord-
ing to the figures that you have for city traffic it may be not be an excessive amount
but again I think that we are forgetting the fact that this is a Grove Street. What
this means on Florida Avenue it means it's a very narrow street and it means that
there are children walking in the road and it means that there are no sidewalks or
very very rudimentary sidewalks there. Under the specific conditions that we have
then, I suggest that the amount of traffic is excessive and frankly I think it is
very dangerous. I myself have had two accidents backing out of my property. I now
very gingerly back my car into my property and come out nose first so that I can see
what's on its way. Last week there was another accident on the street also caused
by, Norman who lives just further up from me, also backing out and hitting
a car on the road. When I'm working out in the front and I have my son there, it's a
constant battle to keep him out of the road. Now by all of this I don't mean to imply
that the motorists themselves, that is to say the teachers or anybody else using that
road are necessarily evil people because after all they're only you and I in cars only
you don't just happen to use that road. But I do want to stress that I think it's
something that we have to consider with regards to the central city. I don't consider
it to be desirable to have automobiles as we know them today and as they are handled
hurtling down small streets in the Grove particularly when they're packed with child-
ren. We had thought, and we discussed this with the city, we thought of asking to
have speed bumps put in or some other means for diverting traffic or slowing it up
but the city informs us this is not possible to do because there is a likelihood that
if there is a problem, somebody hits a bump and goes off the road they'll end up suing
the city. Now the other alternative which we discussed was putting up signs and ask-
ing people to go slow but unfortunately I must say that I'm becoming cynical and I've
lost faith in the passive restraint. I don't believe that the people listen or rather
they don't obey signs anymore and if we have any doubts about this what I suggest is
that the commission and I go out to the expressway and that I pay the commission $5.00
for every car that we see doing less that 55 M.P.H. and you pay me $5.00 for every one
that's doing more than 55 M.P.H. I'll end up a rich man and the commission will end
up broke. So in other words people don't... You don't believe me? Ok. Anyhow, I
honestly believe that people do not obey signs. They don't obey the signs regarding
parking and they don't obey the signs generally speaking even on McDonald with regard
to restricting speed there. Now as I said the other problem in the area is that per-
ennial problem of the safety of picking up the children and dropping the children in
the neighborhood of the school. As things are at present what has happened is that
the parents come to the school and they drop their kids on the wrong side of the road.
They'll then make a hammerhead turn in the road and then come back down so the kids
are subjected to cars which are backing, they're subjected to having to cross the
road against traffic. I personally, as I think some of you know, do not believe that
29 MAY 181977
this is the best possible solution which we could achieve to achieve safety for
the children in the school. 1 believe that we need a total redesign of the area.
However, that's another matter. That's something for the future. For the present,
I think that what the city has proposed is perhaps the best solution for what we
have available. Now for once I find myself in complete agreement with the school
on this particular thing. Both Mrs. Cord, I think she'll speak for herself and
Mrs. McAliley who spoke for the PTA are in favor of this. With regard to the
residents, we've already heard that of the owner residents on the street that the
majority of them are in favor of this. In fact, we have a particular problem on
Florida Avenue as you probably know. We've been exposed to a tremendous amount
of urban pressure and at the present time we have a situation where 40% of the
houses in an R-1 zoned area are in rental. Now if this proposal by the city can
act to decrease the amount of traffic that we have in that area and restore some
measure of the residental quality of our neighborhood then I would be very much
in favor of it. My attitude towards these things is such that I think that the
city, I know that the City of Miami is acting to preserve downtown central areas.
They're trying to rehabilitate things. It doesn't make much sense in my opinion
to put a tremendous amount of money into rehabilitation if we don't act to pres-
erve areas which are already residential and which can be retained as residential.
Several of us on the street have been working to try and reverse the trend away
from the residential quality of the area. You will remember this is one of the
reasons why I personally opposed a Burger King parking lot coming in next to
some people down there on the other side of Florida Avenue on the other side of
McDonald. I don't think it makes any sense for us as a community to allow develop-
ments, traffic developments or parking developments or anything else, any develop-
ment which acts to decrease the environmental standards of the neighborhood. Now
something, I know some of you others are concerned in this too, that something
of the same sort of thing that is happening to us has occured in the case of Bay
Heights and I'm quite sure that a lot of people disagreed with all of the signs
which are there in Bay Heights, I personally don't. I think if Bay Heights
didn't have those signs there that it would be knocked flat by the traffic which
is coming to and from the city. Anyhow, I've tried to cut this down as much as
I can and I'm in favor of the motion as you can gather.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much. How many minutes was that?
Mr. Ongie: Ten minutes.
Mayor Ferre: Just keep a cumulative total so the other side will have the same
amount.
Rev. Gibson: Let me ask this question so that as you all address yourselves to
this change that I might hear this answer. I am unusually concerned about what
part the PTA plays. Now as I heard both parties, both citizens who spoke, I
heard that the parents who bring their children are the people who after they
let their children out are speeding away. Now when I came along, and that was a
long time but even when my son went to school and now my grandson we had PTA's
and this kind of a problem, this utter disregard for the speed limit in a school
zone and also the failure on the part of parents to exercise caution was usually
taken up; and I am tremendously disturbed in 1977 that we live such carefree
careless lives that those parents whose children's lives may be jeopardized are
not being confronted. And all we do is say, well... we make it easy for you to
do your thing. Now I hope when the citizens address themselves to this issue
further that somebody would help me to understand what part the PTA plays and if
they have made this a real concern in their PTA Meetings. All right?
Mayor Ferre: All right, next speaker.
Ms. Joella Good: I'm Joella Good, principal of Coconut Grove Elementary School.
I'm not a PTA officer, Mrs. McAlily is in Tallahassee with the Urban Coalition
trying to get money for our school system and sends her regrets to the commission.
I am in favor of having this street one-way for the reason that sometimes we do
have to protect people from themselves. We have tried to encourage parents in
every way we could to dismiss children from the east side of Matilda Street.
Some of you may have seen me in my comical outfit out on the street in the middle
of the street directing traffic which is illegal. That is the job, I believe, of
the Police Department not of a school principal but in an effort to try to protect
the children as cars came in both directions in a heavy rainstorm to pick up
children. That doesn't happen often but it does happen many times during the day
And the week parents are hurrying to work and they do come and let the children
off at the wrong place. We do have safety patrols who do not have any authority.
They can warn children, ask them not to cross. We have worked with our children
and have not been thoroughly successful in asking them to cross in the right ways
and asking them to come down Florida Avenue and so, therefore, we are asking hope-
fully that the commission will help us to help the children to be safe. It's not
30
MAY 181977
•
something I would fight the residents of the city for, certainly the people on
Florida Avenue. We feel that on a trial basis this would show us whether or not
the traffic would flow more smoothly around there entering from Grand Avenue going
down to the intersection there of Matilda and Florida and then west on Florida to
McDonald. We feel it would make the situation much safer for the children and
that in doing this it would not be a terribly great inconvenience for the residents.
We have tried very much to be courteous and teach our children, we'll try to do
better, Father. I'm sorry, there have been some structural repair necessary to
our school, it will be closed this summer so any trial period we would ask would
be from August 29th until the Christmas break rather than the summer. Thank you.
Mrs. Elizabeth Settner: I'll try to make this brief. I will say this, they think
we're out numbered. First of all, I made two or three surveys. On our street we
do have people who rent out their homes. We have for instance Joe Harrison that
owns the end house there. Fred Scheske, his mother lives in his house. Mr. Heeter
has two homes down there. Jean Poe, she rents her house out. Mrs. Clarit is my
neighbor and I live there and David Mc Intosh lives there. Now when you count
them up like that there are 8 owners who are opposed to the one-way street. Then
I went around and I got a census of the renters. There were 6 renters that say,
"No, we do not want it a one-way street" because we all live down at the lower
end there. So if you take it that way we really out number the opposition. Now
these people, I've called them all up by phone, all these owners. They gave me
permission to speak for them today and they said if you doubt my word for me to
give you the telephone numbers and call them and they will back me up. Some of
them are businessmen, some of them are attorneys, some are pilots and can't get
here. Now in regards to this meeting, if you remember the city did do a year's
survey. First of all the barricade had come up here I think around 1975 then
they came back in 1976 after the city and the county had done a survey. They had
met with the school and the people on the street, the majority, but we didn't know
anything about it at the time. As you remember we came down here December 16th
when the survey was given to you people. At that meeting I asked for a public
hearing which was held January 4th. At that meeting Mr. Grimm conducted the meet-
ing. It was a three hour meeting, everyone was here, they all had their chance
to speak and they had a long time. The meeting was duly closed after three hours.
We all left, the majority of our people that were in favor of the resolution. We
felt we were satisfied with it and we all left but it seems that Mr. King and Mr.
Schwartz and Mrs. Good and one or two others from our street there, they stayed
after the meeting and made some suggestion. I think Mr. King suggested that they
maybe make it a one-way street. They still weren't satisfied with what had come
up. So the result was though in January 13th we came in front of the City Commis-
sion which you remember. I know Mayor Ferre remembers me asking for the public
hearing and the 13th we came. A resolution was passed and in it it met the agree-
ment of all the commissioners. It met the agreement of the school, it met every-
one's agreement there. Everybody was very happy what had happened. They decided
the barricades were necessary and which I have always been a staunch supporter of.
I was the PTA President for two years there and I know pretty well the workings
of PTA and at that time we knew how to have our children come up there. We had
the barricades, the parents came, it was a two-way street always, the parents came
up there. Now in the survey that was made the year's survey, they go ahead here
and it says, "Matilda Street provides a major vehicular and pedestrian access to
the school" and it goes on here and it says, "Although Matilda is a local street
it is heavily used during the afternoon or the peak traffic hours when it is not
barricaded as an alternative route for motorists who wish to avoid the heavily
congested Grand Avenue, Mc Farlane Road, Main highway Intersection". Now you
must remember all those, and it also goes on to say that we only have a very min-
imum traffic group on Florida Avenue. Florida has not created any significant
traffic problem because there is only I think they say one car every minute or
something like that goes by. Now at this time if you stop and think we've worked
on that Comprehensive Survey for Coconut Grove. At the time they showed us with
the traffic how it was going. Now, for instance, if you make this a one-way traf-
fic street that would mean the people ... The reason I'm objecting, I have young
people, I wanted to say also in our survey there were 18 drivers, I counted up in
seven houses we have 18 drivers down at our end of the street. Now the people
think that there's not going to be as much traffic. Well, all these 18 drivers
are going to have to come in from the Matilda side and come past their homes which
they don't do now. And these young people, they come in and out. I don't want
my girls or the other young people, we have a couple of young doctors, young girls
there working with other different activities, I don't want these girls who have
to came in at all hours of the evening or the day and have to go to Grand Avenue,
wait on the light there, they're coming down McDonald, wait for the light at Grand
Avenue, go up a square hoping to God that they can cross Grand Avenue because
there they have the traffic coming from the other end of Grand Avenue. They have
McFarlande Road, they have it from Main Highway and also from Fuller Street leads
in there and Commodore Plaza leads in there. So they have those five heavily
31 MAY181977
congested streets to wait to come up Grand Avenue, that one 11111bck to try to get
across into Matilda Street again then down their street. I don't want my girls
having to stand there on the corner wait there on the corner at night until the
lights change because it's not safe. Another thing in this thing, I asked Jack
Luft yesterday what about the bicycles and the bicycles have to go the way the
traffic flows. You're stopping a lot of the children from coming up our street
that come from the west. I think this thing works perfectly. This one-way street
will work perfectly for any one who lives east of the school, McFarlane Road, Main
Highway, but it's not taking into consideration any of the parents who live west
of McDonald and believe me we have a large group of people who live west of McDon-
ald who come up that way. Now you think that's going to make it a safe street by
having them say come in, and in the recommendation as Mr. King just said, they
have to leave the children out on the east side of the street. Ok, if you're going
to have it a one-way you're having the Grand Avenue traffic coming from the east,
the people from that way. You're coming from Fuller Street and the ones you're
forcing to come up Grand Avenue. That will be three lanes of traffic trying to
pull in on that one little half strip across the buses and the vans. There is an
MTA bus and two other school buses and a van that parks in there. How on earth
can they do that? There's going to be such a traffic trip you're going to need a
policeman there and it's not going to be possible to have a one-way street there.
It's just impossible. I mean I've been there 40 years, as you all know I've been
here a long time and I think that this is wrong because I think we need that flow.
When we have the Arts Festival, look at the bottleneck that's going to be, we're
going to have the Goombay Festival I think in a couple of weeks there, another
traffic tie up because traffic has to flow the two ways. This is creating a dan-
ger. As I said, our bicycles always come up. If we have to have the fire trucks
come in they can't come in from McDonald, it's barricaded, I mean from Matilda,
it's barricaded there. We have only one way, they always come down McDonald, up
Florida Avenue and then out that way. Now I'm hoping you consider this. This
isn't a safety thing this is just something that was thought out. And another
thing, Mr. King did say, we asked him what the disadvantages were. He said, Well,
of course, it's going to cause all of you people at the lower end of the street to
use more gasoline because you're going to have to go down on the corner and wait
for the light to change, go up to the next corner, wait for the delayed action
light up there to change and get across. And as you see, Mr. Carter did say "Save
on your energy" so I think we're going against the government in every other way
and this isn't a safety factor. It definitely isn't a safety factor. If you had
the possibility of making every car come in from the east and pull in the by school,
yes but this is not the answer and I hope you will consider that, please.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much, Mrs. Bettner. Are there any other speakers at
this time?
Mrs. Marilyn Reed: Yes, I would like to speak to this issue. I'd like to call
something to your attention. I live on McDonald, I own property there. I'm just
about two small blocks away from Florida. All right? Now I don't know what kind
of surveys they're taking but I live there and I have to live with this 24 hours
around the clock. Consider your McDonald Street traffic. I have cars wrecked at
my corner constantly. They come into my yard. My telephone poles are constantly
knocked over, they teeter over my property. I have had people killed on this cor-
ner because of this traffic. One of the main things we're having to put up with
now is at least 20 cars a minute on McDonald, I've counted them. Now the biggest
problem is semi -trucks around the clock 24 hours a day. I have to keep my front
door shut all the time, I can't stand the noise, I cannot talk on the telephone in
a normal tone of voice, I cannot have guests in my living room because we have to
yell at each other because of this traffic and you must consider when you're going
west what you're taking these people into and I think if Metro wants to do some-
thing for this neighborhood they could put up "No Trucks Allowed" signs. This is
a residential neighborhood, this is a secondary street. I've been to Tallahassee,
I know what the plans are for thatand if they want to help us they can put up
"No Trucks Allowed" and let's get some police enforcement on it.
Mayor Ferre: Are you, then you're for the one-way?
Mrs. Reed: I am not speaking to that because I don't live on the street and I
don't think it's appropriate. What I am calling your attention to is what they're
doing is directing traffic into a badly, it's a heavily trafficed street, bad
accidents and I have seen some gruesome ones right in my front door and I don't
want to look at this.
Mayor Ferre: I would agree with that statement and perhaps we ought to pass a
resolution here asking Metro to study this problem that we have in some of these
areas that are strictly residential and become arterial streets for trucks.
32 MAY 181977
Mrs. Reed: I think you 41Ould know also that these big :Ors are coming tnrougn
on Mary Street. I've had complaints constantly, why ever dy in the Grove calls
fae I don't know but I guess I'm the Grove trouble maker and 1 have to come down
here. They are coming through and something must be done about that.
Mayor Ferre: All right. Mrs. Bettner.
Mts. Bettner: May I say one mote word? I did ask Mr. King if he made a traffic
survey of McDonald Avenue because that is where all the traffic is going to have
to feed into. Be also suggested it would be made a two-way street, I mean down one..
way, left turn and a right turn and I asked him if he had made a traffic survey of
McDonald. He said that's irrevelevant. I think that's craziness!
Mayor Ferre: All right. Now, members of the commission, questions? No questions?
The chair is open for any motions that the commission wishes to make at this time.
I recognize... I recognize either one of you.
Mrs. Gordon: From the testimony I've heard and from the reports that I've read I
haven't found enough evidence to warrant the change and I would not recommend a
change.
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon moves that no change be made. Is there a second?
there a second?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I'll second the motion for discussion.
Mayor Ferre: There is a second, discussion. The motion is "no change". In other
words it's got to be maintained and it's a two-way street.
Mr. Plummer: As is.
Rev. Gibson: Let me ask this. You know maybe I'm too conciliatory. I was dead
in the corner with all those changes that the school wanted and the school gave
some and took some - no - the people gave some and took some. I wonder, I wonder
if the school cannot now take some. I'm just wondering. You know, the funny thing
about politics, we never get everything we want. We get some, we win some we lose
some and sometimes it isn't always to our liking. I would think some of the very
same people who are for the change for the school and fought vigorously for it, I
would hope that the school would want to be equally as conciliatory and concerned,
I hope. And like Mrs. Gordon, I'm not so sure the professional has said too much
to convince me nor am I sure that Mr. Grimm has said enough to make me believe
that this is a burning issue. You know I'm just wondering.
Mayor Ferre: A11 right, further discussion? If not, call the roll, please.
The preceding motion introduced by Commissioner Gordon and seconded by Rev.
Gibson failed to pass by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Gordon and Rev. Gibson.
NOES: Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre.
Mrs. Gordon: J. L., did you vote yes or no to the motion?
Mr. Plummer: I voted no.
Mrs. Gordon: That means you want it changed.
Mr. Plummer: I can't answer that, Rose, but I'm going to go along with the recom-
mendation of trying.
Mrs. Gordon: Oh, I see your point.
Mr. Reboso: I also vote no, I'm going with the department to give them a try.
Mayor Ferre: The trial period would be between August and December. All right,
Mr. City Manager, I think that this is a difficult vote for me because I think
Mrs. Bettner made some very very valuable statements which concern me. On the
other hand, this has been studied a great deal, the administration is recommending
it, Metro Traffic is recommending it and so we've got an awful lot of people who
supposedly have studied this a lot more than we have. So it is a difficult decis-
ion. I would like to request that we set up a trial period some time after the
summer starting in September. I don't think we should go to December. I think
the trial period should be for a month and a half, six weeks maximum and then
bring it back to this commission to see how it's canning along. Follow me? In
other words we don't need to wait until December. So I would vote, I think if we
33 NAY 181977
al and that of to be plenty of
timed amend this fortheneighfour six week
neighbors to see, andif the problem then exists, Mrs. Bettner, then
I would change my vote and go with the neighbors. May I have your commitment then
that the trial period would be for a period of let's say 4 weeks, six weeks from
starting September the 1st after Labor Day let's say for a six week period?
Mr. Grassie: We'll settle on six weeks then?
Mayor Ferre: Yes. And then at the end of six weeks if you'd come back, and I'd
like the recommendation of the Metro Traffic, I'd like the school and I'd like the
neighbors to see if it is functioning. If it's not functioning, Nrs. Bettner,
then at that point I would reconsider my vote. Is that acceptable to everybody?
Mr. Grassie: Certainly.
Mrs. Gordon: Did you want to speak to that?
Mayor Ferre: ...
and then you come
havoc and back up
that basis then I
Is there a motion
Yes, that will be fine. And let's say for a six week period
back and we'll discuss it again. If it's creating a lot of
and traffic problems and what have you. ... Alright. So on
would vote no with the motion. Now, so the motion is defeated.
then that we try it for a six week period?
Mr. Plummer: I'll second it, Mr. Mayor, my only problem that I question is that
you could get a true picture in six weeks.
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Plummer:
experts for.
Well, how long do you think it takes to get a picture?
Well, I don't know. I mean that's why we pay these high priced
Mayor Ferre: Look, I think you can get a true picture in a week but I'm perfectly
willing to go for six weeks.
Mr. Plummer: Well Mr. Mayor, it's going to take enforcement now. You know that's
the point.
Mayor Ferre: Let's see what happens and if it doesn't work, I don't think it is
going to work. ... Mrs. Bettner, let's try it for six weeks for the month of
September and in mid -October... Ma'am? ... See, these people have a ...
Mr. Plummer: But Mrs. Bettner, what prohibits them, assuming the black mothers
are bringing the children, and you brought it up so let's just follow through on
that train of thought, there's nothing to prohibit them from coming Grand Avenue
.... May I finish? Can I finish? Can I finish? I'll give you that courtesy.
Mrs. Bettner:
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Bettner, I'll tell you what, we're going to try it for a six
week period.... Look, let's try it for a six week period. I personally am going
to call you. I'm going to call you and I'm going to go out personally to see it
and you show me, I'm going to see it with my own two eyes and then it will be
back here in October and we'll vote on it again at that time. Ok? We'll try and
see what happens. Now there is a motion now by Reboso, seconded by Plummer.
Further discussion for a six week trial?
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77- 439
A MOTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO BEGIN
A SIX -WEEK TRIAL PERIOD OF MATILDA STREET/FLORIDA AVENUE AS
ONE-WAY STREETS, BEGINNING APPROXIMATELY AUGUST 29, 1977.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES; Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso and Mayor Ferre.
NOES: Mrs. Gordon and Rev. Gibson.
Mayor Ferre: The meeting is adjourned and we'll pee you in October.
34
MAY 1 61977
JOURHMENT i
TH R e 1 NG N0 PU THER gUS I N S 'ErOH $FH
CbMMiSStON, 'DNS MSSTtN WAS A�J iURNSb AT 4I O u ttlx
Mawalt A tech_ t
MAYOR
1
DOCUMENT
INDEX
MEETING DATE:
MAY 18. 1977
ITEM NO.
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
COMr1ISSION ' RETRIEVAL
ACTION CODE NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871, ARTICLE 5, ONE
FAMILY DWELLING R-1, AND R-2 AND R-1B DISTRICT
BY REVISING SECCTION ONE.
AMENDING ORDINANCE 6871, BY ADDING ARTICLE II
(DEFINITIONS) SECTION 2 A NEW SUB -SECTION
NAMED 57-A .
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO 6871, BY CHANGING THE
ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF LOTS 1 TRHOUGH 20
ON BLOCK 66-N, MIAMI NORTH, B-41.
GRANTING PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE
A POST OFFICE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE
XXI-2 SECTION 3, OF ORDINANCE 6871.
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 6871 BY DELETING SECTION
NO. 3 , SUB -SECTION (3) IN BOTH ARTICLES
XXXI AND XXXII ( CONDITIONAL USE )
ESTABLISHING THE THIRD THURSDAY OF EACH MONTH
EXCEPT AUGUST, FOR THE COMMISSION PLANING
AND ZONING MEETING.
0016
0017
0018
R-77-432 77-432
0019
R-77-434 77-434