HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1977-06-21 Minutes6ITYOF MIAMI
OMMISS1ON
MINUTES
OF MEETING HELD ON
JUNE 21, 1977•
PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
CITY HALL
RALPH G, ONGIE
CITY CLERK
ItBEX
CIiMSglOif
T NO,
REJECT
!NANCE OR
SOLUTI cxv+i o, PAGE NO,
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16
17.
18,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXPRESSION OF GRATITUDE TO SENATOR LAWTON
CHILES FOR HIS ASSISTANCE WITH CUBAN REFUGEE
PROGRAM FUNDING.
DISCUSSION ITEM: COMMUNITY STANDARDS ON
OBSCENITY.
GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE STUDY MIAMI-DADE AREA.
URGE D.O.T. TO CORRECT CONDITIONS ON S.W. 8
STREET.
DISCUSSION OF P.A.D. PROJECT 3495 MAIN
HIGHWAY.
MOTION OF INTENT TO PERMIT THE SALE OF BEER
AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM AND REQUESTING
CITY MANAGER TO STUDY PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS.
BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: DEADLINE FOR PLACING
QUESTION ON FALL BALLOT.
PERSONAL APPEARANCE: RICK SISSER, CITY OF
MIAMI LOBBYIST - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINT-
MENTS TO CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION COMMITTEE.
FIRE DEPARTMENT MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION.
REPORT OF FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE TRADE FAIR
OF THE AMERICAS.
CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTED TO PROCEED IMMEDIATELY
FOR QUICK TAKE CONDEMNATION OF F.E.C. TRACT.
FURTHER DISCUSSION OF P.A.D. PROJECT 3495
MAIN HIGHWAY (LATER CONTINUED AS ITEM 22 OF
THE AGENDA).
LONGEVITY INCREASES FOR ASSISTANT CITY
ATTORNEYS - REAFFIRM RES. 73-290.
COMMENDATION TO MEMBERS OF TEAM WHO WORKED
TOWARDS BRINGING THE SUPERBOWL TO MIAMI IN
1979 - MISCELLANEOUS PRESENTATIONS.
PUBLIC HEARING: BUDGET FOR THE DEPARTMENT OP
OFF-STREET PARKING, GUSMAN HALL AND THE
OLYMPIS BUILDING.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 13-
10 OF THE CITY CODE "POWERS OF THE DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY."
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE
8589 BY REAPPROPRIATING $486,632 FOR 31%
SALARY ADJUSTMENTS - POLICE AND FIRE
DEPARTMENTS.
SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE
8589 - TRANSFER FUNDS FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS
AND ACCOUNTS.
M- 77-513
DISCUSSION
M- 77-514
M- 77-515
DISCUSSION
M- 77-516
_'<, i.
-J
DISCUSSION
SEE
R- 77-548
PRESENTATIO
DISCUSSION
M- 77-519
DISCUSSION
M- 77-520
- 10
11 - 16
16 - 17
17 - 20
20 - 28
28 - 2S
30 - 3!
36 - 3'
40-4
R- 77-521 44
DISCUSSION 44 - 4
Ord. 8665 46
Ord. 8666 46
Ord. 8667 47
.
IND
CiPSSIoilEOF MIAEFLORIII4
11131 No,
SUBJECT
DINANCE OR
SOLUTI ON NO,
19.
20.
21:
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
PRESENTATION TO DELEGATIONS FROM VENEZUELA
AND BOLIVIA.
AUTHORIZE PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION -
RESIDENTS LOCATED AT 190 S. E. 12 TERRACE.
AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A LEASE
WITH MARINA BISCAYNE, INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT
OF MARINA AT THE MARINE STADIUM.
A) LONG DISCUSSION ITEM AND EXPRESSION OF
OPINION OF CITY COMMISSION FOR REVOCATION
OF P.A.D. AT 3495 MAIN HIGHWAY.
B) REQUEST STUDY OF EXISTINF P.A.D.
ORDINANCES.
DECLARE BEERSHEBA, ISRAEL, AS SISTER CITY -
ENDORSE PROPOSED TRIP AND DESIGNATE
COMMISSIONER ROSE GORDON AS REPRESENTATIVE.
DISCUSSION OF FILMING OF JACKIE GLEASON
SPECTACULARS IN THE CITY OF MIAMI AND. MOTION
OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE.
RECEIVE ANNUAL POST AUDIT FINANCIAL REPORT
FISCAL 1975-76 - PEAT, MARWICK, MITCHELL & CO
FIRST READING ORDINANCE- AMEND SECTION 17-6,
17-18, 17-19, 17-113, 17-121 OF THE CITY CODE
"FIRE PROTECTION, FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION
SYSTEMS.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE - AMEND SECTION 17-36
AND 17-326 OF CHAPTER 17 OF THE CODE OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI ("BUILDING PERMITS").
ACCEPT PLAT: MARIA SUBDIVISION.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: AMEND ORDINANCE
8589, DELETING $900,679 FROM DEPARTMENTAL
APPROPRIATIONS FOR SALARIES.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPROPRIATING
$2,710,050 IN HEAVY EQUIPMENT SERVICE
FACILITY TRUST AND AGENCY FUND.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPROPRIATE
$3,985,910 IN DINNER KEY EXPOSITION HALL
TRUST AND AGENCY FUND.
ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK WESTERN DRAINAGE
PROJECT E-38.
ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK - EDISON PARK, LITTLE
RIVER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY PROJECT.
AUTHORIZE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE -
OBJECTIONS TO ACCEPTANCE OF COMPLETED WORK -
W. GRAPELAND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-
5387 C & S.
PRESENTATION
M- 77-522
PACE NO,
47
48 - 49
M- 77-523 50 - 56
M- 77-524
M- 77-525
fij; 77-526
M- 77-527
M- 77-529
R- 77-530
First
Reading -
First
Reading
R- 77-531
First
Reading
First
Reading
First
Reading
R- 77-532
R- 77-533
R- 77-534
57 - 76
77 - 80
80 - 83
83
83
84
84
85
85
86
86
87
87
ZcifffEltR154
111'I KO.
&E,1ECT
DINANCEo�
sou rloN No, PAGE NO,
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42,
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION - RESIDENTS
AT 36 N. E. 59 STREET.
ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT - VIRGINIA
I. LIEBERMAN.
ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT- HARRY
PEARLMAN.
BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: EXTENSIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT BEYOND AGE 70.
CLAIM SETTLEMENT - CHON SENG LAU.
CLAIM SETTLEMENT - CHAREN AUSTIN.
ACCEPT BID: SHOTGUNS, CARBINES AND
MAGAZINES. (DEPARTMENT OF POLICE).
ACCEPT BID:
FIRE HOSE. (FIRE DEPARTMENT).
ACCEPT BID: COLUMBIA SANITARY SEWER
IMPROVEMENT - SR-5420 BID "A" - (SANITARY
SEWERS).
ACCEPT BID:
IMPROVEMENT
STATION NO.
COLUMBIA SANITARY SEWER
- SR-5420 BID "B" - (PUMP
84) .
ACCEPT BID: BUENA VISTA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT, BID "A" -
(HIGHWAY) .
ACCEPT BID: BUENA VISTA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND SANITARY SEWE
MODIFICATIONS - BID "B" - (DRAINAGE).
ACCEPT BID: BUENA VISTA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND SANITARY SEWE
MODIFICATIONS - BID "C" - (SANITARY SEWERS).
ALLOCATE $5,000 FROM QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAM
TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO
RE-ENCUENTRO CUBANO.
CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: RECOMMENDATIONS POR
APPOINTMENTS TO CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
COMMITTEE.
CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: REQUEST CITY MANAGER
TO DEVELOP PLANS TO IMPLEMENT IMPROVEMENTS
TO THE ORANGE BOWL.
FIRST READING ORDINANCE: ALLOW SALE OF BEER
AT THE ORANGE BOWL STADIUM.
CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: AUTHORIZE CITY
MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON ISLAND.
R- 77-535
R- 77-536
R- 77-537
DISCUSSION
R- 77-538
R- 77-539
R- 77-540
R- 77-541
R- 77-542
R- 77-543
R- 77-544
R- 77-545
R- 77-546
R- 77-547
R- 77-548
R- 77-549
First
Reading
R- 77-550
88
88
89 - 90
90 - 91
91 - 92
92
93
93 - 94
94
95
95
96
96
97
98-91
99
C1�
1404
gclinsEto
53. CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: REJECTING BID OF
SOUTH FLORIDA MACK TRUCKS, INC. (TWO DUMP
TRUCKS) .
54. PERSONAL APPEARANCE: A. G. SHERMAN PRESIDENT
OF G.E.A., REQUESTING COST OF LIVING INCREASE
55. BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: POSSIBILITY OF CHANG
OF DATE OF THE SEPTEMBER 22 COMMISSION
MEETING.
PAGE NO,
R- 77-551 100
DISCUSSION 101 - 102
DISCUSSION 102
MINUTES Off' REGULAR MEETING Off' THE
CITY COMMISSION OP MIAM1, f?LORIbA
* * * * * * * *
Oh the 2lst day of June, 1977, the City Commission of Miami, Florid-
at its regular meeting place in the City Hall, 3500 Pan American thrive,
Miami, Florida, in regular session.
The meeting was called to order at 9:15 a.m. by Mayor Maurice A. re
with the following members of the Commission found to be presentt
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
Joseph R. Grassie, City Manager
R. L. Fosmoen, Assistant City Manager
George F. Knox, City Attorney
Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk
Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk
An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those
present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag.
Reading of the Minutes: Moved and waived.
that
Mayor Ferre: All right, ladies and gentlemen, before we got into the regular
schedule we have several pocket items and the first one that I'd like to bring
out.
I. EXPRESSION OF GRATITUDE TO SENATOR LAWTON CHILES FOR HIS
ASSISTANCE WITH CUBAN REFUGEE PROGRAM FUNDING.
Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, you may have noticed today's newspaper...
Senator Lawton Chiles really went to bat again for us. There was a voting
committee, the vote was 11 to 0. It was a move of foot to cut the Cuban
Refugee Program down in half and it was thanks to the diligence of Johnny
Jones, our new Superintendent of Schools, and others who flew up to Washington
last week and it comes to show you, Father, you never know how these things
happen. Johnny Jones was telling me at the dinner on Saturday that he became
very friendly with Senator Brook. Senator Brook,.a Republican, was against
any extension of the Cuban Refugee Program. Now, as a matter of fact, I am not
talking about this, you know, from a racial point of view whether you are Cuban
or not Cuban, or what have you, but the point is this permits the school system
of this community be funded by a substantial amount of money that if it did not
have would create serious problems to our already critical educational system.
I really think that we really have got to recognize Lawton Chiles a lot of times.
I've been quick to criticize him on things, this time I think we should commend
him and I would like for one of you to, if you'd like, otherwise I'll be happy
to do it, to make a motion of commendation and gratitude to Senator Lawton
Chiles for the magnificent work he did in the Appropriations Committee this
past Monday where he.narrowly approved.$76.2 Million for the Cuban Refugee
Program which greatly impacts the economic stability not only of the State but
specifically of our school system here.
Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson moves, Manolo Reboso seconds, is there further
discussion?...Call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved its
adoption,
JUN 211977
MOttON NO. fla-51.3
A MOTION EXPRESSING THE GRATITUDE OF THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION
TO THE HONORABLE SENATOR LAWkTON CHILES FOR HIS EFFORTS AND
ASSISTANCE IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONTINUED FUNDING OF THE
CUBAN REFUGEE PROGRAM.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote-
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
2. DISCUSSION IT 1: COMMUNITY STANDARDS ON OBSCENITY.
Mayor Ferre: Secondly, ladies and entlemen, I am going to pass out to you
to read something that came out in the New York Times, I'm sure you may have
seen it on television or you may have read about it. I don't know whether
it's been covered by the local press but I cut out the New York Times' story
on it where Cleaveland has used its Sanitation Department in establishing
what obscenity standards are in that community. Now, I think that one of the
problems we have as we have noticed on various occasions though we've tried
to pass Resolutions on pornographic shops, what the zoning requirements would
be and so on...is the Supreme requisition that each community has got to
determine what its standards are on obscenity. Now, the other side of it is
that we have got to be careful that we don't end up getting into witch-hunts or
getting way out on extremes. There is no question in my mind that the pendulum
has swung so much in the other direction that we are so cluttered with filth..
pornographic shops and things that..you know, a little pornographic shop here
and there is not likeable but that's part of the modern world but when you go
into these places and it's just one after another and it's whole neighborhoods
infested...it seems to me that we have got to keep a very close look and see
what has been done by Mayor Ralph Perk, in Cleveland, and if it has any suc-
cess, I think perhaps we might want to do the same thing if for no other reason,
so that we can establish the standards in our community in case we get in trouble
with the cases that we have. Therefore, I would like to request the City At-
torney in conjunction with the City Manager to write to the City of Cleaveland
and to get from their legal Department and from Mayor Perk's office the1details
and a copy of the questionnaire, how much they estimate it will cost, etc. I
might point out that during Mel Reese's days I well remember, on many occasions,
the City of Miami would use its Sanitation Department as a vehicle to get in-
formation over to the citizens. They would just drop off these flyers or what
have you, so this procedure is not completely unknown to the City of Miami and
I think this is a rather clever way of utilizing something in what I hope will
be a positive way. I am not saying that we are to do anything today, I'm just
recommending that you study it and I wanted to do it publicly on the record
and perhaps bring it back with some recommendations; at that time the Commission
can discuss it, go against it, or..if you think it's an attack on the First
Amendment and that pornography should be open as a valid expression of American
thought..then that's perfectly all right, we will discuss it at that time. In
the meantime, I'll just pass this around to the Commission.
3. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE STUDY MIAMI-WE AREA.
Mayor Tierra: The third thing that I have is a proposal by price, Waterhouse
which, as you can see, it says "a proposal to study the government structure
and operation in the Miami -Dade area." Let me explain to you how this comes
about. You may recall that two months ago there was a group of young people
from Price, Waterhouse, in Washington, their government service office, that
was here because they were doing a study of government for Memphis, Tennessee.
They spent about two or three weeks around here interviewing different people,' hope
they interviewed.you,...they interviewed me for 2.or 3 hours,..and it struck me at th
2 JUN 211977
I
second interview, after listening to them, and they were talking about the
two-tier and how Metro, and how Memphis..or the Knoxville plan works, or the
bthet plan works, and they were already talking about Toronto and Los Angeles
and what have you....and it struck me...I said, look, while you are doing the
study, would it cost a lot for the City of Miami to piggy -back on you?..And,
naturally, they want more business so they said -all right, we think it would
be relatively inexpensive. They said, and what's the purpose of the study?
Well, the purpose of the study is that next year Metro will be 20 years old
and we have had several challenges coming out of Metro as to the viability of
the City of Miami; those powers that want to eliminate the City of Miami. I
think it is long overdue and this is no criticism, Rose, to the Bill Freides'
Committee, which I happen to have been a great believer in, but the Bill Freides'
Committee ended up getting into a lot of arguments and they ended up doing some-
thing which I thought almost didn't make any sense. Do you recall what they...?
They ended up their argument...their battle cry was "a strong Mayor form of
government" and districting;..then they weakened the districting part, do you
remember that?, because it got too controversial, so their battle cry was "a
strong Mayor" which this community doesn't want, and therefore, an awful lot
of good things that should have been done to streamline Metro and its relation-
ship with the City was not done. Now, previous to that, of course, as you may
recall in 1968, was the attack on the merger of the Fire Department and the
Police Department with Metro and that, the Metro consolidation forces lost.
Recently, we've had a flurry of people in Coconut Grove talking about secession,
a la Nantuckett, which is absolutely the reverse direction. Somewhere, somehow,
someplace there has got to be happy medium and I think the happy medium has been
tabu. We've always been reluctant to approach...the only other public body other
than the City of Miami who has had the courage to get involved into it was Ray
Goode, the County Manager, who as you may recall two or three years ago for the
first time in the history of Metro created taxing districts, for example in the
Fire Department. As you know, the City of Miami spends approximately and please
forgive me for being a little loose with these figures but they are approximate,
we spend about $50 per person in prevention, $40-$50, I'm sorry...we spend $40-
$50 with our Fire Service per person in Miami. Metro spends $20, and there was
a time when the people of Miami, who received absolutely no benefits from Metro's
Fire Department, were paying the bill not only for our Class 1 Fire Department
but for Metro's Class 4 to Class 9 Fire Department, and we, the people of Miami
had to pay the bill. Ray Goode, to his credit, I think was honest enough and
courageous enough to say now, look, if you get the service you are going to have
to pay for it, so for the first time in the history of Metro, unbelievable that
it took 15 years to do it, they set up taxing districts. At that time, hopefully,
when I talked to Jack Orr, was the first step of many that would bring back into
balance the relationship between the City and Metro. That has never happened.
I would like to submit this proposal that was mailed to me just a few days ago
and let you have time to read it carefully and analyze it. What I would like
to do as a matter of principle today is accept the request by me that we should
hire a major nationally recognized outfit --whether it'd be Price, Waterhouse
or Booz-Allen & Hamilton, or whoever it is-- that specializes in inter -government
relationships and perhaps give us a study of what areas between Metro and the City
of Miami can be improved. I offer this, ladies and gentlemen, in a very positive
sense...I didn't wait for the television cameras to get here, I'm not trying to
do this for any publicity of any kind, this is an honest -to -goodness sincere
attempt on my part to throw out for consideration first for study and then for
discussion, ways in which we can improve our relationship. J. L.,...
.A
Mrs. Gordon: What would it cost, Maurice?
Mayor Ferre: They didn't put that in here but when:I talked to them they said
it would be under $20,000. I told them that we wanted a piggyback price. I
think they charged the City of Memphis something like $50,000 or $60,000 and I
told them that we weren't about to pay anything like that but that if we could
piggy -back on the Memphis' study that I...as you'll see in here, I:told them that
one of the things that I thought that they really should spend time studying is
the Toronto Plan which seems to be the most effective functioning metropolitan
form of government. Let me tell you what the real basic differences between
Toronto and Miami. In Toronto, instead Metro trying to abolish the City they
have accepted an honest -to -goodness two-tier form of government and each city
is a part of Metro, in other words, each city has kind of a delegate to Metro
OD Metro is the sum total of the cities. Now, there they function in harmony,
there they cooperate, there they get along well, there they have a regional form
of government that really functions and it seems to be working very well. Now,
they came back, as you'll see somewhere in here, and they said that we ought to
also study Los Angeles because that seems to be a very good system where the
JUN21197
local government participates in the regional government a little bit more
effective. I don't mind telling you and I think it's no secret how we all feel,
at least most of us, 1 think we all feel the same way to some degree or another,
that we feel that the City of Miami is really a step -child that is somehow cast
out in the desert and everybody is kind of hoping it will pass away but it's
almost 20 years and it hasn't passed away and instead of getting smaller it's
gotten bigger and, as a matter of fact, our budget this year will be over
$100,000,000...was last year over $100,000,000; this is not a small government.
And I really think that we've got to get down to the reality that the people of
Miami are not going to abolish themselves. I think that every year that goes by
that's more and more certain and I would welcome any challenge to abolish the
City of Miami. I think we could have a real field -day on that one; but when
that challenge comes I'm not going to sit still waiting for that challenge, I'm
going to challenge the whole concept. Now, don't misunderstand me, this is in
no way an attack on Metropolitan Dade County or its form of government; I.believe
in it, I think it's necessary, I think it's essential that we have regional
government, I think we must defend it and keep it, I'm an advocate of Metro-
politan Dade County's form of government; what I am against, is the constant
snipping and barrage of attacks that mainly come from a little clique of people
in the downtown area whose champion is the Miami Herald and Channel 7 and who
continually knit -pick day after day, and week after week, and month after month,
and year after year, and now decade after decade without any progress, and
instead of adding what they do is they subtract. They divide, they cause confusion,
they cause •-egativism, this is a community that feel that it doesn't have roots,
because of all this division...because ladies and gentlemen, I gave a book to
one of my kids last night, you know, I've got all these teenagers and they don't
want to read, they just want to play all the time, so yesterday I sat them down
and I told them - now, you are going to read, here is a bunch of books and you
pick one. One kid picked up a book called "Something of Value" by an African
writer, 20 years ago, by the name of Ruarch; a lot of people may not remember
that and I started to flip through it. The first page it was about Kenya, and
there is a proverb of some Kenyan tribe that says: "if you are going to take
something away you must susbstitute something of value in its place." The reason
why, the Johnny McLeod, and all these anti -Metro attempts of the past have all
failed is because they haven't substituted anything of value, all they wanted to
do was destroy Metro. I do not want to destroy Metro, what I hope we can do jointly
with Metro, jointly with Merritt Stierheim and Steve Clark and our colleagues in
the Metro Commission is to sit down together as brothers and sisters living in one
community having similar problems and then say, -look, we are not going to go away,
now how can we best work amongst ourselves?..And I think this day is long, long
overdue, I would say 20 years overdue. It's now new, it's a hang-on...any of you
that has ever read the transcripts of the meetings that created Metro when Mr.
Charlie Crandon chaired that group...as you know the author of that Metro Charter
was none other than Dan Paul, our sometimes nemesis. I would say that what was
the creation of that group, of Crandon's group, Dan Paul's writing, was nothing
more than a series of unfortunate compromises that didn't really solve the pro-
blem. And I think it's time, 20 years later, for us to once more not to attack
no, no, we have to learn from Ghandi, this is not an attack...this is not a violent
approach to the problem, we hope that this is going to be a logical, sensible,
reasoned project, positive in nature where all we want to do is dialogue, this is
not an exercise in polemics, it's an exercise in dialogue, and therefore I would
submit to you that you pass a motion asking for the Manager to put out for ad-
vertising --so that within 30 days, that will make it the 21st, which is plenty
of time-- that we would have two, three, four or five people which, I would leave
up to the discretion of the Manager to select, to come before us and recommend
qualified people to take this test. I want to tell you that sometimes we have a •
tendency to complicate things. Price, Waterhouse, as you know, is the number one
or the number two accounting firm in the nation. They don't do any work for the
City of Miami, they don't do any work for me personally, directly or indirectly,
I never met these people until they came here to make this study for Memphis,
Tennessee, I was very impressed with the work they did, I think this is an in-
expensive way of starting the ball rolling, this is not going to be conclusive
obviously; all this is going to be is for someboiiy who is proficient at it, to
give us a study and some recommendations, and I would propose that we bring this
back on the 21st of July for a vote so that we can proceed this kind of a study,
you know the time date on it would be 60 days.
Mrs, Gordon: Mr. Mayor, could I make a couple of comments?...and I appreciate
your comments and your point of view but the University of Miami conducted a
study called the Rand study and very recently came up with some specific recom-
mendations regarding a two-tier form of government. Also, if in fact you do
JUN 2 .197
Consider that not what you are looking for but this is more to the tune of what
you Want, it seems to me a proper avenue to pursue that the League of Cities
take this on and that all the cities fund this and not unilaterally that the
City of Miami be the one to pick up the tab, The League has a Committee which
is called the Inter -governmental Relations Committee which probably would be
the Committee that would be assigned to the supervision of this kind of a report.
Mayor Ferre: Let me answer that by agreeing. I do not think that this should
be a unilateral act of the City of Miami; however, if nobody else wants to join
us, I for one am perfectly willing to take on all by ourselves as we have in
Many other things in the past. Now, I would recommend that you take this to
the League of Cities and that you have them request a local funding of this,
and that if this is not successful, that at that point the City of Miami would
proceed but I don't want to waste too much time.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, they have other projects where they do all chip -in and
fund, specific areas that they are presently working on...so why don't you handle
that directly with the Executive Director of the League?
Mayor Ferre: When is the next meeting of the League?
Mrs. Gordon: In July...I don't_know the exact date...
Mayor Ferre: You are our representative, aren't you Rose?
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, I am your representative and Father Gibson is the alternate,
we both serve.
Mayor Ferre: Well, when you go let me know and I'll be happy to go with you...
Mrs. Gordon: You have to be scheduled for this presentation. Why don't you
have your office contact the Executive Director and ask to be scheduled?
Mayor Ferre: All right, I will do that and then depending on that then we'll
bring this up on the 21st, in the meantime, Mr. Manager, and I guess I'll do it
in the form of a motion is to have you study who else is available in the nation
and preferably locally to do this kind of a study, specifically geared to the
City of Miami, specifically comparing our system with the Metro system of
Tennessee, the Metro system of Toronto, Canada, and the system that functions
in Los Angeles, with specific recommendations as to how best on a positive tone
we can approach the problem with Metropolitan Dade County to improve the relations
between us. I would hope that we could bring that to some kind of a vote before
the end of July, before we go on vacation, so that we'll have it sometime in
October or November after the elections so that nobody will say that this is a
political: thing and at that point, ...I would also hope that perhaps Price,
Waterhouse might involve Dr. Tom Wood or Dr. Roz Biler in the study. Now,
I've seen their study but the problem with their study is that it doesn't
specifically address itself to the City of Miami's problems. All right, I
so move.
Rev. Gibson: Do I hear a second?
Mr. Plummer: Second to send it to the League?
Mayor Ferre: No, second to send it to the Dade League to have the Manager study
it and come back with a recommendation for us to vote .upon it on July 21st or
28th, whenever it works out.
Mr. Plummer: Let me understand this, this is not the final thing..
we are going to ask the Dade League of Cities to underwrite...
Mayor Ferre: Right.
Mr. Plummer: No. 2, the Manager is to study this proposal and come back with
recommendations.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, but more than that, I want him to go out and look at the
four or five people who do this kind of work and submit to us the one, or two
or three....you may not want to use Price, Waterhouse..
W. Plummer: What's number three?
JUN 21 197
0
Mayot Ferret That he bring it back with a fihal tecoMMebdatidn for either the
meeting of July 21st or July 28th whichever is best for hits, with speoifie tea
commendations for us to vote on it.
Rev. Gibson: All right, all the toll please.
The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre.$ who toyed its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77-514
A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO SOLICIT
PROPOSALS FOR A STUDY ON GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE OF THE MIAMI-DARE
AREA EXPRESSING THE PREFERENCE THAT THE STUDY BE MADE BY A LOCAL
FIRM AND REQUESTING THE DADE LEAGUE OF CITIES TO SHARE THE COST
OF THE STUDY.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon*
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
ON DISCUSSION:
*Mrs. Gordon: There are no decisions being made now, this is simply referring
it to the League and referring it to the Manager, okay, I vote yes.
URGE D.Oa. TO CORRECT CONDITIONS ON S,W. 8 STREET
AND 36 AVENUE.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Manager, I saw one of the most awful conditions in the City
of Miami on S.W. 8 and 36 Avenue that I've ever seen in any city. No way in
the world we can afford to live in this city and have that kind of condition
exist as a result of poor drainage. If you come from 37 Avenue going East on
S.W. 8 Street it is impossible for you not to have an accident. I saw perhaps
possibly 10 accidents of the worst kind and I would urge this City to take the
necessary action to appeal to the State of Florida and if they don't do it, we
ought to do it, because these are our people and it's a damn shame and a
disgrace that within 5 minutes time after the rain stopped the man who has under-
taken his establishment there can't get into his place; the man in that cafeteria
in the other corner can't get in his place...and either you want to protect these
business people or let's get out of the business. Now, what is necessary I don't
know, I mention the condition you tell me what to do.
Mayor Ferre: Well, I recommend you move it.
Rev. Gibson: I move you, Sir, that we send a Resolution of the utmost importance
to the necessary parties, Mr Grimm can tell us who that is, that's•a motion.
Mr. Grimm: It goes to the State Roads Department...Department of Transportation.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Father Gibson moves, Plummer seconds, further discussion,
call the roll.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77-515
*MOTION URGING THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TO TAKE ACTION ON AN EMERGENCY BASIS TO CORRECT CONDITIONS CAUSED
•
s JUN 211977
$Y HEAVY FLOODING FOLLOWING RAINS AT THE INTERSECTION OF S.W.
STREET AND 36 AVENUE.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the motion Was passed and
adopted by the following Vote=
AYES: Commissioner l4anolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Fevre
NOES: None,
DtscuSSION OF PAD PROJECT 3495 MAIN Htc,**AY,
Rev. Gibson: The second thing, I received a letter..a copy of a letter in the
mail yesterday and I'm sure all of you did, talking about that P.A.D. project
on Main Highway. I think that this Commission needs to realize that we can't
forever put our heads in the sand and say to the staff, okay -now, I was con-
cerned because I live in the Grove, I know how the Grove people think and how
they feel. I've been down to that project; either we are going to stop that
project, if we have the authority, or we are not going to stop it; and I think
that this Commission ought to take a forthright positive position today, because
we are going to get into a lot of trouble. They have already built that darn
thing up, six to eight feet, now the engineer could tell you better but I think
that the Commission rather than go any further ought to put that thing on that
board right now because you are going to be in trouble.
Mayor Ferre: Are you talking about the property next to you, Mike?
Mr. Simonhoff: Yes, that's the property.
Mayor Ferre: Well, now, Father Gibson do you want to make that in the form of
a motion.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, I don't know whether a motion...let me tell you what's
in my mind then you can tell me what to do, you and the Legal Department and the
Building Department. If those people have got a P.A.D. there is no way in the
world you could get a P.A.D. and then do a piece of this and a piece of that and
not fulfill the obligations in the P.A.D. Now, either we are going to do it ---
we are going to carry out the obligations or let the people stop and start again.
Now, you can't convince me that you could build up that land and then disregard
the three or four people to the one side and the three or four people to the other
side; what is going to happen is everybody is going to come in here later, sooner
or later, and tell you let's build up the doggone place. The State of Florida
is out there, they are watching you and they are going to put it on you. Dade
County is out there, they are watching you, and they are going to put it on you.
Now, Mr. Grimm, that's your line, you tell this Commission...because I think the
Commission must either stop the building out there or...you know, we fulfill the
requirements.
Mr. Grimm: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, at the last meeting that you
had where this project was discussed the Commission's decision at that time was
to go back to the original P.A.D. application and that's what we are doing. Now,
Mr. Simonhoff doesn't agree that that's what we are doing but that's what we are
doing. Now, the site had been filled partially beyond the requirements of that
initial P.A.D., there is no argument about that. That fill has to be removed.
The lower portion of that property will be restricted to six feet in elevation
and the buildings will be built according to the original height limitations.
Mr. Simonhoff: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is Mike Simonhoff,
I am the adjacent neighbor at 3503 Main Highway. When any developer comes before
this Commission and they represent to you that they are going to build something
and they show you plans and they show you elevations and they show you profiles
JUN 21 197
and that goes out for public record and fot public heating before you and all the
other inembets of this City, I think it is a darn tight crittie to have a different
"set of plans, a different set of requirements cote in and be granted a permit
whereby I am going to suffer irreparable damage, the environment and the entire
area of the Grove and the ecology of Biscayne Bay. Now, you voted to make them
go back and do what the Planned Area Development granted. it's black and white
there is difference between looking at what they are doing now, what's i a
under construction, that's not what you granted them as a Commission. When you
said go back and do what you were granted by this Commission, that means - stop,
do a different set of drawings, modify your plans and drawings so that you have
it that way, and that's not what's happening;:they've been working through the
week -end, the buildings are going higher, the mud is going off into the bay and
nothing is happening here.and if the City Commission is going to allow any other
Department of the City to say -we are just going to allow it to happen over and
above your directive, I'd like to know it on public record today.
Mr. Reboso: Mr. Grimm, are you aware of the letter that Janet Reno sent to the
members of this Commission yesterday?
Mr. Grimm: No Sir, I'm not.
Mr. Reboso: I thought so when you spoke before. Are you aware Mike of the letter?
Mr. Simonhoff: Yes, I am.
Mr. Reboso: ..because I think Father is referring to that letter that we received
yesterday.
Rev. Gibson: Yes, Sir
Mr. Grimm: I haven't seen any letter...Did they send a copy of it to the
Manager?
Mrs. Gordon: I have a copy upstairs, I'll have Delores bring it down.
Rev. Gibson: Look, let me tell the Commission something that's very important.
Now, I am not a builder but I fooled around in building churches, you know, that's
my hussle, and I'll tell you what's very important, I've gone and walked over that
land, somebody said well, they may not let you go through there, you know, because
I'm Theodore, so I said no, they'll find out I'm the Vice Mayor and they may be
damn glad to let me walk through the..for fear of something..you know, okay. They
built the land up and you've got a great big mound on that piece of land alone,
all the other is flat, plus I'll tell you what they did to the Commission...this
is why the Commission needs to go see and get busy...they built the first house
out to the water ..getting near to the water first. You haven't been there, go
see. Now, all the other houses are going to follow. I don't know if all under-
stand what I'm saying, let me demonstrate, as a layman. This is a piece of land,
this piece is near that water that the State is telling you you better not fill
and all that, this is the end, so the fill is up and they built the first house
here; now, all the other houses that are to come will come later on and you need
to be smart, you can't afford to be seating up here just passing motions...and
when I got that letter yesterday I was scared.
Mrs. Gordon: Here is the letter, Father.
Rev. Gibson: Okay, here is the letter. "Dear Mr. Mayor and Commissioners:
This firm represents Mr. David . We understand the Commission,
on June 9, 1977, had directed its staff to see that the developers comply with
the original P.A.D. application approved by the Commission for 3495 Main Highway.
A subsequent inspection of this site reveals that the developers have done nothing
to restore the natural slope reflected on the original plans accompanying the
PAD application. A footing for a wall the property has been poured since
the June 9 hearing. No such wall is reflected on the original plan. Large
concrete butresses some directly to the property line. These butresses were not
reflected on the original plans." ...This letter is telling the truth: "In ori-
ginal presentations of those plans to the City, the developers expressed the
desire to maintain 'environmental integrity' of the area. However, a view of the
site from the barnacle reveals a.large fortress -like barrier of fill which con-
flicts markedly with the surrounding environment and destroys the natural shore-
line." And they are telling you the truth! "My client is not opposed to reason-
able development. He raised no objection to the plans originally approved by
the Commission, but he respectfully requests that all further construction at
JUN 2i19
the site be stopped and the building permit be revoked or suspended until the
Site is restored to the condition depicted in the original plans and until
plans ate submitted to the Building Department which comply with the original
plans. Sincerely. Janet Reno." All tight, Mr. Mayor, I'm ready because 1
just think people can't coupe in and stand here and tell us ...
Mayor Ferret Father Gibson moves...
Rev. Olson: My move is to stop the construction as of right now. Now, I know
the builders don't want to hear that, I understand that, but I'll tell you that
I have an obligation. You come in and you say to us same things and,man, you
know, you keep your word.
Mayor Ferre: There is a motion, is there a second?
Mr. Reboso: Second.
Mayor Ferre: Further discussion.
Mrs. Gordon: Under discussion, Mr. Knox, please, you heard the motion, how
effective is the motion unless you go into the courts or we take a positive
action to prevent any further construction and mandate that they restore the
site prior to a continuance of the development. Can you tell us how to proceed
so that we can have some clout?
Mr. Knox: Initially, the matter is under the jurisdiction of the Director of
the Building Department at this point, now the City Commission...I don't know
whether you do wish to do so but you would have the power to rescind the PAD.
At this point, compliance with the PAD is under the jurisdiction of the Build-
ing Department and it is an administrative decision that would be made by the
Building Director as to whether or not the PAD is being conformed to.
Mrs. Gordon: Okay, so, in other words, we have to take a much firmer stand
in order to insure that what Father Gibson is asking be done. Is that correct?
Mr. Knox: Yes, Ma'am, even though the motion would, once again, would repre-
sent the will of the Commission but this would be in the form of an expression
of an opinion to the administration.
Rev. Gibson: All right, then let me raise this before we vote, so that we
don't have any misunderstanding and I won't be in a cross -fire, I would just
as soon vote to revoke the PAD and I know that the monkey is in somebody's back
at that point.
Mayor Ferre: Can we do that, Mr. Knox? Can we revoke the PAD?
Mr. Knox: No, you would have to have a public hearing.
Rev. Gibson: All right, let's call for an immediate public hearing, I'm
offering that motion. I have very little sympathy for the people who come here
and do not keep their word.
Mayor Ferre: Well, now, let's see if we can get this thing unraveled. The point
is that we have a motion to stop construction which we cannot do other than as
an expression of an opinion so therefore will you withdraw that motion at this
point and then make another motion?
Rev. Gibson: Well, maybe I need to...let me raise this question..maybe I need
to have enough faith in the Building Department Director asking, through expre-
ssion of this Commission, to revoke that permit. Now, I have another alternative,
if we find out the staff isn't willing to carry out the mandate of this Com-
mission maybe we ought to do something else.
Mayor Ferre: Well, you better be careful now because we don't want to get into
Charter problems and all we are really doing is we are expressing an opinion the
way your motion reads now. Now, if that doesn't work then what we can do is
we can call for a public hearing and at that point withdraw the PAD.
Rev. Gibson: All right, I offer the motion to give our expression to the Bui.d-
ing Director, then I'll make another...
JUN 211977
HAyot Vetter Is that acceptable Mt, Riiok, legally?
Mt. knoxt 1 didn't heat the question.
Mayor 1'ette: All he is saying is that this CoMtissioh is going to go on
record expressing an opinion.
Mts. Gordon:
Mayor Verret
Mt. Reboso:
know what we
MRs. Gordon:
Didn't we do that last tithe?
No, it wasn't quite as clear last time.
It was not to the point, Rose, now that we have the letter we
are addressing ourselves to.
I don't know...
Mr. Plummer: Maurice, I've got to interject something here and I don't want
this thing to be misconstrued that I'm for or against what Father is trying
to do, but I'm going to tell you something,I am going to voice very serious
objections that this is being done without both parties being present. Now,
I think it's unfair, violently unfair, that this thing is being discussed
with only one side being presented and I think that both sides of this matter...
and invite them this afternoon if you wish and I'll sit here as long as it takes
but I just don't think that it's right to proceed Father, without having the
man here and his attorney ....
Rev. Gibson: J.L., I respect your wisdom, Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that
this be an emergency on the Agenda immediately following the recess and that
this Commission deputize, through the Manager, an individual to go and find the
representative who is doing the building and find the other party and have him
here for this hearing.
Mr. Reboso: Father, excuse me, but I think we should have here the Director
of the Building Department,..he is the one that has to tell us if the matter
is right or wrong.
Rev. Gibson: Beautiful, I'll go for that.
Mayor Ferre: Let's leave the time for some time this afternoon whenever you
can get all these people together, you may not be able to get them together
by 2:00 pm, it may be 4:00 pm before you can get them together, so when you
can. All right, we don't need a motion to that end, I do not think, so you'll
hold your motion in abeyance.
Rev. Gibson:
Mayor Ferre:
Mrs. Gordon:
I'll hold my motion, you just have them here.
All right, thank you very much.
Did you want to say something?
W. Simonhoff: Yes, somebody is going to notify me and the attorney or what-
ever at what time..or do you want me to get our attorneys together for this.
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
W. Simonhoff: At what,..2:00 pm?
Mayor Ferre: I would guess that it will be
agenda, in the late afternoon.
Mr. Simonhoff: Could we have the drawings
here originally?
this afternoon beyond the regular
that were approved by the Commission
Mayor Ferre: Yes, I think you should bring all the information so thatwe'll
discuss thing openly.
10 JUN 2119
MOTION OF INTENT TO PERMIT SALE OF BEER AT THE ORANGE BCWL STADIUM
AND REI ESTING CITY MANAGER TO STUDY PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT'S,
Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, one more thing before we go to the regular
agenda. On the 16th of June, which was last Thursday,...Mr. Grassie, 1 asked
the City Attorney, Mr. Knox, you weren't here but Mr. Alvarez was here and I
asked you to do two things, one- to make a survey of all the stadiums in the
United States that sold beer and to give us a report on that, and for the
City Attorney to prepare a Resolution wherein we would rescind our objections
to selling beer in the Orange Bowl, and secondly- to start preparing a Reso-
lution so that we would instruct you to start putting together for the
November ballot a vote which we could of course always abstain or change as
time went along, to specifically go to the electorate to get permission to
improve the Orange Bowl. On the first one, let me say that I notice in this
analysis presented June 20 that is before us, that looks like just about
every major stadium in the nation with the exception of two that I see sells
beer..The Greenbay Packers, the Oakland Raiders, The Baltimore Colts, The Atlanta
Falcons, ....The Patriots, The Philadelphia Eagles, the St. Louis Cardinals, the
San Diego Chargers, San Francisco, Washington, Kansas City, etc., etc. I think
that this is a matter that, number one it is obviously of benefit economically
to the City of Miami. We should get at least $100,000 a year, as I under-
stand it, from the sale of beer. Secondly, I want to point out that in 1980
which is only two seasons away, the concession will be over, the concession
contract, and since we get only 20% --in other words, we get $100,000 and that
represents 20%, that.... Isn't that right?
Mr. Grassie: 30.5%.
Mayor Ferre: Okay, 30.5%, that if we are getting $100,000 now then that means
that when the concession is over we will have if we keep the beer sale or if we
have a better contract on that, we will hopefully have over $300,000 a year for
whatever portion it is that we negotiate that will come to the coffers of the
City for the maintenance of the Orange Bowl. The last argument that I would
have, I think I heard Commissioner Plummer say, which was that over at the Miami
Baseball Stadium we've been selling beer for a long time and it does not seem
to have created a problem at any time. And lastly, there was a very good article
by Charles Whitehead, who really is an exceptional newspaperman, who I thought
hit it right on the head, I forget whether it was Monday or Tuesday of this week
Herald, where he said that everybody takes whiskey and umbrellas in false radios
and everything else to the stadium and that it really makes a lot more sense for
beer to be available because the effects of beer are a lot less than hard liquor
and that we are really much better off, so as soon as we get a full Commission
here I am going to make a motion to that respect, ...did you have one drafted
up Mr. City Attorney?
Mr. Knox: Yes, Sir, we have prepared an Ordinance which would authorize the
sale of beer/malt beverages.
Mayor Ferre: Would you pass it out at this time? Now, while you are passing it
out, let me....would you also pass out the other one?...Do you have the other
one on the ballot for November?
'Mr. Knox: No, Sir, we will have that ready by this afternoon.
Mayor Ferre: All right, we will just make it then in the form of a motion and
I think later on we can get the specifics of it...Mr. Grassie, did you want
to add something?
Mr. Grassie: Only, Mr. Mayor, that my understanding was that the last time
you gave us directions to do the study preparatory for that, but I had not
felt that you wanted a Resolution or an Ordinance at this point.
r..
Mayor Ferre: Well, I just want to make sure that this Commission is going on
record as to what direction we want to take so that it is an official mandate
to you rather than an unofficial type of a thing. It seems to me that if we
do it any other way is just...you know, it's just going to create confusion.
i2 JUN 2115
Mfs, Gordon: On the beet Ordinance, I don t.see it on the Agenda, Mt• Mayor,
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon, as you recall that was something that I brought
Up at the..,
Mrs. Gordon: There are a lot of people that would like to speak to this you
know,..
Mayor Ferre: Yes, as I brought it up on Thursday on the 16th, and you invoked
the 5- day rule, so therefore....
Mrs. Gordon: It was on another matter, this is the beer Ordinance.
Mayor Ferre: No, Ma'am, on the beer Ordinance and I specifically stated that
it would be brought out first thing on the June 21 Agenda,which is this morning,
and therefore, based on that, a request of yours, it has been postponed.
Mrs. Gordon: I requested a continuance on the other matter, Mr. Mayor, if you
check your records you have your Minutes right here before you, you requested
those minutes.
Mayor Ferre: I tried to get this beer matter before the Commission on the
21st, and the 5-day rule was invoked, the 5 days are here, and I am bringing
it up at this time.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I differ with you, I invoked the 5-day rule on the
other matter regarding the improvements to the Orange Bowl. Also the people
of the City of Miami have a right to know if we are going to be voting on a
matter of such consequence, they should be allowed to come in and speak to it.
Mayor Ferre: As you know, if we pass it on First Reading today, 30 days from now,
we will have the Second Reading, at which time we will call a Public Hearing for
that purpose.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Knox, isn't it necessary to advertise for a First Reading on
an Ordinance?
Mr. Knox: No, Ma'am, between First and Second Reading...prior to Second Reading
we can have a Public Hearing.
Mrs. Gordon: You don't have to advertise the First Reading.
Mayor Ferre: All right, at this time I pass the gavel over to Father Gibson
and I move the Ordinance before you, it reads: (MAYOR FERRE READ THE ORDINANCE
INTO THE RECORD).
Mr. Reboso: Does the Administration recommend it?
Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir.
Mr. Reboso: I second the motion.
Mayor Ferre: Would you then, if this thing passes, make sure that we have a
Public Hearing on this at the appropriate time for the Second Reading?
Mr. Plummer: Somebody do some explaining here to me. Mr. Grassie or Mr. Knox,
what is .this "such privilege may only be granted once during each calendar year"
what are you driving at there?
Mr. Grassie: We are talking about the concession privilege, Commissioner, the
point is to make sure that you do not have uncontrolled sale or uncontrolled dis-
pensing within the facility. Bob Jennings tells me that there is a better
explanation, maybe you ought to get up there and tell them.
Mr. Jennings: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, perhaps you'll remember that about a
year or so ago the Orange Bowl Committee asked whether they could use the area
above gate 14 for a cocktail party prior to the Orange Bowl game for the Orange
Bowl Committee members, about 150 or so. This Ordinance at that time was written
in such a way that it would have prohibited that party so the Ordinance was re-
written at that time and this provision relates to that particular party. In
other words, on one occasion per year.
12 JUN 211977
tiff Plummer: Okay, then what do you do if the NFL owners during Supetbowi
want to have such a party, would.it be prohibited?
Mr. Jennings: Well, no, I don't believe so let me read to you....
Mt. Mummer: You can only grant it once, it's pretty clear to me, Bob.
Mr. Knox: In other words, each authorized user has one opportunity per year.
Mr. Jennings: That's my impression too, I don't know if that's what it Bays
but I think that that's it.
Mr. Plummer: All right, let me ask you this; would this allow Joe Ban to
bring his own beer in?
Mr. Jennings: No, because we are not repealing the other Ordinance which
prohibits bottles and cans being brought into --or any alcoholic beverage --
from being brought into the stadium.
Mr. Plummer: Okay, a guy brings in cardboard cup full of whiskey. How are
you going to stop him? I'm just asking these questions now, you know.
Mr. Jennings: I'll let the City Attorney address that, I think.
Mr. Plummer: I think these are all things you better get damn clear.
Mrs. Gordon: I think a matter of such importance should have been given to
us prior to now. We've just been handed this Resolution or this Ordinance
I don't think that anybody here is really acquainted with it.
Mayor Ferre: Well, there is plenty of time to amend it and change it between
now and the second reading.
Mr. Jennings: It does say in the first sentence that except beer, wine and
malt that are sold within the stadium, so it does restrict in bringing it in.
Mr. Plummer: Maurice, so that there is no misunderstanding, I'm in favor of
selling beer in the Orange Bowl. I'm just trying to get it clarified now so
that the question doesn't come up later.
Mayor Ferre: Well, after you finish let me make a statement about it.
Mr. Plummer: Please do.
Mayor Ferre: From a practical point of view, I don't think that it is any
secret to anybody who has ever gone to the Orange Bowl that just about everybody
in every row has some kind of liquor,..that doesn't mean that everybody that goes
there takes liquor but I doubt very much that there is a row anywhere where some-
body doesn't have a bottle or some kind of a bottle or some kind of aeanteen or
an umbrella (as Charles Whitehead says) that's full of liquor. It seems to me
that, you know, prohibition was over 40 years ago and every stadium in the nation
has beer sale and, you know, it's almost incredible that we happen to be the
dinasour of the stadiums in more than one way, and this is one of the ways in
which we are a dinasour. And I think it's time for us to improve the Orange Bowl
to improve these things, this is going to give us the funds that will help improve
the Orange Bowl. Now, you know, if we don't do it this way, do you know what the
alternative is?...we are going to have to get that additional money from the tax-
payers of this City. Now, we will have between First and Second Reading to make
new changes,.. corrections...
Mr. Plummer: Now, Maurice, I'm sorry, we have got to do it right. I don't see
anywhere in here where it is excluded the sale during highschool football games.
I don't see anywhere in here where it is excluded at rock concerts.
Mayor Ferre: Would you explain that?
Mr. Jennings: Yes, we discussed that, that Law Department and I. With the Law
Department's opinion that you restrict that in your concession agreement, in
other words, the agreement with the concessionaire rather than in the Ordinance.
In other words, when you develop your agreement with the concessionaire so that
he may sell beer, you would restrict him in the agreement from selling it at
13 'JUN 21.197;
high school or whatever type of event you may want to testtict
Mayor Ferre: Well, we don't want any beer selling in any high
rock concerts* or any other soft of ...this is strictly for the
for the Superbowl, and for the Orange howl Pageant.
W. Plummer: Well, how about the University of Miami?
Rev..:Gibson: No...
Mr. Plummer: No? Well, they sell beer in their campus.
Rev. Gibson: No, what I mean is that I don't think we ought to..I don't think
we need to worry about the Dolphins, as long as it is a professional "something".
•I'm opposed to the children and I'm opposed to rock concerts. Now; the other
things, you know, I don't think we can afford to restrict, for instance* if
Florida N & M comes down here as a professional outfit, you know, or the University
of Miami, we couldn't do that to them.
Mr. Jennings: Well, we presumably could ask them in each case if they'd like
to have it restricted or not and then put it in the agreement with the concession-
aire.
it in.
school games*
bolphins and
Mayor Ferre: All right, any other questions on this? All right, Father,if not
I call the question.
Rev. Gibson: Okay, call the roll.
Mr. Ongie: W. City Attorney, do you want to read the Ordinance?
Mr. Knox: We have to read the Ordinance at a formal commission session. This
is a Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Plummer: Weal", what -are iae doing?
Mr. Knox: We are just making a motion now.
Mayor Ferre: This is a Committee of the Whole, what he is saying is that we
ought to pass it as a Motion and then pass it as an Ordinance later on today.
Mr. Grassie: Yes, this is really an opportunity to debate it as you said
earlier, it was not formally put on your Agenda or it would have been put on
later.
Mayor Ferre: As a motion then, I move i t .
Mrs. Gordon: Correct me if I'm wrong, didn't we pass this as a motion last
week?
Mayor Ferre: No.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Manager, wasn't this passed as a motion?
Mr. Grassie: No, what the City Commission did was indicate its intention to
have it on as a first item of discussion in the Committee of the Whole on this
date. Now, as it happens, the Agenda had already been circulated so that we
could not actually print it on the Agenda but that was your indication of in-
tention.
Mrs. Gordon: I wonder why you didn't have it on the Supplemental which came in
last night.
W. Grassie: I did not receive the Resolution until this morning, that is the
only reason, Commissioner.
Mayor Ferre: We passed it on Thursday...well, okay, All right,
question again.
Mx. Ongie: This is a motion now,
Mayor Ferre: As a :motion.
19
call the
Thereupon the foregoing motion introduced by Mayor Ferre and seconded by
Commmissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr., passed and adopted by the following vote4 Vas
designated Motion No. 77=-516:
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.*
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Fevre
NOES: Commissioner Rose Gordon
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mr. Plummer: Understanding that this is nothing more than a motion to sell
beer at the Orange Bowl Stadium, number two, that a Public Hearing will be
called prior to the final adoption, and number three- it is understood that
many revisions, or any revisions can be added to or deleted from this which
has been presented this morning, I vote yes.
Mayor Ferrre: This afternoon, when we vote on the Ordinance on First Reading,
I would like to call the Second Reading to be on the 14th of July, which would
be a Public Hearing. Would the Clerk advertise an appropriate time on the
14th, is that all right, Mr. Manager?
Mr. Grassie: Yes, Sir. I would like to ask one question of clarification when
you are done with your comments.
Mayor Ferre: I'm done.
Mr. Grassie: Before we present this for you, this afternoon, as an Ordinance
for First Reading, do you want us to make the change that Commissioner Plummer
has suggested with respect to the one time?
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
Mr. Grassie: So that should be amended.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, that's what all this discussion is about. All right, now,
secondly, I also mentioned on Thursday that I wanted to offer and I do it this
time as I pass the gavel over to Father Gibson, offer to you a motion so that
a proper Ordinance would be prepared instructing the Manager to pursue forth-
with those improvements to make the Orange Bowl a first class stadium in time
for the Superbowl in January of 1979, specifically in the areas of: parking,
seats, public areas and other amenities that would upgrade the quality of the
stadium, number one; number two, that the Manager be instructed to pursue the
possibility of having Metropolitan Dade County and even Broward County help
us finance these improvements any way that they see fit. And that if 45 days
before the November election, no such help has been proffered, that on a specific
line item basis, outlining the improvements, but on a total vote, in other words
there is only one vote, the city of Miami go on record and put this on the
November election, so that the electorate of the City of Miami will have the
opportunity once again to decide whether or not it is willing to pay ad valorem
taxes to improve the Orange Bowl, and I do this on the basis of what I felt
was an overwhelming vote of approval on the June 7th ballot for the Orange
Bowl. This does not mean to say Mr. Manager, and if you can find other ways of
financing this, such as beer sales, etc. in which you feel it is conservative
that we can finance some of these improvements like for example, the signboard,
that it can be done without going to public expense,that we can find advertisers
that are willing to pay for it, that obviously we would not want the taxpayers
to pay for. But that is something that will have to be discussed between now
September. As I recall that day would be the 24th day of September. That on
the 24th day of September, we would then specifically put this on the November
ballot.
Mr. Plummer: It would be the same date as the final date
Mayor Ferre: The 24th of September.
Mr. Plummer: Which is 23rd of September.
Mayor Ferre:I stand corrected. It is a Friday?
W. Ongie: Friday at 6 o'clock.
Mayor Ferre; I so move,
for filing.
Mr. Mutter: 1 Will second it. This is a way to explore and I think this is
what we tteed to do. Mr. Mayor what I maybe didn't hear is one thing that is most
itaportant to me, and that -is, that a definitive plan be developed of the itaprovei.
tents..
Mayor Ferre: I started out",by saying, parking,-----
Mr.Plummer: Did you -understand it that way Mr. Grassie?
Mayor Ferre:-----public areas,and-other amenities.
Mr. Plummer: No, a definitive plan.
Mr. Grassie: Rather than a definitive plan, Commissioner what I would like to
do is bring to you a stepped plan, or set of alternatives, each one costing
some what more than the last so you have some choices to make.
Mayor Ferre: I accept that as an amendment to my motion.
Mr. Ongie: I am sorry, I didn't hear that last amendment.
Mayor Ferre: The amendment was that in the order to the Manager, to come back
with a proposal, that it be a definitive stepped plan so we can look at alternatives.
So much for an additional thousand parking, so much for three thousand parking, so
much for escalators, so much for the different amenities that we can have and we
take it from there.
Mrs. Gordon: I vote yes because of the exploratory nature of this and the recom-
mendations to have.a survey of it on a step-by-step basis.
Thereupon the foregoing motion, introduced by Mayor Ferre, seconded by
Mr. Plummer, was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote. Said motion was designated
Motion No. 77-517. (See resolution No. 77-549 adopted later in the meeting)
7 BRIEF DISCUSSIONITEM: DEADLINE FOR PLACING QUESTION ON FALL BALLOT:
Mr. Plummer: Let me just bring out one other thing which is not part of the
motion. Mr. Grassie, it relates to the motion, but it doesn't. I for one, want
you to develop in particularly the plan which was used to second -deck the Orange
Bowl in revenue bonds, because I am going to tell you for one, that before I will
stick 10 cents on the ad valorem taxes,that you have got to prove to me, that that
plan won't work for the improvements that we are presently proposing. To me that
plan worked. Nobody lost a dollar. It was a successful plan. It didn't cost the
taxpayers anything and I don't see why that same kind of plan cannot be used again
to do future improvements as it was done in the past. So all I am saying to you is,
you have to prove to me that it won't work this time before I will consider putting
it on ad valorem.
Mrs. Gordon: I could say amen to what you just said J.L.
Mayor Ferre: Let me put it to you this way. That is more or less the position
you were in before, and I respect that, and that is why you voted the way you did.
We put it on as a straw ballot and consequently we ended up in a kind of situation
that we did. So we don't end up getting snookered again, Mr. Clerk, if we pass
this on first reading on Septebmer 24, or 23,-.t-if we pass it on 2nd reading 30 days
thereafter, is that sufficient time for us to get it on the ballot November 8th.
Mr. Ongie: Not September,----youldon'.t have to wait 30 days anymore.You could pass
it the next day, on second reading. There is no time requirements anymore.
Mayor Ferre:So we could have 1st reading in the first week in September, and have
2nd reading immediately after, so if we only get three votes.
Mr. Plummer: I have no objection, if this system is discounted, to going and asking
the people if they wish to do it on ad valorem. I want the revenue way of doing it,
to be proven that it is not successful.
Mayor Ferre: I know J.L. You want to go to heaven but you don't want to die.
Mr. Plummer: I don't know about that. I don't know that I want to go to heaven.
'JUN 217977
16
Mayor Ferre: I will tell you something else about that. For the record and
perhaps this is the first time anybody has ever said this on the record in
the City of Miami. I want to say that the Orange Bowl has been,— ---Mr. Manager,
this is city business I want you to hear, ----
Mr. Grassie: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferrer ----the Orange Bowl has been an expense to the taxpayers of the
City of Miami for several years. It has not been, all this milarky that we have
heard, that the Orange Bowl doesn't cost the citizens of Miami one cent, is
a lot hooy. It costs the citizens 100's of thousands of dollars and let's not
kid ourselves about anymore.
$, -PERKNAL APPEARANCE: RICK SISSER, CITY OF MIAMI LOBBYIST - RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR APPOINTMENTS TO C'STITUTIO AL REVISION COMII I if.
Mayor Terre: Now, we have Rick Sisser with us and he has to catch a plane,
so before we go to the regular agenda, we will get Rick Sisser up here. Give
us your report and I know you have to catch a plane to Tallahassee to go the
testimonial dinner for Lew Brantley. We want to think you Rick for the wonderful
job you did. I think you accomplished almost the impossible. Why don't you give
us your report and tell us where we -are and what we need to do.
Mr. Rick Sisser: Okay. At the current point in time, unless the Governor vetoes
the Bill, we will be able to redevelop downtown Miami with tax increment financing.
The budget was passed on Thursday. In line item 201, the Governor's recommendation,
the House recommendation and the Senate recommendation was 150 thousand dollars
for the Latin American trade fair for the City. 0f course we did pass a bill to
enable revenue bond financing for theme and amusement parks. So all the major
priorities that we set forth at the beginning of the year were accomplished.
The next step, is a decision of the Commission, on constitutional revision
commission which starts meeting on July 6 and they will be taking up all taxing
measures of the City, all the city's power in taxing. I think that is the next
area that the commissioners are looking to.
Mr. Plummer: Has the Commission been named?
Mr. Sisser: The people who are on the commission know who they are. The list
has not been released.
Mayor Ferre: You mean the total commission has already been named?
Mr. Sisser: All I know is, that when walking around Tallahassee those legislators
that are on the commission already know there is a July 6 meeting and already making
plans.
Mr. Plummer: Aren't there others than legislators on constitutional revisions?
Mr.Sisser: Yes, sir, and I am sure that those people have notified and know they
know the plans. The entire list has not been released.
Mayor Ferre: I have been writing letter furiously trying to get some of our city
people on.
Mrs. Gordon: I think George Knox was nominated. I don't know if he has been
appointed or not.
Mayor Ferre; We have been working diligently on that one through Sandy D'lambert
and through the Governor. But let me ask you this Rick. I am worried about the
Governor vetoing any one of these things we have. Is there any chance of his vetoing
the tax increment?
Mr. Sisser: The compromise we setforth on the tax increment bill which I think
alleviated any problem we had in the governor's office, was that the school boards
get their village. The only village that is used is the other 20 mills. So the school
boards get theirs. The school system is not hurt in any way shape or form and they
get their increase. I think that solved the problem.
Mayor Ferre: This saves me writing a letter, - I casually vention this, the
17 JUN 21 977i
atoty that was wtitten. it didn't have a byline. I don't know who wrote it.
came out in the last week or so► It was page 2B I think it was.It had two
basic mistakes in it, In the first place it did not indicate that this does
not involve the school millage. That was left out of the story. That is an
important part of it. The second thing was that it came as a surprise. But
I want to tell you that that whole thing was the City of Miami's baby. We
thought of it. The Downtown Development Authority spent thousands of dollars,
We wrote the bill through Mr. Jacobs in California. Rick Sisser personally
handled it. He got John Forbes personally committed to it. There is no mention
in any of the press releases that the City of Miami had anything to do with it,
Okay. That happens. I just want, for the record, it won't appear anywhere else,
but for the record, this was the City of Miami's victory. We thought of it. We
did it. We guided it. We paid for it, and cost us a hell of a lot of money. So,
I am happy to say that that was one victory that we had. Rick, an awful lot of
the credit goes to you. I wan to tell you how grateful we are in the City. I am
glad to hear from you that the Governor is not going to veto it.
Mr. Sisser: That is the response we have got. He might not sign it into law, but
I don't think he will veto it.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you this. More importantly till this morning, what is
the possibility if any, that the Governor would veto the funds for the world trade
fair.
Mr. Sisser: No.
Mayor Ferre: He is all for it.
Mr. Sisser: In the Governor's recommendation for the budget, it was $150,000
for the Trade Fair. In the Senate recommendation in the budget it was $150,000
for the Trade Fair, and in the House budget it was proviso language on line item
201 for the $150,000 for the Trade Fair. The next step, is once the legislators
pass some form of taxing to fund the budget, we then go to the department of
commerce and ask Trombeta and Hennessey to release the $150,000.
Mayor Ferre: I don't think we have any problem with that. I have talked to
the Governor's office. You have really earned you fee. By the way, on that.
Let me ask you, our contract with you is for what?
Mr. Sisser: For lobbying.
Mayor Ferre: I know its for lobbying. Our contract with you, for lobbying, is
it for the year, or the session?
Mr. Sisser: I have interpreted it to mean whenever I have to be in Tallahassee
to represent the City for whatever committee meetings are there for the legislature.
MayorFerre: In other words, we are covered on a legislative basis. The session
is coming up on Wednesday again. Tomorrow.
MR. Sisser: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: You are going to be there representing us and watching after
interest. Is that correct?
Mr. Sisser: Yes, sir. At no extra cost to the City.
Mayor Ferre: As I recall we had put $3,000. for expenses. What was the agreement
we had with you?
Mr. Sisser: The agreement is for the year for legislative services, $12,000,
fee and $3,000. expenses.
Mayor Ferre:I see. And that covers us for whatever legislative functions,-----
does that cover us for the constitutional revision?
Mr. Sisser: No, sir.
Mayor Ferre; It seems to Me, Mr, Mananger we need somebody there perhaps more
important, than even in the legislature. I would like for you and Rick, ----would
you assign this to somebody in your office because the constitutional revision
begins in tuly. As you know, once that is done, it goes straight to the electorate.
I think we had better be mote concerned about that than we are about the legis.=
lature. Here is what I would like to do. I would like to propose, --Rick what
would be fair? Let's have an open discussion about it.
Mr. Sisser: I think that with the agendas that have been set forth and a time
required, I think somewhere in the neighborhood of $7000. fee and $3,000. for
the expenses of traveling around the State to meet with whoever they meet.
Mayor Ferre; Rather than us take a position, why don't you discuss this with
the Manager and with the City Attorney who really probably has more to do with
this as a legal matter, and why don't you both report to us this afternoon what
your recommendations are. If you don't want to use him as a lobbyist then tell
us who you want to use as a lobbyist, if you have an alternate.
Mr. Grassie: In fairness to him Mr. Mayor we need more time than by this afternoon,
because we are going to be in session with you all the time until this afternoon.
Mr. Plummer: Give him all that is in the contingency fund, $12.63.
Mr. Reboso: How long is the constitutional revision going to take?
Mr. Sisser: It will probably be meeting for over 6 months.
Mayor Ferre:When does it start?
Mr. Sisser: July 6th.
Mayor Ferre: We don't have a meeting between now and July 6. The only alternative
is for you to go on good faith and go to those meetings, and hopefully you would
bring it back by the 14th.
Mr. Grassie: Certainly that is plenty of time. If you wish to simply to indicate
your general intent that we be covered on those sessions, we would bring back a
formalizing resolution for you on the 14th.
Mayor Ferre:I don't know what the rest of this commission feels, but in my
opinion it is essential that we have people that do nothing but sit around
Tallahassee when these things are happening and lobby for us. The firefighters
have found out better than anybody else how that functions. And the teachers
have. God takes care of those who take care of themselves. As far as this vote
is concerned I think we need somebody watching out after our interest, during
the constitutional session.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor maybe I have no business mentioning this, but I happen
to know the chairman, and we had a discussion. The chairman indicated that it was
his wish that the city of Miami would, --I want to put this in the record, maybe
we could take the necessary action, --that it is his wish that the City of Miami
would look with favor upon the using of our City Attorney and helping to draft
and revise this constitution. Sandy D'Lamberti told me that in my office. It might
be a good thing if the commission expressed itself, that should we come to that
position, that the City of Miami is not adverse, and since you say you want somebody
on the constitution revision to write it, I am only saying to you what was said to
me. I want you to note, I put it in the record so if it is a lie, it can't be a
lie I told. I said he told me. I don't want anybody to think because he is black,
and because it is political. I want to make sure this is an open, above -board deal.
So now what do we do Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Ferre: About what?
Rev. Gibson: I said to you that I talked with Sandy D'Lamberti last week, and
it was his wish that the City Commission will look with favor upon his asking, ---
Mayor Ferre: It is done. It is on its way. The governor knows about it. Sandy
has already requested it. His name has been submitted. I have written a letter
of recommendation to the Governor. What else can we do?
Rev. Gibson: Mr, Mayor I am only asking for information. I want to make it a part
of the record. You wrote a letter as the Mayor. I am talking about the Commission
ought to express itself, --the five of us.
19 JUUN 211977
Mayot .ette: f'athet Gibson moves that tae recommend to the Governor, the Speaker
of the House and the President of the Senate, the natne of George Knox, to be on
the constitutional revision committee.
Mr, Reboso: We also have the request of one member of the City
be on that.
Mayor Ferre: That J. b. Plummer also be, ----we recommend those
sideration.
The above motion was passed and adopted by a unanimous vote of
(See Resolution No. 77-548 adopted later in the meeting.)
Commission to
two for his core -
the Commission.
9, FI RE OEPARIMENT MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION,
Mayor Ferre: Now we are on item 1A, presentation of the fire department's
master plan.
Chief Don Hickman: Good morning, Mr. Mayor and Commissioners. Don Hickman, Chief,
City of Miami Fire Department. I want to repeat a truism you recently made Mr. Mayor.
We are not going away but we do wish to work with and serve. I would like to make
a few brief statements introducing this plan. This Plan first has been before Mr.
Grassie, second, before the PAB Board and now to this point before you on a workshop
session. In 1973, the fire department set about reorganizing our department. After
careful analysis of the present situation, we immediately changed our priorities
to fire prevention and education. To cope with the future growth we turn to the
concept of master -planning. After several meetings with the citizens' committee,
a committee from the firefighters union, we turned to the Planning Department for
help. The Planning Department graciously assigned two men to us, Mr. Acton and
Mr. Fosmoen has continued this cooperation. In the fire department's opinion, the
assigning of the two men from the Planning Department has been the best thing
that has happened to us since we unhooked the horses and started up our motors.
They are both extremely talanted men. We coupled with these two men, Mr. Ed Lynch
and Pierce Ekelbert, Deputy Chief Brice and two captains, Captain Rehr and Captain
Farrer..For. the last year and a half, they have worked many many hours to get this
plan to this position. And to capuslize master -planning to you a short statement
I would like to explain it to you in my way. I think that emergency and fire master -
planning, is a plan that is built for the ciitzens to ascertain fire risk they wish
to assume in their community. It is a total developed plan by the community. It looks
at today's fire situation, ,anticipates tomorrow's problems an builds alternative plans
with costs and benefits to solve them both. I would respectfully request that we could
present this simple agenda in a team effort beginning with Mr. Lynch, Deputy Chief
Brice, Deputy Chief Prolie and then as a team answer any questions that the Commission
desires. Mr. Lynch.
Mr. Ed Lynch: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, before talking about the
organization and content of the plan I would like to go over with you a little bit
the reasons why a plan was prepared at all. One of the principal reasons for the
plan is that we anticipate that federal grants in the future will require that
local governments have an adopted fire plan. The second reason is that state law
requires that local governments in Florida prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan
which we have done. But in addition state law suggest that the larger cities pre-
pare and adopt several additional elements including a public facilities element,
a public services element and a public safety element. We feel that the fire plan
will partially satisfy the element and also make our neighborhood plan more compre-
hensive. The third reason for preparing a fire plan, is that it is a useful manage-
ment tool. It provides the administration with the guide to better organizing and
utilizing the resources it has. There is very little doubt that in the future in
order to maintain its class one rating, the fire department will look towards
improving the efficiency and effectiveness of its services..It cannot look towards
increasing the manpower resources it has, or expanding the number of fire stations
within the city, as the Dade County fire plan has suggested for its fire service.
In terms of the evolution of the plan, it represents a year and a half's work of
the Fire'Department and the Planning Department and thoroughly analyzing the
operations, resources and goals of the Fire Department. Literally dozens of work-
shops and meetings were held to look at the programs that on -going and find ways
of improving those programs. Goals were developed, priorities were established,
and means for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of services were identified,
The plan was prepared parallel to, in considering the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood
20 JUN 211977
Plan. Representatives from the Fite Department attended the meetings that we
had on the comprehensive Plan, and we looked very Carefully at where developments
in the future was to occur, and took it into consideration. For these reasons we
consider that the fire plan is comprehensive, realistic and achievable. Altogether
a total of more than 50 recommenations have been developed, and they have been
organized by the major fire department functions that we have shown here, which
are fire prevention, fire suppression, rescue, training and safety, communications,
water supply and apparatus maintenance, organization administration and management,
human resources and capital improvements.
We are going to talk a little bit more in the workshop this morning about this last
one, capital improvement and particularly about fire stations. When we are talking
about fire service and rescue services, we have to appreciate that capital improve-
ments, --they are very closely related to operational cost. A new fire station including
lands would cost the city perhaps about 600 thousand dollars. But in only one year,
it cost the city 600 thousand dollars simply to have two pieces of apparatus at
that station. So we have to look very carefully at where new stations are going to
be located in the future so we don't waste any public resources, and we also had
to look very carefully at existing stations, to determine whether or not they should
continue to operate and whether or not they will be able to serve the fire projection
needs of the city in the next 10 years. With only about 3 or 4 exceptions, most of
the fire stations in the past have been located on lands that was already owned by
the city. The land was available and the lands was inexpensive because the city
already owned it. We just had to worry about the construction cost of the fire
station. Fortunately with the approval by the electorate of the 1976 fire bonds,
we are going to be able to look at purchasing some property and finding locations
which are much better suited than some of the locations in the past may have been.
During the last decade the science of planning fire stations has been become
very sophisticated, and computer models have been developed which look at such
things as fire incidence history, work load, physical barriers, like rivers and
bridges and expressways and things like that. Type of apparatus, whether you have
ladders or engines. Travel time to various fire hazards in the city, travel dis-
tances to various points in existing or proposed land uses.
About a year ago the city acquired the Rand Institute, Fire house site
evaluation model which considers all these variables that I mention to you,
and which provided us information on what the impact would be of moving stations
around or moving apparatus around within the City, in terms of what the response
time would be, to fire hazards. It didn't make decisions for us. It simply provided
us information in terms of the advantages and disadvantages of moving these stations
around or moving apparatus around. Although about 100 different alternatives were
looked at before we arrived at the proposal that we will be presenting to the Commission
today, but this has a brief introduction. I would like to ask Chief Brice now to talk
to you a little bit about what the plan is or station locations in the future and to
talk a little bit about the task force concept that we've come up with.
Chief Brice: Thank you Ed. Mr. Mayor, Commission. This plan that we are submitting
for your review this morning is contingent upon finding resources to do some new things
in our community. We are attempting to identify in these 50 yard recommending ways of
serving the public in a better way. Realizing that there are certain constraints in
terms of continued growth. We had to look within in our own department to find ways
of utilizing existing resources in a more productive way and we found that the basic
way to do this was to look at our fire supperssion forces. The relocation of fire
stations and the reduction of 15 fire stations to 11 fire stations is the essence of
this whole plan. It's within this concept that we find the resources to provide the
programs that we will identify to you today. The configuration of stations as we
propose it in 11 instead of 15 carries with it the advantage of the task force concept
which we have always recognized as good fighting tactics. Today, the map on your left
represents the existing 15 fire stations in the City of Miami. Most of the stations
are either double companied, an engine and a ladder, or single company and engine.
The elements of good fire attack is made of a combination of two engines and a ladder.
The "H" on the plan represents an engine. We identify a hose and an engine in a single
company, station, or in a station that way so we can distinguish between engine one,
hose one, for instance. But for discussion purposes this morning the engine and the
hose are synonymous. What we were trying to do in addition to finding resources was to
find a way to put these three elements, an engine company, a hose company, and a ladder
company into one fire station responding together, working together daily code eefore-
went and inspections and in training so that when we hit the scene of a fire we have tha/
21
J JN 211977,
team work together arriving simultaneously in order to do the best and most productive
way of handling and neutralizing an emergency. The ;fifteen stations that you see you
on your left and I won't go into identifying all the locations. Basically, as represent-
ed the changes on your map on your right and 2 will identify those areas that we plan
to make changes in and where we plan on consolidating two fire stations into one.
(Can you see Mr. Plummer?) Station one downtown will remain on 5th Street. Station
2, at 19th and Miami will remain. Station 3, which is located over near the Orange
Bowl on 7th Street and llth Avenue will be combined with a new station facility.
Station 14, located the present time at 27th Avenue and 1st Street. We're looking in
the area of 22nd Avenue, S.W. section for a new location and we will bring together
the engine and ladder company of Station 14 with the engine from Station 3 closing
Station 14 and utilizing Station 3 is a Fire Deparment Resource. The station at 27th
and 1st will be returned to the city for their disposal or their use for whatever
purpose they define. Whether it be for a park or whether it be for social programs or
whatever the need of the community is. Station 3 will remain as a rescue headquarters
at this time and be utilized in training and storage of our equipment at that point.
Station 4 is an old fire station 50 some odd years old located on loth Street and South
Miami Avenue. At the present time it has an engine company and a ladder company. We
proposed moving this fire station to the S.W. of its present location and closing Station
15 which is located on 12th Avenue, 13th Street, combining those two stations and utiliz-
ing the task force concept again. So here we have two fire station locations which
will be consolidated into one and the two existing locations turned over to the city.
Station 5 located at the present time at 17th Street and 7th Avenue is near in completion
of a new facility located at 20th Street and 12th Avenue, the old incinerator site.
We are hopeful that this station will be completed in July, next month and at that time
Station 16 located at 23rd Avenue and 23rd Street will be closed. The ladder company
at that station will be moved to the new Station 5 and the engine company will be
removed from Station 16 and transferred to Station 10 and we will utilize the manpower
from that engine company and change the company to a ladder company. One of the areas
that we have been weakish in our total fire fighting capabilities is to have proper
ladder coverage in the westend of our city. At the present time the closest ladder is
located at 27th and 1st and it runs to the to the west is extremely long.
So this ladder company will go a long way to making our fire utensils far superior to
what we have now with the 15 fire stations. Station 6 remains. Station 8 in the Grove
remains. Station 9 in the Little River Area will be moved to the 71st location to an
area somewhere in the 62nd Street area and Station 13, a single company station on N.E.
2nd and 48 Street will be closed combining that engine company with a ladder and the
hose company at Station 9's new facility. That's the summary then of taking our 15
fire stations reducing it to 11 and we feel that the flexibility that we will gain from
this consolidation will enable us to do some of the new programs that we are outlining
in our master plan and we feel that it will enhance the fire protection capabilities
of our fire department to the citizens of the City of Miami by utilization of our task
force concept. Now, very briefly I'd like to show you some comparisons in terms of what
the computer has done for us which enabled us to arrive at this conclusion. First of
all we must understand that all the limits set on this particular map are well within
good fire protection expectancies. We feel that if we can get to the scene of a fire
our average response time being 3.2 minutes. If we can reach the scene of a fire with-
in 412 to 5 minutes that we are covering our city adequately and you can see from the
chart on your left that the response time have not been injured to a great degree by
the configuration of the new station. Now, we're talking here about not only first
due engines as we had in this particular existing situation, but rather the arrival
of two engines simultaneously. So we had to keep in mind that we are placing in the
new proposed plan of 11 fire stations, 2 engine companies on the scene at the same time
which is a great advantage in handling those situations that are out of control or a
major incident. So we feel that the first due engine and the second due engine time
are far within the acceptable range with our proposal of 11 fire stations compared to
the 15, and if we can look at the next chart the impressive thing that came from reducing
our fire stations from 15 to 11 is the tremendous improvement that we got from our ladder
coverage. Our first due ladder which is interglacial part of firefighting necessary for
rescue, for ventilation and for all those support services that go along with the
extinguishment part of the engine company. You can see that my placing the ladder in our
western part of our city that we reduced this 4 to 5 minute response time to the west
and that we substantially have increased our response time to a lower level in the
central part of the city. So, in conclusion we feel that we can reduce our fire stations.
The better you utilize our resisting resources and continue to protect the city in an
excellent manner. Chief Proli?
Chief Proli: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission. You have presented here for you a
few charts and you all see, the Fire Rescue Capital Program and primarily it addresses
itself to the ten million dollars in bond money that was passed by the community in
September of 76. We identify it by number, project description, total cost. The
appropriation is to date. The estimated required amount of money, anticipated fiscal
year that this is going to be implemented. Fire Station #5 is presently under construction
and is located at N.W. 12th Avenue and 20th Street and you'll see it identified here
$412,000.00 under the 1970 bond issue. It wasn't sufficent funds to complete the project
22 JUN z i 1977
or
So therefore $90,141.00 will be coming out of the first five million dollars of bonds
that have been sold out of the 1976 bond program. The $17,000.00 of capital improve-
ment furx3s that covered the total cost estimate. We anticipate moving into that
station July 15th to July 31st and will house two engine companies and a ladder carpany.
This is some preliminary bond expenses that contingencies. Number three is air mask
and breathing apparatus for a total allocation of $152,000. This is the new NASA
type of breathing apparatus that has a redundant regulator, a positive pressure and a
face piece. 30% less weight. However, only $60,000.00 is identified in the 1976
bond puvyLam. Presently you have $65,000.00 incumbent in federal revenue sharing funds
to enable us to purchase 150 breathing apparatus carrying cases, face pieces and some
spare cylinders. You passed, we went into an agreement with Survive Air Company, which
not the NASA type breathing equipment. It's the old type breathing equipment that is
not provided for the fire service. It was an agreement, it was a temporary measure
to use in this interim periods until the NASA units were on the market on a competitive
prices. So it's a temporary agreement we went into that can be terminated in the first
year, second year, or third year and these funds right here $27,000 on the operating
budget will provide the first year payments on Survive Air. They are not the NASA
breathing equipment. Item 4E4 represents the purchase of (3) Rescue Vehicles, they're
approximately $30,000 each. They're harsh useage that the rescue service has. A
vehicle usually lasts a vicinity of four years before it totally has to be replaced.
So identifies in the fiscal period 76-77 (3) Rescue Vehicles. The following year (1)
Rescue Vehicle . Of course, specifications have to be prepared, bids have to be
received, contracts be awarded and the vehicles constructed. Fire Station #10 presently
exists at Le Jeune Rd. & 7th Street and it's simply and addition of $100,000 that
provide dormitory space, sanitary facilities, and an apparatus bay to house new ladder
10 that Chief Brice just spoke to you about in consolidation of our stations. Fire
Station #9 which is number 7 on your list $600,000 provided for the facility itself
and land acquisition it weuld be necessary for. It is a 53 year old structure, I
believe. It's in a residential area, very poorly located, deteriorating very rapidly.
The ceiling fell in yesterday, part of the ceiling fell in yesterday. So, that's
take care. That's in the fiscal period 77-78. The new fire station # 4 that Chief
Brice spoke to (of course you see the fund is a little more) $750,000. We feel the
land value will be a little higher in that particular area. It will take care of the
facility and the fire station and we'll cambine Fire Station 15 & 4 in a new facility.
Medical equipment program #9 sets forth $29,4 4dm� that very simply is two telementry
packages (2)defibulators, (2) oscialloscopes, es for our sophisticated equip-
ment in our Rescue Division. Item #10, which is for the year 77-78 again provides
funding for our Medical Rescue Units and again it repeats we have (5) Rescue Units
in serviceat this particular time and one back-up unit in the event that a failure
of a oscIlose,R Machine or so forth. So itan #10 includes that. It also includes
some funding for (2) scooters for the Orange Bowl , replacement scooters. I'm going to
give you all my attention Mr. Plummer.... Ok, what was that? This number, number 9 and
number 10. ... Ok, it provides funds, the $39,400 is a little more than the $29,000.
It provides funds for the defibulators , the oscilloscopes , CPR Machines,and tele entry
packages and in addition to replace the (2) Orange Bowl Scooters that's used during
the Orange Bowl Events where we have our rescue people riding them. That's going to
became very necessary during 77-78 to have this type of a vehicle. Fire apparatus
replacement identifies $1,115,000. It provides funding for (3) pumpers and (4) aerials.
We submitted in our specifications for (3) pumpers with the availability of purchasing
a fourth pumper if funding permits if the price is low enough. The specifications are
at the Purchasing Agent's Office at this present time. We hopefully, the next two
months will have these specifications prepared for the aerials. New Fire Station #14
Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, Wait a minute Ed, what you better tell these people is that
if you placed an order today for a fire engine it could be any where fran 22 to 32 months
before it's delivered. Ok? So, that's really the importance of getting this equipment
ordered because you could be up to almost three years before you actually get delivered.
I think that's important.
Chief Proli: That's an important point and as I said we have submitted a specificat-
ion for the three pumpers. One month later the bids will cane back. It will be a fixed
cost. So inflation won't runaway with us. We'll fix those charges very early so the
first five million dollars of allocation we want to move with very rapidly because ...
Mr. Plummer: .... give me another example.... for your edification, the city bought
that 150 foot storgel. I think, Don, what did we pay for that 340 or 360? The storgel,
the firebird? $242 today, which is approximately a year later that same piece of
equipment as I think $480,000.00. Am I in the ball park?
Correct.
23 'JUN 211977
Mr. Plummer: So, not only are you talking about getting this stuff ordered because of
the long delivery but this stuff is rapidly going up in price where in a one year frame
that one piece of equipment has almost doubled in price. So, what he's saying is to
get these spec's in, get then ordered so we get a locked in price, so that we don't
pay the price when we take delivery three years later.
Chief Proli: Thank you Mr. Plummer. I appreciate that. We are working very
expeditiously on preparing these specifications again for the four areas. Station 14,
$750,000 identified in the fiscal period of 77-78 which would consolidate the Fire
Station #3 and 14 together. Computerize dispatch, the total amount of money for the
computerize dispatch information retriever system is $1,500,000. Phase I , item #13
identifies $450,000. $18,000 has been expended to date for various studies and
c x riaatibility with other computers in the city leaving a total allocation from the
first five million of $431,000. Fire Administration Offices are very seriously needed
in terms of the Fire Chief's Office was spread city-wide. That's very important that
we get 60 people together in Administrative Office so that we could effectively and
efficiently administer the affairs of the Fire Chief Office. So your first 14 projects
identified five million dollars worth of bonds. These bonds have been sold. We are
working expeditiously in having all of these particularly terms of facilities, land
acquisitions, appraisals, and so forth, working with Mr. Donal Stewart. The next five
million dollars worth of funds will be sold whenever it becomes necessary and we feel
we're prepared to start dealing with it and whether it's necessary for us to complete
our projects. Item #15 again, is for rescue vehicle replacement identifies four rescues
in the period between 89 and 1980. Again, those are very harsh useage of those vehicles.
Number 16 is medical equipment. Number 17 is medical equipment. Again the defibulators,
CPR's, the oscilloscopes , and telementry packages are all important for our rescue
service to provide funding. However, it goes through the year of 79 and 80. Fire apparatus
replacement identifies two additional pumpers and same laclaprs of $805,000. This will
be for apparatus replant piuyiams. $170,000 of item #19 identifies the cost projected
for two pumpers. The vehicular modifications is $37,400 will provide compartments for
our respiratory air breathing. Presently, they're being carried on the outside of trucks
and they're exposed to the weather, heat and sun causing damage to our breathing apparatus
and, of course, as we replace apparatus we're going to provide for air pack compartments.
This will provide some funding for the balance of our equipment. The balance of one
million fifty thousand dollars is the second phase of the cxniputerized dispatch manage-
ment information center. Number 22 is the Illumination Truck- $62,700 which provides
funding, the 6th portable elevated range generator and equipment as passed by a resolution
in 1974 by the Miami City Commission and we have it scheduled for 1978-79. The 6th
Rescue provides funds for a rescue vehicle -$30,000, $25,000 in the equipment that's
needed. However, putting a 6th rescue in service would require some additional manpower.
Perhaps economic conditions will change by the year 1980-81 where this is scheduled for.
If the changes do not take place, well we will cancel that rescue. We'11 hold those
funds in abeyance. Fire training facility, closed circuit television is $2,300,000.
Substantial amount of funds for a training tower, a driver training course, apparatus
base, closed circuit television that's very important in terms of training for total
fire forces. A contingency of $349,000 is built in if inflation rises and cost goes up
sane of the inflationary cost will be picked up out of this $349,000. Now that would
conclude the full $10,000,000 of bond proyLam. Thank you. Chief Brice?
Chief Brice: We would like to summarize by pointing out the twelve general policy
statements that we hope to accomplish by this master plan looking at the next 10 years.
As we stated a couple of times there are 52 exact recommendations that we will be
submitting at a later time, but basically, ... one of the paramount things that we
want to maintain is the Miami Fire Department should modernize and continue to be
self sufficient depending on its on resources to maintain a class I service for
Miami's residents and the Mayor was speaking to this earlier and we support that.
We think that Miami should take care of its own needs in terms of fire protection.
Number two, Miami should maintain control of and modernize its communication and
dispatch function resisting centralized County -wide dispatch for city company. Again,
this is a City Commission position that we should attempt to have our own 9-11 center,
and we're working toward those ends. Three, the Miami Fire Department should became
carmunity service oriented by stepping up fire safety education programs. By expanding
the blood pressure testing program and by initiating the energetic CPR public educat-
ion program accomplished by non -emergency activity time. Number four, rescue services
should be expanded to maintain a maximum four minute response time to all parts to
Miami and all matters should be better prepared to provide emergency medical
assistant. We're basically saying here that we need to extend the expertise of our
our fire fighter on the engine and ladder company to be better prepared to carry out
the paramedics work that we've undertaken by the city codes directive. Number five,
the Miami Fire Department should anticipate federal and state safety standards and
continue to provide adequate safety closing and equipment for fire fighters. Fortunately,
we have already being doing this and the explosion of the fire back in December 13th
is an example of why it has already paid off and that these people might have died as
a result of that' explosion. Had it not had been for the gear that we
using at that time. Number six, emphasis in fire service practices should be placed
on an increasing fire prevention code enforoement activity. Seven, local legislation
_ 24 JUN 211977
41
pertaining to fire safer. standards. One and two family i'nes should be more resistive
since we're restrictive. Since most fire injuries and deaths occur in residence where
people sleep. That's where we lose people. So we need to address ourselves to smoke
protection in these facilities, one and two family. In addition to expanding the four
mention programs that will be necessary to maintain a well equipped and adequately man
fire fighting division to minimumize fire related loses. We need to experience first of
all how our fire prevention program is working before we, cut too much drastically our
fire fighting capabilities. Number 9, where possible fire companies should be con-
solidated, the construction of future stations to enhance the task force fire fighting
concept to reduce operating cost and to prevent flexibility in man -power allocation.
Number 10, man -power resources should be organized by functions to be performed and
greater responsibilities to activities given to those people directly in the field.
Such as our district chiefs and company officers. Yes?
Rev. Gibson; I heard a word... I don't think you meant that one. That was just ac-
cidental. prevent but you permit.
Chief Brice: Where did I use it? Oh, I see... yes, on... and to permit flexibility,
you're correct. Thank you. Number 11, more minorities including women should be hired
and number 12, the Miami Fire Department, should move expeditiously to implement this
bond program before inflation takes over. So this is a summary and at this time I'd
like to ask Chief Hickman, to take the mike and if there are questions.
Rev. Gibson: Before he takes the mike, I want to say something. I have to give a
testamony. Last East... or when ever that was. Thereabout, I was the recipient of
this service. I want to say this... within five minutes after the department was
notified... within five minutes they were there my brother and I could tell you another
thing, I was in the hospital and the head nurse said this, that .she would not mind in-
creasing... now she lives in the City of Miami, a white head nurse at Cedars of Lebanon,
said she would not mind increasing her taxes to support the service of the Fire Depart-
ment, especially that rescue squad. Now, let conclude by saying this, I hope we don't
get strung out on time and I hope we aren't the guilty party to prevent nor impede
progress. I would say this, that the City of Miami, may not have many other reasons
for surviving in existence. You see I'm not arguing with the Mayor, about this because
he and I are together. If we have no other reason... well I better not put it like
that. One of the most important reasons, because see I don't want to get in trouble
with all the others fellows, is this Fire Department.
Chief Brice: We appreciate it.
Rev. Gibson: And 1 would hope we don't drag our feet and all that.
Mr. Plummer: Let me make a comment.
Rev. Gibson: I'm going to hush my mouth.
Mayor Ferre: Are we going to get
Chief Brice: Yes sir.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, let me make a comment.
Mr. Grassie: We can distribute it right now Mr. Mayor.
Rev. Gi.bscp: You better hear this more than the Chief better hear this. Because I'm
going to tell you something I'm a little perturb and I tell you why... I'm more than
a little perturb. It was this Commmissioner, who purposed that $10,000,000 bond issue.
It was my idea and it was basically one idea to do it and do it now, don't drag it out
over a period of years. Now it makes me a little bit upset when I see as part of this
planning, that it goes on out to 81. Thats four years from now. Now I'm going to
reiterate what my motion was, what my intent was and I think that, that was what was
offered to the public and thats what should be done. Basically I can sum it up, do it
and do it now. Now, I'm going to tell you there is not a lot of things that I'm
strong on. But, Mr. Grassie, I think everything and I have some differences here with
a few of these items. They are minor, they can be worked out as far as J.L.'s, thinking
is concerned. But, Mr. Grassie, I don't want this thing to go to 81, I want it to be done
now exactly what we proposed to the people when they voted upon this thing and as
Father says I don't want to wait until 81, to order that 6th rescue. I want it now,
that what the purpose of this bond issue was so that we could do it all at one time
Now, I'm speaking as one Commissioner, and I think I echo the sentiments of Gibson,
Rev, Gibson; You got two votes.
Mr. Plummer: But I don't want it strung out.
Rev, Gibson; you may save a life, mind was saved man,,,
JUN 211977
Mt. Plummer: Father, 1t you fail to realize and what
io
Rev. Gibson: but man they were monitoring that, they said look man
you know I was that conscious so I happen to know. You are talking to a living
testamony.
Mr. Plummer: But, what you fail to say is that Father, you almost turned white
when you saw your undertaker walk in there as quick as a rescue.
Rev. Gibson: You were right, you can say that again. I thought I was gone.
Mr. Plummer: I'm just expressing and Mr. Grassie, you know I... you weren't here
when this...'I don't think you were, but that was the definite intention of mine
that we do it and do it now. And I think that by god I for one want to do it and do it
now. Thats what we presented to the public as, I don't want down the line in 81... I
want to do it in 77. If nothing more from a selfish stand point that I might not be
here in 80.
Mr. Grassie: Well, I think that noone would disagree with that as an objective Com-
missioner, I think that the command structure in the fire department, is at least as
interested in speed as you are. They also, I think take a responsible view of their
job and I think that they would present to you as quick a. time table as the service
can digest. You know, we can't ask them to do unreasonibie things. I didn't want to
get you that upset. But they will... you know they ar'e--anxious to get it done as quickly
as possible and I'm sure that as quickly as they feel that they can digest the improve-
ments and do them properly and do them responsively, that we will move them forward.
Mr. Plummer: Well...
Mr. Grassie: Because the money is there.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, let me say this to you. Maybe I'm getting over excite.
Rev. Gibson: You're getting scared.
Mr. Plummer: Maybe I'm getting scared, I'm getting over. But Mr. Grassie, I would like
the fire department to come back here within 30 days... go back home do their home work
and come back here with a revised time table much, much faster than what they have
presented here today. Because there is a few as I say... a few items in here that I
want to urgue with and I'm going to reserve that right. But I want a time schedule
that will live up to the commitment we made to the public and that was lets do it and
do it all at one time... do it now and get it over with.
Mr. Grassie: Well, let us commit ourselves to look at it again, we will not pre -judge
whether in fact the time schedule can be materially effective, but we understand what
it is that you are saying and let us take another look at it and see whether we can do
anything that is realistic that we can probably...
Mr. Plummer: Go back to that chart on the . Where is the other one?
What I'm looking at... and let me just give you a few examples so that you will know
the way I'm thinking. And I'm not necessary looking to this one here because that one
pretty well speaks to current. So I'm going to be speaking to this on here. The ones
that I'm thinking about is it makes me a little unstudy that I was under the impression
... a thing which I know from personal knowledge that is needed in illumination truck
which I thought had been ordered, is not even ordered and not proposed to be ordered
until 78 or 79, that upsets me. It upsets me that we're going to wait until 80 or 81
to order the 6th rescue. It upsets me that we're not going to be getting the computer,
which I have seen in operation in Huntington Beach, California, and took three days of
my time to look at. These are the kind of things that I don't feel this City can stand
still for until nineteen 80 or 81. And that was the very reason that we put it into a
bond issue so that we could do it. Now, I... reserve Mr. Grassie, so that I don't take
up a lot more time this morning. Those particular areas in which I have problems and
disagreements with, with your permission or with... how ever you want to talk with the
Chief and express to him my problems of concern. But Mr. Grassie, the only thing I
hope that you can... and I'm not speaking for Rose, or Manolo, they can speak for them-
selves. Nothing would please me more than to see a plan come back before this Commission,
that would speak to that second page and put more of it on the first page if you know
what I mean.
Chief Hickman: Commissioner Plummer, if we can get this master plan adopted and get
us out of paper work. We certainly can expedite quite a few of those items.
Mr. Plummer; Well, Don, look there is no reason that, that 6th rescue can't be ordered
along with 4 and 5.
Mr, Grassie: But there is a reason Commissioner,
JUN 21197
Mt. Plummer: Sixth rescue,
Mr. Grassie: There is a reason,,,. you ktow and the reason that the department doesti't
have it ordered sooner i i theit plan is fi powet,
Mr, Plummet: I undet...
Mr, Grassie: You don't want the piece of equipment sitting there if you can't man it.
Mt, Plummer: I understand $375,000 is annual cost, I realize that, but I think that
cost can be reduced and still provide the 6th rescue,
Mr, Grassie: All we're suggesting is that first the fire department is at least as
anyone else to improve the service and if they can come up with a way of doing it
they'•re going to recommend it.
Mr. Plummer: Ok.
Mr. Grassie: Just to be sure of that.
Mr. Plummer: Ok, alright but I would like to hear back next month Mt, Grassie, as to
what they have been able to do to expedite this implementation.
Mr. Grassie: Just as a final word on this... this work shop is the first step. We
intend to bring back a completed plan for your approval and probably the middle of
July would be an appropriate time to do that.
Chief Hickman: Approximately yes.
Mr, Plummer: Fine.
Chief Hickman: Thank you very much. Are there anymore questions?
Mayor Ferre: Yea, I have a question now. Have we sold these $5,000,000
Chief Hickman: Yes sir.
Mayor Ferre: The total amount have been sold ?
SPEAKER UNKNOWN: Five sold, five to sell.
Chief Hickman: No five...
Mayor Ferre: Five out of the ten. We're proposing to spend $5,000,000 a year right?
With these 25 items.
Chief Hickman: No, these fourteen here Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: The fourteen are five, the twenty five are five, the total is ten.
Chief Hickman: Correct.
Mayor Ferre: Ok, we've sold five thats what this is going to go for. The other five
is to be sold in the future when ever you get ready to go from fifteen to which are
item that will be in affect from 1978 to 1981, which is what Plummer is talking about.
Chief Hickman: Thats right.
Mayor Ferre: Ok, now what is your estimate of when you're going to sell these $5, 000,
in bonds.
Cheif Hickman: We would like the flexibility sir, to discuss this with the City Manager,
when ever we need to sell these.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. City Manager, I'd like to make two points on the record. First place
that at the present time the City of Miami, has a $132, 000,000 of bonds out -standing,
Now that is slightly under the 3% of our tax assess base. As you know state law per-
mits for any City to go up to 15%. That so in number one I want to point out that at
$132,000,000 we ought to conservatively,... our debt structure unlikely New York,
Philadelphia and Boston, who all have B ratings or less than that with Standard and Poore
is a fairly good rating, Number 2, I want to point out that Standard and Poore, increased
already from A to A+ and you saw the results of that by the successful selling of $28,000,
000 worth of bonds at less than 5% in the month of March,,, or was it May. 1 guess it
was May,
SPEAKER UNKNOWN; March or April,
27
fir
Mt, Gtassie: It was Aplxl Mayor,
Mayor Ferre: Ok. Now, furthet more, I persoihally went out'and,imade a computation
which I think this is something that you ought to submit to us on an annual basis,
I've ask for it from your predecessors, I've never gotten it.., a very simple one
page statement as to the debt condition of the City, that ought to have all these
things. For example, in the last years budget we were spending less than the 15% of
the total budget amounts. All expeditures of the City of Miami, less than 15% were
ear marked for debt retirement or interest. Which is as I understand it less than
the national average in the United States. For major Cities we spend more than 15%.
The point of all this being that I think the citizens of Miami, through the radio
stations, television and news papers have not really been exposed to the fact that the
City of Miami, fiscally solvent number one, highly regarded in Wall Street number two
and number three, has a very low debt structure. Because you know, to the average
resident when they hear $10,000,000 or 5,000,000; they say oh, my god... you know and
then we get editorials or we get letters to the editor saying that we're going the
road of New York, we're not going the road of New York, New York is heavily in debt...
we are not, we only... as I said we have 3% we can go up to 15%. So I think this is
something that we always have to be pointing out every opportunity that we can. Ok.
Chief Hickman: Any other questions? Thank you very much.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you, Chief and congratulations for your continued show of excellence
and we're very pride of our Fire Department and every time you go to bat you always
either bat a home run or at least you're on second base or third base without fail.
Chief Hickman: Team effort.
Mayor Ferre: Team effort. Congradulations to you.
101 REPORT Cf FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE TRADE FAIR OF THE AMERICAS,
Mayor Ferre: Alright, now we're on item number B, which is report on the financial
status of the Trade Fair of the Americas. Mr. Charles Crumpton?
Mr. Crumpton: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, you had asked that we get $150,000 com-
mitment from the State of Florida and a $150,000 commitment from Metropolitan -Dade
County. You've heard the report earlier this morning from Rick Bisset, on the status
of the $150,000 from the State, which is in the budget... was approved by the legislature.
Just 20 minutes ago Metropolitan -Dade County, passed a resolution that will assure the
City of its participation, and authorized its County Manager, to begin budgeting $150,
000 of funds for the Trade Fair.
Mr. Plummer: In funds?
Mr. Crumpton: In Cash.
Mr. Plummer: Very good.
Mr. Crumpton: So we do have the commitments of the State and of Metropolitan -Dade
County, for a $150,000 each. And as you recall your ordinance that you passed and
resolution had an effective date of June the 24th, which is the Friday of this week
and we would continue to pursue under those particular ordinances where we have met
the commitments that you had as a stipulation and we must have the commitments of
these two agencies, the State and Metro, before we can proceed. We have those commit-
ments.
Mr. Plummer: Very good.
Mayor Ferre: I want to thank you, for that information and congratulate you andEvelio,
for the diligent job thats been done. I think what they shows now is that... at least
my condition and I think that or the rest'of the Commission, who has to get a full
participation from both the State and the County, and I think now we have achieved
that. So it seem to me that, that was the major road block left and now we have an
open field between now and March 78, for our fair.
Mr. Crumpton: Thats correct sir. What I would also like to inform you is that as of
yesterday afternoon we have 2/3 of the first floor committed and sold and about 18% of
the second floor sold to companies. We have Brazil, Columbia, Rl Salvador, Guatemala,
Costa Rica and Jamaica, are committed and have sold and signed the contract.
2
JUN 2 1971
MAW Vette: *lotidetful
Mt, f to ptoht For the fait,
Mayor Iette: Very good.
Mt, Ctut►ptoni Mr. tey, would like t$ sake a tenant,
Mayor Pettet Mr....
Mr. Ley: : I would like just to comment Cotnissioherist, thatrmissiont Dade
to of ithe ty"aC issidhett ii►lc
al
Massed this resolution unanimous from the nine
that all of you would like to know about this affair.
Mr. Plummer: Alright, let me ask you this question. Till be it Columbia, next week.
is there anything that you want me or suggest .that I .can possibly do while I at there
with the Sister City Program?
We Ley; Well I think you can meet with
the
ofpColtimbia,eople of PforPtherfair andrlim goingthe rt
sentatives... the official representatives
give you the names...
Mr Plummer; Why don't you have prepared for me...
Mr. Ley: Surely.
Mr. Plummer: Some kind of documents which I can read prior to my leaving and that I
can o down there and maybe give these people 'assurances that this is a go item, that
B
this thing is materializing. You know what I'm talk ng.
Mr. Ley: Right...
Mr. Plummer: Perpare me so that I can go down there and instill confidence in these
people and I'll be more than happy to do it.
Mr. Ley: I will get some information for you.
Mr. Plummer: I'm leaving Tuesday.
Mr. Ley: Thats fine I will have it ready for you Commissioner.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, anything else on that item?
CITY ATTORNEY DIRECTED to PROCEED IMMEDIATELY FOR QUICK TAKE COCEMNATION
OF PLC* mat
I
Mayor Ferret We will now get to the FEC certificates of the appraisers City
Attorney reports. Mr. City Attorney
Mr. Knox: We are now distributing certificates of appraisal which have been
issued by the Cole Appraisal Company and J.I. Wilson's Company. You will note
that the J.I. Wilson Appraisal of the entire FEC property is 14.5 million dollars
and for the Cole Appraisal Company 15.1 million dollars. Both of these figures
include the 3 million dollars that the City currently has in the registry of the
court.
Mayor Ferre: That is wonderful. That is the appraisal of the entire property?
Including what we already have?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: We have that kind of money don't we?
Mr. Grassie: Almost. We are very close.
Mayor Ferre: It seems to me Mr. Manager and Father Gibson, I would like
to make the following motion. Based on the information we have gotten from both
of these appraisals, I move you sir, that the City of Miami forthwith, immediately
enter into a condemnation proceeding, based on,(there are two ways to condemn
as you know), one is you take the property and then you argue about the figure,
and the second one is, you go an you argue and let the jury decide the figure and
then you take the property. I think we have been for much too long going in the
timid ground. I think the only way to go now, Mr.City Attorney is to go in there
based on these appraisals and take these properties.
Mrs. Gordon: Quick taking, is that what you mean?
Mayor Ferre: Yes. Just take the property and then we argue, ----
Mrs. Gordon: I second the motion.
Mayor Ferre: --then we argue about it later on. That way there is
Mrs. Gordon: Okay. I am with you.
Mr. Plummer: Under discussion, Mr. City Attorney,
Mayor Ferre:Have you passed the copies?
Mr. Plummer: ----I am reading mine. I just got it. Mr. City Attorney, assuming the
motion of the Mayor passes, and we go under an order of taking. The Manager has
expressed that we have almost the 15 million dollars, if that is to be the case.
Under an order of taking, the jury comes back and awards a figure higher than the
15 million dollars. Under an order of taking, where are we?
Mr. Knox: We are committed to pay whatever the jury awards.
Mr. Plummer: What happens if that figure, ---Maurice, listen to this please. Under
your motion, if we go forth with an order of taking, the appraisal is 15 million
dollars. The Manager says we have very close to that. It is now understood by me,
from what the City Attorney has just said, that if the jury comes in with an award
let's say for hypothetical discussion, of 20 million dollars, that the City is ob-
ligated. Is that what I understand? Or higher?
Mr. Knox; Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer; Then my immediate ciudsti.on is Mr, Mayor is, if we enter on that action,
JUN 211 77
and such a thing hypothetically were to happen, Mr. Manager where ate die?
Mr. Grassiet You ate in the position where you have to wise the required additional
funds.
Mr. Plummert That is not the question. Where are we going to get it?
Mr. Grassier That is not what you asked to begin with.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you know what I am asking.
Mr. Grassie: You have two options. One, you can cut current expenses and reallocate
existing resources, or you can borrow the money against future revenues,
Mayor Ferre: It is time to fish or cut bait Plummer.
Mrs. Gordon: Let's vote. J.L. I would like to remind you and the other commissioner,
we have a 8 million dollar indebtedness due to us by the State. And the timing of this
certainly would be, --long enough for it to come to conclusion, I am sure where we
could go with our effective lobbyist to Tallahassee and have him do the same fine
job he's done on everything else we have asked him to do. And that is where we could
probably receive whatever, if there is a shortage. But it seems incredible to me
that there would be,because the many aspects of this land which precludes the raising
of its value to 20 million. We already have the front portion.
Mr. Plummer: For the record, I am not setting a figure of 20 million. I only use
that for a hypothetical ----
Mrs. Gordon: I understand your point. I just wanted to remind everybody about this
money that is due to us.
Mr. Plummer: I am scared your grandchildren will never see the check. Mr. Knox,
is there another alternative?
Mr. Knox: Mr. Anderson will explain the alternatives.
Mr. Anderson, Assistant City Attorney: Let me explain the problem with the quick -take.
Just so you don't enter into anything and regret it later. Just because we come up
with one figure doesn't mean that the FEC won't come up with a different figure,
even though we intend to hire the best of counsel. There may be a rather wide spread
in the amount of dollars, so that for example, and I just throw this out as an ex-
ample and it should never happen. But if their appraisers came up with 30 million
and the jury should award 30 m illion,okay,---if we quick -take, we own the property,
we have to pay for it. We have 15 million dollars, they get the 15 million dollars,
then they can put a lien on any city property that is not being used for governmental
purposes.
Mrs. Gordon: Mike, we understand the ramifications. We are not babies and we have
been on the scene a long time. We know what we are doing. We know the risks involved
and we know we are willing to take that risk because it is a mandate of the people
of the City of Miami to have this proper in public ownership.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Anderson will you explain to this baby, becuase I am a baby, ------
that is the question. What is the alternative?
Mr. Anderson: The alternative is to go through, ----first of all there has to be
a proper authorizing resolution, as we know from the last case. Have the judge
determine the necessity that we need the property for park and recreational purposes,
and then go to a trial on the merits and when the jury awards an amount, makes it
verdict and awards whatever amount it is, if it is too high and we can't afford
to pay for it, we can walk away from it, and we pay all costs and expenses of the
litigation.
Mrs. Gordon: A question to you Mr. Anderson. What about if you take the quick -taking_
route. Isn't the value set at that time?
Mr,Anderson: At the time that the judge enters the quick -take, the property become
ours, and the value is set.
31 J U N 21197
Mrs, Gordon: If it drags through courts for five years, the value iS as of that
tithe, not five year hence,
Mr. Anderson: In the other method, the value would be at the date of the trial,.=
Mrs, Gordon: Right. And that could conceivably much higher because of the itt-
flationary factors that come into play.
Mr, Anderson: ----as opposed to the date of the quick -take. That is possible,
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you this question. Do you contemplate and from your know-
ledge, would one area be,time of trial, quicker than the other?
Mr. Anderson: I don't think the trial would come up any quicker, in either case.
Mr. Plummer: Let' lay the cards on top of the table. Whatever we do the other
side is going to appeal, if they lose. Right? Okay. Now, if you went the quick-
taking route, and they have I assume the right of appeal to that, ----
Mr. Anderson: Right.
Mr. Plummer: --would that process take any longer than the other process of going
through the condemnation?
Mr. Anderson: I don't believe it would take any longer. I think the two processes
will take the same period of time. The question is, --the two problems are, that
the date of valuation is set as of the date of quick -take, and if the trial comes
up four years later, the date is still back at the date of quick -take. The other
case, it is at the date of trial, but when you enter into the quick -take proceeding
there is no way to walk away from it.
Mr. Plummer: Okay. Now, let me make another point. That point is this, Mr. Grassie,
beyond this 15 million dollar appraisal, what are the costs involved?
Mr. Grassie: Basically you have these considerations Commissioner.
Mr. Plummer:Just give me a bottom line.
Mr. Grassie: You have the liability that Mr. Anderson talked about, which could
be 5 or 10 million dollars more than this appraisal. Let's assume that its, --for
purposes of conversation, the final price is in the neighborhood cf 18 or 19 million.
In addition to that you have attorney's fees which would estimate a million and a half,
a million and one -quarter?
Mr.Anderson: I don't want to estimate attorney's fe.s, but they are going to be
substantial, but we also have attorney's and copes to pay in this last case.
Mr. Grassie: Of course we are going to have our. Let's estimate that a million
dollars. In addition to that you have the unresolved problem of the 1.4 dollars
which is the imbalance within the park for people bond fund, affected by this
decision, which we explained in some detail to you when we went through the capital
improvement program report and the parks for people bond issue. So those basically
are the major liabiliites that you have outstanding. In other words, -----
Mr. Plummer: Approximately 2.5 million dollars beyond the 15.
Mr. Grassie: No, sir. We are guessing of course about.the final award but let's
say that is 4 million beyond the 15 million. Here you have a million dollars for
attorney's fees and you have a little less than 1.5 dollars which is the unresovled
problem within the parks for people bond fund. So those are the liabilities that
you have outstanding. You could by policy decide to ignore the 1.4 million, but
the others you can't ignore.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, what is your recommendation?
Mr. Grassie: The recommendation has to be conditioned Commissioner,by a prior
position taken by this City Commission. In other words you have to take a position
on one of two alternatives. Either you are going to make this decision based on
fiscal consideration or you are going to make the decision based on your desire to
acquire the property. It has to be one or the other.
32
JUN J 1977
Plummer: You speak to the first.
Mr. Grassie: Well, you are viewing this simply from the point of view of the
fiscal position of the City, there is no way it can be recommended.
Mrs. Gordon: Will you call the question Mr. Mayor, I think we have had the
opinion of both the Attorney and the Manager and I believe that it is;.tithe
to fish or cut bait.
Mr. Plummer: I would like to get these questions answered. I heard Mr. Grassie'
pretty well. Now, Mr. Knox, what is your opinion? Which avenue to proceed?
Mr. Grassie: You are asking a policy question really, Commissioner.
Mr Plummer: No, I am not.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, he is. He is asking an opinion.
Mr. Plummer: Joe Grassie, if you don't know what this city can afford, we might
as well close the doors and go home.
Mr.Grassie: I have told you that. There is no question about that.
Mr. Plummer: You can't recommend it from a financial standpoint.
Mr. Grassie: It is strictly a financial question that cannot be recommended.
That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: Okay. I want to hear what Knox has to say. Which avenue, if either
one of those.
Mr. Knox: Well, No. 1 we have employed outside counsel to pursue this litigation
and of course we would want to have his recommendation. No. 2, the fiscal concern
becomes more important when you talk about quick -take in the sense the City is locked
into a position, if we go to quick -take route.
Mr. Plummer: That is what the motion speaks to.Do you recommend that?
Mr. Knox: That is a monetary consideration and not a legal one.
Mr. Plummer: You know the possible ramifications.
Mr. Grassie: Let me try and clarify that question Commission. If we go the
quick -take route, and I am not expressing any opinion with regard to your policy
role, if we go the quick -take route, we have to be prepared to come up with 5 million
dollars that we do not now have identified in short order. If we are willing to do
that, if we are willing to take that risk, of having to come up with 5 million dollars,
in very short order, we do not now have identified, then it is advisable to go the
quick -take, yes.
Mrs. Gordon: Can we call the question?
Mr. Plummer: Rose, let me make one other point on that. You made a statement which
I don't agree with, and I want to put my opinion on record.
Mrs. Gordon: What is that?
Mr. Plummer: You say this is what we presented to the public and they voted upon.
That is not correct. Let's correct the statement to make it the truth as I know it.
And that is, we presented to the public, in which 15 million would have bought the
Ball Point property and this property. So we are now talking about at best, double
what we originally presented to the people.
Mrs. Gordon: I remember a certain person on this commission, namely you, who were
the first one to ask that the Ball Point property be put in trust for this property's
Acquisition.
Mr, Plummer; Exactly, I was Just eorreet.ing a statement-.
33
Mrs, Gotdon: Yes, but hate we
Mr. Plummer: But I am just correcting the statement Lose, that this is not
what we presented to the public, because the total bond issue was 40.
Mrs.. Gordon: We haven't gotten Ball Point, so we can't fall down on two promises.
We promised the people of the City of Miami that we would acquire the bayftont.
So far we haven't acquired a damn thing. Not a doggone thing.
Mr. Plummer: That is not true. We have Bicentennial,
Mrs. Gordon: No, we haven't sir. All we did was improve what we already had..
We didn't buy any additional land at all, other than the little spots of land
on Biscayne Boulevard which is a part of this property, and which nobody would
have voted a quick -take on had it not been agreed that at the appropriate time
we proceed to acquire the whole. Mr. Mayor would you ask that the roll be taken?
Mayor Ferre: I have kept quiet, so now I want to be heard. The people of Miami
were given the opportunity to vote for bond issues in the year 1972. At that time
they voted for 39 million dollars. A certain amount of that which is close to 30
million dollars was specifically earmarked for the downtown area, which includes
Bayfront Park, and the other areas, from Bicentennial, now New World Park etc.
We went into court about 4 years ago, as I recall, isn't that right Mr. Knox?
Mr. Knox: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: And we kind of got knocked around, we went up to the appellate
court and came back from the appellate court. Marshall Harris had gotten special
legislation passed that he sponsored which in effect gave us a priority as a
government over the FEC railroad who claimed they were a semi-public body and
therefore also had certain rights. Once it was established that truly we had
a superior claim.Instead of starting over again with a new lawsuit, we stayed
on the old lawsuit, appealed it to the supreme court, which is why we have gotten
all of this rigmarole and delay, now we are back to peg 1. In the meantime, it
was my opinion rather than stand still, we ought to go ahead and proceed and take
certain portions of it so at least we could tear down or do something with that
gas station, and put a green strip along Biscayne Boulevard. At that time, there
was a lot of hemming and hawing and fighting about all this, and what have you.
Once we got that done, the second step was, that we were going to take as much
as we could and met with Mr. Grassie, in what we called an executive session but
what ended up being called the so-called secret session of the City of Miami
even though we took tape recordings, had the Clerk there to take all the notes,
and it was delivered to the newspapers within 24 hours. The so-called secret hearing
which by the way, the legislature both senate and house, passed to amend, so that
these meetings could be held in that way, and so far the governor has not vetoed it,
but nevertheless, we are not going to re -hash that one again, the point is, the
reason for that was that we all estimated that the cost of taking that property
was in excess of 20 million dollars. Recall that? The whole thing, the only con-
troversy was, we have 12 or 13 million dollars, we don't have enough money. It is
going to cost 20 million, therefore let's.buy what we can. All right. Metro hasn't
come through, the state hasn't come through. We had all this rigmarole of what to
do. All we were trying to do, is to take it one notch further. We got into all
kinds of trouble, based on that. More psychological than real. Now we have two
appraisals, one at 14.5 and one at 15 million. We have 15 million dollars, or close
to it. Now, Joe, if we go about this, the conservative Mel -Reese way, which was to
go in and fight it in court, and at the last moment decide whether or not we want
to go ahead with it. First of all its a longer process. It is harder.
Mr. Plummer: I heard the attorney say it wasn't a longer process. That is the
question I asked.
Mayor Ferre: It is going to cost you more money. You have inflation. It seems to
me that we have to proceed, and I think we ought to proceed with just the taking of
it. The moment we do that, and I think the FEC railroad knows that we mean business,
and perhaps we might be able to settle this thing out of court. I don't know. But if
we don't, then I think we have to move. Now, that the fact is, that they will say it
is worth 40 million and we may have to come up with another 4 or 5 million dollars, --
that is something this community will have to worry about when that decision is
34
JUN 211977
ffiad+e► By this torlibtUnity I bean the City of iiisaii, jointly with tietto and the State,
If we dons t do it, forthright, slid with courage, We ate going to end up going in the
same circles we have been goin
�g Ifrtheseaappraisalset Me pa that comeit to back,ya20 million
this way, so
nd
it is very cleat on the rec
dollars , there is no way in the world that I would have gone for this, but if they
come back at 15, I think we can live with it. That's what changes my position.
There is Father Gibson?
Mr, Plummer: He went down to look for the gold that is buried on the property.
Rev. Gibson: The roll call is to proceed with quick= -take. Is that right?
Mr. Ongie, City Clerk: Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: (prior to roll call), I have to clarify. No. 1 let it be very clear
that I have been, and always will be, in acquiring that property for the
efCity
tof
Miami, I have had trouble from the very beginning about the appraisalsThe of that
piece of property,and as the days go by,onP,I am proven more right,
has already informed us that we have a possible 9 million dollar deficit for neat
year.
Mrs. Gordon: You couldn't use this money.
Mr. Plummer: I feel without question, that the strong desirethat
1 liveitity
e to
acquire this property, that I cannot put this city in the potentialie this manner of
that could exist, based and hinged upon the award of a jury afford
quick -taking. I would vote in favorof did onnBallation Pointsothat which If we could had hoped totacquire. it
we would be able to withdraw as we l it p hpossibilityof this
c cynbvote the motion
tcause I ee
financial problemthatswecould not overcome and
city beeingg pll acced inna potential
I will have to vote again the motion.
The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77-519
A MOTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO IMMEDIATELY ENTER INTO CONDEMNATION PROCEDURES TO
ACQUIRE THE.F.E.C. TRACT ADJACENT TO BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
IDENTIFIED AS PARCELS 1,2,2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2E, 2F, 3,
4, 7, 8 AND 9, ON AN ORDER OF QUICK TAKING BASED ON
CERTIFICATES OF APPRAISAL MADEIBY W. BATES COLE,
M.A.I.
DATED JUNE 17, 1977, AND BY
ATED
JUNE 20, 1977
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Reboso, Vice -Mayor Gibson,:Mrs. Gordon
NOES: Mr. Plummer.
ABSENT: None.
Mrs. Gordon: I want to congratulate the City of Miami Commission for the courageous.,
stand it has taken today.
Mayor Ferre: It is not the first courageous stand we have taken, and I am sure it
won't be the last.
and Mayor Ferre.
1
JUN 21197
FURTHER btScUSStoN c P,A,t, PROJECT 345 tt&1N HIGHWAY (LATER CONTINUED
A8 ITEM 72 OP THE AGENDA) ,
Mt. Gtassie: Mr. Mayor, I wonder if we could come back to an item that you treated
this morning, the P.A.D. case because we have people here now who are not going to
be available this afternoon and you asked that they do report to you.
Mt. Plummer: No way.
Mr. Grassier They have agreed to be here and I would suggest to you, Commissioner,
that in the interest of the city that you listen.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, in the same way that I argued this morning for their
right to be here so that both parties could be heard at the same time now it's
just reverse and I'll argue just as long for the other side. Mr. Simonoff is
not here nor his attorney. Mr. Grassie, I think this item can only be presented
to this commission with both parties being before this commission so that we can
question both sides and I would. be just as opposed to now them presenting their
side... Let me tell you something. I don't know this gentleman but I can see
the concern on his face. ...
Mayor Ferre: J. L., save some time will you? Everybody agrees, we'll see you
this afternoon.
Mr. Grassie: July 14th.... What they're telling you is that they can't be here
this afternoon. Can we do it July 14th?
Mr. Plummer: Then he will have to suffer the consequences.
Mr. Carson Wright: You gave me no notification.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, that's fine.
Mayor Ferre: J. L.
Mr. Wright: What's fine?
Mr. Plummer: Exactly what I said, sir. Did you understand? It's very clear.
Mr. Wright: I just don't believe it.
Mr. Plummer: Well, you don't believe it sir, and you don't believe that I stood
here and fought for your right this morning to be heard when this commission was
ready to move. May I finish? May I finish? I'll give you that courtesy which
you won't give me.
Mayor Ferre: J. L., wait a moment now, I think I'm still the chairman of this
so let me chair this meeting properly. You both have the right to express your
opinions. You were speaking first as I recall so finish your statement and then
I'll let you make your statement. Ok?
Mr. Plummer: I don't know of anything, Mr. Mayor, that can be more important to
this developer than this huge project which is being undertaken at the present
time and I cannot believe that he wants to stand here without counsel,nor any-
thing could be so important this afternoon that couldn't be changed because we
gave the latitude of the entire afternoon, not at 2:00 O'clock or 2:30, but the
entire afternoon and I for one stated on the record this morning that I'd sit
here as long as it took so that we could have in front of us here both sides at
the same time and I still stand on that position. I'm finished, sir.
Mr. Carson Wright: Thank you. Mr. Plummer, my difficulty is that I heard about
this dilemma an hour ago. I'm scheduled to be in Chicago tonight for a meeting
that's important to me. My attorney is in court all day. How can I possibly
defend whatever I'm going to defend myself against when I can't be properly organ-
ized?
Mayor Ferre: You're absolutely correct.
Mr. Wright: That's all I ask - give me time to prepare.
Mr. Plummer: I agree, I agreed this morning.
Mr, Wright; Well then could we possibly set aside a time when we pan all be here?
36
JUN 21 1977
Mrs. Gordon: Could I ask you a question?
Mr. Wright: I'd love to answer it.
Mts. Gordon: I want to know if you ate proceeding with any further development
from the state of development that you were at at out last Commission Meeting
which was about two weeks ago? At any tate, have you proceeded with anything as
fat as development of your property goes?
Mr. Wright: I am proceeding within the guidelines that you instructed me to
maintain when I left. We have fill stacked up on the property which we are
going to put back into trenches, that's the only reason the fill is there. We're
not doing anything beyond what we were approved to do.
Mrs. Gordon: Have you done any further construction on the houses?
Mr. Wright: Yes, of course, you didn't ask us to stop, and why should we?
Mr. Plummer: Let me try to bring up something. All right? Sir, this commission
this morning was ready to move to stop your project. Ok? Now, I think that you
should have the right to appear, be prepared and present your side of the story.
How much damage would it do to you as a compromise if you stopped this project
until the 14th of July? Would it do you serious damage?
Mr. Wright: Mr. Plummer, have you ever paid four points over prime on a daily
basis?
Mr. Plummer: Sir, I'm not that foolish.
Mr. Wright: Well wait a minute, I hope you're not calling me foolish.
Mr. Plummer: No. Sir, I'm not paying that kind of money. I'm not a developer.
Mr. Wright: Yes► we've already been damaged }.y having hearings that weren't
even scheduled prior to this. All I'm asking is if you're going to question us
again, you did it two weeks ago and we resolved it.
Mrs. Gordon: Sir, the Clerk has informed me that you haven't stated your name
and the records don't reflect who you are, so would you do that.
Mr. Wright: I must be upset, that's unusual. My name is Carson Wright. I'm
an architect, I practice in Coconut Grove, I'm also a developer in Coconut Grove.
Mrs. Gordon: Ok.
Mr. Wright: On the spur of the moment, I receive a phone call that there is on
the table an item regarding our project again which we thought we totally re-
solved two weeks ago. I walked away from here stating that I would do whatever
you approved prior to this. I've read this letter that was sent to you and I
can answer that letter and I'll be glad to come before you anytime you invite
me. All I say to you is pay me the courtesy of organizing my life, having my
attorney here present because I think it is rapidly coming to that point where
he should be here. I mean I just can't drop everything, I haven't even been able
to reach my attorney.
Mr. Plummer: Sir, let me ask you this question for the spirit of compromise so
that you don't walk out of here with everything handed to you. On those areas
in question that has been raised by this letter which some of these commissioners
have given serious credence to, would the stopping of those particular items until
the 14th of July do you serious harm?
Mr. Wright: Being an honest man, I'd like to give you an honest answer and I
can't do that just like that. However, I don't feel that I should be stopped
because I don't feel I'm wrong.
Mr, Plummer: I understand that.
Mr. Wright: Why do you feel I'm wrong?
Mr. Plummer: I didn't say you were, sir. I didn't voice any opinion this morning
about this particular item except what I thought was fair, not having both sides
present. That was the only opinion I expressed, The letter from Janet Reno in
question has raised certain points.
37
JUN 211 77
Mt. Wright: We*re not cited by the Building Department, they think weere operating
properly.
Mt. Plumitler: All right, Mt. Mayor, live tried.
Rev. Gibson: Mt. architect,
Mt. Wright: Mr. Wright.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Wright, alright, just as you say reverend, you know. Mt. archis
tect, I know you're upset and I don't blame you. I would be too.
Mr. Wright: And I apologize for shouting.
Rev. Gibson: I understand. Look, I would be. In the spirit of fairness and
cooperation, now I went to law school for a day, I'm not an architect but I'm a
clergyman. Ok? Since there is a dispute we need to resolve the dispute so that
neither of us will not know what is. Let me explain to you we have one or two
alternatives because I raised the point, I read the letter and here is the letter.
I went and saw the property. Plummer taught me something, whenever there's a
zoning dispute or something man, you get your behind on out there and see. I've
walked on the land. I reported to the commission what I saw, I'm the culprit
because I don't want you to be taken and I don't want the other people to be
taken in the spirit of fairness. Ok. Listen to this. We could have voted here
right this morning to withdraw the P.A.D., that was one way. We could have
voted to instruct the Building Department- this is what they told me, this is
the interpretation - instruct the Building Department, the head of the Building
Department to revoke that permit. We didn't want to do either one. We wanted
to come here as good citizens and get that understanding because the people, your
neighbors think that you and the department aren't carrying out the intent of
the P.A.D. I happen to be one of the persons, Theodore Gibson, I believe once
you get a P.A.D. a P.A.D. carries with it all of the considerations and I give
me, I give you this because I had considered the fifty other elements in the pack-
age. When you change one of those elements... I'm going to tell you how I'm
going to be voting so there'll be no doubt in your mind where I stand. When you
change one of those elements you then put me in a position where I must revoke
my agreeing to let you do what you did. So therefore, the only way I know to do
is to have us all together. Now I regret that you have to go to Chicago but you
know that's part of the game. I was due in Raleigh, North Carolina yesterday, I
fooled around and because I ... I didn't get there and I was saying, "My God,
what's going to happen? The world's coming to an end." But you know what? They
went on, that Trustee Board Meeting, man, without me and you know unfortunately
I have an awful lot at stake going there. And you know they had that meeting
and not a single person really died yesterday, I haven't heard about it. And all
I'm saying to you, sir, is I sympathize but we want to do the right thing by you
and by those neighbors.
Mr. Wright: I'd like to ask a question if I might. I'll come back to you this
afternoon, one thing I'd like to request of this commission. I'd like that the
meeting be conducted in an orderly fashion. Two weeks ago I came here to with-
draw, there was nothing on the table and an hour and fifteen minutes later you
allowed me to leave. All I ask is let's conduct the hearing in a fashion, I mean
there's no hearing before.... I'll be back but conduct it in an orderly fashion
it was a fiasco last time. That's all I want. I want to be heard, let them
attack and we'll try and answer your questions but when we do it I'd like to do
it once and for all so that we can complete this project and this city for once
and for all will take a stand and say "They're doing it right".
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Wright, I want to promise you you have my word I'll defend your
right to the very end to have an orderly meeting to be heard and to respect you
in an orderly fashion. By the same token I want to do the same thing for the
others and I want to tell you this, since we have some doubt about what the dir-
ector is doing, not because he's doing a wrong thing but maybe his interpretation
is in question, I don't want you to think that you're coming back here this after-
noon so that you know I have to always console people, that's part of my hustle
for living. I don't want you to come back here this afternoon and feel that all
will be finished because even if we decide against those other people they're
going to court. If we decide against you you're going to court but you come back.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Wright, will you be here at 2:30?
Mr. Wright: Yes, ma'am, I always love a party. The only question I have is is
the essence of this meeting this letter?
1)
3$ JUN 211977
Mayor Perrot Y , t
ri htt at'o It
tibaorit
t4r&oht Will you 'ple a aostise the liaarisq tChit laths!/ That,a all
ask
hey. i bb8til All ht i
N 21197.
•
13, LOICEVIlY INCREASES FOR Assls A r Cinr A-rromiers - REAFFIRM REs. 73-290.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, we're now on item number D, which discussion of the basic
practices. Mr. City Attorney, we're on item number D.
Mr. Knox: Yes sir. This item is before the Commission, to discuss the policy o
salary administration...
Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Carter?
Mrs. Carter: Yes?
Mayor Ferre: This is your item I think, you better get in here.
W. Knox: Policy of Salary Administration that the
aCiCity
actor ey'b ffitoceahas adgopted.
Specifically as it relates to longevity increases
and increases generally. Now thecharter
provides
dischargethat
andthe
administrationeof salariesy, has uofve
authority with respect to the appointment,
the assistant City Attorneys. As we approach the next economic year we have a situation
where at least one of our City Attorneys, will have been with the City for approximately
1.5 years. In the classified system this would entitle that employe tosaaos ecalisl two that
step or 10% increase, The policy that the City Attorneys o
ffce increases are based upon merit with lnresolu ion which established orgevity being one of several ewhichr sauthorized•
The City Commission,in 1973, passed a
the City Attorney to establish a salary schedule, which began at $17,000 annually. We'v
made four appointments since October and none of these starting salaries
Capproachty $17,00
The question is, is it the policy of the Commission, to have Assistantto begin at $17,000 number one, and number two whether its the policy of the Commission
4 'JUN 2 ?.197-
Pr i'
that those individuals who are Assistant City Attorneys _.d have accumulated each of
ten or-f ifteen years of longevity with the City. Would ,automatically receive a longevity
increases. I'd like to have the Commission recognize Mr. Joe Weil, who.is an attorney
and who represents Mrs. Micheal Carter.
Mayor Ferre: Counselor?__
Mr. Weil: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, My name is "Joseph E. Weil", "I practice law at 401
Flagler Federal Building, Miami, Florida. I'm here on behalf of my clientas Mr. Knox,
indidated... Micheal Carter. If it pleases the Commission, this is a hearing on a
very limited purpose as Mr. Knox, indicated to you. You are all in copy... receipt
of copies and some correspondence. Mrs Carter, had written earlier... this hearing is
not for the purpose of dealing with those complaints or those alleged inrquities .'If
that is unsettle0We will come before you on that at a different time. The only thing
we are here to talk about today is this question of longevity. I had not been prepared
nor do I really want to get into even the other question that Mr. Knox, raised for
my purposes of start salary. But let me very biefly indicate to you, based on our
stipulation that between Mr. Knox and Myself, that we are only addressing ourselves to
the longevity related problems and not the main complaints we have previously discussed.
I think that what we are talking about is as important as any of the other items
that were discussed on this mornings Committee of the Whole agenda. All of us are
aware that there are two types, two groups of employees with the City of Miami. The
classified service basically your merit system service and the unclassified. We deal
here with a strange breed of cats, that is my client who was an employee for many years
in the classified service. As a matter of fact, who obtain her first longevity increase
after ten years as a member of the classified service... subsequently was transferred
laterally to the City Attorney's Office, which became part of the unclassified service
before her transfer. Now we have some City Attorneys here in the City of Miami, who
were City Attorneys in the classified service before the City Attorney's Offia:e became
unclassified... They're not in the same position she is. She now has been with the
City 15 Years last October. Which would have given her under the prevailing arrange-
ment where she is still in the classified service without any questions... a second
5% longevity increase or a total of longevity in the amount of 10%... two increments.
As a matter of fact, when she went to the City Attorney's Office the City Attorney's
Office started her at what was then the base or starting salary for City Attorney,
Mr. Knox, indicated which was $17,000. By doing that she automatically lost her first
5% increment, at that point she had it, when she was transferred to the City Attorney's
Office she lost it. We don't think this is right, we don't think she ever should have
lost it, we don't think that was the intent of the Commission. Now all of us are aware
that the City of Miami, adopted a charter change whereby the City Attorney's Office,
became a full-time... it was the employees of the City Attorney, •who was taken out of
the classified service. But nothing in that charter amendment indicates an intent to
do away with longevity... Quite to the contrary and I'm reading now from section 62,
of your charter D. or and I'm going to take the liberty if I might of reading a good
portion of this. " City Attorney shall be the supervisor of attorneys employed by the
City. The City Attorney shall have exclusive authority regarding, but not limited to
appointment, removal in salary as to assistant City Attorney. The forgoing provision
of subsection D., shall not apply to those attorneys in the classified service of the
City on November 1, of 1972... that was what we talked about a moment ago. Attorneys
with permanet civil service right appointed by the City Attorney to any applicable
unclassified shall retain civil service rights in the position from which selected
as may have accrue". I thing the language of that provision and the intent of the
people of the City of Miami, in adopting it ; is very clear that you should not lose
a civil service right when you went to the City Attorney's Office, which would be
longevity. Especially accrue longevity which my client already had the first step on.
So I think the real problem we're addressing ourself to, was it the intent of the Com-
mission that the City Attorney's Office should be bound by further by the second
longevity step at least as far as my client is concerned, which is the 15 years step.
I think that the history of this Commission, indicates it is. In 1963, this Commission
adopted an administrative directive in supporting longevity and then again in 1973,
you passed a resolution, the Commission adopted a resolution no. 73-290 and if I may
I would like to read briefly the title of that resolution by title. "A resolution
declaring the policy of the Commission, that the fixing of salaries provided for in
the executive pay plan submitted by Yarger and Associates the matter of longevity be
taken into consideration and employees be given extra compensation based on the a-
mount of time they have spent as a employee of the City of Miami, in the position
which they are presently occupying. Now your City Attorney feels that longevity is one
of a number of factors which should be taken into account, but that there should not
be a specific schedule of longevity as is available to all other employees... all other
departments of this City. I think it is clear that the man date of this Commission
was longevity is City wide and is a City wide policy and that therefore, it should be
taken into account as to my client and as to everyone in her position as it is to all
other employees. We are hopeful that if the Commission can resolve this log jam we
maybe able to work out the other problem and want even have to come be to you. Thank
you Mr. Mayor.
41 J U N 21191
Mayor Ferre:
in response.
r
Thank You
x. Weil. Do you have anything you want to add
Mr. Knox: I will just add one thing with respect to the idea of longevity.
It appears my position based upon... on the basis upon which salary in-
creases are made, where We talk about soul criteria of merit with longevity
being one of the considerations is that it'appears unrealistic... the idea
of longevity is design to encourage individuals to pursue a career in
municipal government. Number one, if the City Attorney has the power to
make appointments and number two, as City Attorneys change so do the staffs
and its not a valid kind of an inducement when a new City Attorney would
have the power to terminate all of those who are currently being employed.
And the second thing is that City Attorneys by virtue of the charter have
the ability, capability and power to negotiate their salaries and negotiate
their increases and this is a benefit that does not approve two members of
the classified service.
Mayor Ferre: Are you telling us that this is something thats within your
purview and not ours.
Mr. Knox: No I'm saying that based upon the articulation of a policy about
increases... I'm saying that it does not apply to the Law Department and I'm
saying that the matters of salaries and supervision of attorneys is reserved
by the charter to the City Attorney.
•
Mayor Ferre: Well, thats what I'm asking you. In other words this is not
a classified position... this is a unclassified position and under the chart-
er this is something that you are the one who has to determine... is that
correct? Yes or no.
Mr. Knox: Yes sir.
Mayor Ferre: I don't see what we can do... what do you want to do?
Mr. Weil: Mayor, I would add... I think clearly, the charter pviovision and
the ordinances and the resolutions you've passed, allows the City ttorney,
to set the range and in effective he indicated negotiate. But the ranges
with which he works are set by this Commission... this Commission has reserved
for itself... under the applicable language of your charter provision and
by based upon the opinions of the predecessors to the present City Attorney.
The fact that is a Commission prerogative to set the ranges. One of the
ways that the Commission had implemented that prerogative was to establish
a long standing policy... I cited to you... that policy was annunciated in
1963, and specifically again in 1973, in resolution 73-290, that longevity
was one of the major considerations on a City wide basis. I think in under-
standing this problem that, that has been a man -date and its certainly one
that if a Commission is going to change is going to require Commission action.
Mayor Ferre: Well, isn't then the thing for us to do is to ratify what
we previously done in 1973. That this Commission ratifys the posture that
it took in 63 and 73N Doesn't that solve the problem?
Mr. Weil: It would make me very happy... yes Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Knox,... whats your problem with that?
Mr. Knox: Well, the problem is that this resolution that Mr. Weil, had re-
ferred to, we have different interpretations. The resolution says that
longevity is taken into consideration... my position is that longevity is
taken into consideration. Mr. Weil, position is...
Mayor Ferre: Well, then you have nothing to lose by this motion. If he
wants to challenge it in court, then its something that he has to take to
court.
Mr. Knox: Right, so what we are talking about is the emphasis thats placed
upon longevity and whether an individual automatically receives a longevity
increase.
Mayor Ferre: I ask you specifically, do you have any problems with this
Commission reaffirming its previous posture of 1973, in that resolution?
Mr. Knox: No sir.
Mrs. Gordon: Would you read that then if we're going to reaffirm...
J 1N 21197
P
p
Mr. Knox: Alright, I'll read resolution No. 73-29u; "A resolution de-
claring the policy of the Commission, that in fixing of salaries provided
for in the executive pay plan submitted by Yarger and Associates, the matter
of longevity be taken into consideration and employees be given extra com-
pensation based on the amount of time they've spent in the employ of the
City of Miami, in the positions which they are presently occupy.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, I so move.
Mrs. Gordon: Wait a minute. The last sentence.., in the positions that
they were occupying... I mean there has been a transfer position here that
seem to be the cause of the problem. Is that correct? and if that resolution
is passed I don't see how its going to correct the problem... am I wrong
about that Mr. Weil?... let me ask you...will the reaffirmation of this
resolution aid your client?
Mr. Weil: Well, the resolution if you reaffirm it as of June 21, 1977,
she is presently occupying the position of Assistant City Attorney.
Mrs. Gordon: Alright.
Mr. Weil: What I am addressing to the Commission, I think is a more simple
question. Is it the intent of this Commission, that longevity increases
as such as they are payed to all other employees also be payed to members
of the Law Department as longevity increases. Is that the intention of
this Commission... as I read it which was expressed in 63 and again in 73.
If the Commission doesn't directly want to address that... Yes we can pro-
ceed as you suggested Mr. Mayor, but what we're doing here both Mr. Knox and
I agree that its a Commission prerogative to express this view and thats
what we're really doing here is to get what your view is... we each have
our view.
Mrs. Gordon: Well, what I'm... I don't understand one thing is that if we
reaffirm it today 1977, is that going to solve your dilemma?... if it we're
going to go that way, if it isn't then lets find out how we do.
Mr. Weil: Well, the resolution says that longevity shall be taken into
consideration and employees be given extra compensation based on that amount.
I think as I read it that solves my problem...
Mrs. Gordon: Ok.
Mr. Weil: There is no problem. Mr. Knox, takes it that since it is one
of the criteria that he uses in setting salaries that he is also doing
that under his present...
Mayor Ferre: Joe, look... hey, let me put it to you this way. I under
You're very good lawyer and I understand...
Mr. Weil: What the problem is.
Mayor Ferre: Mike's problem. And I don't want to have any personalities
in my when it vote for this thing because it shouldn't be that way, it has
nothing to do with who's involved or the person or anything else. I'm
talking a matter of principles now.
Mr. Weil: It is going to affect certainly more than her, its going to af-
fect the number of employees hopefully in the future.
Mayor Ferre: Right, as far as I am concern there are a couple of things
that are to be considered here. One, is this a Civil Service protected
situation? Which you've answered to me that it is not.
Mr. Weil: It is not.
Mayor Ferre: Secondly, we have a department head which reports to this
Commission, who must have to run his department like the Manager, must have
autonomy to run his department. Now, you brought up the interesting questl
which is that of Commission policy regarding the question of longevity.
This Commission has taken a position in 1973, that it should be considered,
Now, to what extent and how far and how its to be used is a decision to be
strictly in the hands of the City Attorney, otherwise, what we end up doini
is we begin to start infringing upon and running the City Attorney's de-
partment which is against the chart. Therefore, in my opinion the way to
do this simply is to ratify our previous posture in 1973, beyond that its
43 JUN 211977
betweeft you acid him,
Mrs Weil: Very good Mr. Mayor, is, thato etttaihly emeeptable t me,
Mayor Verret I SO MOVe4
ReVibsoh: Airiqht, do i hear t e ti0
Mrs. Gordon: Second.
Rev. Gibson: Mrs. Gordon, tecend,., alright, eall the roll pleaae.
The following motion was introduced by Mayor Pierre, who moved itt
adoption:
MOTION NO, 77-520
A MOTION TO REAFFIRM THE POLICY OF THE CITY
COMMISSION AS CONTAINED IN RESOLUTION NO. 73-290
REGARDING LONGEVITY INCREASES FOR ALL CITY EMPLOMS,
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Vice -Mayor (Rev) Theodore Gibson
NOES: None.
14, COMMENDATION TO MEMBERS OF TEAM WHO WORKED TOWARDS BRINGING THE
SUPERBO4L TO MIAMI IN 1979 - MISCELLANEOUS PRESENTATIONS,
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, w o
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-521
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE GRATITUDE
AND APPRECIATION OF THE MIAMI CITY
COMMISSION TO THOSE CITIZENS AND CITY
OFFICIALS WHO TRAVELED TO NEW YORK CITY
ON JUNE 13, 1977, TO REPRESENT THE CITY
OF MIAMI AT THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE
OWNERS CONFERENCE WHERE MIAMI'S BID TO
BRING THE 1976 SUPER BOWL TO THE ORANGE
BOWL MEMORIAL STADIUM WAS SUCCESSFUL.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor (Rev) Theodore Gibson
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Maurice Ferre.
15• PUBLIC HEARING; BUDGET FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF CFP-STREET PARKING,
GUSMAN HALL AND THE OLYMPIS BUILDING.
MX. Grassier ,.for the Department of Off -Street Parking. It does not in-
volve adoption of a ordinance at this point, this is simply the public hear-
ing for input from anybody who wishes to express himself.
Rev Gibson: nright, who' p here to make the preSentation7
44
JUN 211;
P.
Mr. (;raeaie: A Mrs hiehard LaBaw, the biredter of the dff
tyste .
Rev. dibsoi : Mr. tataw Pieaee. Tha ik your s'ir.
Mr. LaBaw: •
key. Gibson: Does anybody have any questions?
Mr. Plummer: Is there anybody in the public that wishes
ference to the budget? For the purposes of the record it
that this public hearing was going to be held and copies
were available to the public.
Mr. Labaw: Yes sir.
Mr. Plummer: Ok.
Rev. Gibson: Any questions? Alright...
Mr. Plummer: Mr. LaBaw answered that yes
Mr. LaBaw: Yes sir
Rev. Gibson:
Mr. Plummer:
Rev. Gibson:
Mr. Grassie:
Mr. Plummer:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Grassie:
Plummer:
Grassie:
Plummer:
Alright, J.L.
I move that the budget be adopted.
...?
But we're not asking you do it.
Well, why not do it?
Because you don't have it in front of you.
I do.
No sir, you don't have an ordinance in front of
Oh, an ordinance... I got the budget.
treat Parki
to speak in ref
was advertised•
of the budget
Mr. Grassie: But, we do have another public
for the Olypmic Building in Gusman Hall.
Rev. Alright.
Mr. Plummer: Is there anybody in the
etwaspbic who cintsttotspeak?thishearinbody
have any questions? For the recordP
this public hearing was going to be held today.
Mr. LaBaw: Yes sir.
Mr. Plummer: Copies were made available to the public for their inspection
if they wish.
Mr. LaBaw: Yes sir.
Mr. Plummer: You got a ordinance ready for that one.
(INAUDIBLE)
Mr. Plummer: Bye.
Mr. LaBaw: They'll be ready for July the 14th, sir.
Mr, Grassie: By way of explanation for the implied question there CommissaJ
er Plummer, at the last meeting the City Commission
adirected dythat wet wepaget
t
for you more information that is in process of prep that.
;Went... we're not asking you to vote on anything until you get._.
Mr. Plummer; Ok.
Rev, Gibson; Aright, so then what shall we rho
hearing which on
45
p
Mt. Massie: You have done what is ire diced ' t� �i.p1y eiciee the publd
heating and we cat go to the hekt item.
Rev. Gibson: Altight,..,
16, SECOND SING ORDINANCE: AMEND SECTION 10 OP THE CITY CODE "POWERS
OF THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYou
Mr, Plummer:
12ev. Gibson
discussion...
I move item number 3.
Item number 3, has been moved and was seconded by fie. Alright,
call the roll please.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SUBSECTION (g) OF
SECTION 13-10 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
MIAMI, FLORIDA, RELATING TO THE POWERS OF
THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BOARD
BY ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT OF 10 YEARS
EXPERIENCE IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW ON THE
PART OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL; CONTAINING A
REPEALER CLAUSE AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of June 9, 1977,
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Plummer, Mr. Reboso, and Vice -Mayor Gibson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Ferre and Mrs. Gordon.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8665.
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.
17. SECOND READING ORDINANCE: AMEN ORDINANCE 8589 BY REAPPROPRIATING
$486,632 FOR 3 l SALARY ADJUSTMENTS -
POLICE AN FIRE DEPART ERIS.
Rev. Gibson:
Mr. Plummer:
Rev. Gibson:
Number 4.
I moved it before, I'll move it again.
Second. Alright.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE
NO. 8589, AS AMENDED, ADOPTED NOVEMBER 11, 1976,
BY TRANSFERRING $486,632 TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
AND TRANSFERRING $437,179 TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT
FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS - 31% SALARY
ADJUSTMENT ACCOUNT, REPEALING ALL ORDINANCE OR
PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND
CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of June 9, 1977,
was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Vice -Mayor Gibson, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Reboso, Mr. Plummer and Vice -Mayor Gibson.
NOES; None.
ABSENT: Mayor Ferre and Mrs, Gordon.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO, 8666,
46
UUN 211977
The City Attorney read the ordinance into the public record and
&t ottttded that copies were available to the tnembers of the City GotvtiiSsioh
and to the public.
Sait INS ORDINANCEt
OvtNA►Ct 85 - ThANsFER RNA mom
Sp C1AL PROGRAMS AND AcCOUt S.
V. Gib�'bl5t`f t Alright, number 5.
Mr, Mutter: tioVed it before, I'll moue it ac aiti.
Rev. Gibson: Second.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED --
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8589,
AS AMENDED; ADJUSTING CERTAIN GENERAL FUND
APPROPRIATIONS BY TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM
SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND ACCOUNTS --RESERVES FOR
OVERTIME, HOLIDAY, SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL, AND
SEVERANCE PAY TO CERTAIN DEPARTMENTAL ACCOUNTS;
REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES
IN CONFLICT HEREWITH, AND CONTAINING A
SEVERABILITY PROVISION.
Passed on its first reading by title at the meeting of June 9, 1977,
Was taken up for its second and final reading by title and adoption. On
motion of Commissioner Plummer, seconded by Vice -Mayor Gibson, the
Ordinance was thereupon given its second and final reading by title and
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mr. Reboso, Mrs. Gordon, Mr. Plummer and Vice -Mayor Gibson.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Ferre.
THE ORDINANCE WAS DESIGNATED ORDINANCE NO. 8667.
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.
19, PRESENTATION TO DELEGATIONS FROM VENEZUELA AND B3OLIVIA,
Presentation of Keys to the City of Miami to a delegation
officials from Venezuela visiting the City of Miami:
Lic. Jesus Salazar Caceres
Director Nacional de Identificacion Y Extranjeria
(b) Dr. Eduardo Marcano
Director General de Defensa Civil
(c) Hon. Italo Maltese Manzano
Concejal/Distrito Federal
Presidente de la Comision de Inmuebles
(d) Presentation of a Key to the City of Miami to General
Fernando Satori, Mayor of Santa Cruz, Bolivia, who
is visiting Miami. (General Satori has a present for
the City)
'JUN 211977
(l� Aut-oRt E PuRC AsE IN LIEU OF COWENNATIoN = ksIbtstfts WA= AT
190 S.E. 12 imACE i
Mayor Ferre: Alright, we will then take up item number 19, thigh where
the major of the people are here on. Authorizing the City Manager, to
purchase in lieu of condemnation a residence located at 190 S. E. 12
Terrace for the sum of a $115,000 and allocating $117,000 from the County
Development funds to acquire said property for historic preservation.
City Manager recommends. Ladies and gentlemen, are you here in protest
of this or are you in favor of it?
SPEAKER UNKNOWN: Support.
Mayor Ferre: You're in support. Is there anybody here who is in protest
of it?
Mr. Plummer: I have some questions.
Mayor Ferre: Alright, Mr. Plummer, is recognized.
Mr. Plummer: Assuming that we buy it, what are we going to do with it?
Ms. Spillman: Mr. Plummer, we've made an agreement with Dade Historic
Trust, to be people represented... they're going to lease the building
from us at a nominal fee and operate and maintain the building. We will
not...
Mr. Plummer: Can we see that lease?
Ms. Spillman: We don't have the lease yet, because we don't own the build-
ing yet. Perhaps you may want to talk...
Mr. Plummer: Well, my concern is maintenance and up keep. My also concern
is you're taking something off of the property tax roll, these are all
areas that I think we should know about.
Mr. Fosmoen: Commissioner, I would remind you that you approved this as
part of the community development opportunities.
Mr. Plummer: As in principle I'll remind you.
Mrs. Jude: I'm "Sally Jude", and I'm Vice -President, of Dade Heritage
Trust and President of the Dade County Medical Artillery and we would be
co -inhabitants of this building and make it a musuem, so that
it would have a tourist interest as well as a historic preservation of
Dr. Jackson's office.
Mr. Plummer: Mam, I have no problem with that, but buildings have main-
tenance and up keep insurance liability.
Mrs. Jude: We would assume the responsibility, this would be part of the
leasing agreement as I under it.
Mr. Plummer: Well, all I can say to you is, you know I'm not apposed to
it, I just think we ought to have more information. Here we're spending
...what?
$115,000.
Mr. Plummer: $115,000 and I don't know really in fact... you've got no
lease.
Mrs. Jude: Well, you can't take the next step until you've taken the
first.
Mr. Plummer: Well, I think you can, ok. I think the two of you... you
and the City could have sit down to a tentative agreement, it couldn't
be sign until we purchased it.
Mrs, Jude; Well, we'd be delighted to do that.
Mayor Porte: Will ..d Make Me a Alotioh that this tatter ba.: s
Mt, Plummer: 1411 make a Motion Mr, Mayor, that this be passed and approved
aubjeot to the oonfirtatioh by thin Cofniaaion of the 1eaae Whioh t
betWeen the partners.
Mayor Eerie: Alright, Pltitter MOVaa, is there a seoeind With thoeo Co
ditiOhs?
Rev. Gibson: Second.
Mayor ?erne: Seoond by.. wh i a
the roll.
The following motion Wee introduced by COMMiggiOhor P
toyed its adoption:
MOTION NO. 7/=522
A MOTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
PURCHASE IN LIEU OF CONDEMNATION A RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 190 S. E. 12 TERRACE, MIAMI, FLORIDA
FOR THE SUM OF $115,000 AND ALLOCATING $117,000
FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS TO THIS PROPERTY
AND OTHER COSTS INCIDENTAL TO THE ACQUISITION
SUBJECT TO THE CITY COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF THE
LEASE BETWEEN DADE HERITAGE TRUST AND THE CITY
OF MIAMI.
Upon being seconded by Vice -Mayor Gibson, the motion was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
UN 21197
11 AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER to ENTER INTO A LEASE WITH MARINA BISCAYNL1 INC.
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MARINA At THE Wilt STAADICP1,
Mayor Ferre: Item 15. Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a lease with
Marina Biscayne, Inc. for the development and operations of a marina and marina
support facility in the area of City of Miami bottom=land. The City Manager
recommends.
Mr. Grassie: This would implement a purpose of the City Commission. You asked that
we attempt to develop further marina facilities for the City. This is a major step
forward. I think you all know the location. You have seen the initial plans.
The agreement that you have in your packet covers all of the major terms of
lease. There have been some minor word modifications to it in order to put it
into the form the City Attorney's office prefers. But basically we are talking
about a 30-year lease which will improve that property at no cost to the City,
and will provide right from the beginning at lease 100 berths and will provide
the best return to the City of any such lease that we have so far signed.
Mr. Plummer: You say 100 berths?
Mr. Grassie: One hundred to begin with, going to 200 before the project is completed,
Mr. Plummer: When will that point be reached on the 200?
Mr. Grassie: Rather than tell you secondhand, why don't we ask Mr. Rabin who
the person with whom the lease would enter into, to speak to the question of
time schedule.How quickly he expects to get them.
Mr. Plummer: Okay. Also what I want brought out, there was a figure,(refresh
my memory) ---what was the figure that he was going to spend in the way of improve-
ments?
Mr. Grassie: We have not asked him to make any promises in that regard. What we
have done rather is, to require of him that he promise to perform. That he provide
us with a certain quality facility with a certain capacity. The price at which he
gets that done, we have left to him.
Mr. Plummer: More importantly, since you are going to do it that way, does this
lease contain a time frame?
Mr. Grassie:Yes, sir.
Mr. Plummer: He must comply within a certain time frame?
Mr. Grassie: Yes. The lease also contains a provision that he has to spend at
least $300,000.00 but that is significantly less than what he is going to end
spending if he is going to accomplish what is in the lease.
Mayor Ferre: Is Mr. Rabin here?
Mr. Grassie: Standing in front of you.
Mayor Ferre: Is Mr. Zell here?
Mr. Grassie: No. Mr. Zell is the city's negotiator.
Mayor Ferre:Yes, I know that. Since he was the negotiator, I would imagine he
should be available for answering many questions, since he did negotiate the con-
tract.
Mr. Grassie: I don't see him in the audience.
Mayor Ferre; He may not be needed. In the future Mr, Manager, whoever negotiates
a contract, I would like present for anything that you expect this Commission to
vote on, in case there are any questions that come up on the negotiating procedure,
whoever that person may be,
Mr, Grassie; I believe the question Mr. Rabin was with regard to timetables, How
quickly we might expect to get done,
50
JUN 2 1 197
Mt, Cabin: Yes, I think if they look at the agreenettt, on page 5, at the bottoth
of the page, I think it spells it out pretty cleat, each phase, ire ate talking
for the first phase, we are talking at 8 months, or less,
Mayor Ferret How many slips are we going to have in this marina?
Mr. Plummer: In this, 95.
Mayor Ferre: Those drawings,- -could we see?
Mr. Rabin: These are ready for permitting. Let me try to explain something if
I may. The first phase calls for 95 slips but in essence there will be dockage
here for 150 when it is completed. That's the way it works out.on the first phase.
I can come up and I'll be glad to show it to you.
Mayor Ferre:
Mr. Grassie:
Mayor Ferre:
I'd like to see it. Mr. Manager, we control the specif iciations?
Yes.
Electrical outlets? Size, quality? Design. Say so on design?
Mr. Grassie: Yes. Quality of materials.
Mayor Ferre: I want to set a precedent for other matters where we
be dealing with this, with other companies that are going to use
I just want, for the record, to establish a precedent. Do we have
design.
Mr. Grassie: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Did we have say -so, -----
are going to
city property.
control of the
Mr. Grassie: In the sense that the final design has to be approved by the city.
We do no do the design, but we have to do the final approval.
Mayor Ferre: I understand.The architect is Stanley H. Greene, of 1460 Brickell
Avenue. Did we choose Mr. Greene?
Mr. Grassie: No,sir. The developer chooses the architect. We have to approve the
design.
Mayor Ferre: I see.So in other words, we did not choose the architect, but we will
have the right to choose and approve the design. Why don't you swing that microphone
around so that he can speak into the record.
Mr. Rabin: Thank you. The design you see here right now represents 95 slips,
but as it works out, these walkways are double T's.They are 36 ft. long. If
you put one in front of each one of these on this side, you pick up the difference
between 95 and 150. Let me show you an overlay.
Mayor Ferre: What you are saying is, if you put two T's then you double the amount.
Mr. Rabin: No, I am not saying
These are the slips. These are
not in use. But if I wanted to
additional 60 slips, --close to
that at all. You have a slip here. A boat pulls in.
mooring piles. This side at the present time is
tie up on the side, broad side, I would pick up
60 more slips. Now,
Mayor Ferre: Let me ask you this. If you move this another 20 or 30 feet why
couldn't you have boats on both sides?
Mr. Rabin: That is a very good question. Let me show you what the 200 slip
will look like, on the next phase. This is an overlay. By just adding these piles
here, it is no further than Dinner Key. By adding these piles here, on this side
here, we automatically got the 200.
Mayor Ferre: You have the electrical and the water supply? The answer is yes,How
about the space between this. Has the City of Miami checked out? That i.00kcs very
short spaced, If you get two boats coming out of there, they are going to hit each
other,
51
JUN 21 1977
Mr, Rabin: These dimensions ate just a trifle latget than those at Matheson
laiinock.
Mayor Ferre: So the answer then is, that we have considered the design and the
spacing and that we are not going to end up having some monstrosity. And Mr+
Manager into the record, staff has checked it out and satisfied that we are not
going to end up with a bad marina.
Mr. Grassie: That is correct Mayor. But keep in mind that we have several additional
stages at which we are going to check this design. So the checking that has gone
on so far, is not all of it.
Mr. Rabin: We have taken a lot of pain on this. The piling for the walkway are
12 x 12 precast concrete piles. The walkway itself is a double T. It is going
to be poured with a 6 inch lip on top. The mooring piles are copper piles with a
guaranteed life expectancy of a minimum of 30 years. In other words, what I am saying
is, when this thing is up, you are going to have something.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask a question. The man who is over here presently is
operating that buzz -buzz boat,
Mr. Grassie: If you recall when we entered into that one year lease, we put
in the lease a provision that if the City Commission were to take any decision
with regard to this property which would require us to change that lease that we
could break it within 60 days. So that person will remain operating there until
such time as the new construction requires that we move him. If the question is
where does he go, there are two alternatives. One is that he negotiate with Mr.
Rabin to see whether he can operate out of that same location. That is not likely.
The other alternative is that we move him to the other side of that out -jutting
point of the Marine Stadium.
Mr. Plummer: My only concern is in the area, here, ----'erect small temporary
office',(possibly use small housetrailer or houseboat), ----
Mr. Rabin: The temporary office will go in here sir. We have to have something
to operate during construction. Just for construction. It doesn't say that? That's
what I meant to say anyway. It is just for construction. It will be removed.
Mayor Ferre: The record so relfects J.L. How about the parking Mr. Manager? Has
this been worked out?
Mr. Grassie: There is specific square footage allocated to parking.
Mayor Ferre: Where?
Mr. Grassie: 0n the east and northeast side of the property as you go around the
elbow of the road which leads to the Rusty Pelican.
Mayor Ferre: How are we going to safeguard that we have some vegetation and protection
so that it doesn't end up looking like an asphalt parking place.
Mr. Grassie: That is all part of the requiremenvfor beautification of the site
which has to be approved in the plans that he has to submit.
Mayor Ferre: Will there be berms and landscaping, and proper watering of it so
somebody doesn't put in a 2 ft tree that dies in 6 months and then the City has
to do it .
Mr. Rabin: May I answer that? We have a situation here that exists. Throughout the
area here, the city installed outlets for watering. It has never been used but they
are there,
Mayor Ferre; You are telling me now on the record, along the parking area, it
would be properly landscaped in such a way that you would hide the cars as ;ouch
possible.
Mr. Rabin; Mayor, this is going to be a first-rate marina. I want the record to
reflect that.
52 +JUN 21 197'
Mayor Ferret I am in no way being cf tical Of your, but 1 have sat here too Malty
times and people have come here with all kinds of beautiful pictures of what is
going to happen, and when we see reality it is nowhere near what the dream was.
So we have learned our lesson on this commission and you will notice that each
of us, Rose and Plummer, and Gibson and Reboso always on the record ask these
questions to make sure, because otherwise we will take you to court.
Mr. Rabin: May I say something for the record? The landscaping plan,will probably
be done Werner Dietel, who I think is great.
Mayor Ferre: Who?
Mr. Rabin: Werner Dietel. Werner has won many awards. All these plans has to be
approved by the City. In other words, I am not going into landscaping without some-
body in the City okaying it. No way. So you are going to have you say in this.
Mayor Ferre: I hope we don't end up with little brick houses out there, like in
Kennedy Park. I hope we don't have any brick houses. Hexagonal brick houses, to
be exact.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask you a question. With the all the controversy, Mr. Grassie,
presently in the paper about private entreprenuers existing on public property,
is there a provision in here for taxes if so assessed?
Mr. Grassie: Yes, sir, and it specifically provides that the lessee will
pay the taxes.
Mr. Plummer: All right. The other thing. Without my going into great details.
Assuming the worst, the man doesn't follow the timetable as provided for in the
lease. At the end of 8 months, we have to default the lease. What about the
improvements already made?
Mr. Grassie: Any improvements and most importantly that includes any permits
which have been secured or secured in the name of the City and remain with the
City.
Mr. Plummer: Any improvements there subject to any liens would become the property
of the City.
Mr. Grassie: Improvements which are of a permanent nature, yes, that does not include
personal property of course. But any improvements of a permanent nature remain with
the City.
Mr. Rabin: Mr. Plummer, may I point out something else.
Mr.Plummer: Surely. Please do.
Mr. Rabin: In the first phase, is this what you are talking about?
Mr. Plummer: Right.
Mr. Rabin: Let's say I do go bad. You wind up with 6 mouths rent in advance,
$25,000. in cash, and the permits , in your name.
Mr. Plummer: That's all well and good. But you see there's not a heck of a lot
of people around here who remember the building of the bridge leading to your
property. I do. And that thing stuck out there as eny sore in Biscayne Bay for
a lot of years. I want to make sure this city is not in the same position of being
stuck with an eyesore that we can't complete that didn't.
Mr. Rabin: I can understand.
Mr. Plummer: Where is the drystorage going?
Mr. Grassie: Immediately east of the horseshoe which forms the wet storage
for the marina . Immediately east of that. In other words, in the direction of
the Marine Stadium, that is where the dry storage goes,
53 JUN 21197;
Mr. Plummer: That would be north of There the preset dry storage is,
Mr, Grassie: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: But you are going in with racks? The only final question 1 have,
because it has been a problem, in tto way is the city having to provide other than
normal police protection for security?
Mr. Grassie: That is correct.
Mr. Plummer: He will provide his own watchmen and things of that nature at his
cost?
Mr. Grassier That is correct.
Mayor Ferre: I have two other questions. On the rental fees, that you ate going to
charge for boats, do we have any say at all on that? What is he going to charge for
a boat slip?
Mr. Rabin: I have a problem here. We have the county up the street who is more or
less setting the rate.
Mayor Ferre: Yes, but they are full.
Mr. Rabin: That is true. We have never talked about that Mayor.
this is a privately owned marina.
Mr. Plummer: They won't be charging what we are charging.
Mr. Grassie: It is a market rate, competitive rate, Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: But the lease doesn't say anything about that.
Mr. Grassie: Does not control it as a function of our administration, ---
Mayor Ferre: I accept that. I am not arguing against that. But then on the other
side, our income is based on a percentage of what he makes. If decides to make
it low, we get low.
Mr. Rabin: There is a minimum and a percentage Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: That is a loaded question and which is going to embarrass the City,
so I won't ask it. I'll make it into a statement. The minimum which is 10% is more
than what we are getting now by running our own.
Mr. Grassie: I am not sure what you have in mind. We are not running a marina there
now.
Mayor Ferre: We are running a marina right behind where we are now. I guess what
I am trying to imply is, that if the private sector were running it we would be
making a lot more money than we are by running it ourselves. That is what I am
trying to say.
Mr. Plummer: Let me ask one other question. Under page 4, the Use, it said you shall
be the sole marina and marina -support facilities operator on the site. What is the
site.
Mr. Rabin: It has been knocked out.
Mr. Grassie: The site is defined as the property which is leased. It is specifically
not inclusive of any property that is not covered by the lease. In other words, it
does include any adjacent property. Shall I say that again?
Mr, Plummer: He is saying it has been deleted.
r, Grassie: I objected to that same provision, and I wanted to make sure the
provisions of this lease cover only the leased property and nothing adjacent to
it,
54
JUN 0977
Mr, Plu let : SO 1 don't geed to know What the hohridarie6 of the 1eaMed
are?
Mt. Gtassie: Of eoutse.
Mr. Plummet.
Don't read them to me because; 47° N, centergrade,""""
Mr. Grassier But we can describe those to you if you wish.
Mr. Plummer: Is this first reading?
Mr. Grassier Yes.
Mr,Plummer: Before second reading bring it back.
Mr. Grassie:It is not an ordinance so it is not going
It is simply an authorization to sign a lease.
Mr. Plummer: You will furnish me a map where I can see where
Mr. Grassie:Sure.
Mayor Ferre: Plummer are you going to move it?
Mr. Plummer: I'll be more than happy to move it. That is to be inclusive of
the amendment.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
to get
a second reading,
the boundaries are?
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 523
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT
WITH MARINA BISCAYNE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, FOR THE DEVELOP-
MENT AND OPERATION OF A MARINA AND MARINA SUPPORT FACILITY UNDER
AND AROUND CITY OF MIAMI BAY BOTTOM LAND IN THE LAGOON SITUATED
NORTHWEST OF MIAMI AND NORTH OR RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY, FOR A
20CYRDPERIOD
ER WITH THE ERMSITH TWO DANDIONAL CONDITIONSRSETTIONS TO RENEM IN
FORTH IN THE ATTACHED
ACCORDANCE
AGREEMENT
(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 -
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mayor Ferrer Mr. Rabin good luck to you and when are you going to have the marina;
open?
Mr. Rabin: I am filing permits this week and I need
Mayor Ferre: What do you estimate it will take?
Mr, Rabin: If I have luck with the permits, ---I might have some luck because
the City is the applicant in this particular case. It is one thing for one to
walk in, and another thing for the city to walk in. And this could help. If I
don't run into troubles in these public hearings.
Mayor Ferre: I look forward to being there and cut the ribbon,
Mr, Rabin; You are invited, You are all invited,
Mayor Ferre: Are you doing your own financing?
55
a lot of help.
MY. Rabin! Veal
tayor.term Mr. Manaitgofi there any way in which through the newlegihlat
that was passed, -you don,t went me to ask the question/ Pfeil, why not
Mr. Plummer: You just knocked out of the box the new negotiator.
Mayor Ferret That will be subject to negotiation.
Mr. Grassie: 1 wouldn't think that we would be negotiating that Mayor. lthnk
i hot
about the same provisions you ate dealing with) that relates to blight. i
think they would be applicable. l really
tounk wouldthat
wantthis
get into that which
you halls f
e a project which is market inancable) y
process that you ate thinking about.
Mayor Ferret It might hurt us in other things) is that that you mean?
Mr. Grassie: 'Yes. You need that sort of financing for projects that are much tnote
marginal than this one.
Mayor Ferret If there are sometsavitigs'inptthe
euinterest) it could
accrue to the City)
as I am sure you looked into further.
22. A) LONG DISCUSSION ITEM AND EXPRESSION OF OPINION OF CITY C+OF44tSSION FOR
REVOCATION OF P.A.D. AT 3495 MAIN HIGHNAYe
$) REQUEST STUDY OF EXISTING P.A.D. ORDINANCESe
Mayor Ferre: We are now on the next item.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor why don't you take the 2:30. We have called these people
all together for 2:30.
Mayor Ferre: I am sorry, Mr. Wright. I forgot. We have several of the people
involved in this. So at this time we will take up the item. Mr. Salman why don't
we start with you? The question before the City of Miami Commission, is, in the
application and construction of that property in Coconut Grove. Is the will of the
City Commission being followed? I guess that is the question.
Mr. Salman: The answer is yes.
Mayor Ferre: Mike, why don't you come up, or whoever wants to, and explain why
the will of the Commission is not being followed.
Mr. Howard Horowitz: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, my name is Howard
Horowitz, attorney at law, 3550 Biscayne Blvd. Miami Florida. I represent Mr.
Michael Simonhoff who owns the property, 3503 Main Highway which is directly
adjacent to the property in question which is 3495 Main Highway. We believe the
property is owned by David J. Miller, and I think some other individuals. Mr. Mayor
and Commission, before we discuss the issue as you directed to Mr. Salman, I think
we could all better appreciate what the problem is, if I give a very short synopsis
of the chronology of events that have occured, so that we all know that we are talking
about the same thing.
Sometime in January or February, the time, which I am not sure. I understand we
are here by a notice at 10:30 this morning, so I don't have all the information
but sometime in January or February, an application was made we believe by Mr.
Miller to this Commission for a certain building construction permit at his address
at 3495 Main Highway. We understand that the Commission after public hearing approved
certain plans, and that they were to procede accordingly.
Approximately the 24th day of May, these dates are only approximate, so I can just
give you a better understanding, on the 24th day of May, 1977, Mr. Simonhoff who
owns the land directly adjacent to the property in question, noticed bulldozing and
fill going on in Biscayne Bay. 0f course, his property now is located directly on
Biscayne Bay. Mr. Simonhoff contacted the Department of Environmental Regulations
Mr. Millen . He also notified the Dade County Department of Environmental
Resouce Management, a Mr. Ken Shane. The Corp of Engineers was also notified. On
the 24th day of May also, Mr. Simonhoff reported this to the City, namely the
Building Department, I think Mr. Salman. It was shown that the plans showed a
191 vertical bulkhead on the shoreline as well as a 131 retaining wall on the
sideline, all contrary to the previously submitted plans to this commission which
they approved as a conditional use. On the 25th and 26th day of May, and I am not
sure which day it occured, but a Jim Eckerd who was also from the Department of
Environmental Resources Management, Dade County, took pictures and turned them
over to the Attorney General's office which a determination was made I believe
there was violations of certain State laws. We should note that these construction
that were taking place, we believe, and we are not exactly sure, we haven't had the
opportunity to inspect, but we believe they in accordance to a permit that was issued
by the Building Department but not in accordance to the plans that were submitted to
this Commission and approved. We should tell you what this would do to the adjacent
property, because this is very important. It is not that we just don't want this
gentleman to build. There is a reason. The reason is, first it is esthetically
different from what I think the City wants. It visually hiniers the natural environ-
mental look of the area. T'ie bulkhead would cause a backwash on the property, which
eventually will eat away the shoreline. Not the property where the building is but
-rather the adjacent property. One side is owned by the State Department of Natural
Resources, the other side is owned by Mr. Simonhoff and the property down further
which is owned by Mr.Sweatman, represented by other council. But what that would do
would literally cause a baskwash during severe storms and wash away his shoreline.
Now the buildings that are being constructed now, and the plans on record with the
Building Department but not as approved by this Commission or different in the several
aspects. One, the greater than 35 ft. in height. Two, the more than 21/2 stories. Three,
there is a buttress to the property line, and four, it altered the entryway' into
57 JUN 21191
the location, Their buildings were not approved by this Commission. And contrary
to what you approved. Contrary to what the adjacent property owners thought that
was supposed to be constructed, and contrary to what the public thought was going
to be constructed.
Also on the 25th or 26th day of May,and I wanted to bring in what the State has
done because I think we cannot isolate State violations which are detrimental
to the public's interest to what you have approved. The State on the 27th day of
May, after an inspection by their proper representatives of the Department of
Environmental Regulations, issued a warning notice, which consisted of a cease
and desist paper and I will give your style. It is a warning notice hand -delivered
to Mr. David Miller, 3495 Main Highway, Coconut Grove Florida, warning notice
Number SE 1156 DF. I won't go into great detail. Essentially it said they were in
violation of State law, namely 403 and the several subsections. I won't give them
Chapter 258, several sections. Chapter 253 and Chapter 74. They never received a
permit from the State, and I will give this to the Commission for them to review.
As far as we know, they have not as of this date even obtained a state permit to
alter the shoreline of Biscayne Bay, to dredge or fill or do any other actions
which the State regulates. On June 7, we believe that Mr. Miller then went to the
Urban Development Board and they requested fill to be brought up to 11 ft. as the
revised plans were submitted. Now, we understand that the Urban Development Board
denied this request. 0n June 8, Bob Davis, Director of Zoning called Mr.Simonhoff
at approximately 5 PM and informed them that the developers had withdrawn the item
from the agenda that was scheduled for June 9. The City called that meeting, because
the City has to be interested in that, the people who are supposedly building in
accordance what the City approved, violation of that must be brought to the City's
attention. Now we understand that on June 9th there was a hearing before this Com-
mission and we understand that this Commission on June 9 by a motion I believe made
by Commissioner Gibson, but if I am incorrect, the record will reflect correctly, that
there was instructions that the developer or Mr. Miller, or whoever was responsible,
with what was happening on the property, to comply, with the submitted plans that were
approved by this Commission. As far as we know, they were not. We understand that
on June 17th, Janet Reno from the firm of Hector, Steel and Davis wrote a letter to
this Commission,(they represented Mr. Sweatman, who owns the property adjacent to
Mr. Simonhoff) informing that there were continuous violations, that Mr. Miller or
the developers, whoever was responsible, completely ignored this Commission's directive
of June 9, continued to build in violation of what this Commission originally approved,
and I think Ms. Reno in her letter asked that the permit for the PAD be revoked and
the building permit be revoked also. AS far as we know, ----
Mayor Ferre: You are re -thrashing what we have already gone through once.
Mr. Horowotz: I just wanted to bring this up Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: We could hear this thing 10 times and it is not going to, you
haven't said a thing that hasn't been said before.
Mr. Horowitz: I will make it very short Mr. Mayor and for the Commission. Exactly
what we are here for is to have the permit revoked mainly because they have not
complied with that this Commission approved, what they should do, --and on June 9
directed what they should do. We have various people here who are also affected
and I think first I will call on Mr. Simonhoff.
Mayor Ferre: I am not going to listen to anybody who has already made the same
statement. We don't want to hear it twice. If you have something new to say, fine.
I'll recognize you, Mike. If you are going to repeat what you said before, I don't
want to hear it.
Mr. Horowitz: Does the Mayor, and the Commission, want the cease -and -desist order
issued by the State, --would they consider that?
Mayor Ferre: Sure. I think that is something that should be made part of the
record. Okay. Mr. Salman, do you want to answer, and then we will hear the other
side.
Mr. Selman, Director of Building Dept: The building permit was issued on a basis
10 ft. high elevation in which we went to Board and was denied the extra four feet.
This was denied because the Board felt that what the Commission approved, was only
for the 6 ft. elevation, which is a requirement by the City and I pass you a memo
in which it states what part of the Code this is all about. Everything that was
approved, was approved exactly, not only in the letter of the Code but also with
the spirit of a PAD. We had a PAD approved in which it is not shown in any place
58 JUN 211977
that any elevation should be changed from the actual requirement by law. When this
thing came to the department to be approved, when the final set of drawings came
to the department to be approved, we will be derelict in approving something that
is contrary to the established law of the City that we have to comply with. Any
buildable lot has to get an elevation of 6 ft. It is there for your own information.
And that is what we did. It doesn't say what is the maximum. The maximum could up
to 20 ft. if they so desire. Because there is no limit for a maximum. We thought
that 20 ft. was absolutely too much. And we established some guidelines in our mind
of what would be a fair thing and will comply more or less with what the PAD was
all about. We said that it will be completely out of line to determine that the
20 ft. elevation would be required for the whole project because that will be an
immense fill in the back, and that is contrary for a logical thing will be facing
Biscayne Bay.
Then we have an established criterion which a lot that has a facing two sides,
could added as average between the high plane plus 6. That also jeopardizes
three-quarters of the building since three-quarters of the building are on a
high elevation, a high -ground elevation,of about 20 ft. high. So we then went to
the thrid alternative in which we said okay, the two-thirds of the building is
on the high ground, so we will say this is the high elevation. The other two
buildings will be on the Biscayne Bay side, and would say there is a point when
you have sudden change of level. It is about 16 over sealevel. The required bulkhead
will be 6, so the two of them makes 26, half of it 131. establish an imaginary
line of 131 to establish the height of buildings. This is how we determine the height
of buildings. Now, we came to the Commission, and the Commission said, we want every-
thing we approved in accordance with PAD. PAD shows an elevation which is not a very
professional way of doing it, but just to keep with the intent, with the spirit of
the PAD that you approved. It won't be something that will be contrary of what you
knew about to be approved. We established a 6 ft. by scale, was the intended fill
in that block, which is what we require by law in a buildable lot. So that is why
we feel very comfortable thinking that that fill is proper, right and just for
everyone.The has not done anything wrong by approving this fill four feet high.
Now, I think we have to restrain ourselves because that is what the Mayor asked
about some items that were brought as of today.
Mayor Ferre: Did they comply with the PAD?
Mr. Salman: They did comply with a PAD. For the complaint that was submitted today,
I think I am not the one who is to answer, about the owner, because it is not a
complaint us, the City, but a complaint against the owner.This about the buttresses,
to restore the natural slope, --I imagine the natural slope is the remaining
from low land, because low land, natural slope, would be the plus 6, that would be
a buildable lot. We authorized the builder to go ahead and pour that footing and to
build up the wall adjacent to this property up to the 6 ft. which is what we believe
is what we have to do anyhow. It says no such wall is reflected on original plan. No
need to reflect the wall because it is not asking in PAD, but to have the R-1 Route,
and that is what you approved. Also, it is stretching the point further on. He has
a drawing which I understand is pictorial drawing. This is the pictorial drawing which
by scale. No professional should do it that way, but just to stress the point. It is
about 6 ft. It says large concrete buttress are direct to the property line. Those
large concrete buttresses, they are referred here, are no other than the walls that
are permitted by our City to be built in a lot. It says this buttress are not reflected
on the original plan. This is not required to be reflected because it is nothing he is
asking for different from what he normally would get with a building permit. He does
not have to ask for any special thing for those walls. They are permitted. You have
it there in your, ------
Mr. Grassie: I think that all of us, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, face
the dilemma that the project is going forward conforming with the established ord-
inances, and with the intent of what the City Commission established but is it not
satisfactory to neighbors. There doesn't seem to be any evident way where everybody
is going to be satisfied on this project. In the final analysis, the only option
really that is open to the City Commission is to make sure that everybody abides
by the rules, the regulations and what has been agreed to. I think our efforts should
be directed in that way.
W. Plummer: Mr. Grassie what you are saying, here I think we are getting back
to a fundamental and that's the rights or property. If I understand you correctly,
59 JUN 211977
what you are saying is, basically and fundamentally this man has a tight to
do certain things with his property. And if I futther understand you, he is
complying within the framework of what his tights are. Is that what I understand?
Mr. Grassie: That is right, sir.
Mr. Plummer: I don't know what this Commission can do. If a man is complying with
the law and he has the rights to do this, what can this Commission do to stop him?
I don't understand. If he has problems with the State, and he is not complying with
State law, then that is another problem. But unless somebody tells me, that this man
is violating the rights which he is entitled to, under ownership of property, I
don't see where this Commission can a thing but maybe sympathize with the people
who don't like what he is building. I don't know what else we can do. We can always
suggest that we buy it for a park. That is always the out around here. If we don't
like we will turn it into a park. If we built parks in this City every time a zoning
item hit, we'd have more damn parks than 17 major cities.
Rev. Gibson: I want to make sure I hear what I think I heard. Are you telling
me that our laws are separate and apart from the laws of the State, or maybe
we need to do far more of what was said this morning in that survey that the
Mayor recommended that we have. Maybe we need to coordinante our activities and
maybe we need to make our laws run the same so we don't get in this cross -fire.
You can't tell me that we are bigger than the State, And you can't tell me we are
bigger than the County. Somebody ought to get us off the spot. I hear what you are
saying but I want to say to the Manager, you just repeated what he said. I want
to say the Manager, Mr. Manager, no way that sounds,
Mr. Plummer: Father what we have to recognize is what is the spot. The spot is
that the man is building something the neighbors don't like.
Rev. Gibson:No, that isn't what I am saying.
Mrs. Gordon: It is more than that.
Mr. Plummer: Let me finish this then I'll be quiet. I am listening to the people
who I pay a hell of a lot of money to be the experts. That is the Manager, attorney,
Salman,--those are the people I have to depend on. They might be wrong, but I have to
depend on their opinion and their expertise. These people are telling me, that they
have complied. They are doing what they are supposed to do. These people aren't
experts. They don't know what they are talking about, and I am assuming Mr. Grassie
will replace them and replace them with somebody who is expert so we won't get back
in this problem again. But I have yet to hear any of my high-priced people tell me
the man is in violation, and until I hear that, I don't think we are on any spot,
Father. I am sorry.
Unidentified: Excuse me, Mr. Plummer, I would like to comment to that, if I may.
There are other people here who would like to speak but I think maybe you are
missing the issue. The issue is not whether or not Mr. Miller is in violation,
I think the issue is whether or not this Commission, and its building department
might not have coordinated their efforts. And going back to you statement, 'you
know we don't have anything to do with the State of Florida', --you are a governmental
representative of the people of the City of Miami. We should pay closer attention
to our environment right here on Biscayne Bay. We can't be like an ostrich and stick
our head in the ground and say I have nothing to do with that. I understand what
you are saying though. Where your authority vests is with the City of Miami and I
understand that. But I also want to get back to the most crucial point. Our qualm
really is not with Mr. Miller, because he was issued a permit. What happened here
is this Commission had a public hearing. The neighbors of the adjacent property came
by and listened to what was being presented to this Commission. They have a right to
rely on what was submitted to this Commission and approved by this Commission and
then it was arbitrarily altered without anyone knowing. Now, is that government?
I hope not. Because then we really have a problem if that is government.
Hr. Plummer: Sir, please don't ask a question with a scatter-gun answer.
Unidentified; That is the issue.
} . Plummer: Sir, once again, so you obviously didn't hear it. Let we please for
60 JUN 211977
your benefit, unless I am mistaken,
Mr, Salman, I will ask you a direct
under the permit as issued from the
Mr► Selman, will you come to the Microphone,
question. Sir, is the developer proceeding
meeting at which a public heating was held?
Mt, Salman: Definitely yes.
Mr. Plummer: Did you hear that sir?
Unidentif ied:I heard. I have good hearing.
Mr. Plummer: Thanks.
Mr. Simonhoff: May I ask just one question? This morning I requested before
this Commission to have the original plans that are public record, of that
PAD area development, at 3495 Main Highway at this meeting this afternoon.That
is public record.
Mr. Plummer: Mike, what you asked this Commission was very simple. Was the plans
available to you and the answer was yes. That's what you asked.
Mr. Simonhoff: Mr. Mayor may I ask a question? I relied on the integrity of this
commission, the integrity of the Environmental Preservation Review Board, the
integrity of the Urban Development Review Board and coming before this Commission with
a submission of a Planned Area Development. Now, what a Planned Area Development
is, is a design submission, as it is, as it, as it set forth and as it is going to
be built, to be approved by this Commission, that is what I relied on. If I had seen
four-story buildings or buildings that are almost 45 ft. or 13z vertical bulkheads
on the shore of Biscayne Bay, I would have had those people in this city in court
and injunction, long enough to make sure we had a proper determination of what a
PAD really is. Now we have plenty of expert witnesses here and I don't believe
Mr. Salman can possibly be, I think he is probably confusing some things
because I am going to read you what it says, 'height of a building.' In the current
Code which I just purchased, it says here, 'height of buildings: the vertical distance
from the average established rate of the front of the building to the highest point
of a building including parapets.' Now, you take any single building. You cannot tell
me you take every building on that site and average above what they are. They are
separate buildings that are on that site. That is different than what came before
this Commission and that is different upon what I relied and saying I would not
oppose the development. I came here and I spoke for it because I thought these
people and this commission had the integrity to go by what their zoning laws are.
Mr. Salman is not properly interpreting this. You have an R-1. I am going to read
you what it says about R-1. It says 'height: Sec. 4-21.1, Rev. 1-1-75--Height:
no building or structure or part thereof shall be erected or altered to a height
exceeding 21 stories,said 21 stories shall not exceed 35 ft.' We are going to
look at what was submitted to this Commission and passed by this Commission and
then what was granted a permit by that Building Department. If you can show me
those buildings are under 35 ft. or under 21 stories, I'll accede.
Mr. Horowitz: There is a question here also, Mr. Mayor and members of the
Commission, is, ----Commissioner Plummer I heard the question that you asked
Mr. Salman. The question we are really asking this Commission is whether or not
that the plans that were submitted to the Commission pursuant to a public hearing,
are the same plans now that they are building on.
Mr. Plummer: I ask the question. Are they different?
Mr. Salman: The scope is right. There are minor little changes, which in a
development of drawing from a very preliminary, like this is, to a complete
set of drawings, are logical and natural to happen.
Mayor Ferre: I think the question is, has the plans as submitted and approved,
based on the permit been in any way changed?
Mr. Salman: No, sir.
Mayor Ferre; They have not?
Mr. Salman; No. The scope of the thing that was approved by FAD,
Mayor Ferre; Now, would you answer the question as asked by Mr, Simonhoff with
regards to the height.
61
Mayor Pere: There ate some specific areas, in which height limitatio § are
itposed and etc, Are they in compliance/ yes, of no.
'Mr. Salman: In the first place this was approved as a PAD. Okay. When they go
through a PAD they have to approve something as a whole. A scope of something.
It has to be approved as a unit, as an idea. A something different from the Ord.,
inanry. If not, they don't have to go to a PAD. Okay, part of the PAD and it is
very well established here because this is the drawings that were submitted. This
is a reduction by the way, ---are showing building heights which are right here.
Mayor Ferre: Were those PAD drawings approved?
Mr. Salman: Yes.
Mayor Ferre: Did it go through the procedure and described by law?
Mr. Salman: Yes, sir.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question for clarification. It is getting
rather confusing because apparently there was approval of a PAD then there was
an issuance of a permit. The question now is, whether the approval of the PAD
and the issuance of the permit were based upon the same design. In other words,
the land elevations and the height of the buildings, were they both the same?
Are they two separate entities ---exactly the same entities?
Mr. Salman: The two entities are the same basic idea.
Mrs. Gordon: That is not my question.
Unidentified: May I show it to the Commission?
Mayor Ferre: In other words what you are saying is, that the application for
the PAD, the approval for the PAD, the building permit are basically the same
thing.
Mrs. Gordon: Basically it is not the answer. The answer has to be, 'yes it is,
or no it isn't.'
Mayor Ferre: Is it specifically the same, yes or no?
Mrs. Gordon: Specifically is the word that needs to be used. Exactly needs to
be used. If it is, there is nothing further to discuss.
Mayor Ferre: By showing me all these little boxes, I don't know one box
the other.
Mr. Salman: Let me show,
Mrs. Gordon: Wait a minute, we will all come up,
Mr. Salman:Let me show you this, Mr. Mayor. These are the PAD plans.
Mr. Plummer: Are these the only plans that you have ever received?
Mr. Salman: They are the only ones in existence. I don't know if there's
Mrs. Gordon: The key question, is the one I asked, ----yes, exact,
Mayor Ferre: Yes, they are exact.
Mr. Salman: Yes, they are exact. How much can be varied from a preliminary
to a finshed set of drawings, ------
Mayor Ferre: It is not 10 ft. higher,--
Mr, Salman; No, sir,------
Mr. Plummer; Is this what was used at the
Saltnau; That's correct.
&evc Gibson; Let me take $ very interesting observation, You would have to adthit
Mf, Director, that when you issued that permit you didn't have detailed dtaWings,
or detailed plans. Look, man, either you had them or you didn't have them,
Mr, Salman; Yes, sir. Positive. I have a set of drawings.
Rev, Gibson; Some where in this discussion, let me put this in the record, some,
where in the discussion, I got the understanding, that the detailed plans were not
presented before the permit. Somebody got to stop lying here. We are not going
to have lies before the Commission and the public. I am not going to be a liar,
Mr. Salman: Yes, sir. Detailed drawings had to be presented in order to be
approved.
Rev. Gibson: Let me ask you this. Did you have the detailed drawings before
you gave the building permit?
Mayor Ferre: Father Gibson, this Commission deals with approvals and we have
never approved anything on final drawing. We only approve things on schematics.
When a PAD is presented, PAD's are not presented with all the detailed working
drawings. Because that wouldn't make any sense. So the real crux of the matter
is, are the working drawings different from the schematics that were presented?
Mr. Salman: Not essentially.
Rev. Gibson: Not essentially. Either they are, or they aren't. Not essentially.
You know what that means.
Mr. Salman: Well, Father, maybe they are 1% different.
Mr. Horowitz: How were they different?
Unidentified: In every respect sir.
Mr. Simonhoff: Do we have the working drawings here? I will ask several people
who are architects in this city, who are in this audience, to come up here and
look at this as it was approved by the PAD and what the working drawings are,
if you tell me they are essentially the same, again I say, I'll walk out and
forget.
Mayor Ferre: I think that is a fair statement Mike.
Mr. Horowotz: Can we ask Mr. Pancoast?
Mayor Ferre: This is a matter and I will ask Mr. Pancoast. But before we do that,
we have also a man who is a distinguished architect in this Community and he
is on the record, and I am sure he is not going to lie on the record. And I am
going to ask you, on the record. Mr. Wright,are the schematic drawings and the
working drawings different?
Mr. Wright, Architect Developer: Mr. Mayor, I am not evading your question but
if you referring to every partition, every door, certainly not. As we develop
the working drawings we move a door,we move a window. If you are asking me,
are the number of stories that I presented in the schematics, the same, yes.
Mrs. Gordon: How about the number of feet?
Mr. Wright: I was just about to answer that. If you are asking me the number of
feet, the answer is yes.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, what. They are the same? Or different?
Mr, Wright; We presented not only 3 storystructures, we presented two four-story
buildings on the Bay.We are building less than we asked for originally.
Mrs, Gordon; You mean on the approved plans sir?
Mr, Wright; On the approved plans we submitted to you, rather to the Panning
department, part of our package, the floor plans. We have two units
JUN 211977
Mrs. Gordon: For a four-story building?
Mr. Wright: Yes, ma'am. Originally, with our submission we had two four-story
units on the bay. The plans are on file. We are not building those. We are keeping
them all down to the same height. If I could continue along, I would like to
answer some of the other questions that have been raised. The issue came up about
fill. In our opinion when we submitted our final drawings, we went into the Building
Department with an elevation of +10 above 0 which is taken at mean low water. That
is not 10 ft. above the ground. We asked for a permit. In my opinion, analyzing the
requirements of flood insurance, this was a means to satisfy that. The Building
Department thought so. We went back to the Urban Development Review Board. They
were opposed to bringing the ground up that high, so we said wait a minute. We
will bring it back down to the minimum allowed under the law. Now the diffuculty
right now is, the fill is sitting there mounded in the site so it looks high. But
if we were to spread the fill out to where it is going, I guarntee you that fill
will not be higher that +6 above 0, mean low water.That's what we told you two
weeks ago we were going to do. We were not going to have that fill in its finished
state any higher than the minimum required by the laws of the City of Miami. Our
wall is not up to 13 ft. We are proposing the wall to be +9.5 above 0 at mean low water.
In essence I doubt very seriously if that wall will come above the wooden fence
that the Barnacles has. Now we are not in here saying gee whiz, why did the
Barnacle
put an 8 ft. fence, it is there? There can't be a visual hinderance with this wall.
All we are doing is building a wall, up to +6 and carrying it an additional 42 inches
above that which is considered a safety barrier. I would like to point out a couple
of other things. Mr. Sweatman who encouraged his lawyers to write this letter, which
I just reviewed this morning, already has his land, and this is not factual, I am
just saying in my opinion I believe he is alreay at +6. He has a seawall. Here is
man who has already filled his land and he is already up to wall what we asked to
bring ours. The only remaining parcel of land in between would be Mr. Simonhoff's
land, which if he develops and builds on that land, I promise you he will be required
to bring his up to +6. The law says he has to. Then when he brings his land up, our
wall won't be so high. You see, the things I want the Commission to recognize, the
issue with the fill, we are only trying to bring our site up to satisfy a Miami law.
If you would like to waive that law, then we will take it back down to natural grade.
If you want to waive it. But is is not a safe condition. The whole issue here is over
a sectional graph that we drew without a dimension. There is no dimension. You say it
is not up to plus 6, I say it is not down to +5. The intention of the graph, was to
show a profile. The law says, so it become semantical to me, that we have to raise
that site to +6. We won't raise it any more than that. The retaining wall is to hold
the fill intact.
I would like to move into another area. The state. It shouldn't be brought up at
the Commission meeting but it is okay. There is no doubt about it. We were granted
a permit, (the City of Miami) to fill the land. Here it is. I believe it is proper.
It is in accord with the law. We asked for permission to build a wall and the City
issued us a permit to build a wall. When the state came down and said, whoa, wait
a minute. We have jurisdition here. My reaction by telephone to Mr. Slaten of the
Corp of Engineers, I apologize to you sir, I wasn't trying to do something beyond
the law. I didn't realize that I had to ask for a corp of engineer's approval because
the City monitors those state laws and when we were issued a building permit, we were
building at mean high water. We are not trying to build out in the water. Now, where
are we right now with them? I believe if they are here, that we are satisfying them.
We are presently asking for permission to build the wall where we originally intended
to build it, and we have every reason to belive that they plan to give us that permis-
sion. We are also proposing to put the mangrove back in after the wall is built to take
care of the washing action. I am almost through, Reverend.
Rev. Gibson: I am not asking you
Mr. Wright: In addition to that, --you know, I am not a stone -thrower. I am not
an argurer, or an attacker. But right now, there is an application pending where
Mr. Simonhoff wants to dredge the water off of his property and Mr. Sweatman's.
He has made application. It is going to disturb the baybottom. We are not opposed
to him doing that if it is going to befit his land. To sit here and say that we
are polluting Biscayne Bay, ---just the sound of that, it is really an attacking
sound. We are not polluting Biscayne Bay. We put fill on the property. It rained
and turbidity went into the Bay. We admit that. Now we have gone out and bought
a turbidity screen. It will be installed Thursday. We feel we have satisfied the
state. To recap quickly, we are filling any further up that land than the City of
64
JUN 211977
Miami requires us to do. We are building a wall that the ordinances of the City
of Miami allow us to do. I must add this. On the original PAD site plan it didn't
show this retaining wall but it also says in this code book that the Building Dept.
has the right to grant permission to build that wall if it is in fact an ordinance
in the City of Miami. We are not going back to ask for a modification to PAD to build
a wall..There is already an ordinance that says we can. I just want to paint the
picture the way it is. I sounds terrible coming from the other side. Again the height
of the building, ----
Mayor Ferre: Let's hear one from you and then we have to bring this to head.
Mr. Dick Roberts: I am Dick Roberts, biologist for Department of Natural Resources.
We started out with some new information and we talked, elaborately last time about
cooperation between the neighbors and you see there is no cooperation amongst the
neighbors. After this meeting on the 8th or 9th, the superintendent land I went
back over the the Barnacle and went back along the property line and we have a
fence which is talked about, it is an 8 ft. fence, and it is structural fence
to keep people on our property while they are touring the site and we moved that
structure six inches into our property line. This is the property line that was
accepted when we bought the property. It has been surveyed 3 or 4 times in the past
even before we'did buy the property. When the superintendent and I did visit the site,
we found that the concrete footers are poured underneath the fence and right beside
the fence, so we already have an encroachment on our property some where in terms of
6 inches to a foot, of a concrete fence, or footer. We also didn't see in the original
plans the bulkhead or the barrier, the patio partion or whatever you wish to call it.
That comes within 6 inches of the property line. The fencing we have along the property
has also been broken in several places. We requested the developer to go ahead and
take care of it, it is unsightly and it was because of him the thing was broken. I
think we would like to have a little bit better cooperation with the neighbor involved.
We don't have it now and we have actually gone to our legal staff and ask them to
review this case and come down here and consider it. So that is about where the
Barnacle property is.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, two things. I am layman. I don't know much about building
but I think maybe we boo -booed. Maybe we boo -booed, meaning the City. There is
nothing wrong with accepting guilt when you are guilty. But before I am ready to
vote, I want to hear Mr. Pancoast.
Mr. Lester Pancoast: Mr. Mayor I know you don't want to sit here and think about
something while I look over the plans which are rather extensive and happened at
several different times. I have looked over the plans but I have to say that my
summary now of what I say about them will not necessarily be complete because I
haven't memorized the plans, and I haven't looked at them for a long period of
time. There is more looking to be done perhaps. But what I would like to say is
that the original PAD was hammered out among interested parties who are extremely
excited about trees. It seemed in the discussion I read over that trees were a big
discussion. If I had been here I would have been talking about trees too. But it
seems that some rather important, rather fundamentally important things were not
looked at carefully enough in the approval of the PAD. I remember personally being
involved with Ransom School and its efforts if you recall to project a football field
out into Biscayne Bay. Some of its neighbors already had 6 ft walls too, but the
state was no longer accepting 6 ft walls, and such a wall would have been a red
flag to the state today I believe unless we have retrogressed in those standards.
Ransom School was made to put many, many loads of enormous boulders there to produce
a natural shoreline and there were valiant efforts to plant mangroves to further
satisfy the state inspectors on making that property natural. The people in the
school were pleased with that, the state was pleased with that. Our mangroves washed
away but some natural ones came along and they are growing there now. No such wall
as we would have perhaps built, was shown on the PAD. When you look at the PAD drawing
it looks as if there are scattered boulders. In fact they don't even create a wall.
They kind of in and out on the drawing, making a naturalistic shoreline. The shoreline
along there, that includes the Barnacle property and the several neighbors, is a
sloping thing that goes almost level with the water and up to a very high ridge,
over several hundred feet. I don't know exactly what the dimension is. But anyone
familiar enough with elevation in that area, would have looked at a PAD and seen
approximately 3 buildings, all right,---2 buildings east of the ridge, anybody
looking at those in that location would have said, but the law says you have to fill
in the land in order to build a building there. Here is where Mr. Salman is absolutely
right. He looks traditionally at the way these things have been interpreted and they
65
JUN 21.1977
just don't let you build a building without fill under it. In my own personal
opinion that is a kind of stupidity that we have indulged in, that came from jolly
old England, or New England or somewhere. But in fact in Florida, there are many
places where fill under your building will do more damage to the environment that
it will not having it. Because when you fill in close to the water, you no longer
let the water have its own way and when the water doesn't have its own way, it bumps
into things, runs around things, it comes in, it floods in, it rolls out, it under-
cuts, but if nature solved it, man is here very rapidly moving towards unsolving it.
I would say that a 13 ft. wall is a shocking element, fundamentally different from
from the earlier drawings. Mr. Salman's department very wisely I think tried to
moderate the height of this thing, but in all of his efforts to bring it into to
coordination with the law, he still was approving something that was in my opinion
at least, fundamentally different from the PAD that had been approved. There are
other things to talk about too in terms of heights of buildings. They are very
complex because they involve traditional interpretations that I still don't under-
stand. Yes, I think it can be established that they are tradition but I can't really
say why it is done that way. If you have an inhabitable floor that fills no more than
75%, it is suddenly given credit as a full floor instead of a half floor. I don't
understand why. But that is traditionally, I am sure Mr. Salman can establish that
that is the way things are done. Part of the law says the height of a single family
building has to be no more than 35 ft. to top of the highest point of the roof, except
the next sentence comes along and says to the mid point of a peaked roof. I am not
sure why that makes sense. But in some cases people have struggled with this thing
and they have come up with that kind of answer. The result however has been cumuiative.
The initial people who reviewed the PAD did not understand what was going on. The
neighbors did not call out what was going to happen to them and they well might have.
The Building Dept. in approving the permit did not call to the attention of the City
Commission that the PAD was thereby changing in character radically, and that is
where we are.
Mr. Horowitz: Mr. Mayor, all due respects to Mr. Salman, when you asked him the
question, is it different from what was originally approved, he said not essentially,
I think Mr. Pancoast made it clear it is a fundamental change.Had these been on
the original submitted drawings before the public hearing, it would have waived
a red flag and perhaps we could have solved the problem. What to do? That is why
we are before the Commission asking that you revoke the permit and go back to the
original plans as approved.
Mr. Pancoast: Mr. Mayor, if I may suggest or probe, I haven't a polidhed idea.
Nobody else seem to either, so I tentative extend this as a hat on a stick. It
seems to me that, the conumdrum, the blame, if you want to put it, is wide -spread.
It would seem to me, that the builders in this case might begin to offer suggestions
on how they might moderate, how they would preceed from here, or even possible alter-
ations to the way they proceeded already. I think in deciding what to do, they should
work with the Building Department but the approval of all that has to be worked out
with the Commission. Because the Commission by now would finally understand what
everybody was saying.
Mr. Vince Grimm: Mr. Mayor I would like to if I can, point out two things. I think
Lester will remember when he was building Ransom School, at that time I was director
of Public Works and although his analogy is appropriate, it is a little different.
In that particular case they wanted to extend the land that they had and move into
the bay and the question was how can we build more land and still get a permit. So
the boulders they talked about were something they recognized in order to get that
permit they would have to treat the shoreline as though they were building a new,
natural one at a different location. Our developers or what I should say, Mr. Miller's
development, what they are talking about now is a retaining wall that is above the
high water mark. There is a differentiation between that and expanding their land
into the bay. That is a difference.
One other thing, I got involved in this problem from a phone call to Mr. Simonhoff
and as a consequence stopped the job because I felt that there was a fundamental
difference between what this Commission approved in their PAD and what they were
building. I think building those buildings at +10 with a retaining wall at +131
was a difference. That is exactly the reason we brought it back before this commission.
When this commission directed these people to go back to the original PAD application,
and they went back to +6, I think that objection was removed.
Mr. Wright: Mr. Mayor , I would like to respond quickly, we did modify. We went
back, we brought that site down to +6 as you directed us to, we altered our
66
JUN 211977
structure so they would conform and still be built +6. Our original application
1 might point out showed boulders but when we decided to build the wall, above
the water, and install the mangroves back in, the state seemed'to think that
that was a very environmental approach. And that is exactly how our application
is going in now. We are not opposed to putting the boulders in there. The state
seems to think this is a better application to the best of my knowledge, and that
is the way we filed our application with them. So, when you asked us to leave the
last time, and ordered us back to develop in that fashion, that is exactly what we
did.
Mr. Horowitz: One thing, I think we should note that the mean high water mark has
been altered because of the construction process. I believe before, now Mr. Wright
is saying there were alteration and modifications.
Mr. Wright: I am sorry. Would you say that again.
Mr. Horowitz: I believe the high water mark has been altered.
Mr. Wright: We had a surveyor come out and establish the mean high water mark.
There's no line drawn across there, but there were stakes there. What I am telling
you,is in my intentions, is not to build that wall any other place but at that line.
And I don't feel that affects the City.
Mr. Horowitz: Mr. Wright, we have no gripe with you. We are just concerned that
something is being built that wasn't done pursuant to a public hearing and approved
by the Commissio n,and I think that is a basic error that is happening here. We can't
let it go any farther. If there have to be correction, it has to be done now.
Mr. Wright: As far as the height of the building is concerned, all I can tell you,
according to what we originally submitted, there are no more floors. Now if you
demand that I build what I submitted, we are going to end up with two four-story
buildings down on the bay. We don't want that. As far as the height is concerned,
we can analyze the section through the building, according to your code, we are
not exceeding that height. Unfortunately there is some ambiguity in the code. But
I can tell you we are not exceeding that height in my professional opinion, If you
want to change the code, that is something else.
Mr. Richard Smith, Attorney: I would like to go on record for 60 seconds. I repre-
sent Mr. David Sweatman. He is an adjoining property owner. I am a partner of Janet
Reno and her letter to the Commission has been read into the record. We object to the
continued building. Commissioner Plummer has said what can the Commission do. Let me
just answer. What the Commission can do is revoke, or suspend, pending a hearing, which
will allow the public, and obviously my client, Mr. Sweatman, all interested people
such as those representing the Barnacle, to come in and actually object or agree
with these buildings that are being built. In our opinion and in the opinion of
Mr. Pancoast, what is going up is fundamentally different than what was the subject
of a public hearing, the PAD application. The differences are not existing contour,
we are going to a 6 ft fill, there was no wall in the PAD application. Now there is
a wall, there were no butresses in what was depicted in the PAD application. Now the
height of the building is changing. Not from 211 stories to a different number of
stores but the actual feet deminsion in height is changing. Therefore we are in
front of the Commission asking for a hearing which will allow the public to either
agree .or disagree with what is actually being built. I might point out for the record
that we do dispute the contention although we respect the opinions of the City's Mr.
Salman, the Dade County code sec. 33-4 indicates clearly that +6 elevation can be
varied from. In other words, we believe it is perfectly possible to build on this
land, not with the 6 ft.fill but going along with the existing contour of the shore-
line, which was originally proposed in what was presented at the public hearing. That
section of the Dade County code, specifically mentions under -grade or below -grade
constructions, such'as parking areas, sunken living rooms and what was presented in
that PAD could be built in compliance with an existing shoreline contour, not with
an artifically filled shoreline. That is a fundamental change. What the Commission
can do is allow a public hearing to comment on those fundamental changes.
Mr. Wright: Mr. Mayor I would like ask one question of that gentleman. I think
it is pertinent to the issue, what is the height of Mr. Sweatman's property?
His filled land. Do you have any idea?
Unidentified person: 4.7 ft., that was filled in 1924,
67 JUN 211977
Mr.Wright: One other point. In determining the height of buildings, this is
a PAD application, a filed drawings, and the drawings are on record. They show
three -stories. They have to be in the configuration in order to build above the
flood criteria requirements in any event, we also show two buildings
that are four-story in heights. I just want to point that out. This is a PAD
application. We are building in accord with the plans as far as height goes, that
we submitted. That is it. Period.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Simonhoff, would you just speak to one point of the 4-foot height
in the original application that Mr. Wright keeps repeating and is this an under-
standing you had at that time, there were two buildings, four -stories high?
Mr. Simonhoff: No. Let me explain what architectually and intention-wise,(I was
going to do it really quick) what an R-1 PAD is. Just as an R-2 PAD would be a
Planned Area Development around the parameters of duplex, R-3 would be around
the developments of multi -family. R-1 is designed around the parameters of a single-
family residential set of qualifications. This site is zoned R-1. It was zoned R-1B.
They got a change of zoning to make it from R-1B to R-1. That means you cannot go
in there and start building apartments on something R-1. If you want to make this
apartments, go before the PAB and then have the public hearing and make apartments.
Under R-1 it specifically says, 21 stories not to exceed 35 ft. and I write that
into the record and it is from the current zoning. I think that is the issue that
we really have to talk about. It is R-1. It is nothing else.
Mr. Wright:Mr. Mayor you have approved the plans, they will be done in a tasteful
fashion. I promise that. They are going to be handsome buildings, in my opinion
of course. They are still single-family residential. It is a PAD application. Only
one family is going to occupy them. They are not multi -family dwellings where people
are going to live on top of one another.
Mayor Ferre: I am going to express my opinion. My opinion is, unfortunately, we
have a conflict here between something that is right and something that is just.
What you have applies with the law. And in a question,if we are doing this strictly
by the book, on the law, we have to be guided by the administration's opinion,
that this complies, that it follows. What is wrong Lester, is that the law is
wrong. That is what is wrong. What is wrong is, that we should never permit these
walls and all these things to be done, in what basically is mangrove area. The problem
is that we have not changed the law to comply with the reality of 1977 and what
is environmentally right. Now we find outselves caught in a dilemma, between what
is right, and what is permissible under the current law. Father if you will forgive
me, I'll be damned if I know what the solution is. Because I happen to agree with
both sides. I think they are right. I happen to think the 6 ft. and height area,
and retainer wall and all that is doing a disservice to the general area which is
basically going to destroy that whole area. If we don't continue doing what they
are doing all over, which they don't want to do, then what you are doing in effect
is creating a high point and everything else is a valley, and you have a wall next
to the Barnacle. So right and wrong, basically, I think they happen to be right.
Unfortunately they also happen to be within the justice of it, because if we are
talking about a rule of law, they happen to be within the law. Now, what does the
City Commission do in this kind of a hiatus?
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor is there any way you all can agree, or compromise? We
are in a dilemma. Can you all compromise or something?
Mr. Wright: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners. There is a further dilemma. Let's assume
that we take all the fill back out. Is the Commission ready, willing and able to
release us from the bonds of the law that require us to build to 6 ft. That is
first. And then will you deny us the ordinance that permits us to build a property
line wall. Let's stop talking about the Barnacle. Let's talk about the tranquility
of the 21 families that are going to live on our site. Everybody is talking about
the Barnacle. People that visit there on a tour,we have people going to live on our
site forever. So the thing is, let's talk about the tranquility of our people. Let's
take the fill out, you still allow us to build a 8 ft. property line wall. So you
want to take all the ordinances and throw them out. It is a matter of the people,
and it is a matter of the people at the Barnacle, who by the way have already built
an 8 ft. wall. They are trying to shut us out. They won't see our wall because they
built one before us. So it is really Mr. Simonhoff's property. I promise you, Mr.
Simonhoff is going to fill his property to 6 ft. unless you let him out of that
box. And let me tell you something else, it is wrong to leave that land that low,
if you are going to let people build on it. And you told us we could build on it.
68
JUN 211 77
The environmental Preservation Review Board, if you talk about being a football,
We wanted to build in the woods and not build on that land. Oh, no. Stay out of
those trees. Don't build on the land. Well, I'll tell you. We had to be out of the
woods, would you like to buy it as a park? We don't know what to do Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: That is exactly what the problem is. We continually confront these
situations where people don't want you to do this, and the other people don't
want you to do that and what do they really want? They don't want anything done
there. Then they say, under our laws, somebody has to pay for that.
Mr. Wright. A gentleman from the Barnacle came over and talked about the tranquility
of the Barnacle. I agree with that. Why didn't they buy all that land and make it
a park Somewhere along the line you have to stop. Again the fill isn't an issue,
because I am going to build an 8 ft. for the privacy of our people. Maybe we don't
want all those people walking on the Barnacle look in their backyard. We are not
going to build a distasteful project. If you permit us to go along with what you
approve and let us finish this project, I have to tell you something, it is getting
costly, it is getting awfully costly for us. I apologize for this morning. I grant
you I was upset. But it is a financial dilemma. I realize when you see it when it
is finished, I promise you it will be a tasteful project. We have heard about the
woods. If you'd only see what we plan to put back in those woods, it will be more
beautiful that it is ever done. Here we are developers that are giving back 265
feet of woods, you will never know that project is there. How about our contribution
to the City of Miami to Main Highway? When you develop a property next door and
build a single family building lot, a house will displace the woods, we are giving
you the woods. The people will never see any intrusion. I feel abused because we have
made contribution. And I would like to be sited for that.
Mr.Simonhoff: Mr. Mayor, I have to interrupt this histrionic performance because
you mentioned that there is right here, but there is law there. No, sir, that
is not the way it is. I take direct difference with the interpretation with your
Building Director. The law is there. The law says what you can do under R-1. The
law says what a PAD is. This project is not the proper interpretation of a PAD.
There is no way that it is a proper interpretation of a single-family PAD. Single
family allows for clustering, for moving, for creativity.
Unidentified person: In 100 ft. Mike?
Mr. Simonhoff; I let you finish. What I am saying is, I am also a developer,
and I am also an architect, and I am building on 16 acres 28 houses. I am not
putting 21 of them on 21 acres. I guarantee you sir, I am going to displace a lot
fewer trees in putting that on 16 acres than you are, and already have, on the
211. But where we are, is the law is not being properly interpreted by the City
at this point. The law is in this book and I read it to you, and I put it on record,
and I am being irreprably affected by it, as has Biscayne Bay. If the state is
so happy about this, why have they cease -and -desist orders, why did the Attorney
General's office come down here and why is the Attorney General in the process
of filing papers against them. Why was a cease and desist issued by Dade County.
If everybody is so happy about it. We have a very strong precedent setting motive
here. If you can come in and alter the shoreline of Biscayne Bay which is what
happened here, and do anything you want behind it by altering that shoreline, you
are in violation of State law and County law. You are in violation of the Biscayne
Bay Acquatic Preserve Act which has to be permitted first. There are not permits
granted by the State of Florida for anything happening on that site. I just want
to make sure we understand, it is not that I or we are right, and they have the
law on their side, I feel we are right and we have the law on our side. What has hap-
pened here, has been a very gross misinterpretation and loophole areas that are
gray areas of certain of these combinations of ordinances here, but when you actually
put down what is a PAD, what is R-1, what the responibility of this City Commission
is, it is to the people to be able to come before this commission and voice disapproval
or approval of any kind of Planned Area Development, not to have something come in
totally different at another time and then we find out about it or the Barnacle
people find out about it, or anyone else. We should have known it before
and had the opportunity to protest it at that forum before it was passed and before
it was under construction.
Mayor Petrel : ... Again and finally for the record, Mt. Mar ager, ± Want you to
repeat the staff's recommendation and then I'm going to ask the City attorney
his legal opinion and then we'll see where we're at.
Mt. Grassie: It is the staff's position, Mr. Mayor, that the developer is cur,.
gently operating within the scope of the permits that have been issued to hit
properly and is abiding by all of the P.A.D. requirements.
Mayor Ferre: How about state law?
Mr. Grassie: In addition to that, we are not aware of any contact from the state
or from the county that would indicate to the city that the city has been in any
Way in error in anything that it has done.
Mayor Ferre: All right, so you recommend that we leave it status quo.
Mr. Grassie: I do not know that you have an alternative.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. City Attorney, your recommendation legally, do you
feel these people have complied with the law to the best of your knowledge both
local and state law? Because we've got to follow the legal opinion, Mike. We
have a City Attorney and we're usually bound by the City Attorney's rulings un-
less somebody wants to challenge that which I in seven years here I've never seen
that.
Rev. Gibson: What did the city Attorney say?
Mayor Ferre: We haven't heard yet. City Attorney, why don't you give us your
legal...
Mr. Knox: As far as the enforcing of our ordinances is concerned as they relate
to building, and it is the Building Department Director who is primarily responsi-
ble for enforcing the ordinances and exercising his power, having made a recom-
mendation and having indicated that the P.A.D. and the project conforms to the
P.A.D. then that's his prerogative and it's not subject to challenge except in
court.
Rev. Gibson: Subject to what?
Mr. Knox: Challenge.
Mr. Grassie: It is not necessary, Mr. Mayor, that the City Commission take any
action on this. It is not something that is before you.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, in good conscience I believe that you've heard, I'm in
plenty of trouble with those people over there because I know what it is to put
your money up and spend your money. I just don't like that. I felt that way
about that other project around here, you remember about two years ago; but I
cannot in good conscience sit here knowing that the state has a law, the county
has a law and if we boobooed, you know nobody is saying that because somewhere
in this whole business I think Mr. Pancoast was right, everybody got so enthus-
iastic over saving trees that they forgot that other thing because if they had
not forgot that you know there would have been that red flag and everybody would
say, "Oh look here." I'm all for a motion to stop them, to withdraw the P.A.D.
and let them go to court. That's a motion.
Mrs. Gordon: The motion is to withdraw the approval?
Rev. Gibson: Withdraw the approval of the P.A.D. Since I can't tell my director
what to do maybe next time his interpretation would be different. You see, I'm
an Episcopalian, I understand what it means not to be able to tell that man what
to do so I'm just going to do the part I could do. I'm going to motion to with-
draw the P.A.D. and then you know that's it.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Knox, are you objecting to this approach? It looks like you
are about ready to say something.
Mr. Knox: Yes, ma'am, I was just about to say that once again we have a jurisdict-
ional problem in the sense that the City Commission does not have the power to
withdraw or revoke the P.A.D. Once again, this is based upon a recommendation
and a determination by the Director of the Building Department.
JUN ?11977
Mayot Ferre: What you're saying is you're ruling then that the thotioh is out
of order.
Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but this motning when we discussed this same thing you did
not rule opposing it you said those were two avenues available.
Mr. Knox: Well this is contingent upon once again a public hearing and a recotn-
mendation by the Director of the Building Department.
Mayor Ferree .... Excuse me, Mr. Plummer. What he said this morning was that
we could give an opinion, what we can't do is we can't give an order.
Rev. Gibson: That's why I didn't say anything about the director.
Mr. Plummer: Well, let me ask you, are you telling me, Mr. Knox, this commission
has the right to authorize but we don't have the tight to pull?
Mr. Knox: Well, you must pull it or revoke it in the same manner in which it was
authorized and that was (1) based upon the recommendation by the Director of the
Building Department and (2) after having had a public hearing.
Mr. Plummer: So what you're saying is then a motion of Father's intent, a motion
to have a public hearing and then after the public hearing a motion to revoke
would be in order.
Mr. Knox: All right, once again, that's based upon a
you would evaluate the recommendation of the Director
Mr. Plummer: Well let me tell you something, there's
there.
recommendation, well, then
of the Building Department.
something radically wrong
Rev. Gibson: Well let me ask something. You mean to tell me that if we had a
hearing on a P.A.D. and all of the people said "hell no" - see, I'm going to for-
get I'm a clergyman now. All the people say "Hell no" and we want to, you know
we have that discretion. Ok? The people say "Hell no" and then the Building
Director, one man, says well, because these are my friends I think it ought to be
then you mean to tell me I'm obligated to what he tells me?
Mr. Knox: Wait.
Rev. Gibson: Man, you'd better change these laws around here.
Mr. Knox: If the P.A.D. conforms to the law then an individual has a right to do
with his or her property anything which conforms to the law. The Building Director
is the officer of the City of Miami who is responsible for enforcing our Building
Code and he has determined that this P.A.D. conforms to the law.
Mr. Horowitz: Mr. Mayor, is it appropriate if I made a comment at this time?
Rev. Gibson: Go right on, we'll let you.
Mr. Horowitz: Isn't this a Conditional -Use, Mr. Knox (1) and (2) I think the
very basic issue is still being missed. As an attorney I'm going to ask you for
a moment let's skip the legal technicalities and say
plans that were approved by this commission? You're
unless we have another public hearing. We're saying
ing for the plans that they're building now. I mean
is right for the gander. Let's do it the right
to look at things fairly and justly.
way.
were these plans the same
saying we can't do anything
we never had a public hear -
what's right for the goose
You know I think we have
Mayor Ferre: Look, Father Gibson made a motion that the P.A.D.
I understand your motion.
Rev. Gibson: That's my motion.
be revoked, as
Mayor Ferre: Now the City Attorney has ruled, as I understand it, that that mot-
ion is out of order. Is that correct?
Mr. Knox: As it was stated.
Rev. Gibson: Ok, you give me the right statement then, 1'11 use your statement,
N. Knox: I'll just say without participating in the legislative process that
the comission does have the power to express its will or opinion by motion.
71 'JUN 21 1977
AN, Gibson: Alright, My motion then stands.
Mayor Ferre: In other Words what you're saying is that this is a matter of opin&
ion but you cannot order, as I understand it, this coiiiMission cannot order the
p,A.D. removed or stopped. All you could say is that it is our opinion that it
should be stopped, is that correct?
key, Gibson: Would that have any legal effect? I'm not worried about that, I'M
hot the lawyer, that's my motion, I want it stoppedi That's their problem.
Mrs. Gordon: I'll second the motion.
Mayor Ferre: All right, there's a second and let's make very clear that We under-
stand that this is a motion.
Mr. Knox: Right. One more thing I'd address to Father Gibson, this is not, it
has no compelling effect upon the Building Director.
Rev. Gibson: Well, man, if my Bishop....
Mayor Ferre: Be careful, Father, because.... Now you be careful because your
Bishop can take you and transfer you from here to Detroit if he wishes but your
motion cannot transfer Mr. Salman from here to Detroit.
Rev. Gibson: No, Mr. Mayor, what you didn't hear was what I said. What you
didn't hear is what I said. Beautiful! I'm not going to say anymore than that.
My motion stands, Rose seconded it let's vote.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor, I think we need some clarification of that motion before
the City Commission is asked to vote on it. If it is a motion which expresses
an intent it seems to me it is germain to know whether, in fact, it is legal for
the administration to carry out that intent and I think that you should know
whether it is legal for us to carry out that intent. It is my impression that in
authorizing a P.A.D. the city has entered into what I would characterize as a
contract between two parties. You have agreed to some things and they have agreed
to some things. In that process you cannot arbitrarily without reason change
your position unless you are prepared to pay the consequences. The consequences
normally very simply end up being a money cost to you. What I'm saying to you is
that we can be arbitrary and do anything we wish but we have to pay for it. Now
if you are asking us to do something which is basically illegal I think that I
have to advise you ahead of time that it is going to cost us money and I'm not
entering into the merits of the case, sir. I am simply attempting to make sure
that you understand the consequences of your....
Rev. Gibson: I understand fully, Mr. Manager. What you don't know is I know a
hell of a lot more than you think I do and all I'm saying is this; that you can't
tell me that if you give me a set of drawings and you don't show me all of that
business there that when I was voting that I am on a P.A.D., that I didn't know
that that was there let me tell you what the law will tell you - that that pro-
fessional had the full responsibility to acquaint me with the danger I was runn-
ing into. Isn't that right, Mr. professional? You doggone right, I could answer
that much.
Mr. Salman: Will you state again your question?
Rev. Gibson: I said that if we were making a determination of a P.A.D. and all
this danger was there about the slope and all of that fill and all of that jazz
you talked about as these people are complaining, you as a professional are paid
damned good money to make sure that you advise me that that danger was there.
Mr. Selman: I wasn't here when this was approved.
Rev. Gibson: Well alright then, you know, Mr. Mayor, that says something even
worse.
Mr. Salman: I wasn't here when this was approved, the P.A.D. was approved but I
am here with a set of drawings that are the P.A.D. approval drawings and those
P.A.D. approval drawings in my opinion they are followed by the set of drawings
that were later on presented to the Building Department for approval.
Mayor Ferre: All right ladies and gentlemen, I think we have discussed this long
enough and it's time now to vote. There is no further discussion, this is a motion
of intent, it is not binding upon the administration, it is an expression which
is the will on a policy matter.
72
JUN 211977
Mrs. Gordon:..Understand of what you'te saying and in regard to the policy aspects
of it, I think it is important for me since I seconded the motion to state why.
I think I feel very strongly that this is a precedent setting incident and one
Which we'te going to have to live with for a long time and even if it should be-
come, as the Manager said, costly to defend what we feel is right then we will so
have to move but to just ignore the consequences in my opinion because it is a
hard decision to make and because we don't want to point any fingers and espec-
ially not at our in-house expertise, nevertheless, because there is an interpret-
ive factor here and because interpreting as we are this time we'll have the con-
sequences for next time. I therefore, seconded Father Gibson's motion.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77-524
A MOTION STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION URGING THE
ADMINISTRATION TO REVOKE THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCT-
ION OF A PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT (P.A.D.) LOCATED AT 3495 MAIN
HIGHWAY.
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the motion was passed and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mrs. Gordon, Rev. Gibson and Mr. Reboso.
NOES: Mr. Plummer and Mayor Ferre.
ABSENT: None.
ON ROLL CALL:
Mayor Ferre: The motion has obviously passed with three votes, the easy way for
me to vote is to vote is to vote with the moion and avoid the possible criticism
that would be forthcoming. However, ...
Mrs. Gordon: You'll be criticized either way, Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: There's criticism either way, I accept that. But I'm sure that many
people in the Grove have very strong feelings about this. I happen to think that
Mr. Simonoff and the people in the vicinity are correct in their concern and I
think that they're right that what is being done there and what has been done in
the past at Ransom, what was done at the Barnacle was wrong. Those were different
times when these things were done and Mangroves were filled, etc., etc. The prob-
lem, however, is one of the law. Now, I have carefully on several occasions asked
the City Manager and the City Attorney and Mr. Salman direction, to on the record
state whether or not these people have complied with all of the regulations and
all of the laws of the City of Miami. They have on the record stated that the
laws have been complied with. We have also requested whether or not there is any
known violation from the state as to whether or not there has been any written
request or advice that there are state laws that have been violated. Now there
may be state laws that have been violated but I can only go by the record and
by our legal interpretation of the Legal Department of the City of Miami which in
eight years of service to this city I have not once gone against the legal inter-
pretation of our City Attorney whoever that City attorney was. Now, and please
forgive me for rambling a little bit but this is a very important thing. There
was a wonderful article in the New York Times last week in he editorial pages.
It was talking the problem that Great Britain, that England is confronting at the
present time because it does not have a constitution. The article was in reference
to the difference between American jurisprudence and laws of America as written
by our forefathers and the fact that we have a constitution and how the English
were now considering writing a constitution. The reason why England does not have
a constitution is because there was a thought that there was an elite which was
the parliament which in effect looked out for the common welfare and, therefore,
what happened in England was based on the concept at the time of what was right
and what was wrong. The title of that article, as a matter of fact it was in ref-
erence to the so-called Anita Bryant controversy that we voted upon recently here
and it was called "The Dictatorship of the Majority" or something to that nature
and that article spoke to the very basic point that the reason we have a constitut-
ion is that sometimes there are things that must be written into the law that
legislative bodies cannot and should not be entitled to tamper with. In other
words the point being that if what we're dealing with is wrong then you change
the law and then make it right and that if it is a constitutional matter and it
is that important then you change the constitution which we in our history have
7 JUN 21 1977
ir
done Many Many many times. Now what we have before us is something that withih
out laws and within the Charter which is our constitution is very clear. Unfortun=
ately, it happens to be wrong in my opinion but until we change the law of the
constitution then I think we are bound as a country and as a community that is
ruled by laws and not by people, to follow the law. Therefore, my vote with My
regrets and my apologies to those - you have your majority is to vote how
against the motion.
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me just interject one point, the point somewhat
touched upon the Mayor that at no time during this hearing today did I hear any=
thing today from the people who are paid to advise me - that's the department,
the Manager or the Legal Department -which would change my mind to the contrary
as to what is presently existing and that was the reason for my vote of no.
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Mayor, since we all now know that we have the conflict in the
law the reasonable sensible thing to do is forthwith proceed to change it.
Mayor Ferre: I agree with you.
Rev. Gibson: And I want to make sure that when you come back with that change,
recommended change, that you get rid of the conflict between the county and the
state. That's my motion.
Mrs. Gordon: Also, I think there is another matter that.... to add onto the
motion.
Mayor Ferre: Rose, excuse me. There is a motion and we need to have a clarific-
ation of it and a second. Would you restate your motion.
Rev. Gibson: My motion is that since we have been told that there is a conflict
in the law, the Zoning Law that permits
Mayor Ferre: Wait a minute, Father, there isn't a conflict in the Zoning Law...
Rev. Gibson: Mr. Director, you tell us what the conflict is since the state is
saying one thing, the county is saying another and we're saying.... That's the
thing I'm talking about.
Mr. Salman: The state is referring to the area over which we have no jurisdiction
which is Biscayne Bay.
Rev. Gibson: Well, it seems to me that if that is, you know it doesn't make
sense for us to permit a P.A.D. to exist or to start being built knowing doggone
full well we have to be in conflict with what the state says about Biscayne Bay.
So, let me go to the other position then I hope that the director from here on
in since you don't need a law would see doggone sure that it doesn't come before
us in that manner.
Mrs. Gordon: Are you making a motion on that?
Rev. Gibson: He says I don't need it. You say I don't need a law.
Mr. Salman: No, I didn't say that.
Rev. Gibson: All right, then if I...
Mr. Salman: I said there was no conflict between our laws and the state law.
Rev. Gibson: Well, that is not what was said here. It was said that the reason
... Counsel, you know they say we pay good salaries for advice, you tell me
what the conflict is.
Mr. Knox: None. Biscayne Bay and all of our coastal shorelines are under the
jurisdiction of the State of Florida. Now generally our laws are subject natur-
ally to the state laws. If there is a violation of a state law as it relates to
Biscayne Bay then that is within the jurisdiction of the state and the state is
currently enforcing its laws as it relates to this development and its relation-
ship to Biscayne Bay. There is no conflict as between our laws and the state
law as it relates to Planned Area Developments or our zoning laws. The thing is
that the state law is another consideration and the state is doing its job by
seeking to enforce its laws as they relate to the preservation of the shoreline.
Mrs. Gordon: But that seems to be a conflict right there because in our inter.,
pretation that we've heard today we permit a shoreline development perse and the
state has their own criteria which is not the same as ours apparently. Is that
right, Mr. Salman?
Mr, Salman: Let me clarify it. We are allowed to issue permits to whatever is
above mean high water marking but under that we are not allowed to issue any
permit. It happens that when this fill was washed off by the rain to the bay
it produced a pollution there on the water so the state had jurisdiction in tell-
ing that that fill was producing that thing. It was an indirect problem which
has nothing to do with us in a sense that we did not authorize the fill to go to
the bay, we authorized the fill inside the land.
Mr. Wright: I don't think there is the kind of conflict you're talking about
between the two jurisdictions. They are separate and they stop at the high water
mark. What troubles me is that laws cannot cover everything and the behavior of
water is not restricted to the tides simply going up and down two feet all year
long. Occasionally there are hurricanes. When a hurricane will hit a six-foot
seal wall it can wash out a neighboring property just as somebody said earlier
so there is more inter -relationship here than is covered strictly by law and I
don't know quite how we handle it or would handle it from here but some under-
standing of the hydro -dynamics of what happens at the waters edge is very import-
ant to a P.A.D. which is on the water's edge.
Mrs. Gordon: I would... Father, did you make a motion or not? If you didn't,
I would suggest that we ask through our Manager that our Planning Department
take a very hard look at our P.A.D. because apparently what has happened from
all of this is that we have become aware of a serious flaw in that ordinance
and that that includes the permissibility of a higher height than is included
in the original ordinance of R-1 and it is my understanding when the P.A.D. was
created it was to make irregular shaped lots which were not easily divided, to
make them buildable and useable. Now if you were going to enforce this zoning
on this land without the P.A.D. you could only probably put very few pieces of
property on there. I'm not sure, I think the property is less than 100' wide,
am I correct? Somebody tell me. It's less than 100' wide, now I don't know how
you could possibly have divided that and gotten more than 3 or 4, maybe not
that many, developed units on that land. So by giving someone a P.A.D. we're
really giving them a gift. We're giving them an opportunity to make a develop-
ment which would be more profitable to them and in that way we avoid the request
for re -zoning which we wish to avoid in that particular area but I do believe
that I would like to move you, Mr. Manager, that you through your Planning Depart-
ment study this problem.
Mr. Grassie: As I understand the question, Commissioner, it is specifically the
way in which P.A.D. regulations impact lots which have shorelines. I mean are
you talking about the shoreline problem?
Mrs. Gordon: That is primarily your problem today but there are other P.A.D.
allowances which have a detrimental effect upon neighboring properties. We've
had that recently in I think you should study the whole situation.
Mayor Ferre: Ladies and gentlemen, we have been on this almost 21 hours and
there are a lot of ladies and gentlemen ...
Mr. David Miller: Mr. Mayor, may I say something, please? I'm sorry to inter-
ject but everybody has added an after the fact comment, I'll move very quickly.
David Miller is my name, my name has been brought up previously. I think the
problem as I've sat here and listened to it in addition to the just and what's
right comment is a problem of visual. The visual application that is before the
state right now is one of a combination of seawall and rocks, rip -rap if you will.
Alright? At or about 5 plus 5, 6 feet above the existing grade. Everybody has
this problem about plus 6, plus 8. What I'm trying to say to you, the intent
of what was shown on the P.A.D. is now being applied to in the jurisdiction of
the State of Florida and the Corps of Engineers. You must respond to these peo-
ple and we are according that response. I would also like to reply to the com-
mission and simply state that we as a practical solution not only did this, we
made the solution, we have a standing building permit for a P.A.D. resolution,
four story buildings that was presented to this commission months ago, it was
presented to all the various boards in front of this commission, it is a now
standing resolution that this commission approved - four story buildings, a set
of 21 units, set backs and now we're making those various applications to other
individuals and other departments that have jurisdiction. I'm simply saying
and I guess in conclusion that the City of Miami is not conflrming whether it be
JUN 21197
the City Commission or the administrative power to something you've already granted
us and something you've already reviewed. Now that's my final statement. There
is no gap, the visual problem that Father sees is the fill that was already put
up on the site. If you visually would see it after it is finished I think you
would have different thoughts about it because you see the visual aesthetics that
everybody keeps referring to, the hydrostatics that have been referred to are all
being solved by people that have that various jurisdiction. That's my comment.
Mrs. Gordon: I have to find out from the people who are sitting on this side if
at any time that this P.A.D. was being presented they had the understanding that
there was a four-story building involved.
Mr. Simonoff: I did not because I was going under the assumption that an R-1
was an R-1 whether it was a P.A.D. or it was on a single site.
Mr. Miller: I'd like to remind Mrs. Gordon that there are not four-story build-
ings being built.
Mrs. Gordon: I know, but you and other people have said it, four -stories was
approved and I don't remember that.
Mr. Miller: With all due difference, Mrs. Gordon, the plans Unit I, Unitll and
Unit III, Roman Numerals,are referred to on the site plan. They are an exhibit
that was approved by this very commission, they're very clear. Everyone refers
to the elevation but no one refers to the floor plans themselves. It's very
clear. The City Attorney if he would like to make that interpretation if indeed
they were exhibits presented to you, they indeed were. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Gordon: With a four-story...
Mr. Miller: Yes, ma'am, they're very clearly exhibits and I remind you....
You can take all the exception they want, it's incidental at this point.
Mr. Simonoff: I think that is really the paint, it is incidental at this point
because I believe a motion was made and passed but I will just follow by saying
one thing on public record, and I have given Mr. Salman a tape recording of that
public record before the Zoning Board that they said they were going to park
underneath and there was going to be two living levels and it was going to be a
low profile and it was going to continue through the site. That's a matter of
public record when they came first before it.
Mr. Miller: ... Members of the commission, I heard what Commissioner Gordon
and Father Gibson said in speaking to the City Manager and I think I made a part
of the record and I think I handed it to the Mayor, as to what the state's object-
ions were to the shoreline involved in this particular case. If I may be so
presumptuous at this time that perhaps that the attorneys and the City Manager
might look at that because it states wit particularity and specificity what their
problems were with shoreline property as it relates to this particular property.
I think it might be helpful with what Father Gibson was talking about, that may-
be we can get things in conjunction without going back to the issue. I think
that might be very helpful.
Mrs. Gordon: I wish to reiterate the motion I made to refer to the Manager the
study for the P.A.D. if there is a second.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gordon who moved its
adoption.
MOTION NO. 77- 525
A MOTION REQUESTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INSTRUCT THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO CLOSELY EXAMINE EXISTING P.A.D. ORDINANCES, IN
PARTICULAR, EXAMINING REGULATIONS AS THEY IMPACT LOTS BORDER-
ING ON SHORELINES TO DETERMINE IF ANY CONFLICT EXISTS BETWEEN
CITY, COUNTY AND STATE LAWS.
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., NODep
76
JUN 211977
23. DECLARE BEERSHEM ISRAEL, AS SISTER CITY : ENDORSE PROPSOED TRIP
AM DESIGNATE COMMISSIONER ROSE GORDON AS REPRESENTATIVEI
Mayor Ferre: This Commission is now in session. All right, Mrs. Gordon.
Mrs. Gordon: I have a Resolution which would be declaring Beersheba, Israel
as a Sister City and it reads as follows:
"WHEREAS Rabbi Solomon Shift, Director of Chaplancy for the
Greater Miami Jewish Federation traveled to Beersheba, Israel
in the Spring of 1976, together with a delegation of distinguished
Jewish leaders including Mr. and Mrs. Mort Silerman, he being President
of the Jewish Federation, and thereby established in accord with the
Mayor of that City, Mayor Ilyahu Naayi for future Sister City Status
and;
WHEREAS the Commission of the City of Miami is desirous of establishing
Beersheba, Israel as a Sister City;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Commission of the City of Miami,
Florida, Section 1, that Beersheba, Israel is hereby declared a Sister
City of the City of Miami as request approval of Sister City International."
I so move.
Mayor Ferre: It's been moved and seconded by Commissioner Plummer. Is there
further discussion? I would like to point out that...Ralph, why don't you
stand up and you and Mel Schoenfeld...we want to thank both of you for being
here and Beersheba is one of the major cities, as I understand, in Israel...
and I think, under discussion,...
Mrs. Gordon: Would you call the roll first, Mr. Mayor?, and have Val speak
then after we pass it?
Mayor Ferre: I'm trying to get Reboso here, that's why I'm waiting so, under
discussion, why don't you go ahead and make your presentation and by that time
we'll have a full Commission.
Mrs.Silverman: I'd like to present Mr. Mel Schoenfeld, who is the Campaign
Director of the Greater Miami Jewish Federation. I am representing Mr. Morton
Silverman, who is the President of the Greater Miami Jewish Federation. In
October 21, 1976, to be exact, Mr. Silverman made a presentation to the Mayor
of Beersheba in which he invited Beersheba to be a Sister City of Miami and it
was greatfully accepted. Beersheba is the largest city in the Negev, which is
the desert of Israel. It is particularly compatible to the City of Miami because
we like Beersheba, it has similar weather and conditions. It has been a leader
in the country of Israel in its vegetation and in its growth and I think that
again, it makes it compatible to the City of Miami. The Mayor of Beersheba is
very proud to be a Sister City to Miami and very proud becuase he knows Mayor
Ferre, who had visited Beersheba and he remembered and therefore, it is indeed
a great pleasure to accept on behalf of my husband, this honor. I am leaving
for Israel on Saturday and I will be making the presentation to Beersheba.
Mrs. Gordon: That's wonderful.
Mayor Ferre: Well, that's wonderful Val, and we thank you for your interest.
I think that this is a pride for us in Miami; I agree with the similarity
out of nothing, the State of Israel in the Negev made something of value, and
we in Miami are proud that out of nothing here, really, but swamp land in the
Everglades, we have a major metropolis and I think that there is a great
similarity in that sense and in many other ways. I hope that what we can
establish is a spiritual bond which is as important as the historic one and
their similaries, so we welcome this opportunity.
Mrs. Silverman: I do want to add that they are planning on building a park
right outside of Beersheba University which will be named Miami.
Mrs. Gordon: Oh, that's very nice.
Mayor Ferre: With that, further discussion, will you call the roll, please,
77 JUN 211977
The following tesolution was introduced by CoMmissioner Gofdoii, Who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-526
A RESOLUTION DECLARING BEERSHEBA, ISRAEL, AS A SISTER CITY AND
REQUESTING APPROVAL OF SISTER CITY INTERNATIONAL OF THE AFORE
SAID DECLARATION.
(Mere follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk).
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I have a note here that you handed me Val, do you
want to say something about that?
Mrs. Silverman: Yes, the Greater Miami Jewish Federation which takes in the
entire Dade County is having a trip to Israel leaving September 29, for 10
days. I think it would be a great opportunity for whoever you designate to
carry the greetings to join the Miami Delegation. We will have all of our
officers with us at that time and perhaps make the formal presentation.
Mayor Ferre: That might fit very well. We also have been planning a trip
of our own which is a City of Miami and Miami Beach joint trip to Israel and
at this time I'd like to recognize Ms. Jones, she could explain what that
is all about and then we can decide.
Ms. Jones (Bette): Mr. Mayor, honorable members of the Commission and ladies
and gentlemen. It's a real pleasure for me to meet with you today and present
a plan for the People -to -People trip to Israel. This is a proposed trip between
Miami and Miami Beach to visit their Sister Cities of Moshav Mei-Am', Ramat -Gan
and the new addition, Beersheba. I have been working approximately for one year
with Frank Cobo, at the Miami Mayor's office, and with Z. George of the Miami
Beach Mayor's office.During this past year I have made two trips to Israel which
runs my trips into Israel into the 20's now. And I have met a number of times
with officials of the government, with officials of the cities and we have already
begun to establish celebration plans. We have laid out plans for an interchange
of ideas between people of similar occupations and interests. There will be many
very special and wonderful activities beyond what would normally anyone would,
have the chance to participate in, as either just a traveler or a tourist.
Mrs. Gordon: When are you planning that?
Ms. Jones: Okay. Frank has given you this folder. The date we have scheduled
is November 18 through 27. This departs on a Friday, returns on Sunday. It en-
compasses two week -ends and the Thanksgiving holidays, which would take people
away from jobs two to three days is all. It is a 10 day trip. I am representing
wholesalers who have one of the finest established reputations for tourism in
Israel, which is by the way, tourism is Isreal's second largest industry. And we
have many citations from the Israeli government.because of the large numbers of
people we bring to Israel annually. Every travel agency in the greater Miami
area will have the chance to sell this tour. It will be available to all residents
of the greater Miami area, and their families and friends. The price is to be
$1299.00 in an all incluvice package from Miami including all thing that are listed
and there are many things listed in the material that I gave you that are out of
ordinary tour. For example, we have included in this money to help cover the cele-
bration, because the cities do not have the money to just lay out to greet us.
$1299. is all inclusive. That means you could get on the plane here in Miami and
unless you wanted to purchase drinks or gifts over there, you would not have to
take a penny with you. Not a penny. Everything is included from the moment you get
on the plane,
78 so 2. 1977,
Ms, &ones: I have had the privilege in 15 years of working in ttavel, to travel
all over the world, many places, many time. To go anywhere is an experience
of growth and education. To go to Israel is an emotional experience. I care not
what your background, what your nationality, what is your religious persuasion,
I will promise you, you cannot go to Israel without having a gut -level reaction,
and feeling for the country and the people, for their struggle, what is happening
there. You will not be able to go and not become involved, and care very deeply.
I personally think you are very fortunate to have Israel, and cities in Israel
for your sister city.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much for your presentation. I don't that there is
any action that needs to be taken.
Ms. Jones: Could I just take one second more? I know you are very late, and read
just a portion of a letter from the head of our Israeli office who is helping
me and has been working with me to set these meetings up and everything, with
the dignitaries,with the government leaders, with the cities and the people.
He states:'I hope that the programs we spoke about do materialize develop into
something well worthwhile. I believe they have the makings of a real tie with
Israel and not just another tour group. If there is anything at all that I can do
to be of help in any way, with these arrangements, please do not hesitate to let
me know. I will do whatever is in my power to make all of it a great success."
Mayor Ferre: Ms. Jones, let me ask you several questions. First of all, obviously
this would be an official trip of the City of Miami Beach and the City of Miami.
Everybody would be expected to pay their way. The people that participate in this
can buy their tour from any one of the travel agencies, so any local travel agency
can sell this tour and you would be arranging the whole thing.
Ms. Jones; That is correct.
Mayor Ferre: We would have to have I would imagine a full plane before it is
a final thing.
Ms. Jones: Well, we actually could go with any number. I think we probably will
have to fill the plane and then turn people away. I really feel it can be that
exciting a thing.
Mayor Ferre: I think the timing is right. It would several weeks after the
election. If there is a run-off, which I hope there won't be, but if there
is a run -off, --will be two weeks after the 8th. So the run-off election would
be on the 22nd.
Mr. 0ngie: No, the run-off is on the 15, if we have to have one. One week.
Mayor Ferre: I'm sorry, so the 15th. If there is a run-off election, we have
plenty of time to recuperate. Lick our wounds and get on the plane. Is there
a motion that we sponsor this? So she can go to Miami Beach tomorrow and make
a presentation before the Council of Miami Beach?
Mrs. Gordon: Endorse is a better word. I move you that we endorse the concept
of having a trip to Israel in November together with Miami Beach. Is that proper?
I want to say, the more trips and the more people who go to Israel from our part
of the country, and cement relations with Israel, the better off our sister city
programs will be and the better off we will be.
Ms. Jones: There is a letter•in the packet that I gave you from Mayor John Rousakis'
office who is head of the Mayors organization of the United States, the elected
head for '78. He expresses what happened to his people from Savannah. And by the
way, they took 250 people from Savannah last May and are leaving again on Thursday,
for another one. The kind of experience that he expresses in that letter is what
is available to you.
Mayor Ferre: Thank you again Mrs, Jones,
The following atieth At thtto :toed by Connissioftet Gorda i Uhd
thoved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 77= 527
A MOTION TO ENDORSE THE CONCEPT OF A PROPOSED TRIP TO ISRAEL
IN NOVEMBER, 1977 TO BE COMPRISED OF OFFICIALS FROM THE CITY
OF MIAMI AND THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, AS A SISTER CITY FUNCTION
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
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor , still in the same regard, Val Silverman has asked
you designate a representative to Beersheba from the City.
Mayor Ferre: The Mayor will designate Rose Gordon as the official representative
from the City of Miami to our Sister City of Beersheba.
The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson who
moved its adoption:
MOTION NO. 77- 528
A MOTION DESIGNATING COMMISSIONER ROSE GORDON AS THE OFFICIAL
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO ISRAEL UNDER THE SISTER
CITY PROGRAM
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
None.
Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, when the federation is traveling to Israel on the 29th
of September, if I am not able to go would you then designate someone who could
Mayor Ferre: Why don't I follow your recommendation? So you think of that and if
you can't go, then you let me know.
Mrs. Gordon: And that she is leaving Saturday on a trip to Israel, would you supply
her with some official memorandum of today's action?
Mayor Ferre: Would you take care of that and do it please? Thank you very much
Val, and best wishes and bon voyage.
24, DISCUSSION OF FILMING OF JACKIE GLEASO�Ii SPECTACULARS IN THE CITY OF
MIAMI AND MOTION OF INTENT TO PARTICIPATE,
Mayor Ferre: Mr. Price, I read in the newspaper this morning, a problem regardin
Jackie Gleason and the fact that the Miami Beach, T.P.A. did not want to foot any
1411s to have Jackie Gleason make two spectaculars over on Miami beach, Now, Jackie
Gleason, along with Arthur Godfrey really have been almost synonymous with putting
Miami Beach on the map. I can't really understand why T.P.A. would not 00 this.
80
1 took it upon thyself to Cell tank Meyer and as I understand it, it is less
expensive fot Jackie Gleason to take these spectaculars in New York or Hollywood,
Where they obviously have better facilities. As I understand from Hank, it costs
something like 80 thousand dollars more per show to do them here because of all the
other ptoblems. My question to you is this. Is there any value that we in Miami
could gain, --as you know Jackie Gleason has a very strong following nationally,
from an advertising point of view, if we were to help sponsor, and I understand
from Bank, that what they need is 10 to 15 thousand dollars. I don't know how much
of this you know. Perhaps you can clarify it for us, but what exactly would we gain
out of it? Could we have a picture of the new convention hall or could we get some
goodies out it? Is it worth our while?
Mr. Price: Yes, first of all it is.The national T.V. show of that importance is
worthwhile
Mayor Ferre; I want you to listen to this. And Grassie, this is coming out o
your budget.
Mr. Price: Mr. Mayor, national television shows are worthwhile and considering
what you get, it is a large amount of money to this commission, but television
wise it is a small amount of money.
Mayor Ferre: What exactly would it cost?
Mr. Price: Well, for instance, the network prime -time television for a one minute -
spot announcement is $60,000 a minute.
Mayor Ferre: You mean just to advertise?
Mr. Price: If you are going to buy a one -minute spot, it is going to cost you
$60,000 on prime -time, for a one -minute advertising spot.
Mayor Ferre: Would the Gleason people agree to say 'coming from the City of
Miami, the magic city, the home of the Superbowl.'
Mr.Price: As you, I think it was two years ago, Jackie Gleason opened Gusman
Hall for us. We are still capitalizing on that believe it or not.
Mayor Ferre: The point is, on national television, could we have a shot of the
J.L. Plummer police station, and the Rose Gordon Auditorium?
Mr. Price: I can't promise if they name commissioners on it.
Mr. Plummer: To hell with them,
Mr. Price: In the past, the television shows we have worked with, have all been
willing to do this. We call them 'promo's, City of Miami promos.I sure there
will be no problem on that.
Mayor Ferre: How much would it cost us Lew?
Mr. Price: I think it is probably going to cost you between 10 and 15 thousand
per show.
Mayor Ferre: How many shows?
Mt. Price: Two,
Mayor Ferre: Where would the money come from?
Mr. Price: In the past it has been put into the publicity fund,
Mayor Ferre: Have you got it? Can you squeeze it out of your publicity funds?
Mr, Price:I haven't made up a budget yet,I have to consult Mr. Grassie on the
funding. Things are a little tight right now,
Grassie; Does this come out of this year's budget or next year's?
Si
UfM 2119 1.,� "�
Mr. Gtassie: YOu would pay theft after Octobet/ 1 don't think you can take it
Out of this yeat*s budget ftoln what t know, and he has to make 71/22 teduction
in next year's budget.
Mayor Ferre: I don't think we can decide it today. Here is what I would like to
do. I would like to pass a motion saying that it is great to have Jackie Gleason
in Miami. We would love to have him in Gusman Hall,instruct you to cooperate with
them, and see what we get out of it, and evaluate whether it is worth it, and you
come back and give us your opinion and where the money would be coming from, and
let the commission vote on it one way or the other. I will tell you what my question
is, to Hank, and my question to you, if it is such a gread deal, why doesn't the
T.D.A. do it? If it is so great, if it is such a great promotional deal, then why
doesn't Miami Beach who has the resources to do it, why don't they do it? Emotions
are pretty high over on the Beach, and people get upset about things and they vote
on emotions sometimes, rather than logical things, which we do too. Let me add
that very quickly. I happen to think, as I understand these Jackie Gleason shows,
have 20 million viewers, or 15 million viewers and if we can get that kind of adver-
tising,
Mr. Price: I don't think you can question the value. You are trying to accomplish
three things right now, among others in Miami, selling a Gusman Hall, the new
World Center, we are trying to promote the Omni, to the world that this is Miami's
new development. I think all those things probably could be accomplished within
this type of,
Mayor Ferre: If we could get a commitment from the Gleason people and have a shot
of Omni and we have a shot of the Convention Center that is going to be, if
we can get something out of it, I certainly think we should give it serious con-
sideration. Do we need a resolution for that?
Mr. Grassie: Only if you want to go on record as being generally in favor of
some amount of money. I am gathering you are talking about 20 or 25 thousand
dollars.
Mayor Ferre: I would like to do it this way. I would like to make a motion and
if Father will take the gavel I'll move that the Manager be instructed to study
the return and feasibility and the benefits to the City of Miami and the citizens
of having two Jackie Gleason shows made in Miami at Gusman Hall and to negotiate
with the Gleason people what exactly we would get out of it, up to a total of
25 thousand dollars and come back to us with a recommendation, yes or no whether
you think it should be done,and tell us where the money would come from.
Mrs. Gordon: I'll second that and on discussion I would like to say that we as
a city,I believe are really indicating our interests in developing ourselves as
an international city and I think this is going to add greatly to our image and
make us better known to a lot of people. Many people think of us as being a
suburb of Miami Beach and not as a separate entity in outselves. I think the
many attractions we have here in the City of Miami are the things we have to
begin to feature.
Mayor Ferre relinquished the chair to Vice -Mayor Gibson.
The following motion was introduced by Mayor Ferre who moved its
adoption:
MOTION NO. 77-529
A MOTION OF INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION EXPRESSING THAT THE
PRODUCTION OF TELEVISION SPECIALS BY JACKIE GLEASON TO BE HELD
AT GUSMAN HALL IS A WELCOME TYPE OF ACTIVITY IN THE CITY OF MIAMI:
FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO INVESTIGATE POSSIBLE PARTIC-
IPATION BY THE CITY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $25,000; TO STUDY POSSIBLE
RETURN ON THIS TYPE OF INVESTMENT AND POSSIBLE ADVANTAGES IF THESE SHOWS
ARE FILMED IN MIAMI: AND FURTHER INSTRUCTING THE CITY MANAGER TO RETURN
TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH HIS RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING FUNDING SOURCES
82
UN 211977
Upon being seconded by Coffimissioner Gordon
and adopted by the following Vote a.
AM: Commissioner Reboso
Commissioner PlDftimet
Cott iissioner Rose GOrdof
Vicea-Mayor Gibson
Mayor Ferre.
NOES: None.
25. RECEIVE ANNUAL POST AUDIT FINANCIAL REPORT FISCAL 1975-76
PEAT, MID() MITCHELL & COI
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plumet,
mooted its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 530
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE ANNUAL POST AUDIT FINANCIAL REPORT
FOR FISACL YEAR 1975-76 PREPARED BY PEAT, MARWICK, MITCHELL & CO.
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO RETAIN SAID REPORT AS A PUBLIC
RECORD FOR A MINIMUM OF 10 YEARS
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
26. FIRST READING
ORDINANCE- AMEND SECTION 17-6, 17-18, 17-19, 17-113, 17121
OF THE CITY CoDE FIRE PROTECTIOO, FIRE ALARM AND
DETECTION SYSTEMS.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "FIRE PROTECTION",
MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 17-6, 17-18, 17-19,
17-113, AND 17-121, WHICH SECTIONS DEAL WITH THE AREAS OF
FIRE ALARM AND FIRE DETECTION SYSTEMS INCLUDING INSPECTION,
INSTALLATION AND TESTING; FURTHER ESTABLISHING REQUIREMENTS
FOR HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN CORRIDORS, ROOMS AND SPACES
AND ALLOWING AN ALTERNATIVE METHOD OF COMPLYING WITH SAID RE-
QUIREMENTS FOR MULTI -RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS LESS THAN FOUR
STORIES IN HEIGHT; FURTHER BY ADDING A REQUIREMENT THAT DOORS
IN STAIRWAYS AND OTHER VERTICAL SHAFTS SHALL BE SELF -CLOSING
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
Was introduced by Commissioner Plummer and seconded by Commissioner
Reboso and passed on its first reading by title by the following vote;
AWES; Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Commissioner J. L. Plummer,
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES; None.
Jr.
83
f
JUN 211977
The City Attotttey teed the otdivauce into the pudic record and
announced that copies wete available to the ffieinbets o€ the City Com
tiesiott and to the public,
271 FIRST READING ORDINANCE - Amain SECTION 17-3S 17-36 AND 17-326 of
CHAPTER 17 op THE CODE of THE CITY Or MIAMI
MILDING PERMITS") i
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OFTHE CODE OF THE CITY of
MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED "FIRE PROTECTION"
MORE PARTICULARLY BY AMENDING SECTIONS 17-35, 17-36,
AND 17-326, DEALING WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF REVIEWING
BUILDING PLANS IN CONNECTION WITH PENDING BUILDING PERMITS
IN AREAS OF LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS, FIRE SUPPRESSION AND PRE-
VENTION SYSTEMS; AND ALSO DEALING WITH THE SUBJECT OF FALSE
EMERGENCY CALLS AND DELAYS IN REPORTING FIRES; AND ALSO
DELETING THEREFROM THE OPERATION FEE REQUIRED FOR A PLACE
OF ASSEMBLY; WITH A REPEALER PROVISION AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE:`
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 Com-
mission and to the public.
28. ACCEPT PLAT: M A R I A S U B D I V I S I O N•
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-531
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED MARIA SUBDIVISION,
A SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF MIAMI; AND ACCEPTING THE DEDICATIONS
SHOWN ON SAID PLAT; AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER
AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE THE PLAT
(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
`pasted and adopted by the following vote-
AYHS; Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J, L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A, Ferre
7
FIRST RLADING ORDINANCE" Ali OttNANct 8580, DELETING 000,G70 FROM
DEPARTMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR SAI tIESI
1 M1ut filet : 3 Want a brief .synopsis Of what this is about.
Mt. Grassier You recall Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, that the'
(;ity.has had the habit of budgeting 2 million dollars of anticipated salary
Savings as a revenue of the City. What this does simply is take part of that
amount of money, that 2 million dollars which we have in fact saved and make
the transfer. So we are simply correcting the budget, correcting part of that
2 million dollars. That is all that is involved.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 8589 ADOPTED NOVEMBER 11,1976
THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS ORDINANCE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1976-77
BY AMENDING SECTIONS 1 AND 4 THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR A DECREASE
OF $900,679 IN CERTAIN APPROPRIATIONS AND REVENUES; REPEALING ALL
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY
PROVISION
Was introduced by Commissioner Gibson and seconded by Commissioner
Gordon 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 Com-
mission and to the public.
30, FIRST READING ORDINANCE: APPROPRIATING $2,710,050 IN HEAVY EQUIPMENT
SERVICE FACILITY TRUST AND, AGENCY FUND.
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $2,710,050 FROM THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT
SERVICE FACILITY TRUST AND AGENCY FUND ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF FUNDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CITY HEAVY EQUIPMENT SERVICE
FACILITY; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, CODE SECTIONS OR PARTS THEREOF
IN CONFLICT HEREWITH 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 Comp
Mission and to the public.
8
JUN 2 11 77
311 FIRST ING OMIT: AP PttA1t $3)535,Q1O IN DIM FEY EXPCGITICN
HALL TAT AN) A N Y FINDi
RDINANCE ENTITLED -
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $3,985,910.FROM THE
DINNER KEY EXPOSITION HALL TRUST AND AGENCY FUND
ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING RENOVATIONS OF
THE DINNER KEY EXPOSITION HALL; REPEALING ALL ORD=
INANCES, CODE SECTIONS OF PARTS THEREOF IN cONFLICT
HEREWITH AND CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
Was introduced by Commissioner Gibson and seconded by Commmissioner
Rboso 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 Com-
mission and to the public.
Mrs. Gordon: Is all of this the money that the federal government gave us, or
part of it, or what?
Mr. Grassie: This is receipt and appropriation of the money we have received from
the federal government. The only other thing that is involved there is the
$227,000 which have been previously appropriated by the city. That is what went
for the design, if you remember.
32. ACCEPT CO(PLFTID WORK - WESTERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-38.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 532
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION OF A.M.J.
CORPORATION FOR THE WESTERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-38 AT A TOTAL
COST OF $159,002.14 AND AUTHORIZING A FINAL PAYMENT OF
$16,625.86 FOR THE WESTERN DRAINAGE PROJECT E-38
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
uN 211977,
351 ACCEPT COMPLETED WORK - EDItON PAM LITTLE RAVER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
HIGHWAY PROJECT.
The following resolution was introduced by Coti issi Piet Gordan, wlio
toyed its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0. 77- 533
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE
BY PERSANT CONSTRUCTION CO.,
$63,283.36 AND AUTHORIZING A
FOR EDISON PARK/LITTLE RIVER
PROJECT
COMPLETED WORK PERFORMED
INC. AT A TOTAL COST OF
FINAL PAYMENT OF $6,438.67
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
34, AUTHORIZE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH NOTICE - OBJECTIONS TO ACCEPTANCE OF
COMPLETED WORK - W, GRAPELAND SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR 5387 C & S,
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 534
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 14,1977 AT
2:00 P.M. FOR OBJECTIONS TO THE ACCEPTANCE BY THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION OF WEST GRAPELAND
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5387-C (CENTERLINE SEWER)
AND SR-5387-S(SIDELINE SEWER) IN WEST GRAPELAND SANITARY
SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SR-5387-C (CENTERLINE SEWER)
AND SR-5387-S (SIDELINE SEWER)
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
•NOES : None.
JUN 2119774
•
i
r
PURCHASE IN LIEU b ►1'RESIDENTS AT 5g STRETI
The foiiot3ittg resoiutian has jntfodttoed by Cottistionet Getdoti, Vitt)
Dyed its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO4 535
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN Lim
OF CONDEMNATION A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 36 NORTH
.EAST 59TH STREET, MIAMI, FLORIDA, FOR THE SUM OF FIFTY THREE
THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE ($53,525.00) DOLLARS, AND
ALLOCATING FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND ($55,000,00) DOLLARS FROM COM-
MUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS TO COVER THE COST OF ACQUISITION OF
FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THIS PROPERTY AND OTHER COSTS INCIDENTAL
TO THE ACQUISITION
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and at file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution %9aS
passed and adopted by the following vote -
Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES None.
ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT -
VIRGINIA I* LIEBERMAN'
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 536
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT
PAST THE ARE OF 70 FOR VIRGINIA I. LIEBERMAN, CLERK TYPIST II
DEPARTMENT OF POLICE, EFFECTIVE JULY 29, 1977 THROUGH JULY 28,
1978, WITH PROVISION THAT IN THE EVENT OF A ROLLBACK OR LAYOFF,
MS. LIEBERMAN, RATHER THAN A JUNIOR EMPLOYEE, WOULD BE AFFECTED
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
'.Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was:
AaEsed and adopted by the following
Commissioner eManolo Reboso
AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
SUN 211977,.,
ONE YEAR EXTENSION OE EMPLOYMENT
HARRY PEARLMAN I
The following resolution was introduced by Co nissionef PIdtMetl .ha
toVsd its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77=537
A RESOLUTION RATIFYING AND APPROVING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF
EMPLOYMENT PAST THE AGE OF 73 FOR HARRY PEARLMAN, WATCHMAN OF
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC FACILITIES, EFFECTIVE MAY 28, 1977 THROUGH
MAY 27, 1978 WITH PROVISION THAT IN THE EVENT OF A ROLLBACK
OR LAYOFF, MR. PEARLMAN RATHER THAN A JUNIOR EMPLOYEE, WOULD
BE AFFECTED
(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 J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A.. Ferre
38 BRIEF DISCISSIa4 ITQI: EXTENSIONS OF EMPLOYMENT BEYOND AGE 70,
NOES: None.
Mayor Ferre: Now, Mr. Plummer,(I guess Mr. Pearlman must thin gave something
on him, for about 5 years in a row, including when I was commissioner) he kept
asking about Mr. Pearlman. I know he is a wonderful man. I understand he is now
73, and he is keeper of the foxes.
Mr. Plummer: And that was said in jest Nr. rayon.
Mayor Ferre: And that is wonderful. What I am going to say is not in jest. I
think there has to come a time in the city of Miami when people who reach 74
or 75 or 73, that they should retire. Now, for several reasons. First of all,
because I think it is right for them to retire and enjoy their retirement,
secondly you have to give opportunities for other people in the system to be
able to move up. I agree that 65, a lot of people at 65 are at full strength.
When you hit 73 or 74,----a guard at 73,
Mr. Grassie: I wonder Mr. Mayor if it would help if I informed you that I have
already asked the Human Resources Department to draft up a policy on this which
I would expect would curtail this kind of practice .
Mayor Ferre: Then I'll hold back until that is brought to our attention. I
will tell the world right now that when it comes up, if it says automatic
retirement beyond 70,----65 I will go along with that we can extend, but beyond
70, -----
Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor since you want to put it on the record, let me put it
on the record..It matters not to me a man's age, but whether or not he does the
job of what he is supposed to do.
Mrs. Gordon: Or she.
Mr. Plummer: Or she. My grandmother for example was 70 years of age, and had to
retire from the federal government. In three months they came back begging her to
take that job because nobody else would to it. My grandmother did that job more
than adequately until age 75. And let me tell you, my grandmother sat on top of
46 hotlines from Boca Chica airport to the Penatgon.
Mayor Ferre: When it comes
to you, when I become 65 I
Mr. Plummer: Can we reduce
doing the job?
before us, and we vote
will not run for Mayor
that? It now comes to
it, I want
anymore.
the point,
to snake pledge
are you adequately
69
JUN 2 1 77
Mayor Pettet I 'see Gene maples and Lt. March here and I Want them to knot that,
just like in the police and fire department, the longevity and all these things
and they can retire at 50.
Mt, Plummer: Harry Pearlman rides that bicycle around that Orange Bowl 'which `ette
is now learning how.
II
Mayor 'Ferre: I have something that isn't quite as good as civil service, but it
ain't bad.
Mr. Peter Joffre: Mr. Pearlman is one of the men that has been with the city over
20 years and if this man retired right he cannot get a penny. He is not even under ;
pension. He came a year ago and tried to buy his time and it was still under study
to try to figure out.
Mayor Ferre: I understand, I voted for him, I voted for him last year, I make the
same comment every year. This is the 5th year I have made this comment. I will vote
for him I am sure next year.
Ms. Pat Skubish: Just one thing Mr. Mayor.
Mayor Ferre: I remember you.
Ms. Skubish: How are you? Seventy years old, I can't see you retiring Mr. Mayor
just because you hit 70. Some of the greatest artists in this world have just done
their creative work when they are 75 years old. You should know that.
Mayor Ferre: A watchman at the Orange Bowl is not an artist.
Ms. Skubish: Maybe to himself he is. Some people just don't want to retire. That
would kill them.
Mayor Ferre: I stand corrected. You just changed my vote.
Ms. Skubish: If the department head says hey, the guy is doing terriffic, okay,
and he is doing his job, and the doctor says he is okay, who are we to say he is
not?
Mayor Ferre: Okay, Pat. I got whipped on that one. I will never learn.
39, CLAIM SETTLEMENT - CHON SENG LAUD
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-538
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO
CHON SENG LAU AND ANDREW W. HORN, HIS ATTORNEY WITHOUT
THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $2,931.88 IN FULL AND
COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY, AND PROPERTY DAMAGE
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI, AND UPON THE
EXECUTION OF A RELEASE, RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI FROM ALL
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AND TO PAY TO CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, WITHOUT THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $268.12
IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT FO THEIR PERSONAL INJURY PRO-
TECTION LIEN, CLAIM AND DEMAND AGAINST THE CITY OF MIAMI,
UPON THE EXECUTION OF A RELEASE,RELEASING THE CITY OF MIAMI
FROM ALL CLAIMS AND DEMANDS
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk,)
90
JUN 211977
,Upon being eeciinded by CothiiSSittiet plummet, the teeoi.utiofi
paeaed and adopted by the following vote -
Mgt Ci3fimissiofiet HatiOld Reboso
Cot issiotiet d. L. Mutt et, df
Commissionet Rose GotdOt
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Fette
NOES: None,
40, CLAIM SETTLEMENT - CHAREN AUSTIN*
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Fluffier
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 539
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO
CHAREN AUSTIN AND RICHARD G. DUNBERG, HER ATTORNEY,
THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $2,850.00 IN FULL
AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL BODILY INJURY CLAIMS AND
RELEASS AGAINST RELEASINGHE THEITY CITYFOFIMIAMI�FROM ALLON THE ECLAIMSON OF
A
RELEASEAND
DEMANDS
(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
Commissioner eManolo Reboso
vote -
AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
41, ACCEPT BID: SHOTGUNS, CARBINES AND MAGAZINES.
(DEPARTMENT OF POLICE),
Mayor Ferre: Take up 25 on the shotguns.
Mr. Plummer: Let me bring up a point. Mr. Manager, not to this one in particular,
but I wish could lonthe yof he thinks
par-
ticularthe high bidder
item.Th
The low bidderis justunder10 thousandand I
is over 25 thousand. I for one would liken to express
halfthe
higher,hasinotagent,
that
those people who are consistently two, to tell you something. The difference
o
between 9 thousand and 25,
bid. This thing looks ridiculousi going don't understand. And if you really go to the
bids, if I am not mistaken, two c°mpaniNs�elywhich
Nationalfact
Gunare
Traders andsame
Southernip,
have two different bids on this thing.
Distributors are both the she�eisompany. wholes leuandght theto see other iseretailSilyjustin tbring
two bids, because one of tm
this to your attention for what it is worth.
e following t solution val introduced by C8 igeiafet Pinar, t`
d Its Adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 774540
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE En OP OUTDOOR SPORTS HEADQUARTERS,
INC FOR FURNISHING SHOTGUNS, CARBINES AND MAGAZINES POR THE
DEPARTMENT OP POLICE AT A COST OF $18,519.71 LESS A TRADE-IN
ALLOWANCE OF $9,819.FOR A NET COST OF $8,500.71 ALLOCATING
FUNDS FROM THE 1976-1977 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET; AUHTORIZING THE
CITY MANAGER AND THE PURCHASING AGENT TO ISSUE THE PURCHASE
GIRDER FOR THIS EQUIPMENT
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted bete end on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the resolution dies
passed and adopted by the following
ommvote-
'AYES:
issionerManolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES None..
42 ACCEPT BID: FIRE HosE.
(FIRE DEPARTMENT).
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-541
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF BISCAYNE FIRE EQUIPMENT
FOR FURNISHING 11", 215", 3" AND 4" FIRE HOSE AT A COST OF
$15,785.; BID OF HOSE AND
FORACCESSORIES,
DEpARZMENTFOR
OF FIRELIGHT
ATWEIGHT
HOSE AT A COST OF $ ,7
TOTAL COST OF $18,515.00; ALLOCATING FUNDS FROM THE 1976-1977
FISCAL YEAR BUDGET; AUTHORIZING
FOR THI3AR DTHE PUR-
EQUIPMENT
CHASING AGENT TO ISSUE THEPURCHASE ORDERS
(Here follows body of resouon, 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
Cvote-
AYES: Commissioner Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES; ' None,
'JUN 21 197z
_r,
1 ACCITT BM : COLUMBIA SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT - SRRS0 11i1 Are
(SANITARY SAS)
The foliating resolution Was introduced by Com` issiohet abaft Ub6
Moied its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0. 77= 542
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF BAC CONSTRUCTION, INC.
IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,351.25 FOR BID "A" (SANITARY SEWERS) OF
PROPOSAL FOR THE COLUMBIA SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT SRC-5420=C
(CENTERLINE SEWER) AND SR-5420-S (SIDELINE SEWER) IN COLUMBIA
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SR-5420-C (CENTERLINE SEWER)
AND SR-5420-S (SIDELINE SEWER); ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $1,351,595.25
FROM THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "SANITARY SEWER BOND FUNDS" TO COVER
THE COST OF THE CONTRACT; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT
OF $99,375.00 TO COVER THE COST OF PROJECT EXPENSE; ALLOCATING FROM
SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT OF $27,031.75 TO COVER THE COST OF SUCH
ITEMS AS ADVERTISING, TESTING LABORATORIES, POSTAGE, ETC.; AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: 'None.
44. ACCEPT BID: CoLumBIA SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT - SR-5420 BID "B" -
(PuMP STATION No.84).
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, w
movedits adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 543
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF INTERCOUNTY CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,300 FOR BID "B"
(PUMP STATION NO. 84) OF PROPOSAL FOR THE COLUMBIA SANITARY
SEWER IMPROVEMENT SR-5420-C (centerline sewer) AND SR-5420-S
(sideline sewer) IN COLUMBIA SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT SR-5420-C (centerline sewer) AND SR-5420-S (side-
line sewer); ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $117,300. FROM THE
ACCOUNT ENTITLED "SANITARY SEWER BOND FUNDS" TO COVER THE
COST OF THE CONTRACT; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE
AMOUNT OF $12,903.TO COVER THE COST OF PROJECT EXPENSE;
ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT THE AMOUNT OF $2,346. TO
COVER THE COST OF SUCH ITEMS AS ADVERTISING, TESTING LAB-
ORATORIES, POSTAGE, ETC.; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM
i
61JUN 211977,
Mete follows body of reeolutioN omitted here and Oh tile
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gibson, the teScAtitiOh VAS
p&ssed and adopted by the following vote -
AM:
NOM None.
Commissioner MothOld Reboso
Commissioner 3. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice4layor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
ACCEPT BID! Bu1A VISTA COVIVNITY DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT) BID "A"
(HIGHwAy).
The following resolution Was ittroduted by commissioner Gordon, Who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-544
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF T & N CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY,INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $346,565 FOR BUENA
VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND BUENA
VISTA SANITARY SEWER MODIFICATIONS - BID "A"; ALLOCATING
THE AMOUNT OF $346,565. FROM THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED
"HIGHWAY BOND FUNDS" TO COVER THE CONTRACT COST;
ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT OF $38,122 TO COVER THE
COST OF PROJECT EXPENSE; ALLOCATING FROM SAID ACCOUNT
THE AMOUNT OF $6,931.00 TO COVER THE COST OF SUCH ITEMS AS
ADVERTISING, TESTING LABORATORIES, POSTAGE; AND AUTH-
ORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH SAID
FIRM
(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 J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
197
ACC B; BUENAVISTA COMMUNITY DEVELORAENT PAVING PROJECT AND
SANITARY Ski MOtFtcATtoNs BID "B" 3AtNAGE) I
TTh# following resolution Was introduced by Commnissionet Reboso, Who
moiled its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77=545
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF WILLIAMS PAVING COMPANY,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,623 FOR THE BUENA VISTA COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND BUENA BISTS SANITARY SEWER
MODIFICATIONS -BID "B"; ALLOCATING THE AMOUNT OF $91,264 FROM
THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS" AND
USING $96,359 PROGRAMMED THROUGH THE "COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM" TO!:COVER THE CONTRACT COST; ALLOCATING $20,638 FROM
THE ACCOUNT ENTITLED "HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS" TO COVER
THE COST OF PROJECT EXPENSE; ALLOCATING $3,752 FROM THE ACCOUNT
ENTITLED "HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT BOND FUNDS" TO COVER THE COST OF
SUCH ITEMS AS ADVERTISING, TESTING LABORATORIES AND POSTAGE;
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH
SAID FIRM
(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 J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
47, ACCEPT BID: BUENA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND
SANITARY SEWER NbDIFICATIONS - BID "C" - (SANITARY SEWERS).
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77- 546
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID OF JOE REINERTSON EQUIPMENT
COMPANY IN THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF $64,364 FOR BUENA VISTA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PAVING PROJECT AND BUENA VISTA SAN-
ITARY SEWER MODIFICATIONS - BID "C"; WITH FUNDS THEREFOR
PROGRAMMED AND BUDGETED UNDER THE "COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM"; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A
CONTRACT WITH SAID FIRM
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
tiliN 21197Z
i
i
•
t i
i AID $500 PROM QUALITY OF Lin PROGRAM TO PROVIN Ftw IGtu,
Ass I sTANOE TO RE-`ICIJO CIS
The following resolution vas introduced by Got missiohet Reboso; who
loved its adoption:
RESOLUTION W. 77-547
A RESOLUTION ALLOCATING $5,000 FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND
ACCOUNTS = QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAM, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PROVIDING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO REENCUENTRO CUBANO 1977
(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 tJag.
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J.L. Plummer Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: None.
496
CONFIRMING RESOLUTION: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPOINTMENTS TO CONSTITUTIONAL
REVISION CO T I I Itt.
Mr. Grassie: Mr. Mayor we have under the heading of formalizing Committee of
the Whole recommendations, and other actions of the City Commission, we have
thre formalizations of prior actions of the City Commission. We have one follow
up. We will distribute those resolutions to you now. The first has to do with
appointments you made this morning Mr. Mayor on constitutional revision, recom-
mending the City Attorney and Commissioner Plummer.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Reboso, who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-548
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AND THE
PRESIDENT OF THE STATE SENATE, GEORGE F. KNOX, JR., CITY
ATTORNEY AND J.L. PLUMMER., JR. CITY COMMISSIONER, TO SERVE
ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION COMMITTEE TO REPRESENT THE CITIZENS
OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Fevre Absta1ned, fir= Plummer
, CONFIRMING RBOLUTI ; REQUEST CITY MANAGER TO bEVELOP PLANS To
IMPLEMENT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ORANGE MA
Tyr. t;rassie: The next one Mr. Mayor is fortnalizing your resolution with
tegsrds to the development of the Orange Bowl, the submission of plans
Mayor Ferre: Where is the motion?
Mr. Plummer: Don't have it.
Mayor Ferre: I moved it this morning, Father I give you the gavel, a resolution
requesting the City Manager to develop several plans each of which shall require
a different amount of money to implement improvements to the Orange Bowl
with specific emphasis on parking, seating, public areas, and other amenities
further to explore the possibility of soliciting cooperation of Dade and Broward
counties in fiancing said improvements, and if no proffer of assistance is
received within 45 days prior to November 8, 1977 election then to initiate all
precedures and legislation which would place the question on the November 1977
ballot to determine whether the electorate wishes to encumber city funds for the
said improvements. I guess that is general enough.
Mr. Plummer: I am going to vote against it. There is nothing in here which relates
to the possibility of financing the revenue bonds.
Mayor Ferre: Add to it the following: 'financing said improvements, first further,
to first explore, after the first semicolon, after the word other amenities;
the 6th line, ----;further, to first explore the possibilities of non -ad valorem
tax methods of financing',
Mr. Plummer: I'll buy that.
Mayor Ferre:---';further to explore the possibilities of soliciting the cooperation
of Dade, etc. ----further to first explore the possibilities of non -ad valorem tax
methods of financing, then further, getting the County to come up, then if not,
as a last resort, put it on the ballot.
The following resolution was introduced by Mayor Ferre , who moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-549
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP SEVERAL
PLANS, EACH OF WHICH SHALL REQUIRE A DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF MONEY
TO IMPLEMENT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ORANGE BOWL, WITH SPECIFIC
EMPHASIS ON PARKING, SEATING, PUBLIC AREAS AND OTHER AMENITIES;
FURTHER TO EXPLORE THE POSSIBILITY OF SOLICITING THE COOPERATION
OF DADE AND BROWARD COUNTIES IN FINANCING SAID IMPROVEMENTS AND
IF NO PROFFER OF ASSISTANCE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 45 DAYS PRIOR TO
THE NOVEMBER, 1977 ELECTION THEN TO INITIATE ALL PROCEDURES iSTD
LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PLACE THE QUESTION ON THE NOVEMBER 1977
BALLOT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE ELECTORATE WISHES TO ENCUMBER
CITY FUNDS FOR THE SAID IMPROVEMENTS
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Plummer, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote-
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES; None.
97
JUN 21 197
Mt&
FIT READING ORDINANCE! ALIN wit OP talt AT THE ORANGE BOAL
STADIA
t Fette: We have the beet in the Orange Bowl befate usr
Plummet:
Mayor Ferret
Mr. Plummet:
festivals.
Mayor Ferret
I am not voting for this.
I so move.(Mayot Fette tend ordinance.)
Nothing in here prohibiting the sale from high schools and
That is something that can be handled administratively.
Mr. Knox read ordinance.
Mr. Plummer: I hate to vote against this ordinance because I am in favor of
serving beer in the Orange Bowl but I don't want to leave it to a lease. I
want it written into the ordinance, prohibiting it in the ordinance. Since
the Mayor doesn't want to amend the ordinance, to include it, then I must
vote no.
Mayor Ferre: Do you have a problem about putting it in there? We don't want
beer sold at high school games. So what is the point? Why not put it in the
ordinance?
Mr. Grassie: The difficulty that we have, is we have to be quite explicit with
regard to the definition of the kinds of events that are permissible and those
that are not.
Mayor Ferre: Just exclude high school games, and rock concerts.
Mr. Grassie: Rock concerts is too broad a term. You need to be more specific
than that. High school games is not problem.
Mayor Ferre: I will amend my motion to exclude high school games. Is that
acceptable to you Manolo? I will amend it to that extent. Call the roll again.
Mr. Ongie: On the amended ordinance.
Mayor Ferre: Yes.
Mrs. Gordon: No.
Mr. Plummer: Here again I am in favor of selling beer in the Orange Bowl but
I don't feel this ordinance is protective enough and I must vote no.
Mr. Reboso: Yes.
Mr. Ongie: Vice -Mayor Gibson?
Mr. Plummer: Father have you ever been to a rock concert? According to this
the Manager is saying to me, he wants to do it through a lease. I am saying I
want to do it through an ordinance. We have a difference of opinion. I think
both are under the same wording, but he wants to do it the other way and I don't
want to do it that way. Let me ask another question.Wasn't there a provision to
the morning thing, that there was to be a public hearing? I make a motion to vote
yes and then I can adjust it between now and the public hearing. I change my vote
to yes, based on the fact that I can change my mind between now,--
AN ORDINANCE F:NTITLF t
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 39-25 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY
OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, AS AMENDED; BY PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF BEER
AND/OR MALT BEVERAGES WITHIN THE ORANGE BOWL MEMORIAL STADIUM;
CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
Was introduced by Mayor Ferre and seconded by CommissionerReboso and
passed on its first reading by title by the following vote-
AYES: Mr. Reboso, Vice -Mayor Gibson, Mr. Plummer and Mayor Ferre
NOES: Mrs. Gordon
ABSENT: None.
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.
52, CONFIRMING RESOLUTION AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON ISLAND.
Mayor Ferre: I want to make sure that it is clearly understood that we have in
here some specific guidelines. A -the unique location of Watson Island is to be
respected, that it is, there must be a theme park design, and dveloped uniquely,
reflecting Miami as the gateway to Latin America, its water -oriented position
and the history of Miami, B-in other words we don't want Eskimo villages, or
wild west rodeos, or that kind of stuff, this is a Miami oriented type of thing.
Water oriented.B---No considerations to be given to the development of a hotel on
this particular site, C--the concept of lowering the debt as quickly as possible
prior to the distribution of any money must be discussed. I am going to say I think
it should be stronger, that is should be part and parcel of the agreement, D--there
must be an attempt to negotiate an increase in 80/20 split of profits for future
high levels. In other words, I don't mind the 80/20 split down in the lower end,
but as we get higher I think the City ought to get a little bit more. E---the
City of Miami is to maintain control over the design process which shall be subject
to city commission approval, and F---the formal formula for payback in income of
the development of the marina portion, should be different than the formula
for the amusement park. G the maintenance of a small boat type activity in
Watson Island, and even though it isn't spelled out, let the record reflect that
I am specifically thinking of the type of activity as the Miami outboard, Miami
Yacht club, and all that. In other words, small people type of boats. And we find
a place for the Goodyear blimp, which I would imagine would be Virginia Key.
The following resolution was introduced by Mayor , who moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-550
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON ISLAND WITH FIRMS
RANKED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: (A) DIPLIMAT WORLD ENTERPRISES,LTD.,
(B) COLLINS-TUTTLE, INC.; SETTING FORTH GUIDELINES TO BE USED BY
THE CITY MANAGER IN THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS; DIRECTING THE CITY
MANAGER IN THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS; DIRECTING THE CITY MANAGER TO
THEN PRESENT SAID PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR ITS
REVIEW AND ACTION THEREON
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the resolution was
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
NOES: Mons,
99 JUN 211977
Si CONFIRMINGRESOLUTION! REACTIN6 Big OP SCUM FLORIDA MAet< Mum) Na
(TWO DUNIP TRUCKt)i
Mr. Massie: The last thing Mr. Mayor that t know of is a bid rejedtiott Oft
previous action of the City Cotnmission.
Mayor 'ere: Bid rejection for who?
Mr. Grimm: Mr. Mayor at the last Cotmnsision meeting, we received bids for
garbage equipment and trucks, which you awarded. When we went to purchase the
two trucks the low bidder could not supply them.
Mr. Plummer: What that the used trucks?
Mr. Grimm: Yes, sir. We are in desparate need of trucks at Virginia ley. We
are renting them now. What we would like to do is give the Manager authority
to go out for bids again, receive them and award, and we can come back and ratify
that action at any time.
Mr. Plummer: So move. I still think you ought to buy new ones.
Mr. Grimm: We may. This gives us the authority to buy used or new, which ever,
is best.
The following resolution was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who,,
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 77-551
A RESOLUTION REJECTING THE BID OF SOUTH FLORIDA MACK TRUCKS, INC.
FOR TWO DUMP TRUCKS AT A COST OF $29,500.AUTH0RIZED BY RESOLUTION
77-467 FROM FUNDS ALLOCATED FROM FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING AND THE
REPLACEMENT RESERVE FUND; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE
AND ACCEPT BIDS FOR TWO NEW OR USED DUMP TRUCKS WITHOUT COMPLYING
WITH NORMAL PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS; AND SETTING FORTH THE EMER-
GENCY BASIS FOR THE AFORESAID PURCHASE
(Here follows body of resolution, omitted here and on file
in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon, the resolution
passed and adopted by the following vote -
AYES: Commissioner Manolo Reboso
Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr.
Commissioner Rose Gordon
Vice -Mayor Theodore Gibson
Mayor Maurice A. Ferre
54. PERSONAL APt A ANit: A. G. S t t , NESIDEtstt OF M.A., REbitStING
COST OF LIVING INCH•
Mr. Ongie, City Clerk: Item 34.
Mr. A.G. Sherman: Mr. Mayor I am on the agenda, Item 34.
Mayor Ferret You are on the agenda?
Mr. Sherman: Yes, sir.
Mayor Ferre: Did we skip over you, or what?
Mr. Ongie: Item 34.
Mayor Ferre: All right, Mr. Sherman.
Mr. Sherman: Mr. Mayor, Mrs. Gordon, members of the Commission, my name is A.G.
Sherman, I am the present president of the General Employees' Association. I am
not the most profound speaker, or prodigious speaker, so I will make my address
as brief and direct as possible.
I have come before you today to request that this Commission grant all employees
who are currently without a contract, a cost of living increase to help combat the
spiraling inflationary period which we are now confronting. In approximately the
past 21 months, these same employees have received only 2% to aid their financial
attack on inflation. Before you is a copy of the proposed budget for fiscal year
1976-77. It is noted that monies have been appropriated for such a salary adjustment.
Once again I would appeal to this Commission to research and consider, generously
granting a well deserved and needed wage increase at this time. In behalf of all
your employees, I think you for your gracious time you have extended concerning this
matter. Thank you.
Mr. Grassie: Did you ask a question sir? I am sorry, Commissioner Plummer was asking
me a question I was trying to 'respond to.
That is true. We did set up in this budget an amount of money, 31% as a contingency
fund for that. It has not been authorized. We have not moved forward on it.
Mayor Ferre: What is your recommendation?
Mr. Grassie: The money has been borrowed for two purposes. One, you remember that
you funded the Latin American Trade Fair from this amount and the other to fund
a very high-level payment, actually a 1.6 million in excess of what we had anticipated
for early retirements. We have had an unusual number of early retirements this year
and some money has been borrowed for that purpose. I say borrowed advisedly because
we intend before the end of this fical year to make sure that that is replaced from
current sources, from current revenues. But you have taken action to make those two
appropriations. Getting to the question of a recommendation. The only recommendation
we can make to you is that any kind of salary increase has to be negotiated and as
you know we are not in negotiations with this unit at this time. And will not be,
I would expect, depending when they get certified, until, ----if I had to guess, I
would say the middle of August.
Mr. Sherman: Mr. Mayor, I would like to disagree. I feel that the money could be
granted by this Commission and I do not believe we would enter into a U.O.P. suit
of any kind concerning the matter, if all parties are in agreement.
Mr. Grassie: Don't misunderstand me. I didn't say it couldn't be. My recommendation
is that the City not give away salary increases without negotiations. If you would
like Mr. Mayor we can get you some kind of a schedule that estimates when the
recognition process is likely to be completed.
Mayor Ferre: Why don't you do that and bring it back for further discussion.
Mr. Sherman: I would like to ask Mr. Mayor, was this Commission notified that these
funds which were appropriated, would be taken out for other sources?
Mr. Plummer; We had to approve them A.G.
101 JUN 211977,
Mt, Plum er: Mr, Mayo' let ask this question, Thee ate some people in this
-city who do not belong to the General Employees' not belong to any organization,
Mr, Grassie, the same does not hold true for them.
Mr. Grassie: It would Commissioner. We are operating on a policy that would
treat them all in the same way. We have not made a distinction between the groups,
I think that while the request comes from one employee group, I think you are really
talking about all non -uniformed employees.
Mr. Plummer: What your answer is, then, all of those who belong, or don't belong
to organizations are going to be treated in the same manner,
Mr. Grassie: I don't think that prior to negotiations, you can make that statement
categorically. But as a general philosophy I think that is basically true. Yes,
55, BRIEF DISCUSSION ITEM: POSSIBILITY OF CHANGE OF DATE OF THE
SEPTEIBER 22 COMMISSION MEETING.
Mayor Ferre: I would like to remind the Commission that tonight at 8 o'clock we
have Shenandoah and at 10 o'clock on Thursday we have Little River. I will not
be able to be at Little River, so I would be grateful if all or some of you could
cover that.
The last thing I have is, Septebmer 22 is Yam Kippur and we cannot hold a Commission
meeting on that day. So get your calendars out and tell me when you would like it.
Mr. Plummer: Why don't we make that decision in July?
Mayor Ferre: Would you put it on the agenda for the July meeting so we can
schedule it at that time?
Mr. Plummer: Discuss it on the 14th.
NOTE: There being no further business to come before the Commission at
this time, the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 o'clock P.M.
ATTEST: RALPH G. ONGIE
CITY CLERK
MATTY HIRAI
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
MAURICE A FERRE
MAYOR
in JUN 211977
•
cflZV OF M,AMI
DOCUMENT
MINDEX 7271977 DATE:
ITEM NO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
COMMISSION AGENDA AND CITY CLERK REPORT
EXPRESSING THE GRATITUDE AND APPRECIATION OF
THE MIAMI CITY COMMISSION TO THOSE CITIZENS
AND CITY OFFICIALS WHO TRAVELED TO NEW YORK
CITY ON JUNE 13, 1977, TO REPRESENT THE CITY
OF MIAMI AT THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE OWNER
CONFERENCE
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN
LIEU OF CONDEMNATION A RESIDENCE LOCATED AT
190 S.E. 12 TERRACE
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT WITH MARINA BISCAYNE, INC.
DECLARING BEERSHEBA, ISRAEL AS A SISTER CITY
AND REQUESTING APPROVAL OF SISTER CITY INTER-
NATIONAL OF THE AFORESAID DECLARATION
RECEIVING THE ANNUAL POST AUDIT FINANCIAL
REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1975-76 PREPARED BY
PEAT, MARWICK, MITCHELL & CO.
ACCEPTING THE PLAT ENTITLED MARIA SUBDIVISION
ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION OF A.M.J.
CORPORATION FOR THE WESTERN DRAINAGE PROJECT
E-38 AT A TOTAL COST OF $159,002.14
ACCEPTING THE COMPLETED WORK PERFORMED BY
PERSANT CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. AT A TOTAL
COST OF $63,283.36
AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO PUBLISH A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 14
1977
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE IN
LIEU OF CONDEMNATION, A SINGLE FAMILY RESI-
DENCE LOCATED AT 36 NORTHEAST 59TH STREET
APPROVING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF EMPLOYMENT
PAST THE AGE OF 70 FOR VIRGINIA I. LIEBERMAN,
CLERK TYPIST II, DEPARTMENT OF POLICE EFFEC-
TIVE JULY 29, 1977 THROUGH JULY 28, 1977
RATIFYING AND APPROVING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION
OF EMPLOYMENT PAST THE AGE OF 73 FOR HARRY
PEARLMAN, WATCHMAN OF DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
FACILITIES.
AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO
CHON SENG LAU AND ANDREW W. HORN, WITHOUT THE
ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF $2,931.88
IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF ALL INJURY
COMMISSION
ACTION
R-77-521
R-77-522
R-77-523
R-77-526
R-77-530
R-77-531
R-77-532
R-77-533
R-77-534
R-77-535
R-77-536
R-77-537
R-77-538
RETRIEVAL
CODE NO.
0056
77-521
77-522
77-523
77-526
77-530
77-531
77-532
77-533
77-534
77-535
77-536
77-537
77-538
)OCU MEN11N DEX
CONTINUED
4 NO.
DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION
15 AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO PAY TO
CHAREN AUSTIN AND RICHARD G. DUNBERG, WITHOUT
THE ADMISSION OF LIABILITY, THE SUM OF
$2,850.00 IN FULL AND COMPLETE SETTLEMENT OF
ALL BODILY INJURY
16 ACCEPTING THE BID OF OUTDOOR SPORTS HEADQUART-
ERS, INC.
17 ACCEPTING THE BID OF BISCAYNE FIRE EQUIPMENT
18 ACCEPTING THE BID OF BAC CONSTRUCTION, INC.
19 ACCEPTING THE BID OF INTERCOUNTY CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,300.00 FOR
BID "B".
20 ACCEPTING TIIE BID OF T&N CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $346,565.00
21 ACCEPTING THE BID OF WILLIAMS PAVING COMPANY,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $187,623
22 ACCEPTING THE BID OF JOE REINERTSON EQUIPMENT
COMPANY IN THE PROPOSED AMOUNT OF $64,364
23 ALLOCATING $5,000 FROM SPECIAL PROGRAMS AND
ACCOUNTS -QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAM, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO
REENCUENTRO CUBANO 1977
24 RECOMMENDING TO THE GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF
FLORIDA, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRE-
SENTATIVES, AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE STATE
SENATE, TO SERVE ON THE CONSTRITUTIONAL REVI-
SION COMMITTEE TO REPRESENT THE CITIZENS OF
THE CITY OF MIAMI
25 REQUESTING THE CITY MANAGER TO DEVELOP
SEVERAL PLANS, EACH OF WHICH SHALL REQUIRE A
DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF MONEY TO IMPLEMENT IM-
PROVEMENTS TO THE ORANGE BOWL, WITH SPECIFIC
EMPHASIS OF PARKING, SEATING, PUBLIC AREAS
AND OTHER AMENITIES.
26 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AN
AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WATSON IS-
LAND WITH FIRMS RANKED IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER
27 REJECTING THE BID OF SOUTH FLORIDA MACK
TRUCK, INC. FOR TWO DUMP TRUCKS AT THE COST
OF $29,500
COMMISSION
ACTION
R-77-539
R-77-540
R-77-541
R-77-542
R-77-543
R-77-544
R-77-545
R-77-546
R-77-547
R-77-548
R-77-549
R-77-550
R-77-551
RETRI&AC
, CODE NO.
77-539
77-540
77-541
77-542
77-543
77-544
77-545
77-546
77-547
77-548
77-549
77-550
77-551