Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1977-09-26 MinutesCITY OF MIAMI • SPECIAL COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON SEP 2 61977 PREPARED aY Tit OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY HALL RALPH 6, OHHIE CITY CLERK MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING CITY COMMISSION OF MIAMI, FLORIbA * * * * On the 26th day of September, 1977, the City Commission of Miami, Florida met at its regular meeting place in the City hall, 3500 Pat American Drive, Miami, Florida in Special Session. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 O'Clock P. M. by Mayor Maurice A. Ferre with the following members of the Commission present: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore Gibson Mayor Maurice A. Ferre ALSO PRESENT: ABSENT: Joseph R. Grassie, City Manager George F. Knox, City Attorney Ralph G. Ongie, City Clerk Matty Hirai, Assistant City Clerk Commissioner Manolo Reboso An invocation was delivered by Reverend Gibson who then led those present in a pledge of allegiance to the flag. Mayor Ferre: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, this is a Special City of Miami Commission Meeting. It is also a public hearing, the third last legally required Public Hearing on the Budget and at this time I'll open up discussion by seeing how many members of the public wish to be heard on the budget this evening. Would you raise your hands, those that wish to be heard? I see four hands, raise your hands again because I may have missed somebody. Ok, I see seven hands. If you would please give your names to the Clerk in whatever order you come up I'll call you to bat just like that. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, may I bring to your attention that the public hearing is not scheduled until 8:00 O'Clock, that we have scheduled from 7 to 8 O'Clock four different departments and there are people who have called my office who have been informed that the public hearing doesn't, in fact, start until 8:00. So hope and I know that no one will be precluded who does come here at 8:00 O'Clock from signing their name and speaking. Mayor Ferre: I've got a feeling we're going to be here beyond 8:00, Mr. Plummer, so.... Mr. Plummer: Not much more, the football game starts at 9:00. Mayor Ferre: So I don't think we'll have a problem. Ok, I stand corrected on that. So Mr. Manager, we'll continue, we'll follow the procedure as outlined here from 7 to 8 and at 8 then the seven people that have signed up and if others want to speak then we'll do it that way. So we're on the 7:00 O'Clock agenda, Management and Budget. Mr. Grassie: The City Commission has made good progress in reviewing the indi- vidual departmental budgets, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission, we have only a few left and they can be done relatively quickly if you would like. The first one on your agenda is the Management and Budget Department, that's page 173 in your budget book and Mr. Gary will speak to this. Mr. Howard V. Gary: Good morning, Mayor and Commissioners. Mayor Ferre: I know how you feel, I feel the same way. I don't know whether it is morning or night 1 Gary: Good evening. The budget for the Management and Budget Department is approximately 20% less than what it was last year. The reason for this de- crease is due to the fact that the Computers Division of Management Services for 1976-1977 has been centralized and a new Computers and Communications Depart- ment which you approved this fiscal year. Our budget also reflects an increase of approximately $96,000. This increase was attributable to the rent for Man- agement Services, the 3 and 51% projected salaries just as for other departments and also the allocation of fringe benefits. The Department of Management and Budget does not project any reduction of services for the next fiscal year. Our Table of Organization reflects an increase of approximately 11 people. This increase is attributable to the fact that we were able as the result of a number of turnovers to fill our positions utilizing CETA employees. Are there any questions? Mayor Ferre: All right, any questions from members of the Commission? Mr. Gary: I think we've cut it down to the bone, I think you've been over in our office. Mayor Ferre: All right, any questions of Mr. Gary at this time? A11 right, Mr. Manager, what's next? Mr. Grassie: The next budget, Mr. Mayor, is the one for the City Manager's Office and Labor Relations. That's on page 39. I'm going to ask Bob Homan who did the basic staff work on this to present it to you. Mr. Robert C. Homan: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, as you can see on page 39 essentially what has happened here is that we've reduced two secre- tarial positions and in view of that the personnel cost... Mayor Ferre: Is that 39 or 29? Mr. Homan: Thirty-nine. The cost of personnel in the Office of the City Man- ager has not increased appreciably due to those two position cuts. Other than that the only difference from last year, of course, is the assignment of those fringe benefits under Fixed and Sundry which also happened with the other depart- ments. Are there any questions? Mayor Ferre: Are there any questions? All right, Mr. Manager, I don't hear any questions, so Labor Relations. Mr. Grassie: That is considered a part of the same budget. Mayor Ferre: All right, next. Mr. Grassie: If there are no questions on that then Mr. Mayor we would move to your office and if you would like I would have Ron Daniels of Management and Budget briefly comment on that. That's page 28. Mr. Ron Daniels: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, the budget you see before you for the Mayor Office represents approximately an 81% salary increase for all staff in the Mayor's Office as well as the provision of approximately a 6% in- crease in non -payroll costs in all areas except Fixed and Sundry. Fixed and Sundry represents about a $45,000 increase.... Mayor Ferre: How much? Mr. Daniels: $45,000 due to the fact that we apportioned fringe benefits costs to the budget that we formerly budgeted in Special Programs and Accounts. Mayor Ferre: As you have in the other departments? Mr. Daniels: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Well, I certainly think that the Mayor's Office and the Commis- sioners' in my personal opinion that the increases should not be any more than whatever the rest of the people in the City of Miami get, whatever that is it ought to be the same. Mr, Grassie: That is what we have done; Mr. Mayor, it is not more than any other department. r ( 1.0.7 t'-1 mer MEW i.. m& Mt. Daniels:And incidentally, your ekpenditures in your non -payroll area of your projected level of expense for this year budgeted for fiscal 78, so your budget is very conservative. Any questions? Mayor Ferre: In the past you haven't, you know I haven't been paid a salary that is I don't collect it, are you projecting the same thing in there? Mr. Daniels: We're projecting a $5,000 whatever you want to call it, salary or whatever. Mayor Ferre: Ok. Mr. Daniels: Also, another thing I might just mention is if you've noticed in 77 we budgeted $78,000 in salaries and this year we've only budgeted 48.9 but that is because of the fact that we moved your contractual people from Salaries to Contractual Services where they appropriately should be budgeted. Mayor Ferre: Ok, any questions on this budget? Next. NOTE: Commissioner Manolo Reboso entered the Meeting at 7:20 O'Clock P.M. Mr. Gary: The next budget is the Board of Commissioners, page 31 of your budget. Mr. Daniels failed to state earlier that the City Commission and the Mayor's Budget was determined in the same manner we determined departmental budgets, that is by adding the 31 and 5% to salaries and 6% to other expenses and we also apportioned thoe fringe benefits that were previously budgeted in Special Programs and Accounts to your budget so you have not gotten any special treat- ment. The Board of Commissioners' Budget was determined by talking to each of your aides in determining the needs for your department for the previous year taking into consideration that you have restricted limits. As a result of those discussions we were able to determine your budget and the increases are attri- butable mainly to the apportionment of fringe benefits and the provision of 31 and 5% salary increases which is the same provision made to other departmental budgets. Are there any questions? Mayor Ferre: Are there any questions? All right, next. Mr. Grassie: there are... That is the last of the departmental reviews, Mr. Mayor, so unless Mr. Plummer: Before Mr. Gary runs off - Mr. Gary, see how you can handle this question, and this is an overall question. The question was asked of me if everybody in the City is being forced to cut back yet the budget shows an in- crease of approximately 8% over the last year. Is that correct? Mr. Gary: Yes, it is. Mr. Plummer: Ok. Now, if everybody is being forced to cut back 8% but the budget increased where are we and why? Mr. Gary: Well, the reason you're still showing increase is that we took this year's budget as a base and through that budget we projected that all employees would be granted the same salary increases given the police and fire personnel. That was added to the base of this year. We also added to the base of last year 6% to other expense items. After that we made a reduction of 7.65% and this 7.65% was based on the 6.122 million dollar budget gap. So even though we had a reduction it was not from this year's budget but on a higher base after you add the 8.67 and the 6%, so you will have an increase. Mr. Plummer: So you took it from this year's budget rather than last year's budget. Mr. Gary: Right. Mrs. Gordon: As a further clarification of what you just said which was the anticipated salary increases, are you speaking then of the increases that would be retroactive to last year, if, in fact, you know in negotiations the subject should be resolved in that manner would the budget have the funds available to cover the increases that were not granted last year simply because the bargain- ing agent had not been designated, is that what you're saying? Mr. Gary: No, we do not have any provisions in this budget to give salary in- creases retroactive to October 1st of 1976. However, we have provisions to 3 begin paying employees as of October 1st this fiscal year of 315 and 5. assumption is that it will begin as of October 1, 1977. Mrs. Gordon: Well this is a point that I need more clarification if you don't Mind, as long as the subject was brought up I'd as soon as it now as later. What happened to the money that was allocated last year for that increase, where is it, what happened to it? 0 our Mr. Gary: Ok, a number of things happened to it. Just recently you passed an ordinance transferring funds from that account to Severance Pay, Overtime and Shift Differential which were under budgeted for 1977. Those amounts have been apportioned to the various departments. For example, we had budgeted $1,000,000 in severance pay this year. We project that expenditure will be 2.3 million this year. That's a 1.3 million dollar increase alone and we had to find those from available funds and we utilized the 31% Salary Account. Mrs. Gordon: Well, I have some mixed feelings about that procedure since the only reason that I know of that we received last year was because the negotiat= ing process was held up by State law. Is that correct? The designation of the bargaining agent. Mr. Gary: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: So that's something that I just can't reconcile personally. recognize the needs for the funds, yes, there's always the need for funds, don't reconcile the utilization of those funds for what we had to do. Mr. Plummer: How much money are you talking about? Mr. Gary: ...$2,625,000. Mr. Plummer: Two million six? In other words what you're saying money is gone. Mr. Gary: Right. Approximately 798,000 of it was moved to Police and Fire for the 315 and the 5. Mr. Plummer: In this budget is proposed adequate funds to bring them up to the same level as the others? Mr. Gary: Yes, beginning October 1, 1977. Mrs. Gordon: Well, you're saying that bringing them up though you're talking about the 31 if it were 31 that was developed at the bargaining table. You're not saying the 31 plus the 5 are you, are you saying 81? Mk. Gary: Yes, I'm saying a 31 plus a 5 beginning October 1, 1977. Mrs. Gordon: Well, then that would be the retroactive 312. Mr. Gary: No. Mr. Plummer: That 2.6 is gone. Mrs. Gordon: It's not compounded but... Mr. Gary: It's compounded but it's not retroactive to October 1, 1976. Mrs. Gordon: But the increase could be the 81, you have a budgeted figure. Mr. Gary: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: Well then you've answered my question. Ok. .... No? Well did he say that they have 81/2%? Mr. Plummer: Rose, what he is saying, the 312 that the possibly could have gotten last year is gone. What he's saying is that the non -uniform if everything works out will be the same. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, the back pay isn't going to be there. �`FP 2_6.1s Mr. Pluniner: That's tight, a big difference. Of course, there again, Mr. Gary, there are no doors basically locked because it's still subject to negotiation. Mr. Gary: Yes. Mr. Plummer: And even though you would be tremendously hard-pressed to come up with 2 million 6 which is what that would have represented... Mrs. Gordon: And the dollars that you explained that the 31% for last year would represent that would have to be available for last year would be you said two million and how much? Mr. Gary: 2.6 million. Mrs. Gordon: Just for the General Employees? Mr. Gary: That's 2.6 less the amount we transferred over to Police and Fire for the 31. That is roughly about $800,000. We transferred to the Police and Fire, we had negotiated contracts to give them 31, we moved that out of the Special Programs and Accounts and allocate to their departmental budgets... Mrs. Gordon: How much money would we need to give if, in fact, the negotiation should arrive at 31% retroactive to 76, how much money would we need? Mr. Gary: Approximately 1.8 million. Mrs. Gordon: You would need 1.8 for the General Employees for last year. Mr. Gary: Yes. Rev. Gibson: Well, let me ask a question. Are you telling me we will treat one set of the employees one way and another set another way? Wouldn't it be fair - I hope the members of the Commission hear this - if the people who work for the City meaning Police and Fire justify, and I believe justifiably so are entitled to a 3% or 31% isn't it true that the other people are equally justi- fied to an increase based on the cost of living because the cost of living is the same for most of us? Isn't that true, Mr. Manager? Mr. Grassie: The basic position that we are always taking, Commissioner, is that understanding that these questions are all negotiable the City should try to treat all of its employees in basically the same way. ... Well, that really gets you into a different question, Mr. Mayor, because they're no longer employ- ees. But as a philosophy you know I think that the City should have the position of treating all of its employees in approximately the same way within the con- straints of the labor negotiation process. Now before this budget process is done you're going to have some very basic questions in front of you which ad- dress specifically that point and if you notice my budget message, one of the most evident things about it is that the budget is developed on the basis of attempting to treat employees fairly and evenly in an even handed manner. I simply hope that we end up this budget process doing that. Rev. Gibson: Well, let me pursue this a little further. If the Fire and Police are going to get 3�%, is that what you're telling me, Mx. Gary? Mr. Gary: They're receiving it now. Rev. Gibson: They're receiving it, well not if, they're getting it. Ok, fine, that's even worse. Are you telling me that you're not going to be willing or no provision was made to take care of the cost of living for the other people? Evidently, Mr. Manager, because the only reason, let me point this out because you know I was in that cross -fire. I'll never forget that. I may have short hair but I have a long memory. If the other people were considered, were recog- nized you wouldn't have been able to do that. And it would seem to me that fair play would have said that you would have made the provision knowing that someday somehow this was coming about and I want to say for the public benefit even though the papers talk about you and I don't get along the reason we don't get along is I think that people ought to treat other people right. I was very very concerned and I'm glad that lawyer is here this evening, I was very very concerned that even after the state passed a law that the Sanitation people could be an agent if we wished everybody tried like hell to keep them from being a bargaining agent. Now I hope this Commission would pay attention to what was said. The Fire, and I love them they ought to have it because they saved my life twice and you aren't going to have no problems with me, man, getting that increase for you because any man who saves my life, man, is my friend and 1 punish my enemies but I reward my friends. Ok? The Police, I've got to have them but it's also true that just Teftley says that the other people's cost of living goes up too. I just don't understand how we are going to give it to some and don't give it to the others. All of the people are a part of the ad- ministration, they help to keep the City alive and I hope, I hope, that we would want to do the same thing by all or do nothing by any. You can't do that to the Fire and Sanitation people now. Fortunately, I want to thank, let me make this further comment, Mr. Mayor, I don't think the lot of us heard what Mr. Hall, Mr. Hall, you stand up here. You taught this Commission and the public a great lesson Saturday, and this was a lesson I want you to hear this. He said, "Mr. Mielke, I'm indebted to you because you taught all of us who work for the City that we either must hang together or we will all die together and you have solidified us." I don't know if the Commission heard that. Isn't that what you said? Words to that affect. And I want to thank you for that business because all along when they bargained, and I want to say this for the record because the Sanitation Workers, well the Sanitation Workers especially didn't have the same clout. They got kicked around and kicked out. You know? But I thank God that the Police and the Fire now understand by what brother Hall said that you've got to be a brother's keeper. Thank God for you, sir. Mayor Ferre: All right, are there further questions at this time? Are there further questions from members of the Commission or the administration on the budget as presented up until now? I think in the interest of time if that is the case, Mr. Manager, unless you want to add anything else we will then go into the public hearing. We've got eight speakers, we might have more than eight speakers. Mr. Grassie: I think that we should go to the public hearing then, Mr. Mayor, so that people don't have to wait any longer. Mayor Ferre: All right, is that acceptable to everybody? All right, the first speaker is Dr. Knowles. Is Dr. Knowles here? Did Dr. Knowles leave? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I put his name into the hopper because he had requested to speak, they were waiting for his arrival. Mayor Ferre: Dr. Knowles isn't here yet? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, sir, he's flying in from the west coast this after- noon, he'll be here any minute. Mayor Ferre: Ok, well when he gets here would you let me know, lieutenant? All right, Mr. Ernie Fannatto is the second speaker. Is Ernie Fannatto here? Ail right, Mr. Fannatto, you know how we operate here, you've got five minutes and stick to the subject if you would, please and that is the budget before us. Mr. Ernie Fannatto: Honorable Mayor, members of the Commission, interested citizens, Ernie Fannatto is my name, President of the Taxpayers' League, Miami and Dade County and President of the Homestead Tax Exemption League of Dade County. I'm going to start my presentation by saying "People first, Projects second". What I want you to do is try to put all these people back to work, those that got laid off if possible, give the people a raise and here is what I want you to do - finecomb your projects, cut your projects back and put people to work. Now, if you don't have the money, Mr. City Manager, do you have the money without in any way possible can you give, what caused all this year com- motion of not having the money? May I ask you? I mean as I understand you to say most of these increases in the budget are salaries and pensions, is that right? Mr. Grassie: That's correct, Mr. Fannatto. Mr. Fannatto: All right, now do we have the money to give the increases that the people want? Mr. Grassie: If we eliminate the positions that are cut in the budget yes, Mr, Fannatto: And if we eliminate, and how many positions? Mr, Grassie: A total of 380. Mr, Fannatto: Now, Mr. City Manager, if we give these people a small increase and give them the rest retroactive at the end of the year with interest can we put the rest of the people back to work? Mayor Ferre: You'd better explain that a little bit, Mr. Fannatto. Mr. Fannatto: What I'm saying is if we cut some of these salaries but still give the people their increase in salaries at the end of the year retroactive with interest so they won't be deprived of their raise but they.... so as to prevent these people from being put off of the tax rolls. That's what I meant, is it possible to do that, Mr. City Manager? Mr. Grassie: It would be possible, Mr. Fannatto, unless what you mean by retro- active is that they get later with interest everything that they would have got- ten to begin with. Of course, if you give it to them later with interest you have not saved any money. If you don't save any money you won't have enough money to bring back the people that would otherwise be laid off. If what you mean by retroactivity is that they would get the increase but that it would be delayed that would conceivably could provide enough money so that you could bring the employees back to work, yes. Mr. Fannatto: That's what I would like to see. I want to see all the people put back to work in that manner, if you don't have the money I want to see these people be put back and give them a good Christmas present. I don't want to see families laid off before Christmas, I don't want to see them laid off any time but if that's the only way you can do it let's do it and let's put the people back to work. I am... I mean if you can't do it you just can't do it any other way and I want the people, put "People first, Projects second" but before you do that I want you to go over every project that you have budgeted in this budget and coming down as much as you can so as to make it easier for the taxpayers and so it will make it easier at the end of the year for the retro- active increases that these people are going to get. If it's the only way that you can do it no use of kidding yourself, let's do it that way. I want to go on to say a little more in reference to what hurt the economy of Dade County and why the City of Miami has got to pay 18% County Taxes. I'm going to tell you why •••• Mayor Ferre: Mr. Manager, I don't see that we're televising now, are we? Is it alright if we turn off the lights? It is kind of hard to work under them. Mr. Fannatto: It is a plan that Dade County adopted called the Master Plan. The Master Plan is 60% efficient, 40% defective. They have kept hundreds of thousands of people unemployed in this County because they've retarded the con- struction effort. The Master Plan is too stiff. Thousands. and thousands of acres in this County, and owners have gone before the Commission and they weren't able to get their projects. So what happens? We lost millions and millions of dollars in taxes that the City taxpayers had to pick up because they're paying 18 - 20% and there are no jobs, we lost plent of jobs. It drove a lot of people out of business, Mr. Ferre was hurt, Mayor Ferre was hurt by the Master Plan, he's in the cement business. When there is no construction he don't sell cement and when there's no construction there's no jobs and when there's no jobs you have a sad economy. And I think that the City should look into this and go before Metro and let's try to do something about it. But I am going to say again what I said at the beginning, "People First, Projects Second". Let's put the people back to work, let's don't have some sad families around this City before Christ- mas, if we have to do it retroactive I hate to do it that way, let's do it, pay the people their raises retroactive to the end of the year, pay them with inter- est but let's put the people back on the payroll. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker is Cleofa A. Good. Mrs. Cleo Good: (INAUDIBLE) Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Good, as you know in our budget process hearings each citizen is allowed five minutes, would that be sufficient? Mrs. Good: All right, I will keep it short, Mayor. I'm a nurse and I say there are three fiscal problems afronting us - the cuts in our policemen, our law enforcement officers we need, we all need them. The children on our street are not safe... And if we hadn't had the policemen that we have had in the last year in my own neighborh000d there were 100 robberies committed by one teenager. Now if it only takes one teenager to commit 100 robberies in three years if we hadn't had our law enforcement people I don't know what we would have done. So P7 �..-,.rv--t a1 do hot cut them away from us, let us have safety in that manner and we do not heed another Tamarac. And our firemen are very important too. And also, on the next street from me I saw rats in the garbage, because we have a foreign population here it is a melting pot, we melt. And if you see rats in the bar- bage and you have a hurricane you're going to have not only a physical problem but a medical problem. So I would like to ask that we all keep our law enforce- ment, our firemen and our Sanitation men. Do what you can, I know you always have losses and gains but let's keep a good force in Miami. Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you, Mrs. Good. Pat Skubish? All right. Gene Naples? I'm calling these in order as they came up, I don't care how, you know if you want to speak later it's all right with me. You want to wait for Dr. Knowles? Mr. Plummer: (INAUDIBLE, NOT USING MICROPHONE) ...I would prefer so that no one can say anything badly that you wait that report until 8:00 O'Clock where every- body would have the opportunity to be heard. I think that would be the best part of valor. Mr. Gene Naples: We're willing. Mayor Ferre: All right, Gene. Mr. Plummer: Do you agree, Gene? Mayor Ferre: That's fifteen minutes from now. Let me ask the public here, would those of you that are non -employees, non -related to the City by I mean working for the Commission or the Mayor or something like that, would you raise your hands. Please, raise your hands, those of you that are not employed by the City. Sixteen. Ok, now those of you that work for the City and your families, raise your hands. Mr. Naples: Mr. Mayor, is that before October 1st or after October 1st? Mayor Ferre: That's a good question, Gene. Mr. Plummer: What year? Mayor Ferre: Now on Saturday I counted 22. All right, thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. The next speaker is... Mr. Sherman, do you want to wait until 8:00 too or do you want to speak now? Mr. Sherman will wait. All right, Jasper Andre, do you want to address the commission at this time? Mr. Jasper Andre: I had might as well. I don't know what I can add here, if I don't say the right thing I know I won't be able to get out of this building but I'm with you. I'm all with you. I came down here, as you all know, I did inform you about our particular area and incidentally I want to mention my name is Jasper 0. Andre and I am a representative of the Grapelands Heights Civic Association which is near the airport and we did express our desire in behalf of the budget and on behalf of the workers who we thought were being laid off which we do not agree whatsoever. The reason we don't is because we think in our area as well as in others that the service that we have been getting is not adequate enough and to lay off any particular services such as the Police Department, the Fire Depart- ment or the Sanitation Department is not going to enhance the city, to beautify it or improve it but deteriorate it and I don't think this should happen. I person- ally don't think as well as our group that the Watson Island deal, and I believe I expressed that in a letter to the Commission, that Watson Island was such a detrimental need over the jobs that have been expelled at this time of the year in those departments that I hear over the radio or news and actually in the conversa- tions of the budget in reference to the hearings that have been held publically. I believe that our organization says one thing, that these services and equipment that we have which we're going to have to do away with is a detrimental issue to our property and home life if we don't have the security of the Police, Fire Depart- ment and yes, the Sanitation. It is a deplorable site right now in our area right now as far as sanitation is concerned and I don't think that is an improvement. That is a deterent and it should be corrected and the way you improve things, you don't do it by firing people, if we needed these people last year why get rid of them now? I can't understand how we improve things by getting rid of people that we needed last year. The population is demanding more service and I believe we should keep these people and see if we have an overhead that is completely too bur- dened on the top side. Sometimes management has a complete overhead that is over the top and it should be probably trimmed which will save the lives of many families who are going to be out of a job because they will go in a bad way down the drain. So as far as the Grapeland Heights Civic Association is concerned which 1 represent we say that you should hold onto the people who you intend to fire, keep them on 8 v SEP 261977 the job and rather to even purchase the Watson Island which we disagree because of that one thing. I mean though it is supposed to be a tourist attraction and make money for the City, an economic situation, an improvement but that is not my point. My point is if we're going to improve one area then let's also keep our people improved, keep them on the job and make them work and make a living and spend the money and we can also take care of the tax situation. If man- agement, this management of this organization here which is now the Budget Com- mittee looks ahead and says, "Let's see what we have from the topside down that we can trim" and make up that money without firing them, keep them on the job and that's all I've got to say, Mr. Mayor, thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker is Mr. Ron Koivue. What is the little circle on top of the v, what is that? Mr. Ron Koivue: That's my i. I'm here in person. First I'd like to disagree with your statement of taking a roll call of the members here in that many of the members who are employees of the City of Miami are, in fact, residents of the City of Miami. Mayor Ferre: I've got no questions about that. Mr. Koivue: Okay. Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, ladies and gentle- men, my name is Ronald Koivue, I reside in the City of Miami at 4265 N.W. 2nd Street. I have been a resident of the City of Miami for 34 years. I was born here in the City of Miami and I've been in this building when it was Pan American, my father flew out of here many times and I've played all over the Grove, I even played within a block of Reverend Gibson's home many many times. Presently I'm a City of Miami police officer for the last 13 years. For the last 7 years of the 13 years I've entertained many of your children, entertained over hund- reds of thousands of children in the City of Miami and made them believe in law enforcement, good law enforcement, made them to understand that there is a need for respect for authority and tried to bring them up in the proper aspects to- wards law enforcement. At the present time, however, when I try to answer a child's question, he says, "Why are you a policeman?" You sit there and you try to wonder how can you properly answer the child and say, "Why am I a police- man?" and you sit and you contemplate and you say, "The best answer that I have, son - my own children, of course, our other children, your children - I say that first of all I love being a policeman, I love being a resident of Miami, I've made my home here and I want it to be a safer place to live in." However, I'm always stressing the word freedom, freedom from it all. And I've seen homes, members of the Commission here, the City Manager, I've looked at all of your homes. There are many fortresses. What I'm saying is there are barriers against intrusion and one of the Commissioners even carries a gun, sophisticated radio equipment in his car to report emergencies, we all know about it. I don't have this equipment in my car, I'm not carrying a gun today even though I am a police officer but I wouldn't stop to help any of you if you needed help. But let's say, "Ok, let's go and cut the police" so when you need a police officer within a short period of time you'll have one of our young Public Service Aides coming to your rescue. Of course, we will not send them to your home if there is an intruder there on the premises, they'll get there shortly after he leaves so we can make a police report. Let's cut police so that when your wife is stranded on the highway and she needs assistance we'll dispatch a taxicab to her home or area. They don't even show up in some neighborhoods, we're all familiar with that. Let's cut police so that when a member of the Commission receives a threatening phone call which they do on many occasions, we all know about that too, we'll send a secretary to watch their home. We won't be able to spare an armed guard for you or any of your dignitaries that come to visit the greater City of Miami because police officers are needed elsewhere because of the short- age. In June of 1966, gentlemen and ladies, my life was saved by the Miami Fire Department in an automobile accident where my heart was crushed. I felt that it was a great heroic deed that the Fire Department did and I'm very proud of it and that's one of the reasons why I've made my residence within the City of Miami. Several years later I had another heart attack while I was a police officer employed in armed duty and they came to my rescue again and I call it two times that they were there and that's the second reason why I make my resi- dence in the City of Miami. But we really don't need them because, no because we're probably going to cut them out. It costs too much to save my life and numerous cardiac patients in the CTA Towers here, the teachers' towers. Let's give this equipment to our Sister City in South America, we're giving them a lot of things so let's give it to them. I say what the heck, with all the money we've saved we can pay the bonds as they mature for the beautiful park that the people can't use because there's no police to patrol and protect their lives 9 SEP 2 6197 ,,,,,,, �, v i`T j. ,. when they're using them. As far as garbage, gentlemen, we don't have to talk too much about the cutbacks there because if you cut back the employees there you know we'll go back to the pickup point and I wouldn't doubt it for one Moment that some of the pickup points will happen to be the Commissioners' front doors and I'm certainly sure that that would be a very messy situation. Well, fellow Commissioners, I've had my say and I thank God that I'm still here to be able to say it as a member of the Miami Police Department as a mem- ber and citizen and resident of the City of Miami. I'm very proud still to be a police officer and very proud still to live in the City of Miami but I would like to say that the election year is coming up and I know that the bud- get has to be approved before the election year and I'm sure that you all will be sitting here next year because I know that you're not going to let us down again. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker is Martha Mitchell, the real Martha Mitchell. Ms. Martha Mitchell: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, I'm a homeowner in Brentwood section and we have quite a few elderly people in our area as well as quite a few children. I'd like to make my presentation to you on that basis and call to your attention that the budget section dealing with the tax increase and the decrease in services is not fair to us citizens. You're raising us to the maximum of 10 mills to begin with. You're cutting our police, fire and sanita- tion services. Why? We're entitled to these services, we're entitled to the best protection you can provide for us in all areas. We don't necessarily need extra parks that you can't protect at your present level and are going to be able to protect less at a lower level. My example is Bicentennial Park. How much crime goes on there and how has it been controlled? Also, I'd like to call to your attention that my mother has lived here since 1922. She is 78 years old and has been mugged twice in front of our home coming home from the grocery store. Why? Juveniles, adults, whatever, what is the reason for it? Our Police Department is one of the finest and they answer as quickly as they can and now you're telling us you're going to cut them down? I don't think it is right and I'd like a better explanation than the one we've heard so far. Thank you for your time. Mayor Ferre: The next speaker is Mr. Walter Raddatz. Mr. Walter Raddatz: I live at 1236 N.W. 26th Street. I'm a citizen in Miami since 1949. I have six children, they all went to school here, they went to high school and this and that. They're all out of the house now. None of them live in Miami any more. Why? You know the answer why, because everything is sky high. This is the highest tax in the United States that we have here and they're going to go up another 10%, 20%. My house, I bought it for $10,000, paid $16.00 taxes in 1949 - $16.00 then they went up to $54.00 till 1956 then Came Metro. Now I have to pay Metro and the City. I'm paying over $350 with $10,000 exemption because I'm 72 years old. I can't work any more. I used to make a lot of money but it is gone now. I live on my Social Security, $210 a month between my wife and myself, $210 a month. You tell me how I'm going to pay my taxes next year, and I'm not the only one there are thousands and thou- sands and thousands that are living like this and you want to raise the taxes more? Those poor people here, you want to cut them, why? Cut the big shots, .... the ones who are getting #30,000 a year. We don't need them. If you go downtown in the City Hall you see them talking to each other and doing nothing. The garbage in front of my house hasn't been picked up in four weeks. It's that high now, that high. Where are those people? That's all I want to say, thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker is Mr. Mario J. Cruz. Mr. Mariano Cruz: My name is Mariano Cruz, I live at 1227 N.W. 26th Street. I think he and I, we are a few of the really big taxpayers that were here tonight, a few. And I'm telling the Commissioners that you're supposed to represent the majority of the people, the taxpayers who can't be here tonight, many of them because they have to hold two jobs, three jobs to make ends meet and pay the City tax, Metro tax and all that. What I have to say is I oppose any increase in taxes until the City, all the people that work for the City, they've got to live within their budgets like I live. Last year I was making about $20,000 a year. This year I am making $10,000. I've got a different job and living within my budget. I've cut the air condition, I use fans in the windows, I've cut the water heater, many things could be done, cut the big cars in the city, cut the extra ... the cars running with the air condition on 10 because they want to keep a cool car, to get into the car and keep a cool car. One thing, everything is on the City's taxpayers. We live in the City of Miami like the officer before said, within the City Limits but I know that there are many City employees they don't live within the City Limits by choice, by neces- sity or whatever. Spread the burden a little bit, not everything on top of the City taxpayers. If people are getting paid by the City and working for the City if the City of Miami is good to work for it it should be good enough to pay taxes to the City too like I pay like taxpayers. The minority in this place tonight but the great majority out there in the street not here tonight. Many of them don't know that this is going on, many of the people don't care but we're learning, we are learning the system and we're coming to the places. I don't think how many of the Commissioners have gone across the river in the northwest, I mean there is a northwest Miami, not just a southwest, Coconut Grove and all that, we live there. And the only benefit we have this year so far has been through Community Development, federal funds or CETA programs, not from the City of Miami. The trash on the street I live on, 26th Street, one month like the gentleman before said, one month without being picked up. Now I have one thing I've got to tell the City employees. Last year was an election on September of 1976. Very few people bothered to vote. I went and voted. I bet many of the employees here didn't know anything about that election. It was about trying to get more money for the City with a phone franchise, Southern Bell, you know about that election that was going on. And you know how many people bothered to vote in that election? 7,058 people. It was for that tax 2,152, against 4,906. The City of Miami in April of 1977 got 4,243 employees so if many of these employees had bothered to go and vote we would have about a million and some odd dollars today in the treasury and we don't have money because the people, no, let the property owners pay for that. No, that burden should be for everything. There are many businesses that they get benefits from the City of Miami but they're not paying their fair share. They're getting police protection from the City, they're getting Fire Rescue from the City. I mean it is a good place to have offices downtown because they get all those services but they are not paying their fair share, we are paying that share, the little taxpayer. And Miami is a city of poor people, just got a few pockets of rich people, Bay Point, Bay Heights, Brickell Avenue, Coconut Grove and that's all but you go to the northwest and you tell me how many people there are that make $50,000 a year, not even two or three families make $50,000 a year. But that man and his wife, he makes $210 a month, that's a little better than $2,400 a year. How is he going to pay his taxes there? You know what he's going to do? Like he told me he's going to sell his house. He's got his house for sale and he's going to move up to central Florida into a trailer park because that's the only thing he can afford. He cannot afford to live in the City of Miami. Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: Earl Mc Nair, please. far. Earl Mc Nair: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, my name is Milton E. Mc Nair. As I told you Saturday, I'll tell you again tonight, I am no longer a resident of Miami. I moved into Hialeah and bought a home but I am a City of Miami employee for the past 23 years. I am in the supervisory capacity with the Sanitation Department and I'm here to ask that no employees be cut from the Police, Fire, Public Properties, Sanitation or any other department. Up until two months ago when notices were sent out that some men would be laid off the morale of the department dropped - I mean it dropped. In the 23 years that I have been with Miami I have never seen the City of Miami as clean as it was until these no- tices came out. I never called on anyone for anything like I am doing this past week. I asked Mr. Grassie as Mr. Grassie said it had to be done, the lay- off that is because of the budget. If we are short that much money I think we should consider the taxpayers. The state says that could charge 10 mills or taxes. Well, the City of Miami taxpayers along with the rest of the cities are being over charged on this point to the extent that they are paying Metropolitain Dade County 10 mills, the City 10 mills. Why doesn't Mr. Grassie make Metro return some of the money instead of charging the City again? For instance, the City is charged over $2,000 a day to have their garbage dumped out in County dumps, based on 58 trucks dumped twice a day. The long run out to the dump also costs the taxpayers money in time and break -downs. The Police Department I'll speak up for, the City pays the salary, furnishes the uniforms and Metro gets the money because Metro has the tickets. In return they give some of the money back to the City I understand. Metro should keep the City fully staffed with their Police Department. The Fire Department, our tax money is making Metro not cutting but improving and building their Fire Department and no way should our Fire Department be downgraded by a layoff. Why doesn't Mr. Grassier 11 his haw Depattment check into the legality of Metro taxes in the City without providing any public services? Thank you. Mayor Ferre: A11 right, the next speaker is Mr. Richard Rosichan. Mr. Richard Rosichan: My name is Richard Rosichan and I live at 141 N.E. 45th Street. I'm here tonight to represent the people of my area which is the Buena Vista Shadowlawn area. We've had on our street, N.E. 45th Street in the last three years three murders, one of which was unsolved and remains unsolved. All of these have taken place within two blocks of our home. Our home has suf- fered from seven times and this includes two full scale burglaries out of these seven incidents. There has been one apprehension and our street contains a large number of elderly citizens, many of whom have lived in their homes there for thirty and forty years. These citizens are now unable to go out even in day light without being mugged and robbed and in one case visciously assaulted so that this woman was unable to return to work. About seven blocks from where I live is the Jewish Home for the Aged, Douglas Gardens and I remember that when I first came to Miami this operation was completely accessible from the street but it has now been turned into a fortress with barbed wire and high fences because of the fact that none of these people could otherwise ever ven- ture into the open air without being mugged. The neighborhood has already suf- fered gravely from a lessening in the number of police over the last seven or eight years and it would suffer far more from further reductions. The senior citizens of our area are also very dependent upon the Fire Department, partic- ularly Fire Rescue and I can't count the number of times that I've seen it.... Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, Richard, could we turn off the lights now or are you filming? Oh, you're filming, excuse me. Mr. Rosichan: I can't count the number of times that I've seen the Fire Rescue on our street, there is one very elderly man that lives next door to us that has had to call on Fire Rescue probably 15 or 20 times and I'm quite certain that his life has been saved by them in each such instance. And as far as the Sanitation Department is concerned, we've had an influx into our area of Haitian immigrants which has about doubled the population density over what it used to be five years ago and because of that the amount of trash and garbage has naturally also doubled and this makes it much more difficult for our neigh- borhood to be kept clean. If the number of sanitation employees were reduced the problem would be much further aggrevated. All I ask on behalf of the people of our area is that you re-evaluate your priorities and see if there is any other way in which these budget cuts can be made. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker will be Pat Skubish. Mrs. Skubish. Mrs. Pat Skubish: I keep thinking that record "Rocky" is going to start play- ing. Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, Mr. Grassie, you heard me Friday night, you heard me Saturday morning and now again tonight. I know you must be getting tired of hearing and seeing me but we all have our responsibilities in life and mine is abundantly clear - to protect all employees jobs to the best of my ability. I stated to you at those other meetings my feelings about retaining all police, fire and sanitation employees for everyone knows how vital these services are. The public comes in direct contact with these men and women, they relate to them and rightfully so for they are so visible. The other employ- ees, the non -sworn, the non -uniformed employees, the police and the fire pro- tection that we cannot do without, they cannot function without us. The City could not function without the non -sworn, non -uniformed employees. The taxpayer when calling for help would find no one at the other end of the line when help is needed the most. Without these so-called other employees the policemen would not have a dispatcher to relay the call for assistance, the reports would not be written, the files would not be kept, the telephones would not be answered and above all no employee would get paid without the payroll clerk, without our City Clerks here, they are also the other employees whether they know it or not. Parks and Recreation leaders who are developing the adults of tomorrow, the Auto- motive Department who keeps all the vehicles working, in fact, even your budget wouldn't be done and that's up for a little debate here tonight. So on behalf of all these 2,200 employees I'm asking that don't layoff one single employee. I'm asking for once that this City Commission take notice that we are the back- bone of the City's work force. I'm asking that you recognize that you all need us, that you need us. It's like the Domino Theory you knock one down and they all go boom. That's all. Mayor Ferre; Rose Melvin. Mt, Rose Melvin: Mr. Mayor and members of the Commision, I'm here tonight as a Communications Operator. I'm also a proposed budget cutback. I don't know if you're aware of it but our department works 24 hours a day 365 days a year. It is a very demanding job. Our department is also working extremely short right now. We have three proposed cutbacks in our department. I'm supposed to go to the Police Department. I've been to the Police Department, the Police Depart- ment is working extremely short. They've put in a new position and they are nine positions short, they can't even man that one position. I hope that when you consider the budget cutbacks in the budget for next year that you'll remember that without the Communications Department the Police and the Fire Department cannot function. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, the next speaker is Daisy Black. Mrs. Daisy Black: My name is Daisy Black and I'm a Communications Operational Supervisor for the City of Miami's Communications Department. Three years ago our department worked with 35 communications operators. With the resignations and transfers we are now down to 21 operators, we have to work three different shifts and these positions have to be filled 24 hours a day, seven days a week. With this limited amount of operators we have to call in operators to work over- time. Whenever this happens we usually end up paying them time and a half and this is costing our department more money. If we had the additional operators which right now we're laying off or transferring three and we see now in the near future that we're going to have to call in operators, whenever there is a checkout we're going to have to call in at least two additional operators to cover the position. Now next year myself and the other supervisors have been checking the schedules, we're seeing that we have to allow our operators only two weeks of vacation. Most of these operators have been with the City at least seven years, that's the minimum and they are entitled to more than two weeks. Even with the overtime they're going to have to be paid probably money because in order to keep the budget down to a certain amount of money and I do believe they should be entitled to the three weeks vacation they have and they would work with the City in order to keep the money situation down. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: All right, Mrs. Black, thank you. Mr. Steve Dolnick. Mr. Steve Dolnick: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, City Manager, Rose Gordon, I don't like to come up , I want to tell you the truth I don't like it but it is getting back to the old days again it seems like but then we had a hard nut sitting over there but that nut found something. I'm going to tell you today I stepped on another dead dog. I'd like to ask these guys up here how many dogs they've stepped in today unloading that truck? I'd like to ask them how many of them got real wet today out in the rain picking up that garbage. This goes for the Fire and Police, they were running today all up and down 36th Street, there were sirens going all over but in an airconditioned building where you don't get out much, you only go to an airconditioned restaurant back to an airconditioned car you don't hear too much today. But I'm telling you this City was alive today with a lot of things going on and I don't believe anybody got their garbage missed. There might have been a few trash piles that were missed because we're still lacking the equipment but I know that the garbage was picked up in this City to- day and it was picked up by every one of these damned men sitting in here that work like hell everyday. Excuse the language, Mrs. Gordon, but I'm fed up with this because I see it every day and it just irks me to see these men having to walk through garbage out there to unload a truck. Believe me, they walk through a foot of garbage and it is just very fortunate so far that none of them have cut their ankles on glass or something because I've said if my men do cut their ankles I'm not going to the City Doctor I'm by-passing the City Doctor and I'm dragging them right up to Mr. Grassie's office right on his floor. (applause) Hold it, I've only got five minutes. We've gone through this before with our departments too, we've gone through it all again and I imagine we'll be doing it again and again. These men have given up pay raises, these men have given up holidays, they've given up an awful lot of things for one reason - because they work for the people in the City of Miami who pay these taxes and they go out to get this stuff everyday. Sure, you see some of them sometimes they get done early because in my expression it's like black greased lightening going through a thun- der cloud when they want to get through but I'm going to tell you something, they can walk awful slow because they are not machines and you can't push a button to make them go any faster than what they want to do. So keep this in mind. I asked you Saturday to please think about these things, about these people. I sit in a truck that's hotter than heck. Mr. Gibson, I know what it feels like to be down there already. But, these men are out there behind that truck with garbage cans 13 that have holes in the bottom of them and sometimes you can't even get gloves because there's no more money left to get gloves and they have to handle these rusty cans. And have you ever seen one that got hit in the face with bottles that bust out of the back of a garbage truck or when one of those plastic bags busts that's got dead fish or something in it? It's not a beautiful site believe me ard they do get it and I've seen some of them turn white when a can of paint burst in the back too. These men are doing the work - these men are doing the work - not the man who's sitting in that office writing out different kinds of maps, different kinds of ways and all that shit. Maybe he's thinking of saving the city money - maybe. Think about this word because it can be stretched awful big, it's like if - if we were there, if the garbage was picked up, how fast was it picked up. All these things come into mind believe me. It's just like if there was a policeman there when you needed him or a fireman there when he was needed. And, of course, like our city officer workers, imagine if they all walked out or slowed down for all coffee breaks all day whew what a mess you'd have in bookkeeping - a little bit bigger than you have now. But believe me think about these men because they sure need this thinking bad and the first of October is coming fast and they've been waiting a whole year, two years, excuse me. Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: There might be some people here that are here for the Zoning Meet- ing and the Zoning Meeting is going to be held at Parks and Recreation. Is there anybody here looking for the Zoning Meeting? Ok, Parks and Recreation for the Zoning Meeting tonight. All right, Mr. T. J. Duggar. Mr. T. J. Duggar: Everybody has trouble with that name, it's Duggar (like Doug), Mr. Mayor. i Mayor Ferre: Well, you know Plummer talks about the garbage and I thought per- haps we might talk about Mr. Duggar. Mr. Duggar: Mr. Mayor, I'm the President of the Sanitation Employees Association and I don't know how to follow what Mr. Dolnick said I think he covered just about everything. But after I found out about what happened to my pay raise I was kind of counting on that money for Christmas. You know I've got a little baby now I've got to take care of her and I don't know now, I don't know when we'll get our pay raise. So that kind of upsets me in the first place because I don't think that was a little bit too fair. And everybody is talking about crime and dedication of employees at the City of Miami and we've got some people in the Sanitation Department that have 25, 30 and 40, I think we've got one that's got over 50 years service. So I don't know how much more dedication, and you can ask a man who's spent half of his lifetime toting garbage or working in Sanitation. I understand we're having a lot of muggings and a lot of crime in this city. Well, you know those policemen chasing those people up down the streets after while they're not going to be able to get up and down the streets to chase them because of the trash and stuff that's on the street. These muggings and stuff that are going on in the city now, pretty soon the muggers are not going to have to worry about no place to hide because they're going to be able to slip behind a trash pile and you ain't never going to find them. So that cures the problem of the mugger finding a place to hide and I think Mr. Plummer has a pile in front of his house he's wishing to get picked up. We'll get to it, Mr. Plummer, we'll get to it. But I'm down here again, I spoke Saturday asking about the layoffs in the Sanitation Department. I think the public has come out and showed how they feel about those layoffs in Sanitation, Fire and Police. I think it is a very serious and critical thing that the taxpayers of Miami which pay for this service and pay for backyard service now which very few of it is left and it is a personalized service which makes the Commission look good in an election year because I am sure that each Commissioner would like to be back up here again, we have a very fine Commission and I think a very dedicated Commission to the City. And I hope that the people that this Commission has appointed to these, as some public person said that these "high paid officers" that the City Commissioners put in are as dedicated as you people are and as serious as you people are about this budget and about keeping these people working. We all have families and I'm sure you see some of the families here with babies and their wives which they have to feed and which Christmas is coming up again and I'm sure that I wouldn't like to see them on that unemployement line I'd like to see them have a happy Christmas too. Thank you for your time I know you're getting impatient, thank you for your time. Mayor Ferre; Mr. A. G. Sherman. 14 Mr. Plummer: Duggar, I don't mind the three piles cif trash in front of my house but when you send the Sanitation Inspector around to give me a complaint because I'm cluttering the environment that's carrying it too far. Mr. A. G. Sherman: Mr. Mayor, Mrs. Gordon, members of the Commission, my name is A. G. Sherman and I reside at 7851 S. W. 99th Street. My planned presentation to this Commission was somewhat altered in light of the earlier discussion by Mrs. Gordon and Reverend Gibson. I would like to thank them at this time for recognizing the seemingly forgotten 2,200 employees. I come before you supported by petitions containing over 1,000 signatures of general employees seeking a motion by this Commission to make the funds which were appropriated in the 1976- 77 budget available retroactive at such a time when these employees can negotiate a contract with the City. I would like at this time to seek a motion from this Commission that that be made. Mrs. Gordon: In regard to your recommendation that we move in this direction, there is a way, I just discussed this with the Manager a few minutes ago, but it would require a policy decision of this Commission with regard to what Mr. Jasper Andre mentioned before. That is our project we are anticipating beginning this year on Watson Island and which is not yet on the drawing board. We have Mr. Grassie, a response to the complaints that were given to us by Dr. Barry and I in the response for analysis #3 it is revealed that we have $3,760,000 set aside and available for the Watson Island guarantee. Apparently, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Grassie, contracts have not been signed and there are some legal problems which are presently delaying that signing. Now if, in fact, some of this money if not all of this money could be freed up for the retroactive moneys that were removed from the budget which had been kept there for the raises but which negotiations never came about it appears to me a fair way of handling the situation. Mr. Grassie: You asked two questions, Commissioner. Mrs. Gordon: I asked a question, You made a statement, I'm making a suggestion Mr. Grassie: I'll try and answer the two questions that you asked. The first question, the answer in terms of contracts is you are correct. Contracts have not been signed. In terms of legal impediments to moving ahead with Watson Is- land you are incorrect, there are no legal impediments at this point. Mr. Plummer: Well, but wait a minute. The more important question, I don't dis- agree with what Rose said, if we take that money from that fund aren't we in effect killing Watson Island? Mrs. Gordon: No. Mr. Plummer: Well, I think that's ... If you take that money from that fund you rob Peter to pay Paul. Mrs. Gordon: No, let me explain it, J. L. This money is the moneys that are part of the Florida Power and Light Franchise Revenue Funds. From those funds we did transfer to the budget $3,000,000 leaving a balance of $3,760,000 as a reserve guarantee. However, you see unless you start immediately tomorrow to sell the bonds and you need this money for that guarantee then you couldn't free up any of this money but we're not at that point in time and if we're down the road six months we could free up half this money because by the next fiscal year you would then have another allocation of the franchise money for that purpose. We don't have to build up a lag fund for this we simply have to have an annual allocation if we're going to begin in the middle of the year, we free up half a year of this money. That's at least the way I look at it and I might be wrong but I don't think I am not in this particular case. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie, I'm going to request unless I'm overridden that since this gentleman is up on his feet right now, Mr. Sherman, and since we have not finished the public hearing portion we'll have plenty of time this evening to get into... Mrs. Gordon: To think about that if you wish, sure. Mayor Ferre: And we have Dr. Knowles who is already here and after Mr, Sherman finished I'm going to ask Dr. Knowles and then Gene Naples and then Don Larch, 15 the three speakers we've got left and then, Mr. Grassie I'll ask for your response if you would. Okay? Do you have anything else you want to add? Mr. Sherman: No, I certainly appreciate your consideration and thought on this. Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you very much. Dr. Knowles, good evening, Dr. Knowles. Dr. Robert Knowles: Mr. Mayor, ladies and gentlemen of the Commission, Mr. Grassie, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you at this public hear- ing. My name is Robert Knowles. I am a veterinarian. I live in the county, 18620 S.W. 134th Avenue but I operate a veterinary practice that was established in the City of Miami and operated continuously since 1923, much before the City had its 30th Birthday. I come to talk to you for just a moment about one speci- fic very small part of this budget and that is as it relates to the City of Miami Canine Corps. The Canine Corps was established in 1960 and since that time it has trained 175 animals for the City of Miami and other municipalities throughout the state. I have personally examined and taken care of each and every one of these so I feel I am qualified to speak on that particular point. The question that I would like to address my attention to and your's if I may is the proposed restriction on the use of automobiles for these dogs on a 24 hour a day basis. This in my opinion is an expensive economy. These dogs are trained from the outset to protect their vehicle. If anyone doubts this just approach a City of Miami police car and try to get in it that has a dog in it. Let me go a little further and say that since these cars are especially equipped for them with a wire barrier and all of the inside accoutrements removed they will literally tear up a private vehicle. If these police officers are asked to convey their animals back and forth to work in their own automobile it is going to be a shambles. Now I think these dogs function very well, I think they are exemplary as far as their function to the City is concerned. As a taxpayer in the City of Miami I believe in economy but I would like it not to be an expensive economy. Personally I question very seriously the merit of the minute saving that there will be in restricting the use of these automobiles as compared to the loss of effectiveness and the personal property damage that these men are going to involve. Thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: All right, thank you Dr. Knowles. Mr. Gene Naples. Mr. Gene Naples: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is Gene Naples. I'm the President of the Miami Association of Fire Fighters. Now this is our third meeting, of course, and at the risk of being redundant, of going back over some of the things that have already been said first of all, Mayor, you made some mention of a count of 22 before on Saturday. What was that count you were speaking to? Mayor Ferre: I asked people to raise their hands who were not City employees or family related. As I recall there were 22 people who raised their hands. Mr. Naples: That were not employees? Was that before the buses came or after? Mayor Ferre: I think I asked that, Gene, right after the UTD bus left. Mr. Naples: Ok, we know that there were 361 people that were there that we know we have a count. As a matter of fact we had 27 speakers that we know of that were not.... Mayor Ferre: Yes, and as you recall when I asked I think the UTD buses had already left so I'm not counting the UTD Towers. Mr. Naples: Well Robert King High was there and several of the other places but I just wanted to clear that point up because I know that we had , either that or we paid for an awful lot of transportation. Mayor Ferre: No, I think what you paid for you got. Those buses were there and those people were brought in from UTD and the other towers, I wasn't counting the people that were bussed in. Mr. Naples: And incidentally they all wanted to be here tonight again but I knew that we wouldn't have any place to put them. But anyhow, Mr. Mayor and members of the Commission, we have gone over this budget and we have talked about the cut- backs and as I said Saturday we are very very concerned about the cutbacks but I 16 SEP' 261977 even expressed my concern beyond that and that the Fire Department now has some 34 or 35 vacancies and that we have already cut our numbers to the extent that often times there are two pieces of equipment that are put out of service, that we face the possibility with seven more retirements or for whatever reasons for the normal attritional process of losing seven more people we'll have to put an additional apparatus out of service which is engine 43 which is the busiest engine company in town and I think there was something that hasn't been stressed so far as it relates to the Fire Department. That is very simply that every time a rescue company if it has to do with something that we know, for instance a cardiac situation, that we will respond with the closest engine company to that rescue company in case there might be some delay because we know how important those first four minutes are. We know that Engine #3 has target areas that we said before, the Orange Bowl, Jackson Memorial Hospital, it's the first engine company on the scene so even beyond the possible layoffs we are concerned with the serious cuts we have at this particular point. Now as everyone knows on this Commission the Police and Fire hired an economist to .look at the City's fiscal figures and the economist and the budget people don't agree. As of Sat- urday Mr. Gary was asked to meet with Dr. Barry today. Now it is my understand- ing from just a brief conversation with Dr. Barry that there was really not much communication there, that, in fact, Mr. Gary said something to the effect and I'll let Dr. Barry tell you about that, that he thought it would be a waste of time to sit down and discuss this. I think that is a pretty serious thing on the part of Mr. Gary to say under the circumstances. It seems to me he had an explicit order from this Commission and from the City Manager to sit down with Dr. Barry. We'd like to get into that, of course, and you know you asked Dr. Barry to reappear here tonight at an additional expense to the people who he is working for and I think it is very important that everyone hear what he has to say. Dr. Barry still insists that the money is there, that the cutoffs are not required in any department of the City and we'd like to have you hear Dr. Barry at this particular time and I'd like to come back after his presentation. Mayor Ferre: All right, Dr. Barry. Dr. Barry: First I'd like to apologize for the problem in communication to the extent that it may have been my fault today, gentlemen. I went to see Mr. Gary as we arranged on Saturday at 1:00 O'Clock and Mr. Gary began the meeting by say- ing, and I quote him as nearly as possible, "There isn't any chance of us agreeing on anything." Mayor Ferre: Is this today, Doctor? Dr. Barry: Yes, this is today, yes, sir. And I started off with the report that I delivered to you on Saturday. I said, Well, let's take a look at page 1, do you agree with my figures about the percentage of vacancies since the beginning of, the year of the 14.1%. Now Mr. Gary's response, and I remind you I tried and I'did not in my opinion get angry at all, I remained as professional as I wished for him to be. His response was, and I quote him again, "I really haven't read your exhibit, it would be a waste of my time to do so." Then he went on to say later in the meeting, and it wasn't a very long meeting, "I don't believe any one should be allowed to come in here and try to tell the Budget Department what to do." So I'm sorry, Mr. Plummer, I tried and I'm sure you'll hear the other side of the story but that's the way I saw it. I was here at 1:00 O'Clock as planned and I went in and tried to discuss beginning with this document page by page. Now the important point out of that is if you still have a copy of my document I'd like to refer to it if I may, particularly with the main argument on page 3 which deals with my calculation of the built-in salary surplus and built-in raises if the proper figure is utilized for projection of wage bill for the forthcoming year in the General Fund. As you remember from point 4 on that particular page I pointed out how that if all the general employees, if all the police, fire uniformed employees and all the sanitation and cther employees of the City that are in the GeneralFund receive the 31% in the case where it is due and compounded on top of that the 5% which uniform will get and the 31 and 5 that the non -uniform will get, proposed and not one single layoff and include in that figure the 112% for assumed costs of everyone eligible for merit raises and longevity money to get that in the forthcoming year. Mr. Plummer: Where is that in your report? Dr, Barry: That's on page3, sir. The figures run down Section A 1, 2, 3 and the data in the first three parts are the supporting data showing my calculation as to how I get to the conclusion in part 4. Now what I'm getting at, Mr. Plummer and members of the Commission, is that here I've laid bare a very important 17 sfgument, I mean, had my figures been wrong, had my statistics b.een wrong in teats of the dollar figure that I used for the payroll, the projection, technique into the salary plan for the forthcoming year, the projective cost of themerit increase and longevity increase? the projective cost of the 31% and the 5% raises were appropriate had I been wrong in these calculations, here are my figures. It would've been a very simple matter for Mr. Gary to totally destroyed my argument rather to have said he didn't want to waste his time by reading it. Mr. Plummer: Doctor, where in your report, since you are basically addressing yourself to Police and Fire? is the 471% for fringe? Dr. Barry: Where is the fringe, sir? Mr. Plummer: Well, this year according to the statistics which I have and I hatte heard no one dispute that in Police and Fire and since that's the one you're speaking to the fringe package is 471% above payroll.. Dr. Barry: Yes, sir. Mr. Plummer: And, where in your report in these particular' Dr. Barry: Alright, sir. Mr. Plummer: ... of what you're speaking to now is that projection of Dr. Barry: I appreciate that question because it strengthens my argument Mr.. Plummer, if you'll listen carefully. Mr. Plummer: I'd he happy too. Dr. Barry: What I'm saying is that the City Manager and his budget has over projected the cost of salaries during the fourth -coming year. Now in his budget he has projected the cost of fringe benefits upon this inflated cost of salaries. So what I am saying is that the cost of fringe benefits are in the budget but they are based on a percentage up -charge above a fictitiously high salary figure. Mr. Plummer: What you are saying is he is projecting more employees. It wouldn't have anything to do with the percentage. Dr. Barry: No, sir. I am saying he is projecting more salary which then the percentage would be the determination of the fringe benefits. Mr. Plummer: But more salary would be based on more people, is that correct? D. Barry: No, sir. No, he is projecting fewer people, because his salary figures included the cuts in budgeted postions. Mr. Plummer: Alright... but, now... Dr. Barry: And, he is projecting a salary for those fewer people which is higher than is needed to fund the positions which are currently filled. Mr. Plummer: Doctor, let's assume that you are absolutely correct. Dr. Barry: I'd appreciate that. Mr. Plummer: Where in your report of these figures do you show 47; the lesser amount than 74 which he projects as the fringe package? Dr. Barry: Well, sir, I'm not taking advantage of the savings from his over- projection of fringe benefits cost. I am looking at... I 'm just saying forget about the impact of the over estimation of salaries upon a subsequent over estimation of fringe benefit costs. I'm saying forget about that just look at the salary line item... Mr. Plummer: Alright. Dr. Barry: ... and ignore the savings which would also accrued to this Analysis from the fringe benefit line item. 15 SEP 26177 Mt. Piutmett Alright, then do I understand you correctly that your report does not speak to ftinge. package? fir, tarry: Mr. Plummer: Dr. Barry: I give away Mr. Plummer: I think, I give away funds by not speaking to such, yes., §if' Alrightt sir. Thank you. You understand the reasoning behind my statement that I be1i.e'e savings by not speaking to those fringe benefits. I understand what you say, but I don't agree. Dr. Barry: Alright, sir. Alright. Mr. Plummer: Now, what I'm saying is to get a full and complete total picture: which represents in salaries, I think we have to be fair if it's 1% is the fringe package, we've got to show it in the total overall picture and it's not here. That's my only point. Dr. Barry: No, sir, it is in the budget document. Mr. Plummer: No, in your report documents. Dr. Barry: No, what I'm saying is. I'm saving take the fringe benefit cost figure that the Manager uses in his budget and count that as accurate, even though, it overstates the cost of fringe benefits. Mr. Plummer: But,what I'm saying is in your report, not his message, not his budget, in your report you do not address it. Mayor Ferre: Everybody heard it the first time. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but it really doesn't make a difference. The point is he's pointing out that the total salaries would be less than the budget shows so there- fore the total fringes would be than the budget shows and it really doesn't matter he bringing out the point, I think that's your point, sir. Mr. Plummer: I don't disagree with that, Rose. I'm just saying if you're showing a total picture, it should be a total picture. Dr. Barry: Alright, sir. Mayor Ferre: Dr. Barry? Dr. Barry: Alright, I'll continue then, if that's alright. Now, if I could call upon the City Director of Management & Budget, I would like to have distributed two papers which I received today from him but which I do not have a clean copy of which is his estimate of the City of Miami Expenses and the Projected Fund Balance in the General Fund for Fiscal Year-77; dated September 23, 1977. I beleive that you're planning on passing this out. Would it be possible to pass it out now? Mayor Ferre: Do you have that...? Mr. Grassie: No, I understand that Mr. Gary wants Mr. Mayor and... Mayor Ferre: Well, I don't care... Mr. Grassie: I really don't know what it says Mr. Gary: I'd like for Dr. Barry to finish first please. and I'd like to respond to hi_m, Dr. Barry: Part of my presentation is based upon some given today by the City for the first time and I think if I had it in front of you rather than just talk from information which I was it would expedite things the .... Mayor Ferre: Well, I'm perfectly willing to do it anyway everybody agrees, 1 Mt. Plummer: Yes, but Dr., Barry is right, he's got to have the figures to know what he's talking about. Mr. Gary...I meant Mr.. Grassie, how can I follow his..,. Mr. Grimm: Well, if you'll wait, we'll get these xeroxed, they're all messed they're all written on.., Mr. Grassie: I don't even know what the paper is that you're talking about, Mr. Plummer: I don't either and that's why I'm more curious than ever. Mayor Terre: The memorandum has been copied and passed and members of the Commission have a copy. Mr. Plummer, (repeat). Mr. Plummer: Yes, sir. Mayor Ferre: Okay, Mr. Plummer. Alright, Dr. Barry, Dr. Barry: Thank you, sir, I apologize for ups Mayor Ferre: Excuse me, Dr. Barry ladies and gentlemen, would you please give Dr. Barry the courteousof your attention. I think it's important for you and for us. Dr. Barry. Dr. Barry: I apologize for the delay, as you remember, I just finished with a reiteration of my discussion on Saturday about the built-in surplus in the salary projection in the current proposed budget for next year by the City Manager. Nowt the exhibits that you've just received and if you would, I'd like to take them in order of the one entitled, City of Miami Budgeted vs. Estimated Revenues and Expenses as I refer to it as (a) and the City of Miami Projected Fund Balance in the General Fund as (b), so we can talk to them in that order. My opinion, if you'll notice these are dated 9-23-77, in short these estimates were prepared last Friday, and that is far after the preparation of the budget document which you have before you. But, while it may be a rationalism of the figures in the budget document let's take a look at the statistics, themselves. Remember, last Saturday, I stated that I expected the budgeted expenditures and encumberances to he less than the anticipated revenues a $3.1 million dollars surplus in the General Fund. Now, as far as the expenditures are concerned, my colleague, Mr. Jessup,who is with me here tonight found out from Mr. Gunderson today, that another week will pass before backup information is available on the expenditures listed item (b) so that we just have again the gross expenditure figure which I commented on ,on Saturday concerning the fact that there had not been a detailed breakdown of the expenditures., Now, on the revenue side the important point to note is that the projected revenue of $74,820,466 at the top of the page is a figure which is gained from a document done in the Accounting Department which was not meant to represent the total revenues received in the General Fund during the fourthcoming ,.. during the present year. In facts, talking to the Accounts Receivable personnel doing this, it was specifically meant to mention the major revenues to be received during the forthcoming year and does not address itself, nor did it intend to address itself to smaller so-called revenues. Now, some of these small revenues are quite sizable they were left out. I have the work papers and have analyzed these work papers. Federal Revenue Sharing is understated by over $271,000, Transfers are left out they amount to $515,00':. Cigarette tax nearly a quarter is omitted of $210,000. Left out is the balance on the interest earned which will accrue as income even if it's not received of $319,000 as Mr. Gunderson's estimate. Miscellaneous revenues, which they project on that as $200,000 but I reduced by 100 and added in $95,000 which were left out from the Metropolitan Dade County Court Fines, which are due as a payment, the final payment for the year, to bring the amount that's left out looking at these revenues more completely of $1.511 million dollars or over $1.5 million dollars. Now, the important point to know and this may sound peculiar particularly to my clients is that today we reported to the City that this estimated revenue sheet was in error by the amount of $2.82 million dollars in their favor. So I would like to report that you to tonight, that not only did they leave out,because it was never intended by the person who prepared it to include all the revenues available, but they included and double counted Florida Power & Light Capital Improvement Funds to the amount of $2.82 million dollars. We pointed this out to the Chief Accountant of the City this afternoon, even though we're fully aware that that $2.82 million dollars will be taken away from the proposed balanced. They had already counted that in the August 31 famous report number 8, and so we find that it s.houldn't been counted twice , but one thing that has been left out is information. We also found out again today and what we are aware of is that the fact that there is a maturing investment from the Capital Improvement funds that '11 be transferred to the General Fund 20 SEP 2 61,'977 'tiday night or the 29th.to the amount of $2,020,000. So we're trying to cleanup the records still of the City and we're going to point out the $2.82 million Overstatement of revenues.aa they were listed and lead to this. conclusion of the $74,082,00.0 estimated revenues in the sheet before you. So in short there were $34053,000 left off from the so-called major revenue items and then there was a $2,082,000error and double counting which we called to the City's, attention today which leads to a underestimation, conservative in my opinion of $711,000 on the revenue side on that sheet.. Now, on the expenditure side on Sheet B, there are some points I'd like to call to your attention again. First, is that we were told by Mr. Gary that Mr. Gunderson had the details and we weren't able to get them from him because he said they would not be available for a week, well, of course in week we'll all know what happened because everything will be over for this fiscal year. But the important point to note isif you'll look at page B, is that the projected expenditures based upon Expenditure Report #1 as. of 9-15-77 is $69,241,000 by the City. The important point to note is that aa far as the 15th is concerned at that time there was a $4.5 million dollar expenditure level less than that so they're projecting in Item A an increase of $4.,5 million dollars in the remaining two weeks of the fiscal year above and beyond what was achieved with two weeks left to go. Now, then they add on additional $2,555,000 million for expenditures not included in Report i1 but again, no details were available for that, but just say those extremely high expenditures which would mean that over $7,000,000 million would have to be spent to reach those figures by the... in the last two weeks of the fiscal year. There are several points I want to call your attention to again and they deal once again, unfortunately, in my opinion with errors. While it was ordered or directed by City Management that the amount of accrued wages payable that had been carried on the balance sheet last September 30th be backed in to the payrolls to more truely reflect the amount that was paid during this 360 day period. Now, if I may just explain that to be more clear because I know it's not terribly clear, but half of a payroll approximately that was paid in this fiscal year was in fact worked in the previous fiscal year, because as you there was a payroll early in the month which carried some days which the people actually worked last year so the proper accounting technique as you're aware is to put that amount of money on the balance sheet as a liability accrued wages payable and then what was ordered recently was that that money be utilized to help pay some of the salaries that have been credited against this year's account but the unfortunate thing is that in the expenditure statement which was utilized by the City in projecting this very high $7.0 million dollars in the last 15 days, they failed to realize that that expenditure report had not received the benefit of this backing in process and so when they calculated the cost for the remainder of the year they counted two and one half payrolls as being necessary to be paid with the other half to put back on the balance sheet at the end of the year for time work this year but paid next year, when in fact there is only two payrolls that have to be met because that expenditure report had not received the benefit of the funds placed on last year's balance sheet for payment of s.alaries.. So right off the bat they've overestimated their salaries iu that projection by approximately $900,000 but say $800,000 to be conservative, just to be conservative as I like to be. The other point is that if you'll look at this calculation there's something peculiar about it on page (b) again, Mr. Mayor, and that is that item 2 (c) is entitled Salary Savings of $2,000,000. Now item 1 which is the estimated General Fund Revenues, which is I pointed out is an error, in error for several reasons, one, in the City's favor which we pointed out to them and a number of errors and omissions which bring the total to $700 and some thousand more than that figure, but that's a hard revenue figure. That's no what you might call funny money of anticipated salary savings. Anticipated salary savings is not in that $74,000,000 plus figure. Now, as a result as you remember, when you balanced your budget last year, you put hopefully, and it turned out to be in fact, conservative estimated salary savings of $2,000,000 into the appropriation for salaries in your budget above what you planned on expending and on the other side of your balanced budget the balance that you placed the $2,000,000 salary savings item. Now, what's happening in this calculation on page (b) is that they're giving you a revenue side of the picture which doesn't include a $2,000,000 anticipated salary savings even though you achieve $2..9 million dollars, nearly $3,000,000 which is fine because that's not real revenue that's just an offsetting counterbalance from the inflation of salaries on the salary side, but it is inappropriate ignoring it on the revenue side to put in the $2,000,000 savings for salaries as if it were an out-of-pocket expense requiring cash and short items A & B in number 2 on page B, large B, those two items, particularly item A project the cost of salaries up to the current time, although it overstates it by a half of a pay period and into the future for the rest of this year. Salaries that you've paid out as an expense are included in that figure and what they propose you will pay out as an expense for therest of the year. Revenue item is what they expect to receive during the rest of the year. A $2,000,000 salary saving is what you might call funny ttoney. It never will be paid out of the coffers of the City of Miami and it will not represent a $2,000,000 dollar increase in expenditures encumberances for this current year, the year-end balance so their figure of $1,023,000 even ignoring the underestimation of revenues for the many reasons I gave is in error by $2,000,000 just for the inclusion of that salary savings so in short even with their figures, even accepting the very high projection of expenditures,the approximately $7,000,000 through the rest of the year, even forgetting about the extra half of a pay period which is charged into that projection according; to Mr. Gary in my interview with him today forgetting about that you still have an excess of $3,000,000 surplus of which I spoke on Saturday, just using their own exhibits which is why I wish to have them when I made my presentation. So in short, if I may conclude just briefly, is that the major items as I see them for your consideration are represented by, in my opinion, the still unchallenged as of today at our meeting overestimation of salaries to the extent that all raises can be given for all existing employees? including their merit and longevity steps without laying off one employee and still generate over $1.3 million dollars of the planned $1.5 million dollarssalary savings during the fourth coming year on day-1, not counting any of the savings on severance pay which is in the budget for $2.3 million dollars next year that will be gained by not laying off employees with certain benefits that have a cash value when they're laid off, not counting the accretion money that'll occur assuming, and by the way, another person left on Friday, net person, there's three left Sanitation and two came on somewhere else and so forth, but there's another person not in my projection of over- estimation of salaries since I got the last figures. I updated them again today so the accretion is continuing but I'm not counting any continued accretion. I'm saying that that figure has the funds to accomplish what the budget desires to do through massive layoffs and cutting of services to the citizens and secondly, I think that their revenue and expenditure estimates which were an ex -post I believe creation because of the date on those documents and as I mentioned on Saturday I was told that there were no estimates after June and now there's an estimate dated last Friday. And, I believe those estimates are faulty for the reasons which I gave. They failed to exclude many revenues on the revenue side, they included a revenue which had already been counted in the August 31st run on revenues and they failed to consider properly the expenditure side by including for example, the fictitious item, which is in there for balancing purposes of salary savings, so thank you very much for your time. Mayor Ferre: Alright, the next speaker is Lieutenant Don March, and then we'll come back and let you respond, the Administration answer and then we'll get into... Now, Gene, let me say to you and Lt. March and to Mr. Sherman, and those that represent specific groups, even though after the respond ... (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mayor Ferre: ... well, I'm sorry, who... alright, that... what I'm saying is that after I think we're going to stop the public hearing, except, I will recognize those of you that represent specific groups to speak on behalf of the people you represent, but I think, why don't you wind up your statement and let Don make his, let him respond, let's see if there are anymore public speakers,then the Commission can get a little question and answer period. Mr. Naples: Now, Mr. Mayor, of course, I'll be as brief as I possibly can. I would remind you of some of the statements I made at the Fire meeting and the report came from Mr. Warren Kimble, who is an expert in the field of fire tactics, fire development. We think,as I said before, that we're facing a very, very serious problem, not only in the layoffs but in our present problem. We would seriously like for this entire thing to be reviewed. We intend to continue to investigate this thing and to see that if in fact we're not giving the quality of service to the citizenry that the budget will permit that we certainly think that it's worthy of bringing to the attention of the people of the City of Miami and we intend to pursue it at that level. Thank you. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Lieutenant. Lt. March: My name is Don March. I'm President of the Walter Headly,Jr „ Miami Lodge i 20, Fraternal Order of Police, representing approximately 140 Miami Police Officers. Before I get into the text of my speech, I gave you some additional literature on Saturday concerning the equipment proposals 22 SEP 261977 in the area of K.-9, I think their presentation itself was. quite adequate. To help you out I have additional literature here on the amount of control., I'd like to summarize what I've seen in the past few months pertaining to the alledged budget process, the restrictions imposed on the various departments as each across the board was required to reduce it's budget by 7.65%, the resulting proposals that employees be laid off,including 19 police officers, and the intended reaction that this entire process has generated in the community and in the work force. In researching this problem in conjunction with the Firefighters, we obtained the services of a renown economist, Doctor Marshall Barry, who has addressed you previously. And his efforts have raised serious questions concerning the current fiscal administration and budget planning processes of the City of Miami. We have not received satisfactory answers to many of these questions and we'll continue to seek them long after these hearings are over. We have outlined to you the impact of the proposed layoff and no hire policies indicating to you that we will be cut back to police service level of 1968. We have discussed with you the ongoing crime picture in Miami and have shown how projective growth and increase tourism cannot be expected to decrease the environment that breeds crime. We have illustrated to you how the current freezes on hiring and promotions have contributed to a low job satisfaction level and have led to early departures of qualified police officers and excellant potential police officers in the form of Public Service Aids, trained by our department, who have taken police positions with other departments in the State of Florida and in the country. We've found the projective layoffs in Police, Fire, and Sanitation to be inconsistent with what we've heard the City Commission say when it speaks to progress, to increase tourism, to making Miami an attraction for residents, tourist and investors. We've also heard these same concerns expressed by the citizenry we both serve, employees and Commissioners alike with their consent. Incidently, I have an additional 1,117 names with people who have signed petitions indicating that they're dissatisfied with the reduction of essential services. In raising our questions, the proposed solutions by the City Manager have all been aimed straight at pending the responsibility for this alledged crisis on the public employees. We plead not guilty. The 5% raise was negotiated for over a -year-ago. The City, in agreeing to this raise gained concession from police officers and instructed the deal and finalized the agreement. It was over, so we thought. Now the contention is that the money is not there. Where is it? If it was not there to begin with then the City did not negotiate in good faith. Do the taxpayers of this community pay good money for its top level Administrators to conduct themselves contrary to state statute or maybe the City decided to spend the money elsewhere for more important projects, what were they? What is more important than the essential services, Police, Fire, and Sanitation; or maybe the money is still there, is it being saved for other more worthwhile projects, more important than making the streets safe, clean, or is it rumor to be missing, to pressure the employees into making additional concessions. In trying to assign blame for the public employees for this crisismaking it appear as if we're here appealing for public employee benefits, the Administration has been ably assisted by the careful reporting of this matter by the printed media. I ask you when I seek to have vacant police positions filled who am I arguing for, who am I representing when I argue for a vacant police position? It may be an uncomfortable thought for some but I believe that I am arguing for the taxpayer who is seeing his police service decrease daily. There is a lack of openness on the part of the Administration the extent that I cannot be confident that a crisis exists. A crisis to the extent that the fundamental and essential services cannot be returned to previous levels, they have already been significantly reduced by not hiring. It is projected that this reduction will continue. I do not believe that this continued reduction is responsive to the electorate, to the good citizens of the City of Miami. I must recall that in your comments to Gene Naples when you're talking about the senior citizens who appeared on Saturday, you said, "Gene, I agree that what you paid for you got". Mr. Mayor, ask each taxpayer that question now, ask them in September of 1978 after a tax increase when they realize the consequences of the continued reduction of essential services begun in December of 1976, continuing today and secheduled to continue for the next fiscal year, you ask them if what they paid for they got? Thank you very much. Mr. Sherman: Mr. Mayor, members of the Commission, my name is A.G. Sherman, representing the General Employees, As we know, after the conclusion of tonight's public hearing, we the employees and the public will have no input, neither adaptation or the approval of the budget. I would at this time like to have a commitment from this Commission seeking a motion... Mayor Ferre; Mr, Sherman, I'm going to recognize you to ask that in about, 23 SEP 261977 hopefully five or ten Minutest but I think.now wereally should give Mr. Gary the courteous of answering Dr. Barry and then tiro sure Dr., Barry wants to answer. Mr. Sherman: Fine. Mayor Ferre: Alright, and then i icon t fotget you► i rohise i 11 recognize you again. Mr. Sherman: Alright, thank you very much. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, Mr. Manager, its in your hands. Mr. Grassie: Well, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Gary will be happy to respond to some of the remarks. I want to make only two brief points with you. One, we've been down this road before. Dr. Barry spent three months developing a report and gave it to the world. We had 3 or 4 days to prepare an answer. It turns out that the 7 or 8 major points he made were all incorrect, had no merit whatsoever. Strangely, now after having spent another month preparing another report we don't hear about any of the eight problems that we had a month ago, but we have new ones presented Friday. Our staff is instructed to answer today, having not even had the record of what was proposed by Dr.Barry until this morning and so we go and presumably we will come out of this hearing with another set of carefully selected figures thrown around in order to confuse basically within an adequate period of time the answer will be developed and this set of figures will be forgotten again but there will be another set. So we go through this process. Now, I'm perfectly happy to have Howard Gary talk about these things, but I think that in fairness to that staff we have to be a little conscience of what we're doing to them and what we are asking and just what the rules of the game are in terms of whether or not everyone has an opportunity to raise any question they wish completely out of context, whenever they wish and whether adequate answers can be proposed within ten or fifteen minutes, so with that simply as a forward Mr. Mayor, I'd like to have Howard Gary speak for himself. Mayor Ferre: Alright, but Mr. Mayor, I think I have to respond to that to this extent, and I don't mean to get into any kind of a verbal battle with you or anybody else here tonight, but the name of the game is a public hearing, and in a public hearing any member who wishes to , of the public or their representatives is certainly entitled to ask any questions whether they're reasonable or un- reasonable and I think it's the responsibility of this Commission and yours as the Chief of the Administration, to try to respond as best we can and as best you can. It doesn't mean that you're going to be able to do it. And, I'm not in anyway Mr. Gary, saying that we expect for you to be superman or to respond in three minutes what somebody has taken three hours to work up or thirty hours or so on, but I do think that as best we can we've got to respond to the questions. Now, I recognize that it's hard when a series of accusations are made which are reputed as the case may be and then another series of accusations that come up. But I think in fairness to Dr. Barry a lot of this information, for example, what was passed out today only became available in the last couple of days some of these estimates, so you know, questions that are answered beget other questions and so on,we can continue forever but this is the one opportunity and this is the one time during the whole year that the employees of the City have a chance to ask b.asic questions which I think they're entitled to be answered, you know after we set the budget they all got to go back to their jobs and work and it isn'•t until next year that we go through the process again and I think it's a lot better, these public processes when people are able to ask whatever questions they may have and you know I kid Erny Fannotto a lot, but you know why I let Erny, and I'm not, you know, because I, he and I have more differences than we have agreements, but you know Erny Fannotto sometimes comes up with crazy ideals, some of those ideals he has aren't so crazy after all, you know, he sometimes words them a little bit strongly but you know an awful lot of times the reason I let Erny Fannotto talk in these Commission chambers and like another chamber is that I don't call Erny Fannotto Erny fanatic because I don't think he's Erny fanatic. I think he's a guy that sometimes got an awful lot of common sense. There are an awful lot of people who come here and may sound pretty strongly winded about things but they've come up with fairly good recommendations. You never know when something with wisdom comes out. So excuse me for the long harangue here but I thought that that needed a little bit of an answer. Now,... Mr. Naples: Mr, Mayor, there is a solution, you know, and we offered this to the City by the way and that is to take this one issue and this one issue 24 SEP 2 (1 1977 tSitdifg arbitration procedure all the witnesses. are called from both sides, and they're subpoenaed and that impartial arbitrator makes the.decision.+, Mayor Ferre: Gene... Mr. Naples: ... now if Mt. Grassie wants to do that were willing to do its Mayor Ferre: ... Gene, I'm sure you want to let Howard Gary .., the.saine courtesies that we gave Dr. Barry. So... Mr. Grassie: Yes, but before we get that started Mr. Mayor, I would like to tell Mr. Naples that we would be happy to take the question of the 3% reduction to binding arbitration at the same time. You see he likes to arbitrate these sorts. of things... Mr. Naples: I'll do that if you give me the 11% increase.... Mayor Ferre: Gene, Gene, let him finish and then you can make your statement, Go ahead Mr. Grassie. Mr. Grassie: No,.... I don't think that we need to argue back and forth in a ridiculous fashion here, you know, what he's saying to you is he wants to arbitrate the things in which he can't lose but he is not willing to arbitrate anything .... Mr. Naples: Why can't we lose.... Mayor Ferre: Now, Gene... Mr. Grassie: which the City might have. some opportunity of gaining know. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Naples.... Mr. Naples: Why can't we lose? I don't understand that, but I'll take, you know, the 11% pay increase that Mr.. Grassie got and our people will take a 6% cut. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Gary. Mr. Grassie: Maybe when you change jobs you'll get that opportunity, Gene. which is the way I got it, right? Mr. Naples; Was I threatened, Mr. Manager? Mt. Grassie: No. Mayor Ferre: One answer, and then let's get on with it Mr. Naples: Wks I threatened then? Mr. Grassie: I'm not sure, I'm not very ... Mayor Ferre: I think what he's talking about is your retirement,. Mr. Naples: Oh! Mayor Ferre: ... didn't you say that you were going to retire? Mr. Naples: No, I'm going to hang around and see which one of us last the longer, Mr. Plummer: I think we're the losers. Mayor Ferre; Alright, Mr. Gary. Mr, Gary: Mr. Mayor, Commissioners, at Saturday's workshop two issues were raised, the first one being the question of appropriating in the general fund, approximately $700,000 to ten enterprise funds when the surplus or non -allocated balance of $506,000 exist in their funds. I had some discussions with Dr. Barry to inform him that ... 25 •Nif= dai'y: ... were tailed, The first one being the question of apptoptiating the general fund approximately $700,000 to enterprise funds,when a aUtplus or a non -allocated balance of $506,000 exist in that fund. I had sdhe discussions with Dr. Barryyto inform him that each enterprise fund is separate. (BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mayor Ferre: That's tough, look, nobody interrupted Dr. Barry and I would like to request that you give the same courtesy to this gentleman here and let him speak. Now, if you want to say something after that, I will be happy to recognize you at that time. Go ahead. Mr. Gary: Ok, as I informed Dr. Barry on Saturday, each enterprise fund is a separate fund in itself and that the funds generated within that fund most remain in that fund and be utilized for those purposes, Hence, if we have $600,000 or approximately a $700,000 deficit in one enterprise fund. we can't use the funds of another enterprise fund to off -set that deficit. I think I've convinced Dr. Barry of that fact. Secondly, Dr. Barry, at Saturday's meeting contends that there is going to be approximately $3,000,000 in the fund balance, I still contend that there will be approximately $1,000,000. Thirdly, as Mr. Grassie stated before, unlike Dr. Barry, we do not have the opportunity to review his papers, like he has of ours, in adequate time to give a reputation. Thank you. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Gary, can I ask you a question5please?, because it's your papers that I want to ask the questions about, not Dr. Barry's. Mr. Gary: Sure. Mrs. Gordon: Pertaining to the first sheet on the top,... Mr. Gary: Yes? Mrs. Gordon: ... the $2,000,000 salary savings figure which under the expenditure column ,... Mr. Gary: Yes? Mrs. Gordon: ... is it in the estimated general funds revenues at the top of the page? Mr. Gary: I'm under the assumption that it is. Mrs. Gordon: You are in the assumption that it is? Mr. Gary: Yes. Mrs. Gordon: Can you make sure that it is? Can you you tell us that it is for sure? Mr. Gary: I can verify that. Mrs. Gordon: I mean it's an important point because that is the crux entire, well, not the entire, but a very large part of what Dr. Barry talking about. Ok? Mr. Gary: Sure. Mrs. Gordon: Thank you, Rev. Gibson: Mr, Mayor, I want to,,, UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: ,,, go ahead Father, Rev, Gibson: I want to ask two questions, Again, I hope the Commission will remember what I said some weeks ago, I'm troubled that the Commission would instruct the administration to sit down with Dr, Barry on Saturday 26 mid `dettaitly by the time we had the meeting tonight. And if they would eyeball to eyeball and talk over natters, see where they agree and disagree, And for br. Barry to say publicly that you have not given that courtesy, that bothers thet that bothers me. It deals with a problem that I brought before this Commission before and I hope this Commission isn't that sophisticated, that they will not understandtthat when we the Commission instruct the Administration; that. the Administration either ought to carry out the instructions or tell us to go to hell. Now, one or the other, that's number one. Number two, what really bothers me again, is as T hear Dr. Barry saying.that the budget director wal told and I'm sure, I'm sure I heard it. I hope , I hope I'm not hearing what I think I hear. You know, the church I serve, when the Bishop issues an order, whether I like it or not, I carry that off. I don't know if you the members of the Commission understand this, do you understand this? Ok. Before I make is, I think it is a serious matter for another professional man- this is the way we run the ministery... for one professional man to make an allegation on another professional man and we leave it up in the air and neither one of us is a professional, meaning Plummer is not a budget man and I don't think Ferre is. You come nearer that than anybody Mr. Mayor, I preach and Rose, I don't think you are a budget somebody, all I'm saying is maybe, maybe in order to really and Mr. Manager, please, understand I'm not accusing anybody of not telling the truth. I'm not accusing Dr. Barry and I'm not accusing the Administration, but it bothers me when two professionals get up, and it isn't like when you are giving an opinion on medicine, nor when you are giving an opinion about what the Lord will do for you,because figures don't lie, that's the point I make, figures don't lie and we could really ascertain the truth. And Mr. Mayor, I'm not so sure, I'm not so sure, for my satisfaction, I don't know about the rest of them and I'm not doubting the Administration and I'm doubting Dr. Barry, but I'm awfully distrubed that Dr. Barry could say what he said there and all we get is a short, you know, I want to urge you all. I want to urge you all. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gary, I would like to ask a question. I asked it of Dr. Barry and I will ask the same of you and I apologize for harping on this fringe benefit, but it has been a concern of mine every since I have sat on this Commission and this year it continues to get worse. Mr. Gary, the figure that you show is 2a on the first page,of sixty nine million and two, but does that take into consideration the fringe package or not? Mr. Gary: Part, Plummer. Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, could we hold your question for just a moment? Mr. Plummer: Well, I... Surely. Mr. Grassie: Because I think that Mr. Gary needs to respond to Commissioner Gibson's point. Mr. Gary: I would like to say first Commissioner Gibson, that the City Manager, Mr. Grassie, directed me on Saturday as well as this morning in my bed, is to sit down and talk to Mr. Barry, that's the first thing. Mr. Grassie, did follow your directive. The second thing is, in Dr. Barry's report he states a number of things that I said, so evidently we must have had a conversation. Thirdly, I would like to say thattthat conversation, the way it was presented by Mr. Barry, was taken totally out of context and I would not continue or to dignify those comments. So, in effect we did follow his instructions, my comment to him was that we would not agree and there was no use of wasting time developing a report as asked by Mr. Plummer. However, we could respond to any questions that he had, which we did. As a matter of fact he received the information before you got it, the information that you have before you. So we did follow your directives and the City Manager did follow your directives. Secondly, as you are well aware of)if you read the paper, that my staff, we have been working inconsiderable hours and I think in all fairness to my staff, that we should be given the same opportunities as the other people for adequate response. Now, I think that's the same thing that Dr. Barry is permitted, the same thing in the other staff members and I think we deserve the same. Thank you. Rev. Gibson: Let me respond. Mr. Manager, it pains me world without end to have any member of the public say that when he goes into any office here, "any", a-n-y, that he does not get adequate time, nor given the courtesy. Now, let me respond specifically to Mr. Gary. Mr. Gary, if you 2 JiAit t have enough time to deal with Dr. Barry's question, it seems to me that, SO that you could intelligently and professionally answer here tonight, that should have been said from the word "go". Now, I say to this Commission I will not be satisfied nor will I be happy until an impartial somebody takes your position and takes your and tell us who is, since T... you see, I can't count. And let me go further and since I'm responsible to the people who will be electing us within the next forty days, I would want to make sure that I give a good account of my stewardship and I think, you know, when you start dealing in all these figures you lose me and one thing is sure, if we get an impartial man at the City's expense- we pay for everything else- I will bet you, you won't lose that somebody because you could lose me. And Mr. Mayor, I think out of fairness to the public and us, that ought to be done. Mrs. Gordon: Are you making an motion to that affect? Rev. Gibson: That's a motion. Mrs. Gordon: I'll second it. Mr. Barry: Do I get a chance to respond, Mr. Manor or hot? Mayor Ferre: Yes, of course. Dr Barry: I would like to have the opportunity because... and I'm not going to engage in pettiness or complaints about the odds or the overwhelming disadvantage... Mr. Plummer: Excuse me)Doc. Dr. Barry: I just want to talk about if I may, some of the statements that were made in relation to figures. Mr. Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Mayor, I know on many occasions there are people who are more important than this Commissioners, but I don't think there is anyone more important than this Commissioners getting answers and there have been two other questions asked, one by Mrs. Gordon and one by me that have not been answered and I would wish at this time before the Doctor speaks) that we be given those answers. Mayor Ferre: Well, now, Mr. Plummer, I think under normal circumstances your request would be reasonable. However, since we got an emotional thing unfortunately, which are within the purview of what happens at these meetings. I think if we gave Mr. Gary , the right to answer, we have to give Dr. Barry' the same equivalent right to answersif he wants to and if he wants to I'm going to recognize him and if he doesn't, then we will come back to your 'question and then we will come back to the motion. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Gary, has I guess the opportunity through the Manager to answer Dr. Barry or not. I don't believe he has that chose with me. Mayor Ferre: Well, I realize that J. L., and I'm going to recognize you if you will permit me after Dr. Barry if he wants to respond or would you rather waive that right now? It's up to you, I'm just doing this out of courtesy to you. Dr. Barry: I think the whole issue... and I'm not going to say that my associate and myself, the two of us, you know, we are not going to try to argue the fact that we didn't overwhelm Mr. Gary's total department and his staff in the public interest, because I really don't want to in anyway demean their productivity. What I would like to say is... though that I think it boils down and it's boiling down right now to one issue and that was the question Mrs. Gordon raised abouttis the salary savings on the revenue side of the budget... Now, I have in front of me proof positive and the basis of two computer or computer run for the revenue run that's mentioned, that's used as a base in Mr. Gary's projection, which does not have any money attributed to salary savings in it and I have the work sheet from the Accounting Department that got to the bottom line figure, which is on that exhibit that I gave you both A and B, and as you can see there is no salary savings added in there, so in fact there is not the two million dollars in salary savings and why Mr. Gary might believe that it's in there, it is not and these are two City documents that proves that, Mr, Mayor. SEP 261977 • Mayot Fette: Mt, Gaty? Wait; wait, wait a minute, alright let's be fait now. Mt. Gary, do you want to answer that? If you want to, I don't know whether... Mt. Gary: I didn't hear the question. What was the question? Mayor Ferre: The question Mr. Gary, was he has a computer run which,.if you will show it to Mr. Gary Doctor. And he also has the calculation and he says he has proof positive that the two million dollars is not included. And after that Commissioner Plummer, I'll recognize you for the questions and then we will get back to the motion. Mr. Gary: As before this is the first time I have seen this sheet and this report and I would like to have time just as Dr. Barry had to evaluate it. Dr. Barry: I thought the figures was the same as the ones that are on your report, Mr. Gary. Mrs. Gordon: It all boils down, Mr. Mayor, to the motion that Father Gibson moved, that it's going to take a third party, an impartial party satisfactory to both sides to look into all these figures and come up and satisfy us because let's face it, if we feel very disturbed,as I know I do,and Father Gibson has said he does, how do you think the public feels, my goodiness. We owe it to ourselves if we are going to make an intelligent decision, at least if there is no mistakes in our budget, let us know it and then we can move forward with posthaste, but if there'is let's know it so we can make some corrections. Mayor Ferre: Alright, you have the sense of the motion and the second and now I'm going to recognize Commissioner Plummer, for the request. Mr. Plummer: Very simple Mr. Mayor... no,one question. Mr. Gary, in the figure on your document of 2a of sixty-nine million and two, does that take into consideration the fringe? Mr. Gary: Yes, it does. Mr. Plummer: Thank you. Mrs. Gordon: What was your question J. L.? Mr. Plummer: On the document which we have here, Rose. Mrs. Gordon: Yes, the second one. Mr. Plummer: 2a of sixty-nine million and two, does that figure represents 'the fringe package as well as salaries and the answer was, yes. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, ok. Mayor Ferre: Alright, any other questions? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. Mayor Ferre: Alright,... Mr. Grassie: There is one other comment Mr. Mayor, and that really has to do with the previous question, the question of salary savings. I haven't seen any of the documents, I really can't speak to them, but I can speak to the revenues that are shown in your budget which are the basis for a balance document and if you look on page fifteen of the blue sheets in your budget, you will find that the last item in the revenue for the general fund1is anticipated salary savings and they are marked there very, very, clearly and it is with those revenues, that the entire budget is balanced. Now, whether or not there is some kind of a run that does not include that particular item, is less important in my estimation, than whether or not the entire set of revenues for the City are as we have presented them in the budget and whether they are properly so stated. Now, that line is very clear, whether there is some other tabulation that does not include it. it seems to me is much less important, Mayor Ferre; I think Mr, Grassie, that now, because of the motion that 29 SEP 261977 § 1eeh bade though important, becomes incidental and if you want to express bbt opinion as to the sense of the motion, then we can proceed from there. Mrs► Gordon: Also,... Mr, Grassie: Well, I would be delighted1Mr. Mayor, at anything that we can do- so long as it is professionally responsible- to inject the sense of certainty, both on your part and consequently on the part of the public and I hope also, on the part of City employees with regards to what we are saying, because as I said a month and a half ago, there would be nothing that would delight me more than to be embarrassed and find out that in fact the City has two million dollars that we didn't know we had. For me, that would solve a lot of problems and believe me, I could stand the embarrassment. Mrs. Gordon: Ok, Mr. Grassie, you pointed out page fifteen, but where you pointed out, I believe the '78... aren't you referring to the '78 projected budget? The two million included? What are you pointing to, where you said it was in here? Mr. Grassie: Well, in the first column... on page fifteen of the blue sheets. Commissioner. The first column is the current revenues and the second column is projected revenues and as you see there is a million and five hundred thousand dollars in there. Mrs. Gordon: Right, right, but this piece of paper was for a purpose. It was to take out of this total amount those items specifically earmarked to this particular discussion that we are having and that was with regard to the salary savings. Now, I ask the question and apparently the... you know, it isn't readily available in one minute- the answer of whether 74,820 has it in it or doesn't have it in it. So, I do believe that the motion is in order and would clarify a lot of the feelings of... I personally would like to have some things answered, such as the... and I asked Mr. Gary before and again, I can't expect him to pull figures out of the air, it takes time to find the answer. The Third Year Community Development Program called for a sum of money for administration and it doesn't tally in the same amount for the projected year in the blue page.on page fifteen. So, that is another answer I want to have, you know, where is it? How much is the difference? And where is it going?. Ok? Mr. Grassie: Now, you understand that I'm entirely supportive of your motion and that... Mrs. Gordon: I know you are, I know you are supportive of the motion and the.,, but, the most important thing about the motion, is that.the person or entity that is selected, be satisfactory to both sides, ok? Mayor Ferre: Alright, now ladies and gentlemen, let me express my opinion on this and anybody else that wants to and we can get on with the voting on this. I remember on several occasions, when I went up to Tallahassee with matters regarding the Public Service Commission and invariably, I ended up being frustrated no matter what the subject was, whether it was Florida Power Light or Southern Bell, I'm talking about when I became a Commissioner here in 1967 and we started taking on these big utilities to see if we could get to make some sense. And the thing that really impressed methe most out of that whole process, was that when I went up there to the Public Service Commission, the three board and three member commission was acting as a judge, as a jury, as an advocate, staff, everything, it was everything. It was both the jury and the judge, and it was the advocate and would... no it was... everything rested on those three. individuals. Now, I was a very strong proponent then and I still am, because it has not been corrected. But the only way you are ever going to have any sense out of utility rate mate)is if you divide the functions, so that those that are advocates are not the same people that are prosecuting and defending the very same thing that they are advocating. For the most part,that Public Service Commission is completely dependent upon a staff which they really don't control and therefore, in this day and age of Ralph Nadors and the advocacy positions of protectionist and environmental protection and all the other protectionist movement, that it's impossible to have in one Commission and in one staff, all these functions put together and therefore, Mrs. Gordon, I completely subscribe to anything in the budget process which clarifys something which 30 MMM MMM MMM • • becomes this difficulty because there are differences of opinion which perhaps can only be ironed out by an impartial... not arbiter because I think that's hot an appropriate word in this case. Now, hut, what I'm talking about, I think is the recommendation that Father Gibson any! Mrs. Gordon are making. Now, the question before I vote on it, is who would be... I've got two basic questions. One is, who would be selected to be an Impartial third party?, number one. And number two, I really think this is something that we ought to set up on-- from now on, on a standard basis, so that we have a completely third party that comes here and acts as an advocate or at least have somebody to clarify his position. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, you know, we have setup a budget review committee, which for this year have not had time to function. Mayor Ferre: That's right and perhaps... Mrs. Gordon: It would be my hope that for the following yearyif they could have had the opportunity to become acquainted with our budget and they could in fact be the... Mayor Ferre: Rose, let me tell you why that doesn't work and I'm all in favor of it. Let me tell you why that doesn't work. You know, why it doesn't work, because all those are very busy people- Mr. Wilson, for example. How much time does Mr. Wilson have to go through this complete budget? You know, this is a long time consuming thing. Now, I will tell you how I think it might work and this is what I'm saying, if you have a third... if you have liked a auditing firm or somebody who is proficient at this,to work for that Committee... Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, there are two CPA's on that committee?that I know of. Mayor Ferre: But, they are not... those people... Mrs. Gordon: Ok, it is very logical. • • Mayor Ferre: ... they are not going to work for free. Mrs. Gordon: ... that through the organization of CPA's you may find others willing to do some public serviceiand I think that it's very possible that we could develop a committee made up entirely of men who are trained in that field. Ok? Mayor Ferre: Alright, now we have a motion and a second, is there further discussion)with regards to that motion? Mr. Plummer: Well,... look Rose, restate your motion if you will and then I might have a question. Mayor Ferre: Father,do you want to restate your motion? Mr. Plummer: Father? Rev. Gibson: My motion was that someone be employed- an impartial person - to take Mr. Gary's figures and Dr. Barry's figures and come up and tell us who is right and who is wrong. Mr. Plummer: Alright, so then the intent of your motion, then also says that- and I have to agree- nothing will be finalized until such a report is forth coming? Rev. Gibson: That's my intent. Mr. Plummer: Ok. Rev. Gibson: I can't intelligently vote without information, Mr. Plummer: Ok, I agree, Let me ask.,, Mr. Mayor, let me ask another question. Mayor Ferre; Yes, SEP 261977 Mt, Plummer: And whether you can answer this or whether Mr. Grassie, can answer this. We aresof course, under a deadline and I hate to say that deadline has never really been met by this City, but assuming and I'm assuming in this particular case, the arbitrator is going to be a CPA firm who can sit down and digest... Mr, Naples: An economist? Mr. Plummer: Excuse me. Mr. Naples: An economist? An economist? Mr. Plummer: An economist... well, you know, alright, who ever... That's not the pointsGene. The point that I'm making is,how soon can we get that report? , because you know, what happens here October 1, boy, we've got to start passing all kinds of emergency motions to continue the operation of this City. Now, Mr. Grassie, do you have any ideas as to,number one, who we would use' Number two, the possible time table or you comment on it and please, let the Mayor comment on it and anybody else who wants, because that's my concern. Mr. Grassie: Ok, two or three things. May be three pointssCommissioner. One, I guess just for your information,you should know that the City's regular audit will be done within sixty days. Mayor Ferre: What? We can't wait that long. Mr. Grassie: Two, I need to remind you and this is certainly not to speak against the process that we are talking aboutsbecause I have already said that I'm in favor of it. But, I need to remind you of the letter that we have from the U.S. Labor Department, with regards to the availability of that money. They have said that they expect us to do something by the first of October. Now, third, with regard to the selection of someone to do this, I would think that it should be someone selected by the City Commission and I would also suggest to you that it be without any input, either from the City's staff or from the union. Mr. Plummer: Agreed. Mayor Ferre: Would you repeat that again? Say that again. BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mayor Ferre: I'm sorry but,... Mr. Grassie: The three points Mayor? Basically, the three points were, one, the City's audit is going to be done in sixty days. Mayor Ferre: Yes, I heard that part. Mr. Grassie: Two, the CETA money which is available to us through a special agreement with the U.S. Labor Department, presupposes -and I sent you all a copy of the letter from Mr. Brown, -presupposes that we are going to have a budget adopted by the first of October. And the third point that I made was, that I believe that the selection of the person or firm to do this kind of analysis should be done by the City Commission and I would hope without any interference or input from either the City's staff or from the union. Mrs. Gordon: Well, we just said that we would like it to be a selection that would be agreeable to both sides. I don't think that we want to vamp or take over and say, you know, it's going to have to be so and so or not. I really don't. I think the motion was pretty clear and it isn't calling for a full audit because there isn't that much time, but I think that's what Father Gibson's motion was intended to be. Mayor Ferre: Well, I think there were three points that you made and I would like to pursue those three points. Number one, with regards to the CPA audit which will be finished in sixty days, that's too late. Number two, with regards to the CETA funds that should be in use by October 1, that can be postponed. Can it, Mr. Manager? Now, I'm sure that, that's not something that you have to.., Mr. Grassie: Well, all I can tell you is, what they have told us. Mayor Ferre; I mean, then I got to pull our CETA money away because we haven't agreed,.. 32 SEP 261977 Mt, Gtassiei No, keep in mind what they are doing is, they are holding these positions- they are allowing us to not fill these positions, holding them in expectation that we are going to want to use them to bring back employees. Now, the pressure on us would not he to take the positions away, it would be to fill them. Mayor Ferre: Well, will they hold that a vacant? But, obviously the question is, won't they do the same thing on October 15, that they would do on October 1? Mrs. Gordon: They may or they may not, but the point is, that if in fact we should be able to develop some information that reveals, that yes, in fact we do have extra money, then we won't need it. And further than that... Mayor Ferre: That's not the problem. How about in reverse, Rose? Mrs. Gordon: And further than that, the CETA program, I don't know how you feel about all this, but I feel that it's an improper use of federal dollars, Mayor Ferre: Well,... Mrs. Gordon: And I sincerely mean that, because CETA was never intended to be use for this purpose. CETA was intended to provide positions for the unemployed population of the City and the County and in this case I think it is twisting the facts all the way. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's called sub -planning. Mr. Grassie: That's right, Commissioner. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's called sub -planning, is what it is called. Mr. Grassie: And you are going to have a lot of unemployed City workers, unless we come up with some money for them. Mrs. Gordon: Well, that's what we are going to have to do and especially if we have to transfer, if necessary, that Watson Island money until we can get some other money. Mayor Ferre: Well,... Alright, now, we have a motion and a second and I think we have discussed this to a point where I think we can express our opinion on it, so without further discussion,... Mr. Naples: Mr. Mayor? May I say one thing, Mr. Mayor? I think we can handle this whole thing in just a few days, you know, if you are willing to do it. Mayor Ferre: I do too. Mr. Naples: Ok, let's just leave it to that one issue. Is the money... isthat $2,000,000 salary surplus, where Mr. Gary says it is or isn't it? Mayor Ferre: Gene, let me, you know, I like to be practical. Let me be practical about this. We've got an auditing firm by the name igtf, what's the name? Mr. Naples: Peat, Marwick and Co., and it takes them four months to get_the audit back to you. (BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mayor Ferre: You don't... alright... Mr. Naples: That's the one they used January. (BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mayor Ferre: Who would you recommend? Because if we go ahead and get another auditing firm, if will take much more, you know, and these big auditing firms are all busy and I was just thinking if we could use Peat, Marwick and Mitchell, we would probably cut through an awful lot of time, 33 SEP 261977 1r4 Maples: We probably would and we are using the figures that they gave us in 3anuaty, you know, with this Report, but I think it would be a lot simpler if we'd just put it to an arbitrator on that one issue, we can get it over with in a hurry and we are going to have to have some rules, you know, the American Arbitration Association's rules. So, let's just put it to bargaining arbitration and get it over with, it will only take a few days. Mrs. Gordon: The motion is pretty open as to who you are going to select, so if that's the proper selection, then ... I don't think the motion limited it. Did it Father? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Mr. Mayor, everybody has had something to say. I represent the taxpayers, I'd like to say something on it. I think what you ought to do, is have an auditor, somebody who you think is outstanding, that's twenty-five years in the business and that's got a reputation to start with. And if you can't agree on what you want to do, let everybody select an auditor's firm and draw. Mayor Ferre: Alright, thank you, Mr. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: And I think you should clear the air. Now, as far as the motion, I think Rev. Gibson is 100% in order, but the point about it is, I think you should select a neutral auditor, let everybody select and draw and then that would be fair. There is several audit... practically the same... there is only two to three on it. Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, I think we got to speak to the issue first and then once we decide that that's the will of this Commission, then we can get into the discussion as to time limit, who is going to do this and all that. But, I think it's time to vote now. Alright, without any further discussion then from... unless the members of the Commission wants to ask any questions or make any points, call the roll, please. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Gibson, who moved its adoption. "1•1 MOTION NO. ? -766 A MOTION EXPRESSING THE INTENT OF THE CITY COMMISSION THAT A PROFESSIONAL FIRM OR ORGANIZATION BE RETAINED IMMEDIATELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANALYZING BOTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND DR. MARSHALL BARRY'S BUDGET PROJECTIONS FOR FISCAL 77-78; FURTHER, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING THE CITY COMMISSION CLARIFY THOSE AREAS OF THE TWO ABOVE - MENTIONED BUDGET PROJECTIONS WHICH SEEMED TO BE IN CONFLICT. (THE SELECTION OF SUCH PROFESSIONAL FIRM OR ORGANIZATION TO BE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON BY MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND BY THE UNION REPRESENTATIVES). Upon being seconded by Commissioner Gordon? the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner Rose Gordon Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Vice -Mayor Manolo Reboso Mayor Maurice A, Ferre Mayor Ferre: Alright, now that we have the will of the majority established in it's unanimous agreement, let's get on to the question of the selection... Mr. Hall: Yes, Your Honor, I strongly recommend that it be done in accordance with some established rules. For example, FMCS or the ones I prefer would be the American Arbitration Association where the witnesses can be sworn and cross examined. Mrs, Gordon: I'll move that. Mr, Ha11; 1 think that's an extremely important issue,,, 34 SEP 261977 tordont l think that's important toot Mr, ':alit .„ where witnesses can be sworn and otdsa'eka Mrs, Gordon: Ok, I'll move that. Mayor Ferre: Now, what is your motion, Mrs. Gordon? Mrs. Gordon: The motion is that we refer this matter to the Arbitration Association, the American Arbitration Association, because we ate not reallj+ looking for a total audit, we are looking for an opinion upon one or two specific items and that's about all you need. Mayor Ferre: I'll tell you... Alright, now, look, I'm going to tell you something Charlie. Up until now I agree with you, but when you start getting into something like that, then now all of the sudden, you know, we were going this way, now we are taking another direction and I can't go along with that, I... here, let me give you an alternate which I... Mrs. Gordon: Maurice, state your reason, if you won't mind, I would like to know why don't you like it. Mayor Ferre: Yes, I'm going to give it to you if you let ine Mrs. Gordon: Ok. Mr. Plummer: Well, I wish all of you would abide by the rules, I have heard a motion without a second, which precludes any discussion. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there is a motion on the floor, is there a second to the motion? Alright, then under discussion, let me recommend this to you, I would like to recommend that we chose Martin Fine, Mitchell Wilson, and to balance it off a little bit, Octavio Verdeja who is a local Cuban -American CPA, who is the chairman of the Public Health Trust and a public -minded citizen, who has a committee of three. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, I think the motion proceded this discussion. Mayor Ferre: I couldn't fine a second to it, Mrs. Gordon. Mrs. Gordon: No, no, no, I'm not talking about my motion, I'm talking about Father Gibson's motion that passed unanimously, was that the selection would be up to the two sides, it did not say that you would select them as I remember. Mayor Ferre: Well, you see, the problem with all of that is, that you know, what's going to happen, don't you? I mean, you know, just as well as I do what's going to happen, you're not going to be able to come to an agreement on it. Lt. March: Sure, you can. Mrs. Gordon: You are not giving them a chance, you are spoon feeding them. Lt. March: I heard Father Gibson say that he is looking for impartial, somebody that's going to sit down and examine the Rev. Gibson: Right. Mrs. Gordon: That's right. Lt. March: ... and that's the principle that's contemplated by the American Arbitration Association. There is a selection process in which both sides participants, they arrive at a consensus... somebody that' facts... Mayor Ferre; Lt. March, let me tell you that, that motion die for lack a second. Doesn't that tell you something? Lt. March: Yes, sir, I could talk at length what that tells me, Mayor Ferre; Yes, I'm sure you could and I guarantee you that somebody could respond twice as long and I don't want to get into that kind of a sassion utiless you Want to and if you Want to 1 tlit d6 it* I doit t t like threats, Alright, Mr: Piununer? it, March: Mr. Mayor, I'm not threatening you ok, We have had long discussions concerning the ramification of this whole issue and I'tn telling you what I heart Father. Gibson say and what he was looking for and I'm very confident in the. ^election process that we have outlined, we are very comfortable with it. And T don't understand why the City Administration doesn't want us to participant in that, if they are not comfortable with it. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer? Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I offer a motion at this time, that the firth of Coopers and Lybrand, a very well-known, respected by everyone as far as t know... (BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mrs. Gordon: Again, Mr. Plummer, I would like to retnitid taking the selection. Mr. Plummer: May I finish? May I finish? Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon, let Plummer finish. Mr. Plummer: I make a motion, Mr. Mayor, that the firm of Coopers and Lybrand be selected for all documents to be surrendered and that if a concern of cross examination and subpoena power is of concern to the Commission, that we invoke Section 11 of the Charter by placing one Commissioner on that panel. who then gives that panel the right of subpoena power and cross examination, if that is of concern. I offer that in the form of a motion. Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Plummer, I would have to tell you that what you are doing and authoring is in direct conflict with the previous motion that passed unanimously and unless you want to resend the previous motion, your motion I think is out of order. Mr. Plummer: Why is my motion out of order? Mrs. Gordon: Because the motion preceding was a unanimous agreement to allow the two sides to select a agreeable arbitrator and -call it whatever you wish, it's still an arbitrator. ;Mr. Plummer: Rose, if you would only hesitate for five my motion and a second, and then we can ask both sides but you didn't give me that opportunity. Now, if I don is no use asking. Now, if I get a second... Mr. Mayor, of my motion was only if there is a concern, the basis my motion was the firm of Cooper and Lybrand, ok. Now, seconds, let me make if it's agreeable, 't get a second, there in the second part and the thrust of I don't... Mayor Ferre: Well, now, I think... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, you are out... excuse me. (BACKGROUND COMMENTS OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mr. Plummer: I'm going to ask for procedural policies to be followed, have made a motion, now either I get a second... Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, I think that your motion is out of order, because I think what Mrs. Gordon is pointing out, is that it is a direct contradiction to the motion that was passed previously. Now, let me explain to you why... Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, excuse me, sir. You do not have the opportunity to rule me out of order unless my motion is in direct conflict of the charter, Mayor Ferre: Well, I.,, Mr, Plummer: I have the right to make that motion in the same way that you have the right of no second or to vote against it. SEP 261977 Mayer t'ette: That's tight technically... Mr, Plotter: Now, my motion is very simple, Mayor Ferre: Alright, let me get a ruling then from,, Mr, Plummer: Please. Mayor Ferre: Because this is a question of procedural questions. Mt. City Attorney, I, you know, we got a problem here. Let me pose a question to you. On the one side, Commissioner Gordon says that Plummer cannot make that motion because it is in direct contradiction to the motion that just passed, Plummer on the other hand says that he can make the motion because the Charter gives him the right to make any motion even if it overrules the previous motion. Mr. Plummer: That's right. Mayor Ferre: Now, Mrs. Gordon says that for Plummer to make that motion, previous motion has to resended. Now, who is right? (BACKGROUND COMMENT OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD) Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: We need an arbiter right here. The only differences, Mr. Mayor, if I'm wrong, Alright, let's go, come on. I'll admit it. Mr. Knox: Inasmuch as a motion is defined as an informal expression of the will of the Commission, the Commission's action on any motion would be determinant. Now, if a motion is passed subsequent in time to a previous motion, then it has the effect of resending that motion and as to motions, there is no necessity for formally resending the previous motion. Mayor Ferre: Ok, so that means Mr. Plummer, you were correct. So I recognize you motion, sir. Now, is there a second to the motion? Mr. Plummer: You got any scotch? No, you can't second it, sir, I'm sorry. Mayor Ferre: Is there a second to the motion? Mrs. Gordon: Ok, Mr. Mayor, there was no second obviously, move ahead and with the business before us. Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, I think that- in my opinion, again, Mr. Grassie, .and Mr. Hall and gentlemen. Mr. Hall: Your Honor, just one problem we Mayor Ferre: it... Mr. Hall: No Mayor Ferre: • are having and... Let me finish my statement and then... unless you think that But go ahead if you feel that it's something you got to sa Mr. Hall: Well, I'm just troubled a little bit how the whole process of arbitration can be impartial if one of the parties can... Mayor Ferre: This is not arbitration, that's exactly the point. Mr. Hall: That's right if it... Mayor Ferre: It is not arbitration , and that's exactly the point. Mr. Hall: You are correct, sir and if it's going to be an impartial hearing, of course, it wouldn't be impartial if one of the parties to dispute, is allow to select the so called impartial and that's the problem we are having, that along with whatever kind of rules we hope to use and I strongly recommend that you adopt some kind rules, so that it doesn't take months to decide what kind of rules the procedure is going to be conducted under and that's the reason we mentioned the American Arbitration Association. Mayor Ferre; Yes, but,,, 37 MEW MW MW MWmiffin SEP 261977 ttl§ rued in judicial disputes; its used in insurance disputes, and it's used itt labor disputes; It's a widely -known; widely accepted method of dispute test lution. Mayor Ferre: Look, let me, let me ex.,, Mr, Hall, if I may now, make my point, This City of Miami, Commission is elected to make basic decisions and of those deci'tc.is that we make, the most important is passing a budget. Now, 1 do no;: mtr..l getting into the process of delegation of responsibility to a certain point, because there is a serious dispute on questions of credibility and we have been through that before, you and I, with Mel Reese and with Paul Andrews and now we are at it again with a new manager, so this is not the first time, you and I have been at this juncture. CONTINUATION - SEE NEXT PAGE... SEP 261977 Mrs aples! Right, we ,just took A big step backward. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, whether itts a step backward, sideways, or forward, let me point out that I think that Dr. Barry has come up with some very basic questions which have not been answered in my opinion. Now, whether they haven't been answered because it's a question of time which I accept as Howard Gary said, then I accept that on his part. But I'll tell you one thing that I'm not going to do as long as I'm sitting in this chair and that is I am not going to abdicate the responsibilty that the people of Miami and the electorate bestow upon this Commission when it elects it to sit in these seats. Now, I will not abdicate my responsibility. Now, I'll tell you what I am not going to do, I'm not going to let an arbitration corporation, committee, or otherwise, make decisions that basically I am empowered to vote as a member of this Commission. In my opinion, that would be nothing but irresponsible on my part and I'm not about to be a party forsomething we're going to face as ir- responsibile. Now, for somebody that come in here and give me advice and tell me Dr. Barry happens to be wrong on the $2,000,000 but happens to be right on the other portion of it, that I accept,and then I'm going to end up making up the decision by casting 1 out of 5 votes, but I'm not going to go beyond that. I'm not going to let somebody in Buffalo, New York or Cleveland, Ohio come here and make a decision which by law, by the Charter and by the electorate process I'm elected to do. Mr. Hall: Your honor, perhaps, I misunderstood what was said earlier. We made an offer and I understood the Manager to accept that offer and I understood the Commission to follow that up with a vote that this thing was going to be submitted to binding arbitration. Mayor Ferre: No, sir, absolutely not. Under no conditions, I think that anybody infer something like that and if that's the case I'll move immediately that we rescind that. I want to make it abundantly clear and Father Gibson and Rose Gordon you make your points to make sure that I didn't misunderstand. We did not vote upon binding arbitration. All we voted upon was to get an impartial third party to look at Dr. Barry's position and look at Mr. Gary's position and come back and say he's wrong and he's right. Mr. Hall: Your honor, your honor, that's the only thing I was making reference to was the one issue that would be submitted to arbitration whether the City has the ability to pay or not, just that one issue. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Hall, I am not voting and have not,and will not vote,and will v¢te against binding arbitration at this time, and I just want to make my position very clear. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, let me ask this question, because now we're stalemated again, is it possible and I think anybody would admit would be unbias, that the Economic Department of the University of Miami be called in. I don't think they got an axe to grind either way. Now, I don't know that they could do it, would do it, or what. Mayor Ferre: It wouldn't be Economics it would be County. Mr. Plummer: Alright, a county, whatever department... (INAUDIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Plummer: ,..Now, would that be agreeable possibly to both sides? Mrs. Gordon: I wonder, J. L., if you would let this matter rest for about fifteen minutes while we go ahead with whatever else we have to discuss and let them talk to them and come up with three or four suggestions, or one? Mr. Plummer: Fine. Mr. Hall: I think I can answer your question right now. And, I think that's''` the direction the Mayor wants to head if I understood what he said and that is - that the arbitration would be... Mayor Ferre; No arbitration ,., 39 Mr. Hall: ... would not be binding. All I'm talking... arbitration is a process; and Maybe the word, advisory is a mis but nevertheless if that's... Mayor Ferre: I prefer the word,"advisory": Mr. Hall: Okay. Mayor Ferrel Arbitration means that Y you're locked into et i$ deckled, A binding arbitration is... Mr. Hall: The only thing we're trying to decide is the one issue of whether you have the ability to pay or not. Mayor Ferre: ... that's it! Mr. Hall: Whether you decide to do it or not is the Commission is going to make, Mayor Ferre: ... and then that's up to this Commission to vote whether or not we, you're going to pursue... Mrs. Gordon: We never abdicated that. Mayor Ferre: What's that? Mrs. Gordon: We didn't abdicate that right at any point. Mayor Ferre: We certainly did if what we voted for was binding arbitration.' Mrs. Gordon: We did not. We did not. Mayor Ferre: Mrs. ... I know. Mrs. Gordon: The motion wasn't that. Would you have the Clerk read the motion? Mayor Ferre: No, no, Mrs. Gordon, as you know, Mr. Hall just got up a moment ago and Gene Naples. Mr. Naples got up and made the statement that they wanted to go to the National Association of American Arbitration, or whatever it's called and then they were talking about binding arbitration... Mrs. Gordon: Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon: Mr. Naples: No, no, that was... ... they used those words specifically. ... that was at a previous time. they still don't make the decisions.... Mayor Ferre: But Gene, that's not, you know, I can't go for that. I'm just not going to vote for that. Now, advisory is different. If you're talking about somebody coming in here and it's not going to be an arbitrator, it's going to be an accounting firm or somebody at the University of F.I.U., Miami or somewhere else Timbuktu and come in here and do some simple, straight accounting work and come back and say this is where we're at. Mrs. Gordon: Well, would you do that, would you all...? Mr. Hall: Your honor, we'd... Mr. Plummer: Let the two of them get together and see if they can agree .on Mrs. Gordon: Go ahead... Mr. Hall: We'd much rather have the arbitration binding than to have one the parties select the so-called impartial... Mr. Plummer: That's not going to be the case Mr. Charles, that's not going to be the case. Mr. Hall: No, what I'm saying is if we go by the rules of American Arbitration Association, I think we would be better to go for advisory arbitration than some other process and it goes back to what I said at first where the witnesses can be 40 SEP 261977 sworn and cross examined. I think that's extremely important if we want to get to the truth. Mayor Ferre: Look, that's the procedure which the. City of Miami Coittission can adapt easily about being sworn in ... Mr. Fannotto: I want to make a statement Mayor. Mayor Ferre: ... wait a moment Erny, now stop.... Will you sit down for a momcnt? Mr. Fannotto: So many opinions here, I think, 7 rave a right to speak. the spoke for twenty minutes. Now I want to speak for half a minute. Mayor Ferre: You've spoken your five minutes which is all you got a tight speak under the ... Now, sit down. Mr. Fannotto: Well, ... well, then don't let them speak anymcre of 1't going to count them out -of -order too. Mayor Ferre: They represent Employee groups but you don't. Mr. Fannotto: No, and I represent a group too, and I don't like all this here, I want to tell you point blank, Father Gibson had a motion that was passed, if you want to make a motion or anybody makes a motion to be passed the powers are right here and not out of here. Mayor Ferre: That's right. I agree. Now, let's go. Alright, now,... Alright, Mr. Grassie... Mr. Plummer: Let them get together then they can at least agree on one thing. Mayor Ferre: ... I don't know whether in ten or fifteen minutes the five of you or the ten of you are going to come to an agreement of who to choose to come in here and do this. Now, if you think that that's possible, do you want to give it a try? Mr. Grassie: A couple of things Mr. Mayor. In the last comment that Charlie Hall you may have noticed that he had slid off the issue of whether or not a $2,000,000 figure was included in a $74,000,000 total and moved to the question of ability to pay. What I'm suggesting to you is that there is a vast difference between having somebody come in and take a look at 3,4,5 specific questions .... Mayor Ferre: That's correct. Mr. Grassie: ... that may be raised as against getting the City Commission in the point where you have no control over basic policy... Mayor Ferre: That's absolutely correct and that's exactly what I said ten minutes ago. Mr.Grassie: ... anytime that you hear discussion about ability to pay what they're suggesting to you is that they're going to have some third party make for you decisions like the one for example, that Commissioner Gordon brought up which is policy choice where you eliminate a project and take that money ... Mayor Ferre: No, scree. Mrs. Gordon: I didn't say eliminate a project. Mr. Grassie: Commissioner, I'm trying to give an example... Mrs. Gordon: Well, don't s.ay what I said sir, I didn't say that. Mr. Grassie: In the short run there's no way that you can both have in the short run and use the money. Mrs. Gordon: You won't have it in the short run and let' the whole thing, you know, we can dream too, Mr. Grassie: Well, that's your personal.,, 41 Uayof Fette: Well, the. way it is., ia that he happens. to be right, there's no way in the world in which you're going to have the Watson Island Project and do what she's recommending. There's just no way in God's world.. If you eat the cake there's no way you can keep it.. Now, let's, you know, let's talk straight. I don't want anybody to be mislead about something that just isn't so and excuse me, with all due respects. Mrs. Gordon: Well, all due respects, you're wrong too; Mayor. Mayor Ferre: What? Mrs. Gordon: You are wrong because the ptojett that were talking about is not ready for the monies that have been set aside for it... Mayor Ferre: Mrs. Gordon... Mrs. Gordon: I can finish talking, thank you. The project is not ready for the monies that have been set aside fot it, those monies are security for bonding, the project hasn't yet finished being on the drawing board, that is a few months way down the pike and by the time that that comes off the drawing board and ready for bonding at that time you'll be getting another allocation which you can substitute for this one from FP&L. Mayor Ferre: You're going to get another allocation from Florida Power & Light? Mrs. Gordon: Yes, sir, you will be getting... you won't get off the drawing boards in 1978, mark my words. Mr. Plummer: Watson Island is not going to be the arbitrator. Mayor Ferre: Obviously, Mrs. Gordon, now if I can have a change to answer you. You have not read the perspectives for the financing of Watson Island because that's completely contrary to the proposed financing method. Mrs. Gordon: I've read it. I've also read that there's some legal problems and there's a court action that's pending and a few other things. Mayor Ferre: You've read those things in the newspaper that some people alledged that, now so far I have not seen that that has been taken to the courts and won and as far as I'm concerned I go by what the City of Miami Attorney recommends which is the way this Commission has always functioned and the City of Miami Attorney says that he doesn't think that we have a legal problem. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, Watson Island is not going to be the arbitrator in the longest or the shortest sense.... Mayor Ferre: Alright, you wanted... Mr. Plummer: ... I think that at least this Commission has got to make the effort. I think that everybody has agreed, let's try. I don't say that we can perform miracles let's let the two of them get together and see if between the two of them they can agree upon an individual. Now, if they can, then I think it behooves this Commission to set the guidelines. Mayor Ferre: That's right. I agree with you... Mr. Plummer: Okay, so them come back and see Mayor Ferre: Alright, going to recess. I think we ought to adjourn for fifteen minutes and let whether or not they can come up with a single individual. Mr. Plummer, I'll take up your recommendation and we're Mr. Plummer: It wasn't mine it was someone else's but I'll take credit for it. Mayor Ferre: ... we're going to recess for opportunity to see if you can come up with Mr. Grassie... I didn't say that you were an hour ago that you weren't going to come fifteen minutes and give you an an answer, Mr. Manager. .. Okay, going to have agreement. I told you to an agreement and I was right. Mr. Plummer: It went into the wrong end... (repeat) Mayor Ferre: J. L., you know just as well as I do that there weren't going to 42 SEP 261977 MEM ■ be in agreement., Mayor Ferre: Alright, we're going to get stetted again.. Could somebody ask Commissioner Reboso and Gibson to cote in here? You want to ask thew to come in here? Mr. Grassie? Mr. Grassie: Sir? Mayor Ferre: We're back in session now, so let'" selection of somebody to help? Mr. Grassie: At some length Mr. Mayor, Mayor Ferre: And, what was the conclusion of that? Mr; Grassie: I would summarize it in this way first, Mayor Ferre: Are you getting close? Mr. Grassie: No, We would need a lot more work on it, Mayor Ferre: So your conclusion was no conclusion. Mr. Grassie: That's correct.. Mr. Naples: It seems, Mr. Mayor, that ... what we can't get together on what the Manager had to offer and that was toget an auditing firm, you know, that would go back into the City records and be there with, you know, the same people that we're having some problem with and... Mayor Ferre: Who was that, Peat, Marwick & Mitchell, you mean? Mr. Naples: Whoever you know. Mayor Ferre: You don't want to accept Peat, Marwick & Mitchell. How about Mr. Grassie: But that was not my ... that was not my suggestion Mr. Mayor. Mr. Naples: No, it wasn't any specific. Mr. Grassie: What I suggested was that we take one of the ten largest C.P.A. firms which had done no previous work for the City and take the firm. Mr. Plummer: Well, that's lets Cooper Lybrand out. Mr Grassie: Someone that they will agree to of the ten largest. (BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Plummer: They presently are the auditing firm for the ... one Pension Board. Mr. Naples: We would certainly feel more comfortable with the Tripartite Board and advisory arbitration would come back here and tell you, yea or nay, and you would make the decision as to who was right and who was wrong, and the Manager doesn't want to go for that. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, trying to get off of a center point, I will offer in the form of a motion that you, you the Manager approach the University of Miami tomorrow and ask if they would serve as an independent third party in helping the City of Miami resolve its problem detailing to them the need for expediency Mayor Ferre: How much of a budget are you going to setup in that? Mr, Plummer: Mr.. Mayor, I would have to leave that to the University, you know, I don't know how much detail if we were to agree on an auditor or I assume its arbitration people do have set fees. Mayor Ferre: Rose, pointsout something that you might want to consider and that is that we fund the money and therefore they might have a conflict. 43 SEP 261977 Mt, Pluttet: Well, here again, my motion has to hea second and then accepted by both Sides. I'm merely trying to get of a dead sentence because nobody else is offering solutions. (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Plummer: Well, you know, here again, if its not acceptable I'm bound by the first motion which says it's got to be acceptable to both sides. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a motion on the floor by Mr. Plummer. Is there a second to that motion? Mr: Reboso: I second the motion. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a second. Mrs., Gordon: What was the motion? Mayor Ferre: The motion is that the Commission authorize or instruct me to call the University of Miami tomorrow and have the University of Miami come in and make this determination on a quotation basis. Mrs. Gordon: ... they would want to be included since we fund them with some money in the budget and I think it would be difficult for us to ask them to come in and do this, don't you think? Mr. Plummer: Rose, before we take a vote it's got to be said by both sides as agreeable and if it's not agreeable, if they can concur to the University by their saying they concur means that they don't feel that they would be biased. Mayor Ferre: Well, but you're going under ... Mrs. Gordon: Yes, but you're putting everyb.ody in a very bad position when you do that because we all love the Univeristy. We all respect them. We don't think they would be bias but on the same time anybody reading the budget will see that we contribute money to them. Mr. Plummer: Rose, I failed to find that anybody wouldn't have some preconceived idea. Mrs. Gordon: Oh, no. Mayor Ferre: Well, let me express my opinion. I think that we've got Employee Groups., some of which have in a very systemized, organized way gotten a profession from Tampa to come in here and this is not the first year this has happened, this has happened several years before and Dr. Barry has come in and offered a series of recommendations. Now,they're contrary to what our own department maintained. Now, there are problems with creditability, who's right and who's wrong. I've got no objections personally to having somebody come in and our University of Miami is perfectly acceptable to me and I don't see any conflict because they end up getting $25,000 a year for the Orange Bowl, that the Sports Department is going to go and run down to the Accounting Department and say , I want you to be arbitrary about this and decide something so that it helps Univerisity of Miami. I just don't see that conflict is a real conflict and I think that from what I know of the people of the University of Miami in the Accounting Department, I think those are very high grade professional people, most of them have tenure in the Univeristy and they're the kinds of people that I am sure to come in and give you and objective look at this whole thing and come back with a report and I don't frankly ... this is not an audit. We're not asking them to audit, they're not going... Mrs. Gordon: We're going from bad to worst, Maurice. Mayor Ferre: ... I disagree with that and I'll tell you I'm ready to go with that motion and I think, I see nothing wrong with it and I think it's a good solution. I think you're going to get a quick response and that's my... Mr. Naples; Mr. Mayor? Mr. Plummer; The important question is, is it agreeable to both sides ? hound by that. 44 SEP 261977 Lt. March: You put me in a very difficult position., I like the University of Miami.too, I went there. Some of my children may go there, but you know, i recall the University of Miami being before the City Commission before on certain issues, one that comes to mind is a Convention Center Complex , it involved discussions concerning decision -making and who has the right to do that, who has the yea and nay say , and if I recall it wasn't always something that was easy to resolve. It was lengthy discussion. I think that if the decision -making in that area should continue that you might have a conflict, Mayor Ferre: How about F.I.U. ? Mr. Plummer: What about F.I.U.? (NO RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION). Mr, Plummer: Look, I'm not trying to be the gblomott up hete but everybody else is awful quiet, and I, you know... Mayor Ferre: Florida State... Mr. Plummer: ... well, the only thing wrong with Florida State is you know, I had a thing here of the University of Florida they'd have to send a team down here to do it, that's the problem there. Whereas, they were here locally every- thing would be readily accessible to both sides. Mayor Ferre: I'll go along with F.I.U. I don't know, do you think they'd handle it? (BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Lt. March: Whose specifically are you talking about F.I,U., do you have any names in mind? Mayor Ferre: No, I don't know a soul. Lt. March: One particular college would be responsible for doing this? Mayor Ferre: It would have to be the Accounting people, I mean, this is an accounting,you know somebody who understands budgets and books and that kind of stuff. Lt. March: Well, somebody in the area of Public Administration. Mayor Ferre: Look, Don, you know just as well as I do if you go out there and you get somebody from the Department of Government or somebody in Management you know they don't know anything about... this is an accounting problem. Mr. Plummer: Wait a minute, let me throw this one out. Mayor Ferre: It's a book problem. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, no, I know it wouldn't do you any... I was going to say that the Florida League of Cities, or the League of Cities... Mr. Hall: No, let me throw that one out. Mr. Plummer: No, they... Charlie, just for your information they have received a federal grant for arbitration... Mayor Ferre: That's very funny J. L. Mr. Plummer: ... that I was going to make, Mr. Hall: I suggest our International Union We Mr. Plummer: Yes, well.,. Mayor Ferre: .., very funny. Mr. Plummer: ,,, ok. Look Char; all I'm trying to find. just trying to find solutions that's 45 SEP 261977 Mayot Fetter Well, we're going to find a solution in just about two minutes. Mr. Plummert Well, Mr. Mayor, I will offer as a double fold either University of Miami or F.I.U. or I just think the school would be possibly impartial. Mayor. Ferre: You want to amend your motion? Mr., Plummer: To F.I.U. ? (BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD), Mr, Plummer: Well, they've said the University is not impartial so ..4 excuse me, I didn't mean to say that, they said the University does have ties' with the City and they can't be denied, so I think that already has discounted the University of Miami. Mayor Ferre: Well, but I can tell you the same thing about F.I.U. Mr. Plummer: Do we contribute to that? Mrs. Gordon: You all have any good ideas? Lt. March: Mr. Mayor, F.I.U. would be a better choice Mayor Ferre: F.I.U. would be acceptable to you? Mrs. Gordon: Okay, is. that your motion, J. L.? Mr, Plummer: Well, now, wait a minute, you know, Don, let's don't go on semantics, either yes or no, are they acceptable to you? Lt. March: Yes, sir, when you say acceptable I'm saying better choice. In other words, what is acceptable as our posture. You explore the middle ground you come up with something and say, ok. Mr. Plummer: Okay. Lt. March: You're going to come up with a school Miami is not as good a choice, F.I.U. is a better one we'll go with that. Mrs. Gordon: Okay. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Grassie, is F.I.U. acceptable to the Administration? Mr. Grassie: Well, I should ask Howard Gary to comment on that Commissioner. Mr. Plummer: Gary? Mr. Gary: I'd rather that we had a reputable C.P.A. firm that knows municipal and governmental accounting. Mayor Ferre: He said that he'd rather have a C.P.A. firm • .. Mr. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I'll offer another motion. That you be designated act for this Commission to go forth into this community and find a large reputable C.P.A. firm who has not had any ... Mayor Ferre: We're not going to do it that way. Mrs. Gordon: No, J. L., they'll take it along fine, and they'll charge you a lot of money. Mr. Plummer: Okay, I'll sit back and I'll vote until this thing breaks ... Mayor Ferre: Well, well, the reason is that there is a difference between a University and a C.P.A. firm that does this and establish... Mrs. Gordon: You're talking about a single issue, was that $2,000,000 issues I remember? Mayor Ferre: No, no, ,,, No, I don't remember that at all. I think there are a lot more. 46 SEP 261977 Mt, Plummer: Let tne. take one mote gtab.,, Gene, bon, and Duggatk,,, tt, Match: That's. a group 1'11 take it, Mr. Plummer: About thirty more minutes 1st not going to believe there isnt credibility in anything. Don, to the three of your is there to your way of th3.nking any C.P.A. firm in this community who is acceptable to you? .,.. That is not the auditor of the F.O.P., the... ? Mr. Naples: Are you going to include in that that well have the cross examination process... Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Naples: ... the suppoena process and all that kind of Mr. Plummer: Got to be! Got to be! Now, I think Mr. Knox would have to correct it, but I think you would have to have a member of this Commission there to invoke Section 11 to give subpoena powers. Mrs. Gordon: I'm going to be out-of-town, Maurice. (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Plummer: I don't like the ideal. Well, Mr. Knox, Section 11 that 1 correct? refer to is the ability of the City to form an investigatory committee, Mr. Knox: Right. Mr. Plummer: Alright. Now, it is my understanding that a Commissioner has to be on that committee to fulfill the obligations and requirements that they are giving subpoena power and cross examination power., Now, am I right or am I wrong, or what sayeth the Charter? Mr. Knox: Let me get the Charter. Mr. Plummer: Okay. Look, Gene, I think even the Manager will want the same things that you're wanting the right to cross examine, the right, you know, to bring certain people forward to testify and I don't really see that as any important criteria. Surely, he's going to want to question. Mr. Npples: Mr. Mayor, and members of the Commission. It's my understanding that a C.P.A. doesn't have the right or the ethical ability to make projections, that he can only say,you know, what is there and what we're really... you know, ifyou want to bring it right down to the issue, you know, of whether or not you know, that money is there or whether you're going to go through the whole bunch of figures. I understand that they don't deal with the projections ... Mayor Ferre: Mr. Gary, you want to answer that one? Mr. Plummer: Isn't that what we really are looking for is the truth without anything else? Mr. Naples: Yes, amen. Mayor Ferre: Yes, but the problem is you see who is qualified to these figures to come up with an answer. (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mayor Ferre: Alright, do you want to answer that Mr. Gary? Mr. Gary: My opinion is that there are certain governmental and accounting rules and regulations that must be followed according to this stage and that a reputable Municipal Finance Officer Certified Public Accountant is qualified, not only to state what the facts are but also to project what the expenditures will be for the remaining period that's not included in report. Mr. Naples: Our team doesn't agree with that. Mr, Plummer: Huh? 47 SEP 261977 i (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mayor Ferre: , .. we get on with it, you know, either We bake the deditioh or we don't, I mean, don't tell me we can't,... Mr. Plummer: What decision are you asking for Maurice? Mayor Ferret Have you selected a name that you want to recommend? Mr. Naples: Well, we understand they can't do what we want them to do, Mayor Ferre: That's not... he disagrees with you over here. Mr. Naples: Yes, well our team,you know, disagrees with him. Mr. Plummer: You see, we're bound under the motion. Themotion says, it' says it's got to be agreeable to b.oth sides.. Mayor Ferre: Alright, Plummer you made a motion about F.l.tt. Mr. Plummer: And it was not acceptable. Mayor Ferre: It wasn't acceptable over there. Mr. Plummer: That's right. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Gary, can't you live with that: Mr. Plummer: ... it's kind of unfair. Mayor Ferre: I'm not trying to put you on the spot, if you don't: feel uncomfortable with it, say it. Mr. Plummer: Do you change your mind from your formal position? Mr. Gary: If and only if you have a reputable C.P.A, whose heading up the project and knows municipal finance accounting. Mayor Ferre: Well, but see, but don't you see that F.I.U. may have somebody that fits that category, I don't know. Mr. Gary: They may, I just want to make sure that does exist. Mayor Ferre: Alright, I would accept that as a possibility. That the motion Mr. Plummer since you're the maker of the motion around here I recommend that you word it this way: That we choose F.I.U. provided,however, that they have a C.P. A. that is knowledgeable in government finance. If they don't then we'll going to have to come back here and do this all over again. Mr. Plummer: I've got no problem with that. I just really hate to leave here tonight with this thing unsettled that's you know, because I can see us meeting tomorrow night in emergency session. Mayor Ferre: Well, look let's do it this way, why don't you say F.I.U. is your first choice and if they don't have anybody then the University of Miami. Mr. Plummer: It's not acceptable to them. Mayor Ferre: Gene, Don, where did Don go? What happened to Don, Lt. March? (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mayor Ferre: Yes, suppose we do it this way because I don't know whether F.I.U. has somebody that can do that. Suppose we word it this way, that we choose first F.I.U., ok, provided however, they have a reputable , not a reputable, a C.P.A. experienced in government, in government financing or budget and if he's not available there then number two, the University of Miami provided that the person that is proffered is acceptable to the two of you and if he's not, if those two aren't acceptable then we come back here and do it all over again but at least you got a 1/2 choice, and to Howard Gary, naturally. (repeat) SEP 261977 • • Mt+ Plummet: Anyway to get us off dead center. Mr. Naples.: Well, how are we going to decide.... who's going to make the choiceof whether the guy at F.I,U. is okay or not, I mean? Manor Ferre: I think that's going to be made obviously,in my opinion, it's I;_i`_;tg to be m3da by Howard Gary and Dr. Barry, who is retained by the both of �.�tt and they've bath professionals who know how to determine whether this guy if, going to be,,hcCher he's knowledgeable and fair.. Mr. Naples: I'm beginning to think we ought to throw them both out and work this thing out with a little or something. (BACKGROUND COMMENTS MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Naples: Ok. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a motion and a second. Let the read the 'motion and repeat it over again. Why don't you do it? Mr. Plummer: The motion is that the Mayor be instructed on behalf of the Commission to approach: 1.. Florida International University seeking forth and finding (a). They would consider accepting the project. (b). Who would he the head of that project and he would then return to both sides letting them put their approval, their seal of approval on that individual. 2. If that not be acceptable that he contact the University with the same (a) and (b) applying, the University of Miami. Mayor Ferre: Alright, there's a motion and a second. Is there further discussion on this? Call the roll. The following motion was introduced by Commissioner Plummer, who moved its adoption, MOTION NO. 77-767 A MOTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION DESIGNATING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MIAMI TO CONTACT FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY TO DETERMINE IF THEY HAD, AS A MEMBER OF THEIR STAFF, A PERSON EXPERT IN GOVERNMENT FINANCING AND BUDGETARY PROCESSES TO EXAMINE THE CITY OF MIAMI BUDGET PROJECTIONS AS SET FORTH BY BOTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND DR. MARSHALL BARRY; FURTHER, TO ASSIST THE COMMISSION IN CLARIFYING THOSE AREAS OF THE TWO ABOVE -MENTIONED BUDGET PROJECTIONS WHICH SEEMED TO BE IN CONFLICT; AND IF NOT, THEN TO APPROACH THE UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI TO EXPLORE THE SAME PROPOSITION AS OUTLINED ABOVE; AND IF NOT; THEN FOR THE CITY COMMISSION TO MEET AGAIN TO EXPLORE A DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE. Upon b.ing seconded by Commissioner Reboso, the motion was passed and adopted by the following vote: AYES: Commissioner J. L. Plummer, Jr. Commissioner Manolo Reboso Vice Mayor (Rev.) Theodore R. Gibson Commissioner Rose Gordon Mayor Maurice A. Ferre NOES: None. Mayor Ferre: Alright, now, Mrs. Gordon,.,. Mr, Mr. Mayor? Mayor Ferre: ... wait a moment. Mrs, Gordon, would you accept the charge of chairing? Mrs.. Gordon; I just told you I would b.e out-of-town. Mayor Ferre: Oh, you're going to be out-of-town. Alright, now, Mr. Plummer, would accept the charge of chairing this committee or this investigation? 49 SEP 261977 Mr► Plummer: Mr., Mayor: in seven years I ain't never ducked anything yet; I haven't got enough_sense to say no. Mayor Ferre: Thank you very much. Mr. P3urmaer: Mr. Mayor, this thing is important, it's got to be done based upon the fact that it could be misconstrued that the three of you running and Mrs. Gordon being out--of-town,I got it,but I would ask please that this Commission each and everyone of you individually set forth in writing to me what charge you are giving to me as Chairman of this committee. Mayor Ferre: No, sir. we're not going to do that at all, because that's going to be a very confusing .... you're going to get four different letters saying four different things. That's what we're meeting here for. Mr. Plummer: What do you want me to do as Chairman? Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer, you yourself have pointed out that the only way that the subpoena powers and cross examinations and swearing in of witnesses and all that can be done if a member of the Commission is present. Mrs. Gordon: Mayor Ferre: Mr. Plummer: Yes, that's. all. You just have to sit and listen. Alright, and that's all you're going to have to do. Okay, I accept. Mayor Ferre: And, as far as the actually work is done, it's going to be done by the University of F.I.U. or University of Miami, whichever one is acceptable. Now, at that point, let's see what we're talking about. I'm hoping that this is something that could be done and I'm not talking about months, I'm talking about days or a week, 10 days maximum, and at that point we will hopefully get a report back , if the two million dollars is there then I would assume that you'd be very pleased Mr. Grassie and we don't have any problems. Mr. Grassie: I'd be delighted Mayor. Mayor Ferre: If the two million dollars is not there then I would imagine that we're going to be back at this public hearing so from a technical point - of -view rather than close this public hearing I'm going to extend it and that way nobody here feels that we've arbitrarily cut you out from being able to speak again, ok? Mr. Plummer: You will then inform me of what you find out tomorrow. Mayor Ferre: I'll call up and I'll let you know as soon as I call up. I'm going to call the President of the University and ask them to cooperate. Mr. Duggar: Mr. Mayor, in the meantime what's going to happen to the people who are supposed to be laid off Friday. Mayor Ferre: I'm going to ask that question just now, Mr. Grassie? Mr. Plummer: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor, I think that you will have to designate, isn't there provisions in the Charter George, I think that you have to designate two people to assign to me for the purposes of serving subpoenas number one and of staff number two. Am I correct in that? Mr. Knox: No sir, neither one of them is in the charter, it does provide that a subpoena may be served by any police officer. It doesn't provide for .... Mr. Plummer: Okay. Mayor Ferre: Let's make sure we understand. What's he going to subpoena the City of Miami records? I mean they're available. Mr. Plummer: No, I think people is what you're really looking for, Mayor Ferre: Who in the City, ... who prepares the budget? Mr, Grassie; Yes, who's going to refuse to come? 50 Mayot Fetre; We'll give you all the police power or permits and evetything else you want., Mr. Plunner: Fine, No, no, I'm talking about someone who will do the actual footwork. What you're saying is it's spelled out in there, who will do. Fine. Mayor Ferre: Alright. Now, getting back to the question which is what's going to happe:i on October 1st, Mr. Grassie, with all of the people that have gotten notices for layoffs? Mr. Grassie: Well, two or three things, of course, we would not be making any layoffs effective until we had a final determination from you. Mayor Ferre: Mr. Grassie: Mayor Ferre: That's correct. I need to remind you that the world is not going to wait for us. Who's not going to wait? Mr. Grassie: The world. A couple of things are going to happen. 1. We're going to be at October 1, at which time we have a contractual obligation to make salary adjustment for Police and Fire. 2. I've already advised about the position of the Labor Department with regard to availability of federal money that's not going to be available to us forever so to the extent that we put this off we're going to end up without any alternatives, unless of course, we have a happy eventuality of discovering that we're wrong and that there's a lot of... Mayor Ferre: Which is highly unlikely. Mr. Naples: Oh, Gee, that's a terrible attitude. Mayor Ferre: Well, I really think it's highly unlikely that you're going to find something like that Gene, I really do. And, I, you know... Mr. Plummer: More importantly trying to ... Mayor Ferre: Try and be realistic about this... Mr. Naples: Yes. Mr... Plummer: ... to preclude another special meeting. What powers must this Commission Mr. Grassie, October 1 is Saturday...Now you have to have what, I know we've done it in the past? Mr. Grassie: Well, three things we need Commissioner... Mr. Plummer: You've got to have an authorization to continue of this City to pay day-to-day bills. Mr. Grassie: You need three things. Only one of them is within your control.. The first thing you need is a continuing resolution which will allow us to continue to spend money at presumable last year's monthly level and that will get us through for a certain period of time. It will also by the way if we're wrong about all these things make the problem worst because instead of having twelve months for that budget you're only going to have eleven months available to make up those savings. That's the thing that you can do. You can adopt a continuing resolution. Two other things need to be done. One,by those two gentlemen, by Gene Naples and Don March, they need to assure you that they're not going cause any difficulty with regard to the labor contract so long as we're in this process of resolving the question.And,the third thing is we're going to have to get back with the Labor Department and see just how long they're going to stand still and all I can tell you is that we'll do the best we can. the operation Mayor Ferre: Gene? Mr. Naples: Well, of course, you know, if he's saying that we're not going to go with the new increase you know that is going to be a problem. If he's saying that you know, you're going to hold up and you're not going to give us what we contracted for you know, that of course is a problem itself. The other thing that I see you know, if you're concerned about this C.E.T.A. thing, you know, we're very concerned about that and we think the City under the circumstances 51 SEP 261977 undet the contractual agteement we have with the City would have to sit at the table and negotiate. anything that would have to do with. the terms and conditions of employment for the people who are in pur bargaining unit, and the people that we're talking about laying off and then bring them back under C.E.T.A. you know, if it ever came to that would be something that we'd still have to negotiate, so you know the time element you know, we're kinda spinning our wheels in a couple of directions here. Mayor Ferre: You see, if we for sure that Dr. Barry was right obviously the matter is answered... If we knew for sure that Mr. Gary was right then the problem is not solved because we still have to struggle with what to do. Mr. Naples: Yes, but that's right and then we're going to have to go to some other alternatives, you know, obviously.... Mayor Ferre: But... Mr. Naples: ... have I ever lied to you Mr. Mayor? Mr. Barry is right , Dr. Barry is right, and I never lied to you before. Mayor Ferre: I think... of course, I accept that, you never have lied to me, but that's not the point. The question is have you always been right? It's not a question of lying. Mr. Naples: I can't recall a single time I've been wrong. Mayor Ferre; Gene, I'll tell... Mr. Naples: No, seriously Mr. Mayor, though, we are, we do still face the same problems regardless of whether,you know,... Mayor Ferre: Yes, but I'll tell you, see we're getting into a snookered position in here because if what we do is go in good faith searching for somebody to get into these figuresand give us an answer and if in the meantime the City of Miami does continue to fund everybody (follow me, now let me finish)... Mr. Naples: Okay. Mayor Ferre: ... and that means we'd only have eleven months left so we're going to continue but you're telling me that you're not going to, you know, hold back anything as far as October 1st and the increases are concerned ... Mr. Naples: If you're saying that we're not going to get the increase and that because we're going to try to work out some other solutions that the increase is not going to b.e available to us that we can contract it for last year on the=multi year contract you're already assuming that we're willing to take a cut in that increase and I'm very serious in what I had to say. We went through that negotiating process and with all due respect to the other employee groups who did not negotiate we did in fact sit down and negotiate an agreement in good faith. Mr. Plummer: Yes, but you see... under good faith or under what you're saying you don't get that 5% until a budget is adopted and what I think the Mayor is trying to say is there is no way we can pay you that 5% until we adopt the budget. Mr. Naples: And I'll tell you don't have any choice but to pay that 5%. Mayor Ferre: Well, I'm telling you if that's the way we're going then I think we have a problem that we may as well face right now. Now, I'll tell you, let me take the next step in this thing as far as I'm concerned I think there might be a way as I understand it Mr. Grassie and you haven't brought this up and you haven't told me but I understand that there might be and I'm asking you a question, where it specifically in the case and we're going to take this, don't jump to any conclusions now, I'm just asking a question. Specifically, in the case of the safety portion of the City of Miami which is the Police and the Fire, that there might be a possibility of C.E.T.A. funding this without any layoffs, is that correct? Mr. Grassie: No, sir, it's not correct, Mrs. Gordon; Can't be done, SEP 261977 Mal+ot Fette: Can't be donee. t. Naples: Welly thereis some other fegislatiofi pending but they haven't acted on it ... Mrs. Gordon: Not now anyway.. We can't do it now. Mayor Ferre: No, no, I'm saying no layoffs in the public safety atea. I not talkit,g about anything but the Police and Fire. Mr. Grassie: There is no way that I'm aware of,of using C.E.T.A. money to retain Police and Fire personnel without a layoff...I'm assuming that we're talking about the same thing. We're talking about C.E.T.Ak money restricted'+; to Police and Fire. Mayor Ferre: Yes. Just for that. Mr. Grassie: There is no way that I know of that they can qualify for the use of C.E.T.A., money to support salaries if they do not go through the layoff process. Mayor Ferre: Did you discuss with in the last few days with Mr. Brown? Mr. Grassie: Yes, I discussed it today with Mr. Brown but also the staff has been discussing it for two months, three months, as you know. Mayor Ferre: And, there is no way? Mr. Grassie: No. ... Now, you know, I want to make sure that we're clear there is always the option of laying off other people but if you're talking about using C.E.T.A. money to support Police and Fire, no there is no way. Mayor Ferre: I think we got a problem, Mr. Grassie. Mr. Grassie: Well, yes, we do and I really have been trying to say this for quite some time . Mr. Naples makes a point about negotiation, I simply have to point to page 5 of my budget letter in which I very clearly say that the alternatives that we're talking about short of simply laying off people have to be negotiated with the Police and Fire units. Now, you know you can't be clearer or more direct than that. We recognize that proposition. Mr. Naples: He'd dropped it right on us after we negotiated the contract, he's dropping it on us, you know, it's all our fault because we negotiated a contract in good faith and in order to keep the rest of the City working if we don't give it up they don't work. He said this to everybody, this is the first thit he said it here, he's had it in his budget message. We hear all kind of rumors about about what, you know. he's talking to everybody else about, including the press just Saturday and you know we haven't been called back in... Mayor Ferre: Gene, I'll tell you, where I got off the track is that I don't see that you can have it both ways that if we're going to go in and get somebody to investigate Dr. Barry's very serious allegations, I don't see how you know, you can't have it both ways. Mr. Naples: If you're saying that we will not... I'd rather not... you know, if you saying we're not going to get the pay raise at all until this is decided and go back and pick it up... Mayor Ferre: We don't have the money, how you're going to get...? Well, I'm assuming that we don't have the money. Mr. Naples: But that's something we'd have to negotiate Mr. Mayor, if you're saying that we don't pick up our 5% October 1 and we go ahead and we go on with this investigation ... Mayor Ferre: I'd like to get to the bottom of this investigation so that we know what we're talking about so that we have a third impartial party because we may solve this problem. Maybe they'll find the $2,000,000 and the solution is there, that's the end of it. I hope to God that's what happens, but if that doesn't happen then you know... I mean obviously if we find the money Gene, and this is worked out it's going to be retroactive. 53 SEP 261977 Mr, Map lea: Yes., but if we don't find the money, you know; if you're saying if we don't find the money then you don't get your pay raise and what I'm saying isyou can't just do it that way, it just doesn't work that way.. Mayor Ferre: Well, let me put it to you this way. If this City doesn't have any money and I don't knew that it does or it doesn't I got a feeling .... Yr. Naples: What happened to the motion you guys passed on the 8th of September? Mayor Ferre: What motion was that? Mr. Naples: The motion that Mr. Plummer made that went here 5'0 for the City Manager to review this budget which you know there was a little thing that happened there, and you don't recall that motion? Mayor Ferre: Yes, but I didn't understand this ... Mr. Naples: Well, what he said, you know, that he'd already given you his... you know... his budget and you reminded him that Mel Reese once walked out on the Commission and all that sort of thing, you know. He said, you know, I'm going to take my football and I'm going home, but you told him to re- review that. I never heard anything that came out of that. What happened to that, I never heard anything. Mr. Plummer: Here, I'll give you a copy of it. Mr. Naples: Yes, he told to re-establish his priority based on certain of priorities.. Mrs. Gordon: Are you talking about the motion we tabled? Mr. Plummer: You're welcomed to make a copy but please return that to Mrs.. Gordon: Are you talking about the motion we tabled? (BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Mr. Naples: I'm talking about the written motion that was passed here Plummer made the motion. me.: 5.0. Mayor Ferre: I'll tell you see the problem in all of this isthat if we have to layoff people a month from now I want you to understand that you're talking about laying off how many people? Mt. Grassie: The number that we have dealt with is 167 positions. We're actually going to have a few less than that because of retirements in the meantime. Mayor Ferre: Alright, if you layoff 160 people and you wait another month you're going to have to layoff another 10 or 12 people to catch up for that month you've lost.. Mr. Plummer: Gene return it to me tomorrow. (BACKGROUND COMMENT MADE OFF THE PUBLIC RECORD). Lt. March: Mr. Mayor,if Mr. Plummer would go along with it we'd address the selection process tomorrow going about the somebody we could have this determination by Friday and the we think that business of finding 1st is Saturday. Mayor Ferre: Well, and the first place Don, I don't think that'll happen practical, because that's not the way these Universities Professors work. In the second place Ruse Gordon is going to be leaving for a week on Friday and she won't be here.... Mrs. Gordon: Well, I'll be here in the morning, Mayor Ferre: Friday morning. Mrs, Gordon: Friday morning, You watt to meet Friday morning? 4 SEP 261977 Mayot Ferre; ?ess., I think. we can Meet Friday morning,. Hr.. 1'luminer: Wait a fninute; excuse Met what would we Meeting Hof Lt. March: Well, to hear the results of the.... W. Plummer! Ohl You predicated that ... Lt. March: .., that you chaired or conducted, Mr. Plummer: you're predicating upon that they tbuld by Friday. Lt. March: Yes, sure.. Mr.. Plummer: Well, 1 have no faith in that but I would not it. be disagreeable to Mayor Ferre: I'm assuming that we select somebody that is acceptable to you and acceptable to you and then we would come back. and meet here on Friday if there's an answer by then; Mrs. Gordon: Yes, I'll be here until noon. Mayor Ferre: Alright, we'll setup so that we'll meet Friday at 9:00 o'clock unless the process isn't finished by then and then the Manager you'll let us know and we'll have to reset the meeting. Mr. Plummer: You'll know that tomorrow. Mrs. Gordon: Would you make it 8:30 just because you might run over. Mayor Ferre: Yes, 8:30 is fine. Mr. Grassie: You may, Mr. Mayor, because of the need to adopt a resolution if that's the direction you're going. Mayor Ferre: Well, we'll have to do that on Friday won't we? Mr. Grassie: 0r implement the budget, you know, whatever you decide to do. Mr. Plummer: Can't we do that tonight... continuing Mr. Grassie: ... you probably need to have a City Commission meeting. Mr. Plummer: Can't we do that tonight? He can call a Special Meeting to adopt''. an ongoing resolution. Mrs. Gordon: You'd have it prepared ... Mayer Ferre: Yes, well, we can pass a resolution, I mean a motion now and you'll have the resolution by Friday. Mr. Plummer: Maurice, we're not going to be meeting Friday. Mayor Ferre: Yes, I think we got to meet Friday anyway J. L. to adopt the temporary measures... Mr. Plummer: I was going to say do it tonight... Mayor Ferre: Well, I agree if we can legally do it tonight then I'm with you, We did it that way last year. Mr. Plummer: Ask the City Attorney, is it legal to do it tonight? Can you type it up and get it done? Mr. Knox: Well, the Charter does require a written recommendation from the City Manager. Mayor Ferre: Mr. City Manager can you have that typed up and ready fpr' Friday morning? 5 SEP 2�61977 Mt, Grassie: Yes4 no question about it.. Mt, P1uinroer; You better believe itt he dourt ge.t paid unless he doesr; 1t Grassie: 0r any of therest of us. Mayor Ferre: Alright, it's a quarter to twelve so I think we're coming tit) a conclusion on this.. Is there anything else? Mr. plummet: Well, wait a minute now, two things. First of all, Mr. Mayot, I don't think I need anything other than the request of the City Clerk that those areas pertaining to the testimony of Dr. Barry and Mr.. Gary and the Administration, that as soon as possible would you please have those typed up and made available to me, okay? Mr. Duggar: Mr. Mayor, so what's going to happen if you have to layoff? You still got people... Mayor Ferret I don't know what's going to happen.. Mr. Duggar: Friday is the last day. Mayor Ferre: That's correct. That may be the last day.. Mr. Duggar: We got to know something or thesepeople ate come to work. Mayor Ferre: They may not... no, Now, Friday is Mr. Duggar: They won't be to work Monday. Mayor Ferre: That's. correct. That's correct. Mr. Sherman: Mr. Mayor, eariler, you said youa future time.. Mayor Ferre: Yes. Mr. Sherman: I'd be willing to wait if we are going to open it up for discussion on Friday d recognize me at Mayor Ferre: Yes, sir. What I intend to do now is to extent this meeting to Friday morning at 8:30... Mr. Sherman: Fine. Mayor Ferre: ... for the purposes number one, hopefully, seeing if we have a report back from the University which in my opinion we're not going to have, but I hope I'm wrong, and secondly, at that point we're going to do one or two things., we're going to do one or three things, we're either going to except a temporary continuation of the budget based on the Manager's recommendation or if we find $2,00.0,000 we solve our problem or if we don't find $2,000,000. then I think we're faced with a crisis at that point and we have to make some pretty hard decisions on Friday. Mr. Naples; The Watson Island money. Mayor Ferre: That may be part of it. Mrs. Gordon; Yes., Mr. Grassie, would you please, by Friday look into that, our Watson Island funding, the need for that money being there now for the 4-years please, and s.ee if you can free up a quarter, a half, a portion of the year or until it's absolutely needed, okay? Mayor Ferre: Or if in the meantime... Mr. Grassie; Certainly Commissioner. Mayor Ferre; ... Mr. Grassie, you happen to stumble on a couple of trillion dollars as you go through your papers... W. Plummer: Mr. Mayor, I will only ask the question, I'm not trying to push this on Friday to come in with a the issue this evening, but I don't want 56 SEP 261977 EEE MEE report either way and what-6 a decision made and people walk out the door. There are other issues, that have to he addressed in this budget and I would like to know that on Friday or whenever we go to make these adoptions that there will be opportunity for members of thin Com isis:ien to 'make alternations to this budget. Mayor Ferre: Of course.. Okay, as long as we understand. Look, all we're doing is continuing ..: what we're doing *tot.) Mr. Plummer: Mayor Ferre: not adjorning. Mrs. Gordon: Are you planning a going to having to leave here at full day on Friday? I hope not, 11:30. Mayor Ferre: Well, this is only a morning session, Rose, and Mrs. Gordon: Okay, 8:30 to 11:30. then. Mayor Ferre: ... and I've got to leave at the same time. Mrs. Gordon: Okay, ... three hours, Maurice. Mayor Ferre: I hope that nobody misinterprets anything that's being said here. We have not come to any conclusions tonight. Let's make that abundantly clear. I'm sorry to have to give you that bad news but it's just that simple. I hope that between now and Friday we can come to some kind of conclusion or find some kind of an answer. I hope the Manager will come to some kind of conclusion we'll see you here Friday. So we stand recessed until Friday at 8:30 in the morning. ADJOURNMENT Tliene being no &u/ then business to come be6one the City Commission, on motion duty made and seconded, the meeting am ad j ou)uled at 11:50 P.M. ATTEST: RALPH G. CNGIE City C.2enlz MATTY HIRAI Assistant City C.2eAk MAURICE A. FERRE Mayon P7 SEP 2 61977